Mark Rogers and the First Round Descent | Disciples of Uecker

Disciples of Uecker

We'd like to go to the Playoffs, that would be cool.

Milwaukee Brewers fans have an extreme relationship with GM Doug Melvin. Overall, Melvin’s tenure in Milwaukee is undoubtedly one of the most successful periods of baseball in Brewers history, regardless of any other critiques or concerns. Yet, those concerns are continually bubbling to the surface during a disappointing 2013 season.

From this 2013 campaign, several dichotomies can be placed in sharper light. While Melvin’s Brewers were one of the most competitive teams in the NL once his mid-2000s rebuilding ended, those competitive years were sprinkled with a few losing-or-.500 campaigns. While the club produced some of the best baseball in franchise history in 2008 and 2011, that productivity indicates a win-now ideology that arguably fell flat in 2009-2010 and 2012-2013. Perhaps most importantly, while the club boasts three of their most valuable first round picks during Melvin’s tenure, their recent winning ideology and draft flops leave top picks on other squads, or lost, as signing failures.

Rogers Out
Over the weekend, the Brewers outrighted 2004 first rounder Mark Rogers, which sets up the righty for minor league free agency. Perhaps these dichotomies of Melvin’s tenure as GM appear no sharper than while considering Rogers, who served as the GM’s first top pitching pick with the Brewers organization. Now, I do not put any stock into arguments that Melvin cannot develop pitching prospects, given that the bats he develops have consistently been so good (or traded for even better pitching); it is extremely important to simply develop impact talent in general. So, in this regard, I don’t think Rogers’ outright release is noteworthy for that reason. Rather, Rogers’ release highlights a general issue, outside the picks of Ryan Braun and Rickie Weeks: the Brewers lately have had issues developing any impact first round talent whatsoever.

Outside of Braun and Weeks, Rogers is Melvin’s most valuable first round pick that played in Milwaukee. While Brett Lawrie has had a few polarizing seasons in Toronto, his glove is compensating for some of his batting shortcomings, and he has produced a strong Baseball-Reference WAR during his first few years. By contrast, Matt LaPorta, Jake Odorizzi, and Jeremy Jeffress have yet to emerge as impact talent, but if they do, it will likely be with an organization outside of Milwaukee. Overall, seven of Melvin’s eleven first round picks from 2003-2009 have made the majors thus far, with four of those picks serving outside of Milwaukee for the majority of their respective careers.

Mark Rogers is not a Bust
In this regard, it is difficult to call Rogers a “bust,” and leave it at that. First and foremost, Rogers made the big leagues, and produced some valuable innings for the club in 2012. One might scoff at that, but that’s certainly better than the eight players from his first round that failed to make the MLB. Oddly enough, according to Baseball-Reference, Rogers’ 1.1 WAR is good enough for 17th of the 33 players that made the MLB from his first round. While the average WAR from that first round is approximately 5.1 per big leaguer, an awful lot of that value is tied into Justin Verlander, Jered Weaver, Stephen Drew, Gio Gonzalez, Billy Butler, and Huston Street. 27 of the 2004 first rounders that made the big leagues are worth a combined 43 WAR, compared to those six players listed above, who are worth approximately 125 WAR. Mark Rogers is the median value of that 2004 first round class thus far, which says a lot about where the value of the “average” first rounder sits (Verlander and his gang have a lot of impact on that “average” value).

Even if Rogers represents the median value of his first round class, there’s something disappointing about adorning a fireballing arm with that title. Yet, here’s a key to recent drafts by the Brewers: Melvin’s scouting staffs, recently and in the past, have not had issues looking past some shortcomings in order to land an impact tool. With Rogers, the story was that corrected mechanics would amplify his already stunning fastball; more recently, looking past Victor Roache‘s injury and hit tool, the Brewers aggressively drafted his raw power. Here we might question the Brewers’ recent draft strategies; would an approach that valued something like “polish” or “balance” yield more impact talent than an approach that values “raw tools”? It’s obviously tough to find a direct answer for this, given the sheer number of teams that miss on impact talent in the first round (we’re not going to open the, “if the Brewers had only drafted….” game). Yet, it’s also difficult to ignore the first round trends within the Brewers’ organization.

First Round Developments

Team First Rounders In MLB 1990-2009 in MLB 2010- in Top 10 Median WAR
Giants 48 .703 (26/37) 4 of 5 Mike Phillips Jacob Cruz (0.7-0.4)
Athletics 47 .690 (29/42) 5 of 6 Lee Tinsley (1.7)
Rangers 44 .767 (23/30) 3 of 11 Tanner Scheppers Justin Smoak (1.8-1.5)
Angels 43 .792 (19/24) 3 of 6 Lee Stevens (2.1)
Cardinals 43 .667 (24/36) 4 of 11 Allen Watson (2.9)
White Sox 43 .647 (22/34) 3 of 5 Chris Knapp (0.4)
Twins 42 .722 (26/36) 4 of 8 Travis Miller Willie Banks (1.3-1.1)
Mets 41 .630 .630 (17/27) 3 of 6 Jason Tyner (2.3)
Nationals 37 .585 (24/41) 3 of 5 Michael Barrett (2.7)
Royals 36 .656 (21/32) 2 of 5 Luke Hochevar Mitch Maier (2.0-1.5)
Red Sox 36 .625 (20/32) 6 of 11 Mike Garman Sam Horn (2.5-2.3)
Padres 36 .486 (17/35) 2 of 11 Bob Owchinko Logan Forsythe (2.1-1.7)
Blue Jays 35 .778 (28/36) 4 of 15 J.P. Arencibia (3.7)

In order to accompany the idea that Mark Rogers is a median first rounder, I surveyed each MLB club’s first round performance historically, while ultimately focusing on their “modern” drafts (1990-2009). I did not judge clubs on their 2010-present drafts in terms of how many picks reached the MLB, but I did judge their recent drafts based on how many of their recent first round picks are in their organizational Top 10 for BaseballAmerica>. There are obvious shortcomings to judging teams simply by how many first round picks made the MLB (for, like the Brewers, many clubs have first round players who served as trading chips rather than roster parts). Similarly, there are obvious shortcomings to judging teams’ drafts based on organizational rankings (for, not all rankings are created equal, and not all highly ranked players are impact players).

Team In MLB 1990-2009 in MLB 2010- in Top 10 Median WAR
Orioles 35 .563 (18/32) 2 of 5 Brian Matusz (2.1)
Cubs 35 .654 (17/26) 3 of 6 Ryan Flaherty (0.4)
Tigers 34 .667 (16/24) 1 of 4 Greg Gohr Ryan Perry (0.4-0.3)
Braves 34 .607 (17/28) 2 of 4 Mike Minor Brad Komminsk (3.4-2.2)
Phillies 33 .864 (19/22) 1 of 5 Dave Coggin (0.3)
Indians 33 .533 (16/30) 2 of 4 Drew Pomeranz (1.1)
Brewers 32 .607 (17/28) 4 of 6 Brett Lawrie Dion James (10.2-6.2)
Mariners 32 .739 (17/23) 3 of 4 Ron Villone John Mayberry (3.9-1.4)
Astros 30 .520 (13/25) 5 of 7 Don August Brian Bogusevic (1.8-1.7)
Reds 31 .720 (18/25) 3 of 7 Kurt Stillwell (3.1)
Pirates 31 .680 (17/25) 3 of 6 Sam Khalifa (0.9)
Dodgers 29 .600 (15/25) 3 of 5 Blake DeWitt (2.0)
Yankees 27 .556 (15/27) 1 of 6 Gerrit Cole Brian Buchanan (0.5)
Team In MLB 1990-2009 in MLB 2010- in Top 10 Median WAR
Marlins 19 .773 (17/22) 3 of 5 Taylor Tankersley (0.7)
Rockies 16 .696 (16/23) 4 of 7 Ian Stewart Jayson Nix (3.7-3.5)
Diamondbacks 16 .739 (17/23) 3 of 7 Sergio Santos A.J. Pollock (2.9-2.2)
Rays 9 .692 (9/13) 4 of 14 Rocco Baldelli (10.2)

In the modern era, a sizable percentage of first rounders are making the major leagues. From 1990-2009, MLB clubs average nearly 29 first round picks per team, and 17 of those picks make the MLB (on average). In recent drafts, the sheer number of first round picks has not yet cooled off, as 2010-2013 drafts resulted in seven teams with six picks, and twelve teams with more than six picks. In this regard, we can see a general issue with the modern Brewers drafts is their basic number of picks; from 1990-2009, the Brewers made 28 first round picks, just shy of the league average. Similarly, from 2010-2013, the Brewers made six first round picks, which again, is right at the league average. While it is a good thing that the Brewers are at least making an average number of first round picks, this also shows the club’s general inability to aggressively use labor methods to gain extra draft picks; the Blue Jays (15), Rays (14), and Red Sox, Rangers, Cardinals, and Padres (11) lead in first round picks from 2010-present. One might question whether the Brewers’ modest number of first round picks influences their decisions to gamble with raw tools.

Notably, the Brewers’ 1990-2009 first round-to-MLB success rate of .607 is below average. However, this fact is not necessarily attributed to Melvin’s drafts, but rather, the franchise’s rough early 1990s period. From 1990-1993, the Brewers failed to use a first round pick to produce an MLB player. Twelve other MLB teams boast notable first round droughts of three or more years during the “modern” draft era:

Cubs, 2002-2005
Cardinals, 2000-2002
Astros, 1999-2004##
Mariners, 1999-2001
Padres, 1999-2001**
Yankees, 1998-2001
Braves, 1996-1999
Red Sox, 1995-1997*
Mets, 1995-1997
Indians, 1995-1997#
Tigers, 1993-1995
Brewers, 1990-1993
Dodgers, 1990-1992

*one (supplemental) of six first round picks made MLB
**one (supplemental) of eight first round picks made MLB
#one of four first round picks made MLB
##one of four first round picks made MLB; two years without picks

With the draft becoming more of an ideological focus in the mid-to-late 2000s, it is notable that no club has yet to experience a first round drought from 2005-present.

Ultimately, Brewers fans are right to feel disappointed with the Mark Rogers campaign ending in Milwaukee. However, disappointment with Rogers’ overall performance should not necessarily be the focus of Brewers fans. Rather, Brewers fans and analysts ought to use this opportunity to address the organization’s recent draft picks and Melvin’s staff’s ideological approaches toward their drafts. If Mark Rogers serves as the “median” first round draft pick, how can the Brewers approach their drafts to land more impact talent?

RESOURCES:
BaseballAmerica. GrindMedia, LLC., 2013.
Baseball-Reference. Sports Reference, LLC., 2000-2013.

IMAGE (Getty): http://www.zimbio.com/photos/Mark+Rogers/Washington+Nationals+v+Milwaukee+Brewers/q5HAgZe5uSU

Share Our Posts

Share this post through social bookmarks.

  • Delicious
  • Digg
  • Newsvine
  • RSS
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati

Comments

Tell us what do you think.

  1. Eugene Mannarino says: September 3, 2013

    i HAVE BEEN ONE OF mARK BIGGEST FANS AND SUPPORTERS AND HOPE THEY CAN WORK OUT SOME DEAL TO GET HIM ANOTHER iNVITE TO BREWERS CAMP IN 2014

  2. Mathdude says: September 3, 2013

    Thank goodness we shut him down last August.

  3. Ernie Banks says: September 5, 2013

    I’m sorry, but Mark Rogers is an incredible bust. You have to consider where he was picked in the first round as well as his total performance. When you add the two together, the latter alone qualifying him as a bust, there is not other conclusion to make than he was a horrible pick in that draft. And then when you throw in that they passed on Jered Weaver and Stephen Drew, who were both more highly ranked before the draft, because they would have been too “expensive”, it makes it a no brainer.

    Robers is one of the worst 1st rounders in the history of the franchise, and only a true homer would be able to justify him as “not being a bust”.

    • Nicholas Zettel says: September 5, 2013

      I disagree for a few reasons:

      First, I think the money argument has some merit, but ultimately is a legitimate reason for a club not to draft a player in the early-2000s. Correct me if I’m wrong, but even if the club would not be penalized for spending a ton of money on a bonus, the revenue sharing and central fund were not yet as strong as they would become in the 2007-2011 CBA.

      Furthermore, we can play the “what-if” game with 10-14 other teams; eight players drafted before Weaver are less valuable in the MLB, ten players drafted before Drew are less valuable in the MLB, and two other players were drafted before them and didn’t even make the MLB.

      Finally, I simply think you’re judging his performance according to his pick without considering the distribution of value among those picks. As I mentioned in my argument above, 80% of the first round WAR is claimed by seven players. The remaining 33.8 (or so) WAR is claimed by 34 players (including 8 players who never made the big leagues).

      This doesn’t make Rogers a good MLB player, and it doesn’t mean he’s not a disappointment. But I question the way “bust” is used to describe a guy like Rogers, since he (a) made the MLB, and (b) performed at the median value for his draft class.

      I don’t think it’s homerism to challenge the “Mark Rogers is a bust” line. I do appreciate your comment, it’s good to argue about these things.

      • Ernie Banks says: September 5, 2013

        One thing to also consider when looking at how and why Mark Rogers finally made it to MLB, is that if he were on any other team in baseball, he would have been released at least 2 years prior to what he was. My feeling is that the only reason he was able to pitch in the Major Leagues was that the Brewers are very bad at cutting their losses, and releasing Rogers at the time he really should have been (some time in 2007 or 2008). Teams that draft and develop well, as well as higher market cap teams, would have gotten rid of Rogers about 5 years ago.

        • Eugene Mannarino says: September 5, 2013

          I am not Sure you can say Bust maybe dissapointment you can never say Bust because of Injuries.

          • Ernie Banks says: September 5, 2013

            Rogerrs was a huge injury risk the day he was drafted. The Brewers knew this and they drafted him anyway. He WAS a bust because his injury issues were known and they picked him anyway in the hopes they could have changed him.

          • Eugene Mannarino says: September 5, 2013

            I don;t remember him being Injured coming out of HS. Just that he was from Maine and did not get to pitch alot

      • Ernie Banks says: September 5, 2013

        Also, wit the money question, one of the reasons the Brewers had been historically bad at spending and developing and winning during the Selig years, was that they were not willing to put good money up front for expensive draftees.

        Mark Rogers was given a $2.2 Million signing bonus in 2004, Weaver signed for $3 million and Drew also signed for $4 million. the return on Rogers’ performance was about $4 million, for Weaver 4134 million and about $48 million on Drew. Again, Drew and Weaver were the two best players available that year and fell because of bonus issues. But do you think the Brewers would have rather spent “big” up front and gotten the monster returns? Either horrible foresight or just cheap, or both.

        • Nicholas Zettel says: September 5, 2013

          I think this is a fair question; what I’d like to know is, why did teams like the Mets pass on this talent, too? How do you discern whether the Brewers were cheap or had bad scouting or foresight, and not make that judgment of the other teams that passed on those players?

          I don’t mean that facetiously, but as a serious question when playing the “what if they drafted….” scenarios.

          • Ernie Banks says: September 8, 2013

            The Mets took Phillip Humber that year, who came from Rice U and was a top 5 ranked player as well. They didn’t necessarily “pass” on Weaver or Drew, they just took a different player at the 3rd pick He signed for $3mm. The Mets didn’t pass on signability on Weaver or Drew, they just took a different player.

Trackbacks

Websites mentioned my entry.

  1. Mark Rogers and Managing the Burn | Disciples of Uecker

Add a Comment

Fill in the form and submit.