There are talent evaluators, developers and buyers.
Steve Stone was on the radio and he cringed when sports teams announce they have taken "the best available athlete." No, Stone argues, you should be taking the best baseball player in the draft. A six letter high school athlete may have to learn baseball in six years, while actual baseball prospects are already in the majors.
So what is more important, scouting for talent or developing players? Stone argued both are important. But teams need to scout themselves in order to provide a consistent level of major league talent.
Stone means that every team hits and misses in their drafts. The White Sox took OF Jared Mitchell a few spots ahead of OF Mike Trout. Ouch. So Stone says good organizations evaluate their own scouts to see which ones recommended players and why to see if they got it right or got it wrong. The same is true with player development coaches. Good prospects should develop quickly in the minors. If there are issues with prospects that rated highly in draft preparation consistently fail to make a major league impact, the farm system needs re-evaluation.
There is also a need for an organization to have a developmental blue print on how farm players are supposed to act, play and learn the game. Many teams allow their minor league managers and coaches free discretion to teach the fundamentals and baseball IQ. But this approach gives an inconsistent product as players move up and down the farm system.
Stone thinks an organization needs a balance between good scouting and good development. He admits that the White Sox have been very deficient in developing field position players.
There are some who say the best talent will rise to the surface no matter who is training them. We are not so sure about that. If pure talent wins out there would be more college studs skipping the minors to a spot immediately on a MLB roster. There are probably more Round 20 players that were marginal prospects who have developed into competent players than highly touted first round bonus baby busts.
Then there are teams that just like to buy other teams developed players. Usually confined to big market clubs, these buyers out more emphasis on winning at the major league level over having a consistent or sound minor league system that can supply one or two players every year. Buyers like to have major league experience players because it takes out the risk of scouting "potential" out of the equation because veterans have actual experience.
There is another factor key to developing talent: the player's own sacrificial drive to succeed at every level of competition. If you look at a preview magazine in any sport that lists the rosters and hometowns for all the players, how many do you find from your hometown? From your county? From your state? Very few if any. And that is the point. The best player on your high school team moves up to college or rookie ball playing against the "best" players at his level or above. It is how that prospect reacts to stiffer competition is the gateway for whether he meets the challenge or hits a wall.
There is a mental aspect that elite professionals have that the average player does not: drive. Michael Jordan could by example will his team to victory. Jonathan Toews can put his team into a different skill level during games. Some players are born with this innate ability. Others have to struggle to find an equivalent desire to be better than one's natural skill set. That is where a player with better Baseball IQ is a better prospect than a pure athlete who can play the game.
