the Giants have little success with young hitters. And, since the org. NEEDS to have success with this high draft pick, I say they draft what they know. PITCHING.

hall of fame HR to total hit ratios :o)

Does this prophecy mean Wendell Fairley is destined to end up in a humorous cat macro decreeing his failure?

If someone had the time to list all of the HS hitters drafted over the past 40 years, and calculated the probability of a HS hitter becoming productive at the ML level, would the Giants be above or below the mean?

I want to see HSHBP+ (High School Hitter Becoming Productive Probability as compared to the rest of the league), before I accept that the Giants are cursed! ;-)

I was all set to disagree that Royce Clayton counts as nothing, because he had a good offensive year for the Giants in 1993. Then I looked up his stats for 1993, and his OPS was .703 that year, and that was the best he ever did with the Giants. Ouch. Clearly, I wasn’t a very good judge of offensive production when I was 13.

On the other hand, as I recall, Clayton was traded for Allen Watson, who was traded for J.T. Snow, who is the best first baseman we’ve had since 1993. That’s more a commentary on our pathetic lack of production from first base than anything else, but still, it counts for something.

First, the point is made that over half the #5 picks have made the major leagues since 1965. On that, I will note that Jason Grilli made the majors too. The key thing is to separate out the ones who at least became regulars against those who just got a cup of coffee in the majors. That is what I did in my draft study because who cares if the guy became a good utility player or reliever, if you are drafting the only result that really matters is if you get a good regular starter from the pick, and one who is healthy enough to play into his free agency years.

And on that point, that’s why you need to show which overall pick each of these “failures” are. This is because the failure rate of finding a good major league player when you draft even as low as 10th overall is pretty bad: off top of my head, I think it was about 25% chance – or 75% failure rate – of drafting a good player in the 6-10 picks and about 10% chance for picks 21-30 or 90% failure rate.

So it’s fairly easy and fan-friendly enough to beat up almost any team for a high failure rate when they are winning or even mediocre – only the worse of the worse get the coveted top 5 pick, where my study found that the success rate is around 45%, in other words, failure rate of 55%. It is also easy to point at a preennial loser like the Brewer’s, Tiger’s, and Ray’s and say that they have a good system because of their stockpile of hot prospects, overlooking the fact that the odds are stacked in their favor: when you pick in the top 5 overall range, the odds of you picking a good starting player is about 4 times better the odds of you picking a good starting player in the back of the first round.

If you want better odds of a good results, the Giants will have to draft a college hitter then. If you want to reach for the stars, then you will have to consider high school hitters. With the Giants history of drafting for tools, Tim Beckham’s 5-tool shiny-ness probably is very attractive (Fairley is considered toolsy too), but BP’s draft study noted that it is not a good bet to draft high school players (then again, they then chastise the Giants for avoiding a draft pick by noting that they drafted Matt Cain, a high school player; so is that bad as their study shows, or good as Cain has turned out pretty well).

However, and they didn’t study this, I wonder how well high school hitters drafted in the top 5 overall picks have done, in terms of success. Perhaps it’s easier to spot when they are among the top in the nation, not so much after that, much like a roll of the dice.

And, I would note, you left out one particular high school hitter who the Giants drafted but did not sign, one Barry Lamar Bonds. Would that change the way people feel about the list if he was included, as it was money and not talent that kept him off this list.

Perhaps the Giant’s problem is not an inability to draft HS hitters, but an indifference to actually draft good hitters. It is not like they have produced a whole lot of great hitters from the college ranks.

The Giants organization has appeared to have brought in some better talent evaluators in recent months that could be to our benefit. I am not putting any money on that, but it could be possible.

God be praised.

SF Giants scouting team is under new supervision this season with Messers Barr & Co. so maybe there will have a better track record with hitters. When SF has been unfortunate to select so high in previous drafts they have done well. In 1985 with the #2 overall pick the Giants selected Will Clark. The following year with the #3 overall pick the Giants selected Matt Williams. Not too shabby.

Scout, cross-check, meetings, draft and develop the best player regardless of position or age.

I spent 4 years in Pacifica for high school. Those 4 sunny days were awesome!

But, this is from a Kevin Goldsteing chat from yesterday. (emphasis mine)

Who do you see the giants taking with the 5th pick and is there any chance that Buster Posey falls to them?

Kevin Goldstein: Actually, there are some scenarios where Posey could get there if the DEVIL Rays decide to pass on him. It’s doubtful, but it could happen. Expect one of the big college bats for SF, although there are some wacky rumors with them taking a player that is nowhere near anybody’s radar for a pick that high.

Does this not scare you to death?

I’m so glad to see him join the immortals mentioned in McCovey Chronicles.

It almost negates the foul taste from the mention of Johnny LeMaster, whose promise foolishly ushered out Chris Speier, my other favorite underrated Giant from the ‘70s.

The Giants should stay away from HS hitters with the #5 pick. There is a time and place for that kind of draft pick, but this is not it. (Sadly, last year was not it either, but they did it anyway).

You go with a HS hitter if you’re the ‘93-’06 Atlanta Braves – you have a very low pick because your ML team did so well the previous year, and you have a minor league system that is geared toward teaching young players how to play the game the “right” way. The Giants were sort of in that position in 2000-2003 – but without the appropriately-structured minor league system.

In the Giants current position, a college hitter is the correct choice at #5. If a promising HS pitcher is available at #37, and somebody like Conor Gillaspie isn’t still available, then by all means knock yourself out a select a pitcher. After that, I’d alternate hitter/pitcher.

The big question: which college hitter do you target? Supposedly, the strength of this year’s draft is college 1Bmen. If you truly believe Smoak is the best college hitter available at #5, then you grab him. If not, you have the luxury of another shot at a 1B (Wallace, Dykstra, Davis) with the #37 pick.

And yes, I still want Gordon Beckham at #5.

Your question is one I’ve thought a lot about. In this case, I’d give a slight edge to the college hitter over the high schooler, but I wouldn’t go crazy about it.

For instance, if I had to choose between Eric Hosmer and Justin Smoak, I’d pick Smoak because he’s more advanced and less likely to be screwed up by the Giants’ bad coaching.

On the other hand, if Tim Beckham is available and the Giants’ scouts think he is clearly better than the college alternatives, I’m cool with that. But I’d also want to know whether the team is doing anything to improve its instruction of position players.

All in all, I’m kind of hoping for Justin Smoak or Gordon Beckham.