There is no better time to be a baseball fan than the World Series, especially when we are treated to a fantastic matchup. In the Rays and Dodgers, the two smartest organizations in baseball in my opinion, we could not have asked for a better matchup.
There will be a lot made about the teams’ trade acquisitions, payrolls, and managers. However, the foundation of an organization starts through the draft. After all, the goal isn’t to win for one or two seasons. Rather, it is to build a sustainable winner, and in order to do that, your farm system needs to consistently churn out big-league contributors.
Both of these teams have dealt with injuries and departures. Yet, it feels as though they never miss a beat because they always have a capable replacement. That is a testament to their front offices, who not have only built elite rosters full of depth, but also have managed to maintain high-quality farm systems.
When it comes to figuring out what the optimal draft strategy is, it is imperative that were go over things that have proven true regarding the draft:
The draft is generally a crapshoot
College players are safer than high school players
Specific organizations are better developing certain players than others
The more picks you have, the larger your bonus pool, thus the more flexibility you have
Pitchers are more volatile than position players
Draft Strategy
With that in mind, if I were formulating a draft strategy, these are the principles I would look to stay true to:
Since the draft is a crapshoot, I’d be looking to accumulate as much depth as possible.
If I had an early pick, a college player may be more favorable than a high school player. Later in the first round or in the middle rounds, however, the volatility of prep prospects is appealing; they could end up being the best high school player for all we know.
I would look to draft players who fit my organization’s player development strengths.
With a larger bonus pool, acquiring depth is even more important.
Rather than counting on one-to-two pitchers, I would be looking to consistently add multiple pitchers in order to build organizational pitching staff.
Do the Rays and Dodgers have a specific draft strategy? Specifically, does it align with what would appear the be the proper strategy for the draft. Let us take a closer look. We’ll go through each team’s past five drafts, hoping to discover noticeable patterns.
Tampa Bay Rays (2016-20)
2020:
Round 1, Pick 24: RHP Nick Bitsko (HS)
Round 1, Pick 37: SS Alika Williams (Arizona State)
Round 2, Pick 57: LHP Ian Seymour (Virginia Tech)
Round 3, Pick 96: RHP Hunter Barnhart (HS)
Round 4, Pick 125: SS Tanner Murray (UC Davis)
Round 5, Pick 155: RHP Jeff Hakanson (Central Florida)
It wasn’t a given that Bitsko would fall to the Rays, but when he did, he was a no-brainer. Although high school pitchers are risky, Bitsko has elite pitch metrics, and there is arguably no organization better fit to refine his abilities than Tampa Bay. Meanwhile, they accommodated for that risk with multiple college performers, and then went back into the well for a prep pitcher in the third round. A class full of players that fit their organization well with depth both in the form of college players and prep players? It looks like we’re are off to a good start!
2019:
Round 1, Pick 22: SS Greg Jones (UNC Wilmington)
Round 1, Pick 36: RHP JJ Goss (HS)
Round 1, Pick 40: RHP Seth Johnson (Campbell)
Round 2, Pick 61: LHP John Doxakis (Texas A&M)
Round 3, Pick 99: OF Shane Sasaki (HS)
Round 4, Pick 128: LHP Graeme Stinson (Duke)
Round 5, Pick 158: LHP Ben Brecht (UC Santa Barbara)
Jones wasn’t seen as a first-round pick by many, but he possesses several traits the Rays covert: on-base skills, athleticism, versatility, ability to play an up-the-middle position. After that, Tampa Bay made sure to add as much pitching depth as possible. Not only did they add several college performers, including two in Johnson and Doxakis that should move quickly through their system as flexible chess pieces for them, but they also added multiple prep players later on. Goss, in particular is a name to keep an eye on. His mechanics and command were a concern for scouts, but if one team can fix that, it’s the Rays.
2018:
Round 1, Pick 16: LHP Matthew Liberatore (HS)
Round 1, Pick 31: LHP Shane McClanahan (South Florida)
Round 1, Pick 32: OF Nick Schnell (HS)
Round 2, Pick 56: 2B Tyler Frank (FAU)
Round 2, Pick 71: OF/RHP Tanner Dodson (California)
Round 3, Pick 92: SS Ford Proctor (Rice)
Round 4, Pick 120: OF Grant Witherspoon (Tulane)
Round 5, Pick 150: RHP Taj Bradley (HS)
This draft perfectly embodies the Rays’ draft philosophy. They are better fit to develop a prep pitcher than others, so they were able to feel comfortable taking a calculated risk with Liberatore. Then, they followed that up with McClanahan, who may be more of a 120-inning pitch at best given his command/stamina concerns, but that is all the Rays need from him; they use their pitchers as creatively as any other team. To top it off, they also brought in four straight college performers in the middle rounds, while also adding a couple athletic prep prospects. This class was full of depth, balance, and players at up-the-middle positions; exactly what you should come to expect from this organization.
2017:
Round 1, Pick 4: LHP Brendan McKay (Louisville)
Round 1, Pick 31: RHP Drew Rasmussen (Oregon State)
Round 2, Pick 40: RHP Michael Mercado (HS)
Round 3, Pick 79: SS Taylor Walls (Florida State)
Round 4, Pick 109: RHP Drew Strotman (Saint Mary’s)
Round 5, Pick 139: LHP Josh Fleming (Webster)
Another draft full of pitching depth, particular from the college side. At the time he was drafted, McKay was listed as a two-way player, but he was also regarded as the safest player in the draft; the Rays understood that at the top of the draft, playing it safe with a college performer is smart. Besides that, they did an excellent job adding more college players, including one with on-base skills in Walls that fell due to a lack of power and age. To top it off, they even mixed in a prep pitcher after round one for them to work on developing! Once again, they displayed fantastic process here.
2016:
Round 1, Pick 13: OF Josh Lowe (HS)
Round 2, Pick 53: OF Ryan Boldt (Nebraska)
Round 2, Pick 77: OF Jake Fraley (Louisiana State)
Round 3, Pick 90: RHP Austin Franklin (HS)
Round 4, Pick 120: RHP Easton McGee (HS)
Round 5, Pick 150: RHP Mikey York (CC of Southern Nevada)
This is an interesting draft to analyze, but it does stick to the Rays formula of athleticism and pitching. Not only does Lowe have the speed/power combination that a progressive organization should be thrilled to tap into, but they also signed them for under-slot, which helped them add depth throughout the draft. They then compensated for that risk with multiple college players, before using the extra money to take more shots on prep players. It also is worth noting that they drafted first baseman Nate Lowe in the 13th round; getting a big-league contributor at that point of the draft is remarkable.
Los Angeles Dodgers (2016-20)
2020:
Round 1, Pick 29: RHP Bobby Miller (Louisville)
Round 2, Pick 60: RHP Landon Knack (East Tennessee State)
Round 2, Pick 66: RHP Clayton Beeter (Texas Tech)
Round 3, Pick 100: OF Jake Vogel (HS)
Round 4, Pick 130: C Carson Taylor (Virginia Tech)
Round 5, Pick 159: RHP Gavin Stone (Central Arkansas)
We didn’t have to wait long to see the Dodgers add a significant amount of pitching depth. Miller, Knack, and Beeter are perfect fits for an organization that not only optimizes pitchers’ raw abilities, but will be able to compensate for their reliever risk concerns with creative pitching roles — something you can do when you have so much pitching depth. The intriguing selection, however, has to be Jake Vogel. By drafting a senior in Knack, they were able to save funds to sign Vogel, who is a perfect fit for them. He has the raw tools you’d expect, but needs a lot of refinement. Well, luckily for him, the Dodgers are cited as the best hitting development organization! Pitching depth, college performers, and a prep prospect who fits their development strengths? I’m starting to sense a theme with these two teams.
2019:
Round 1, Pick 25: 3B Kody Hoese (Tulane)
Round 1, Pick 31: 2B Michael Busch (North Carolina)
Round 2, Pick 78: RHP Jimmy Lewis (HS)
Round 3, Pick 102: RHP Ryan Pepiot (Butler)
Round 4, Pick 131: 3B Brandon Lewis (UC Irvine)
Round 5, Pick 161: RHP Jack Little (Stanford)
Deciding whether to draft a college or prep player isn’t a binary decision. Rather, it depends completely on the prospect. Generally, the most stable aspects of a player’s skillset is their plate discipline, which is why I see it as optimal to pay close attention to a college hitter’s walk rate. Michael Busch posted a walk rate over 19 percent in his college career, and is cited as being a complete offensive performer. Yet, he fell in the draft due to a lack of a defensive position? Leave it to the Dodgers to take him, realizing how much more value good offense provides a team than good defense, BEFORE topping it off with more college players; Pepiot has already moved quickly up prospect rankings. Oh, and don’t worry; they even added a classic post-first round high school pick.
2018:
Round 1, Pick 30: RHP JT Ginn (HS)
Round 2, Pick 68: RHP Michael Grove (West Virginia)
Round 3, Pick 104: LHP John Rooney (Hofstra)
Round 4, Pick 134: RHP Braydon Fisher (HS)
Round 5, Pick 164: 2B Devin Mann (Louisville)
If you are going to take a prep player, you better complement them with a lot of college depth, and that is exactly what the Dodgers did here, though Ginn did not sign. By now, I don’t know how one couldn’t come to the conclusion that they try to obtain a high volume of pitching prospects.
2017:
Round 1, Pick 23: CF Jeren Kendall (Vanderbilt)
Round 2, Pick 62: RHP Cooper Morgan (Texas)
Round 3, Pick 100: C Connor Wong (Houston)
Round 4, Pick 130: RHP James Marinan (HS)
Round 5, Pick 160: RHP Riley Ottesen (Tah)
More pitchers and up-the-middle players. Kendall was seen as a top-ten pick that the Dodgers surely were glad to draft, and even though he’s fallen way short of expectations, the process was sound. Wong, meanwhile, was developed as a catcher capable of playing multiple positions, which speaks to the importance of athleticism and versatile. He garnered enough value to be part of a trade package to Boston. Also, it is worth noting that they managed to draft Zach Pop and Rylan Bannon in rounds 7 and 8, who were used to acquire Manny Machado, as well as three notable prospects between rounds 10 and 12: Zach Reds, Jacob Amaya, and Andre Jackson. As a prep player, Amaya is noteworthy here, as the Dodgers also tend to save money to go after a high-school prospect on day 3. Now, he could be a major-league contributor, which speaks to the volatility of prep prospects.
2016:
Round 1, Pick 20: 2B Gavin Lux (HS)
Round 1, Pick 32: C Will Smith (Louisville)
Round 1, Pick 36: RHP Jordan Sheffield (Vanderbilt)
Round 2, Pick 65: RHP Mitch White (Santa Clara)
Round 3, Pick 101: RHP Dustin May (HS)
Round 4, Pick 131: OF DJ Peters (Western Nevada CC)
Round 5, Pick 161: LHP Devin Smeltzer (San Jacinto College)
This draft has a chance to go down as one of the best of all time in terms of depth. Lux, Smith, May, Smeltzer, Andre Scrubb (Round 8), Tony Gonsolin (Round 9), Dean Kremer (Round 14), and Zach McKinstry (Round 33) have all reached the major leagues, while Cal Stevenson (Round 36), Bailey Ober (Round 23), Cody Thomas (Round 13), Graham Ashcraft (Round 12), AJ Alexy (Round 11), Luke Raley (Round 7), Peters, White, and Sheffield all should as well. That is simply astonishing, and it all starts with elite process. Lux was an up-the-middle player they felt comfortable developing, and they minimized the risk by taking three straight college players, including a high-performing catcher in Smith. As for May, he demonstrates why you take a prep player in the middle rounds, rather than the top of the draft. He has become one of the top pitching prospects thanks in large part to Los Angeles’ player development, and is an outcome that is possible for any prep player selected in that range, given the high range of outcomes for them.
Overview
Let us review my expected optimal draft strategy:
If I had an early pick, a college player may be more favorable than a high school player. Later in the first round or in the middle rounds, however, the volatility of prep prospects is appealing; they could end up being the best high school player for all we know.
I would look to draft players who fit my organization’s player development strengths.
With a larger bonus pool, acquiring depth is even more important.
Rather than counting on one-to-two pitchers, I would be looking to consistently add multiple pitchers in order to build organizational pitching staff.
These teams have made sound selections at the top of the draft, but where they’ve really separated themselves is later on. You’d expect that from smart organizations, and the depth of these two team’s draft classes is what stands out.
Additionally, although the Rays were the only team to have a pick at the top of the draft, it’s telling they went with a safer option, and, for the most part, a heavy emphasis was placed on college prospects early, before embracing the volatility of prep players. Even better, they clearly target prospects that fit their player development strengths perfectly, which is very evident in the drafting and development of players like Dustin May. Also, these two organizations clearly understand that the draft is won by the total sum of the prospects, rather than going all in on one prospect; they managed their funds wisely to add as much depth as possible. Oh, and I don’t think we have to go into the idea that these two teams know they need pitching depth, and have constantly looked to the draft to obtain it.
When you believe in a specific draft strategy, it is always pleasing to see it validated by the processes of the two smartest organizations in baseball. Moving forward, I am excited to see what the Giants, Red Sox, and Astros, teams with former Dodgers/Rays executives, accomplish in the draft. San Francisco, especially, has followed a very similar model to Los Angeles, which has allowed them to quickly revamp their farm system.
The Rays and Dodgers are able to exploit every type of market inefficiency, which has allowed them to build deep rosters and farm systems. However, it is how they attack the draft that stands out. Although they are constantly flexible, they generally have an idea of how to play the draft in order to acquire as many talented players as possible. Their ability to know exactly what they want to draft, and then develop them, is tremendous, and goes a long way in ensuring that they’re able to constantly turn some coals into diamonds. As long as their front offices remain intact, I wouldn’t anticipate this being the last World Series appearance for either of these teams.