Re: Signing LaRoche will cost us a #44 draft pick
posted at 1/1/2013 1:10 PM EST
In response to moonslav59's comment:
You need to cut off the study at about 2005. To take the obvious, someone picked #44 in 2012, has contributed exactly -0- to the WAR, bringing the WAR average down. Probably the same with 2011 and 2010, with minor contributions in 2009 and 2008, etc.
The second thing is that it looks like the average WAR is 2.4. That alone is worth >$10M in today's methodology.
You really think it is fair to count theMLB WAR on the 2012 draft picks? One could argue that we shouldn't count the 2011 and 2010 drafts until a few years down the line as these guys get their chances to show their stuff.
To me, looking at the numbers from prior to 2008 or 2009 gives a truer sense of what early draft picks normally amount to value wise.
The Sox have had some hits and misses in the 1st two rounds over the years, but the #44 pick has quite a bit of value.
BTW, this same approximate value is attached to any pre-season trade we make involving Ellsbury. The team getting Ellsbury before the season begins gains this same value in next year's draft (or we lose that value if we trade him rather than keep him and let him walk).
That's why I said the study had to be cut off at 2005. Anything past that, and the draft choice is like not to have achieved 100% of his WAR.
And on most of these moves, the onion is a 100 layers thick. For all the posts about Drew, how many have mentioned the fact that, if he has a good season, we can make a QO and score a pick?