Kyle Boddy has been playing an important role for the Cincinnati Reds since being hired as the club’s pitching coordinator last October, and his duties have included more than pitching initiatives. The Driveline Baseball founder has also contributed on the scouting side, particularly in assessing and recruiting undrafted free agents. Boddy was involved in the amateur draft as well, and while his efforts there weren’t as extensive, he now knows the respective skill sets of the pitchers the Reds selected as well as anyone. He discussed all three, and a few of the undrafted newcomers, in a recent phone conversation.

———

David Laurila: Let’s start with your role in the scouting process.

Kyle Boddy: “I was involved right away helping with the scouting department, which is cool because that’s something I’d expressed a strong desire to be a part of. Like with everything else, the Reds held up their end of the deal on that. I started out on the professional scouting side — there was no amateur baseball when I signed my contract — so I immediately began identifying minor-league free agents to bring into camp. Of the ones we brought in, I probably contributed to signing four or five — identifying them, recruiting them, and bringing them in.”

Laurila: Who are the guys you contributed to signing?

Boddy: Dylan Rheault was one. Walker Weickel, a former first rounder by the Padres, was another. Those are the two prominent ones. A few others I gave some input on.”

Laurila: What made those ‘four or five’ guys appealing?

Boddy: “It wasn’t necessarily the performance work. We have the fifth most analysts in baseball, and they’re better at it than I am, so I let them do their job. A lot of it was character stuff — where they train, and are they a good fit for our player development system. That was the case on the amateur side, as well.

“We pride ourselves in having strong ‘actual’ scouting coverage. We have good area scouts, and it always starts with them. Especially when it comes to amateur guys. It starts with their reports and then we build off of that. On the pro side it’s a little more pitched in.”

Laurila: What was your role in the amateur draft? Read the rest of this entry »

With 2020’s amateur draft consisting of just five rounds, much of the strategy teams typically use related to shifting bonus pool money around was rendered moot. There were no high schoolers to woo with big bonuses after the 10th round, no saving money on a seventh rounder to sign a better first rounder. This served to decrease the incoming talent pool by quite a bit, with many good players going undrafted or unsigned, but it also makes an immediate analysis of the exercise a little bit easier.

With just 160 picks, we can evaluate a team’s decision to take a lesser player early in the draft in order to use the money saved on picks later and vice versa. With less scouting time and fewer looks, there might have been a bit more variation in terms of the quality of the players taken on draft day. Likewise, determining who might improve and surprise is trickier. As such, we shouldn’t consider this analysis ironclad. However, using Eric Longenhagen’s rankings and the selected players’ actual draft positions, we can compare how well each team did with their picks based on those rankings. To determine the value of each player and each pick, I’ll be using my draft pick valuation research from last year, which examined expected production from every draft slot. Read the rest of this entry »

Below is my first mock draft of the year, a mock I’ll link to (along with The Board) at the top of and along with each subsequent iteration, as this one lays a foundation of context that I reserve the right to refer back to.

Teams are largely in the final stages of board building right now. National cross checkers are convening electronically; the last of the staff positional group discussions are wrapping up. How accurate can a mock be at this point? If you’d like to use mock accuracy as a proxy for how things will evolve over the next two weeks, take a look at the first complete round one mock Kiley McDaniel and I did last year and compare it to the one we did the day of the draft. You can see the initial mock has players in the right general range, while the final one is more precise. That’s how readers should think about what they’re about to read.

Of course, things are likely to be harder to predict than usual this year. A monkey wrench the size of the planet itself has been thrown into the cogs of the draft process. The draft’s reduced length, signing bonus limitations on players signed after the five rounds, the bonus deferral guidelines, minor league baseball’s imminent contraction, the asymmetry of prospect-to-prospect playing time this spring, the increased involvement from pro departments and otherwise uninvolved executives who had nothing else to do, the relative ease with which pitchers can upload opinion-changing video during the shutdown compared to hitters, the way teams’ cash flow issues might impact strategy, the way each player’s family’s financial situation may have recently changed and altered their signability, and how a college’s scholarship shortage might make players more or less inclined to return to school or matriculate, not to mention how all of those things (I’m sure I’ve missed some) interact with player, agent, and team incentives, make this year’s draft very unpredictable.

In broad strokes, teams seem more inclined to minimize risk this year. For instance, there are teams that do not have some higher profile high school players on their boards because they didn’t see them this spring. Prospects who were only scoutable for a brief window in March, never began play at all, or were in a crowded region and so were an opportunity-cost casualty, are at risk of not being on a team’s board here and there and sliding. There might be a couple of cases where someone slips past where they’re signable.

In my opinion, this is cowardly. Teams have had plenty of looks at Mick Abel, Ed Howard, Freddy Zamora, Austin Hendrick, and most all of the other names who I’ve heard might slip or become unsignable because of this apprehension. Even Nick Bitsko, who teams have the least history with because of when he reclassified, was widely seen last fall (he was awesome) and by about a third of teams in the bullpen this spring — he clearly belongs near the top of the high school arms in this draft.

I agree that a seven month layoff for high school prospects (that’s how long it’s been for guys who played in Jupiter last October) is not ideal, but neither is a three-month layoff for literally everyone else. Some teams seem more inclined to buy into some of the pop-up college arms who made four good starts in February and March rather than cold weather high schoolers who have a multi-year pedigree of performance. Was anyone really going to learn anything new about Ed Howard’s feel to hit by watching him crush bad Midwest varsity pitching? I don’t think so. On to the mock. Read the rest of this entry »

While many have moved on to a potential renegotiated deal between the players and owners to get the season underway, MLB’s decision to stage a five-round amateur draft shouldn’t get lost in the shuffle. On Friday, Jeff Passan and Kiley McDaniel broke the news that this year’s June draft will last just five rounds. The news wasn’t a total surprise given that when the players and owners negotiated back in March, the sides agreed that the draft would be at least five rounds, but would be considerably shortened. However, given the relatively low present and future cost of having even five more rounds, it’s something of a surprise that the owners refused to put down the half a million dollars per team in 2020, with a quarter million dollars more in bonuses payable in 2021 and 2022.

The agreement in March specified that the draft would stick to 2019 slot amounts, saving owners a little over $8 million from what was in the CBA. In addition, teams would have to pay just $100,000 of player’s bonuses now, with the rest of the payments split between 2021 and 2022. In 2020, that means owners will spend around $15 million in signing bonuses, a $300 million reduction from a year ago. Coupled with the delayed international signing date, the owners are seeing $400 million in 2020 savings, with roughly $80 million of those savings permanent. Last year, teams spent $50 million more than their allotted amount on bonuses for players after the 10th round, which won’t happen this year. There’s also $30 million allotted for rounds six through 10, which also won’t happen this year. According to Passan, that decision didn’t sit well with front offices:

There remains a significant divide within the team side on the draft. A majority of front offices were pushing for a longer draft, recognizing the value reaped even in later rounds can be immense. Pushback to keep the draft as short as possible from some owners was strong.

— Jeff Passan (@JeffPassan) May 8, 2020

Given the $100,000 limit on bonuses to be paid this year, owners opted not to spend half a million per team right now and $1 million spread over the next three years to prevent 150 talented amateurs from turning pro. Teams can sign players after the draft, but undrafted free agents are limited to $20,000 bonuses. The types of players drafted before the 10th round are not the types who agree to $20,000 bonuses unless teams are shifting around money to give other players larger bonuses. The players who would have received decent bonuses in these rounds are now going to stay in school for another year or in the case of high school players, go to college or junior college in the hopes of being drafted in future years. There’s an argument to be made that all of these players will eventually get drafted, so it doesn’t make much of a difference for teams. That argument is not strong. Read the rest of this entry »

I’ve taken a fresh, top-to-bottom pass at my draft rankings, which have changed based on continuous discussion with team sources, review of my own notes and video, and the sourcing of data. The updated list, which includes approximately five rounds of players, can now be found on The Board, which is a benevolent spreadsheet-god that controls my thoughts, feelings, and choices.

The exact date of the draft and the specifics of its format (length, etc.) remain unknown, but team sources anticipate there will be about a month between when those details are announced and Day 1 of the draft, which those sources feel provides them with a reasonable, sufficient window to prepare for the specifics. Especially if that eventual announcement includes an adjustment to the length of the draft, it will likely trigger another update to this list.

At this stage, without games going on, there is no new information about players but there will continue to be information that is new to me, be it what I can get my hands on from a statistical standpoint or from sources I haven’t yet spoken to at length. These evaluations are still subject to change between now and the draft. Read the rest of this entry »

I wanted to pass along scouting notes from spring training games, especially ones that will shape the coming org lists and concern players who are outside the scope of my work but are relevant to the public interest. I’m going to start with observations from big league games and then move into notes from my amateur looks. One important caveat, especially where the big league looks are concerned, is the possibility of players still being rusty. Read the rest of this entry »

Sources indicate to FanGraphs that major league teams have voted to institute new amateur data sharing rules that will, among other things, discontinue the practice of clubs enjoying proprietary amateur player data generated from games played at club facilities and some junior colleges; we’re told the vote was 29-to-1 in favor of data sharing. The vote came after the matter was initially discussed at last Monday’s annual scouting directors summit at the Winter Meetings.

While some distribution rules regarding data collected at NCAA games were already in place, there had previously been no such rules for the data collected at junior colleges, nor for various other methods of collection or for other settings for collection, including internationally. It’s unclear when mandatory data sharing will begin, and many team personnel still think there’s a grey area regarding what kind of data needs to be shared. In addition to TrackMan and other radar-based tech or optical tracking systems that capture the Statcast-ish data readers are likely familiar with, teams also use various other forms of technology to learn about players, such as Rapsodo in bullpens, KinaTrax, Blast Motion, and more. Given the wide range of technologies currently available, it seems likely some will exist outside the scope and definition put forth in this initial policy, creating loopholes for teams similar to the one some had used to install TrackMan units at junior colleges in order to have sole data access; the previous data sharing rules only covered NCAA baseball. The current, agreed-upon language described to FanGraphs mandates that teams share “data collected normally,” but our sources aren’t sure how “normally” will be defined.

As Eric wrote in February, teams have been purchasing TrackMan units for junior colleges in order to enjoy exclusive access to the data collected by those units, a clear competitive advantage. The Yankees and Cubs were the most proactive in securing partnerships with junior colleges, paying for the installation (at a cost of about $30,000) and upkeep of TrackMan units (another five figure amount per unit annually) at top JuCos in exchange for exclusive access to the data. The junior colleges could use the unit for their own purposes in non-game settings and also got to keep the game data. This practice also gave clubs another site in a different part of the country to hold private pre-draft workouts and collect the data from draft prospects for themselves.

Read the rest of this entry »

Here are a few more prospects I saw at the WBSC U-18 World Cup taking place in Busan, South Korea. You can check out my previous dispatches here and here.

Mick Abel (United States), RHP

If you’ve followed 2020 prospects for a while, you’ve probably have heard of Mick Abel, a right handed pitcher out of Jesuit High School in Oregon. The righty is currently ranked fourth on THE BOARD and is one of the consensus top pitchers for next year’s draft. In their report, Kiley and Eric noted that Abel is an “excellent high school projection arm” and by looking at him, it was an apt label. Abel currently has a fairly slim frame but long limbs. When he adds some weight, I can see him having an A.J. Burnett-esque build. Abel pitched on September 3 against Spain during the group stage play of the U-18 World Cup. His delivery indicated how he’s able to throw into mid-90s. Abel has a relaxed yet up-tempo delivery with a long stride. When his body parts sync correctly, he features an excellent hip/shoulder separation into landing, which unleashes his torso and arm forward furiously, resulting in elite arm speed. Abel also gets over the front leg well during the release, which should help him command-wise in long-term.

Throughout his outing, Abel showed a two-pitch fastball and slider mix. His best stuff showed in the first inning, when he sat 92-94 mph and touched 95. His slider also showed some tight spin with a 10-4 tilt. At the time, both pitches showed flashes of being plus. However, as the outing progressed, Abel became inconsistent in his delivery – particularly, syncing his body parts and finding the release point – and his fastball velocity dipped to 90-92 mph range. His slider, while garnering a few whiffs here and there, did not flash the sharpness it had in the first inning and became loopier. Read the rest of this entry »

I attended more games here in Busan, South Korea for Days Three and Four of the WBSC U-18 World Cup. These are my thoughts on some of the prospects I saw.

Theo Millas (Canada), RHP

Millas is an LSU commit. Listed at 6-foot-4, 200 pounds, he has a very good pitcher’s frame and he looks every inch of an intriguing projectable high school guy. He also recently participated in the 2019 Under Armour All-America game, along with some of the other top high school prospects who will enter the draft next year. Millas has an easy delivery with a fluid arm action. It’s not necessarily the best tempo I’ve seen, but he isn’t overly slow either. I would be interested to see if he’s willing to increase his stride length to take advantage of his height. There’s a little stiffness in his front leg when he lands, but it’s not a huge concern for me. Against Korea on September 1, however, Millas was not his best self. While his fastball was advertised to be in the low-90s, he sat mostly in the 86-88 mph range. The pitch showed some late life, but Korean hitters were able to square it up for hard line drives all over the field. His curveball also seemed loopy, and Korean IF Jang Jae-Young squared it up pretty well for a hard, 2-RBI single. Based on all the accounts I’ve read of Millas, it felt like an off day for the righty, as he allowed six runs without recording an out before exiting the game. Millas looks like an arm who could benefit a lot from few years more worth of development.

Austin Hendrick (United States), OF

Hendrick is already known as one of the top prep draft prospects for 2020. He is currently rated eighth on THE BOARD. As expected, Hendrick flashed some serious tools during practice before the United States’ night match versus Japan. During batting practice, he displayed a smooth yet powerful swing that produced strong line drives all over the field. He has a short stroke and he times it with a little hitch and bat tip during his load. Such traits might be a concern for many hitting coaches, but Hendrick seemed to time it well enough to make it work. His hands were impressively quick, as he showed a plus ability to turn the barrel into the zone. As an outfielder, Hendrick displayed an easily above-average arm, if not plus.

As Eric and Kiley have noted in their report on Hendrick, “Hendrick is old for the class but evokes Cody Bellinger in frame and swing. As you can imagine, with the ultra-athletic swing comes with some swing-and-miss to go with the power.” That swing-and-miss tendency showed during the game. In his first at-bat against Japanese LHP Yuki Hayashi, Hendrick struck out swinging on three offspeed pitches. He seemed to favor driving the ball hard instead of making square contact. Hendrick ended up going 0-for-4 with four strikeouts. Despite a poor game performance, his tools displayed in batting practice and his physical talents seem to justify his high draft stock status. It will be interesting to see how his hit tool progresses coming into next year’s draft and how teams may evaluate his ability to handle pro pitching. Read the rest of this entry »

I spent the July 4th weekend in Cape Cod this year, which is far from the worst place to be for that holiday. Beyond the pleasant weather and plentiful beaches there was, of course, lots of baseball being played in the prestigious Cape Code League. Below are some of my observations of a few of the college players I saw.

Harwich Mariners
Daniel Cabrera, OF, LSU

Cabrera opened a lot of eyes as a freshman in Baton Rouge, hitting .315/.405/.525 with 36 strikeouts against 34 walks in 63 games. He followed up with a sophomore campaign that saw him hit 12 home runs but also decrease his walks (24) and increase his strikeouts (54) in 59 games. He steps into this 2019 Cape Cod League campaign ranked 21st on THE BOARD for the 2020 draft.

Cabrera has a smooth and polished left-handed swing with a good path to the ball. He gets into his back hip well and transfers weight quickly, and has a handsy, athletic-looking swing. In my look, he showed solid average bat speed and an aggressive, pull-oriented approach geared for power. Cabrera’s aggressiveness was a negative in this look – he expanded the zone on several occasions against pitchers with below average fastballs – enough so that I think there’s a chance it holds him back from reaching his peak potential hit tool. A swing like Cabrera’s could project as one of an above average hitter, but I think he settles more in the 45-grade hit range with a propensity to swing and miss. However, the power should play at least average and I would be comfortable projecting more. It is likely more 55-grade power than anything above it, but the ball jumps off his bat and his hands’ quickness should allow him to jump on hittable pitches and drive them more often than not. Read the rest of this entry »