Examining the Worst Draft in History

by Dave Gershman on Jan 12, 2011 5:07 PM EST in History & Hall of Fame

The June Amateur Draft, also known as the Rule 4 Draft, is one of the most exciting events of the year if you're an avid baseball fan. This is especially true if you're a prospect junkie, focusing on the young and exciting talent that will eventually enrich your favorite team's farm system, and is extremely fun to pour over. Every year, there are talent evaluators who rank each team's respective draft. In 2010, the Indians, Blue Jays, Red Sox, and Pirates among others were said to have the strongest drafts -- and it certainly takes a smart organization to evaluate and scout talent that those four teams stumbled upon in '10.

The Cleveland Indians 1999 draft was the complete opposite of how their 2010 draft appears (though it's a bit early for that, isn't it? - ed). Despite not having a first or sandwich round pick, John Hart's crew still had arguably the worst draft in Major League history. Funny thing was, they were one of the best teams in the league in '99, actually becoming the first team in the Modern Era to score over 1,000 runs in Regular Season play. They finished first in the league and had one of the best records in Baseball even though they had to pack their bags after losing out in the post-season. Almost everything went right for Cleveland that year ... except for their infamous draft, which looks like this:

Indiansdraftpicture_medium

One thing to note: It may look as though Ben Francisco and Jeff Baker were the highlights of this draft right? Wrong. They failed to sign. As you can see, the Indians selected what would at this point add up to a -1.5 WAR worth of talent. In other words, almost absolutely nothing. Cabrera pitched for the Indians for only four seasons, sporting a 102 ERA+ over that span along with a 2.02 K/BB ratio over 130.1 innings pitched, and Jason Davisin what would be nearly 6 Major League seasons, posted a 4.60 xFIP and a 5.25 K/9 over 461 innings pitched. Kyle Denney doesn't have much to show either, having pitched 16 innings of 5.36 FIP ball in 2004 for the Tribe.

Regardless, never doubt this Cleveland Indians organization. Three years after John Hart and co. left for the Lone Star opportunity, ironically, the Indians were ranked #1 among farm systems in baseball and more than made up for the lost year of prospect additions in '99. Brandon Phillips, Grady Sizemore, Victor Martinez, Cliff Lee, Brian Tallet, and Jeremy Guthrie were among those that made the system so special and cannot be overlooked.

Anyway, the likes of those selected in the '99 Draft by the Cleveland Indians pretty much have to earn the award for worst draft in history, as no team yet has selected a group of guys who have done so little at the pro level. The Expos had some very bad drafts in the early 2000's, but theres still a chance some of those guys can improve, thus there are still many Major Leaguers. Despite their previous and latter successes, one might imagine how their fortunes might have changed if it wasn't for this blemish on their otherwise successful record.

Tweet Comment 16 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

the likes of those selected in the ’99 Draft by the Cleveland Indians pretty much have to earn the award for worst draft in history, as no team yet has selected a group of guys who have done so little at the pro level.

Check out the Jays 1980 draft. 25 rounds, 0 big league games.

by masterkembo on Jan 12, 2011 5:58 PM EST reply actions

Yeouch!

by Patrick42 on Jan 12, 2011 6:54 PM EST up reply actions

Yes, and this is 50 rounds…

Dave Gershman - Beyond The Box Score / SPANdemonium/ Royals Prospects | Twitter: @Dave_Gershman

by Dave Gershman on Jan 12, 2011 7:19 PM EST up reply actions

I give you the 1994 Pirates draft

50 rounds, they did have a first rounder (picked 11th), and the only player who signed with the Pirates and made the majors was ninth-rounder Jimmy Anderson — who had -0.3 WAR according to baseball reference. That’s right, the whole draft was below replacement. (Fangraphs has him at 4.2 WAR, though.) Their last pick was Brandon Larson, who didn’t sign, was later drafted and put up about a win below replacement.

Not actually affiliated with whygavs.

by WHYG Zane Smith on Jan 12, 2011 8:53 PM EST up reply actions

Your point?

I would say that four players that actually played in the bigs out of 50 rounds worth of picks is a better haul than zero players making the bigs out of 25 rounds. You said:

as no team yet has selected a group of guys who have done so little at the pro level

And that is clearly wrong as demonstrated by the Jays example and Zane’s Pirates example.

by masterkembo on Jan 13, 2011 8:57 AM EST up reply actions

To be fair,

negative WAR is worse than zero WAR. So though they might have had a cup of coffee, their team was worse off for letting them.

See Data Differently: Beyond the Box Score | @justinbopp

by Justin Bopp on Jan 13, 2011 10:15 AM EST up reply actions

True enough

And I somehow missed the part about Baker not signing. I take it back, this one was very slightly worse.

by masterkembo on Jan 13, 2011 11:11 AM EST up reply actions

Another credit to Gersh, here:

His original title said “one of the worst,” which would have alleviated this nuance in the first place. But the tone of the article suggested that with the lowest WAR total for a draft in history, there’s little room for others in the “worst ever” category. I edited the title to reflect the thesis.

See Data Differently: Beyond the Box Score | @justinbopp

by Justin Bopp on Jan 13, 2011 11:21 AM EST up reply actions

I'm pretty sure that wasn't clear at first

Not sure if Dave or Justin fixed it or something, but I’m pretty sure that in my first read-through I was under the impression that Francisco hadn’t signed and Baker had. Probably could have put a symbol indicating who didn’t sign in the table, but I suppose we’re past that point.

Baseball is my preferred sport. It should be yours, too.
I'm an editor for Beyond the Box Score, an SB Nation blog.

by Satchel Price on Jan 13, 2011 12:53 PM EST up reply actions

Where's the examination?

You list the players that made the majors and in a cursory glance go over their performance. I don’t see anything in the ONE graph above, that is actually about the Indians draft in 1999, that would qualify as an examination.

There are no “Who was responsible?” outside of naming of the GM. The follow-up should have been “How can a front office that included: Josh Byrnes, Mark Shapiro, Neal Huntington, Chris Antonetti and John Hart fail so badly?”

No “Why did they fail in 1999 but not other years?” or “Did they fail in other years?” No comparison to other drafts headed by John Hart or Scouting Dir. Josh Byrnes.

Something like: Sean Casey, CC Sabathia, John McDonald, David Riske, Paul Rigdon, Ryan Drese and Dustin Mohr are the only players the Indians selected from 1995-1998 to have a positive career rWAR they total 75.3 rWAR (Sabathia has accrued 43.4 of that), 16 other players contributed a total of -15.6 rWAR.

No information about their strategies or drafting tendencies? Nothing? You didn’t ask any question, ergo, you can’t give any answers.

So what is the point of this article, Oblio?

by mudie on Jan 12, 2011 7:07 PM EST reply actions

Here's some data

I was just taking a look at the 1999-2006 drafts per team and looking at the rWAR of the draft picks. I looked at the WAR of all players drafted (regradless if they signed) and the WAR that each player earned for the team drafting them. I’ve also included a yearly payroll, won-loss, and attendance for each team. Just a little side project. I’m putting the NL data together. The Reds had a draft where the only player to make it to the bigs was Sowers who never signed and the 2006 Nationals have yet to have a player make it to the big leagues.

http://tribetalk365.blogspot.com/2010/10/american-league-draft-war-review.html

It was a fun little exercise going through this.

by MrNegative1 on Jan 12, 2011 9:18 PM EST reply actions

Something to keep in mind though

There were some other bad drafts, but I also concluded the minor league stance of some of those players, who never made it anywhere. Also, with 2006, 2005, and even 2004, there are still some players who can make an impact. Especially 05 and 06. For example, Mark Rogers who was picked in ’04. But the Indians draft was so poor, other teams lousy draft had players who are currently playing despite how good or bad they are, see Mike Hinckley with the Expos against Fernando Cabrera.

Dave Gershman - Beyond the Box Score / SPANdemonium / Royals Prospects / Twitter: @Dave_Gershman

by Dave Gershman on Jan 12, 2011 9:46 PM EST up reply actions

you are correct

I’m just providing a link to the data, not trying to dismiss what you wrote or anything like that.

My original purpose was just to see if any teams had over hat period of time drafted and developed players and who hadn’t…..selfish endeavor on my part!

by MrNegative1 on Jan 12, 2011 9:53 PM EST up reply actions

Gotcha

And I saw what you did. Really, really good stuff. everyone check that link out.

Dave Gershman - Beyond the Box Score / SPANdemonium / Royals Prospects / Twitter: @Dave_Gershman

by Dave Gershman on Jan 12, 2011 10:09 PM EST up reply actions

Wow, that's some really good work. Thanks for sharing!

On Twitter: @baseballtwit

by adarowski on Jan 13, 2011 10:43 AM EST up reply actions

Just to specify something, Baker failed to sign with Cleveland too, he went to Clemson

and was later drafted and signed by the Rockies. The way the post currently reads it makes it seem like Francisco didn’t sign with the Indians but Baker may have, just not playing with them.

by Rox Girl on Jan 12, 2011 9:50 PM EST reply actions