Talking with Matt Klentak, Orioles' Director of Baseball Operations
by Stacey on May 11, 2011 11:30 AM EDT
in News & Rumors
Email
PrintYesterday I was fortunate to be able to spend some time on the field at Camden Yards with Daniel Moroz from Camden Crazies, Anthony Amobi from Oriole Post, and Steve Giles of Baltimore Sports Report. The Orioles invited us to watch some batting practice then talk to Matt Klentak, the Director of Baseball Operations, and Jeremy Guthrie (no introduction needed). It was a great gesture by the Orioles to give us the access and it was also really cool.
We got to the field just as Luke Scott was in the cage taking BP, smoking balls into the center field seats. Also in his group were Nick Markakis, Vladimir Guerrero, Mark Reynolds (who was hitting balls the way we thought he'd hit them in actual games), and Adam Jones. The usual suspects (Palmer, Thorne, Hunter) were hanging around the cages in addition to coaches and a few guys from the Mariners. The Mariners filtered out of the third base side bullpen as BP went on, and we got to watch them do some warming up and stretching. Just hanging around in his jeans was Ken Griffey, Jr. It's amazing how much he just looks like a regular dude. The weather was gorgeous and I could have just stood there behind home plate watching the guys forever, but we had business to take care of.
Matt Klentak, the Director of Baseball Operations for the Orioles, met with us first. Not being entirely sure what Klentak's responsibilities were, that seemed a reasonable place to start the Q&A. While his responsibilities vary depending upon what is needed (he mentioned that a person in his position should never fall in love with one particular task because things change so rapidly), he is largely responsible for the administration of the forty-man roster. Upon hearing this I of course immediately thought of Pedro Viola and how he has managed to defy all logic by remaining on the roster this long, but I kept that to myself. Klentak is responsible for ensuring the Orioles meet all the rules of compliance regarding the forty-man roster, including managing the disabled list and other details.
Klentak also spoke about international scouting and specifically the Orioles' decision to not be one of the major players internationally. Klentak echoed the sentiments previously voiced by President of Baseball Operations Andy MacPhail when he said that historically speaking, investments in the international market aren't as sound as domestic investments, and while the team has increased its resources for the international market the past couple years, they are not and probably will not be one of the biggest spenders internationally.
Klentak then went a step further, telling us that last year the Orioles brought someone in for the specific task of analyzing the return on investment for international signings and based on the results, it was determined that it wasn't high enough to to warrant a bigger investment than they are giving it (he understandably declined to give details on the study). The Orioles have to be mindful of their resource allocation and while the domestic front is also risky, it's easier to know their true talent level. Players in international markets have agents that protect them so fiercely that it can be difficult to see them play in enough game situations to accurately assess their talent.
A few other topics were broached with Klentak (he doesn't know what will happen with the new CBA agreement and while he's disappointed with the on-field performance of the team he's certain it's not what we'll see for the rest of the season), but the international scouting conversation was definitely the most interesting. Afterward Daniel Moroz (official number cruncher of the blogO'sphere) expressed an interest in doing his own research on the rate of return on international prospects, and when I got back to my computer I emailed our James F because I knew he would be interested in those comments. Hopefully one or both of those guys will do some digging to try and determine just how valuable international scouting is.
I'll have more later today on meeting Jeremy Guthrie and what he had to say about his performance so far this year, his opinions on Zach Britton and being considered a mentor, his foray into the world of social media, and more.
47 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Great stuff
P.S.: I commend you for being able to resist muttering “Really? What’s the ROI on giving Derrek Lee and Vlad Guerrero 15 million bucks?” under your breath.
I'm not sure how much I trust the Orioles methodology on the international market,
especially when they are pouring money into the super effecient reliever market…
If you look at those UZR ratings or whatever
my sentiments exactly.
it would seem that an obvious, face value assessment of the organization’s investment decisions would lead to the conclusion that the current strategy is completely untenable – a dismal failure. one major avenue sorely lacking in the set up is the investment in the international market.
I can understand how such an investment can be intimidating to a company not used to dealing in foreign business environments. but the upside to investing internationally speaks for itself in the number of outstanding players found overseas. Honestly it sounds like this guy is just making excuses for a bad business decision.
plus, let’s be real. a lot of the places, particularly in latin america, where you can find great baseball are not the most well off financially. with some creativity, there are all kinds of things you could do in say, the DR or Venezuela or Mexico that would be much more expensive in the US. One place I think should be seriously looked at is Haiti. This is the poorest nation in the Western Hemisphere sitting on the same island as the DR, with a huge population of young men who would you know would strive for a chance at the living professional baseball could afford them.
Fan-dabby-dozy.....tastic.....
Good Stuff.
The ROI issue on international signings implies very obvious questions. Do other teams have similar loses? For those that see a return, what do they do right? Is it Orioles scouting is lacking? I still strikes me that discounting international scouting because ’we’re not good at it’ is real weak.
Also, as mentioned above, what is the ROI on the succession of free agents we’ve seen traipsed through here? The O’s continue to lose, yet they’ll bump up payroll by 15 million (or so) to continue losing. It’s frustrating to watch year after year.
All good questions
And ones we’re not going to get the answer to. If I’d been thinking more on my toes I would have asked about the free agents but I’m sure we would have gotten a rote answer anyway. I don’t think they were saying “we’re not good at it” so much as saying it’s not worth the return for anyone but the Orioles are choosing not to throw their money at it unlike other teams. He did concede that it might not seem that way given that the Mariners were throwing out Michael Pineda in game one and Felix Hernandez in game two.
I would never expect you to ask those questions in that context
The front office should be asking those questions behind closed doors. The answers you heard indicate that they back off because of a poor ROI. OK, so now what do you do? The real question is why do we get a poor ROI and can we estimate if the same is true for all others? If not, what are they doing right? I have the obvious suspicion it boils down to the scouting talent and the O’s don’t have that.
The answer would be easier to swallow if the O’s excelled in the domestic market. They average perhaps about 75% of the picks that their AL East competitors manage because those teams have the players and wherewithal to manipulate the draft. I’m guessing 75%. If I recall, I saw an article that indicated the Red Sox had almost twice as many draftees over the past five or six years. MacPhail has said the game is numbers. I’ll agree, and then player development. When are they going to excel in the domestic market?
yeah, that's the real question
forget about the terrible, terrible free agent track record and everything else. The Orioles are making a conscious effort to eschew the international market in order to maximize their efforts elsewhere, but what’s that accomplishing? A team with some promising pitchers but a lot of black holes positionally?
Free Nolan Reimold!
I wonder how much you can read between the lines about that.
Do you think maybe MacPhail/the rest of the FO see the international market as a corrupt game they don’t want to play? I have to imagine a fair amount of money changes hands in shady circumstances in this international prospect scouting/signing game.
"What the hell is a Baltimore knot?" "I don't know, but it's never the same thing twice." - The Wire
by Eat More Esskay on May 11, 2011 12:27 PM EDT up reply actions
That was the impression I got
I certainly don’t want to put any words into anyone’s mouth, but his comment about the agents being so protective of their players is really the one that stuck with me, and it led me to wonder if this isn’t them making a stand against that. Which…ok, but we still need those players.
Ask Gary Williams how avoiding the snake pits of AAU worked out for him recruiting.....
I think the two situations are fairly similar.
"Complacency is your demise." - Kerry King
by duck on May 11, 2011 12:51 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I feel like that's probably not a bad analogy.
The difference is probably that there’s no equivalent to a player choosing to be a one-and-done in this process.
But it’s easy for me to sit here and make these pronouncements when I’m really not sure what kind of money changes hands or who is expected to be given a job or whatever.
"What the hell is a Baltimore knot?" "I don't know, but it's never the same thing twice." - The Wire
by Eat More Esskay on May 11, 2011 1:06 PM EDT up reply actions
My thoughts exactly
Less big words and more exclamation marks
by Astronaut Mike Dexter on May 11, 2011 1:14 PM EDT up reply actions
I agree it's a decent analogy.
But that begs the question – integrity or results?
Do I like the results of maryland basketball the last few seasons – no.
Do I disagree with Gary Williams philosophy – no again.
On the Orioles and the international market – if I think the game is dirty or corrupt, I probably will find I have two choices other than immersing into the muck. The first is to figure out how to work outside the process. That’s a good bet to be more expensive. The other is to not bother and try to maximize my returns elsewhere.
While democracy must have its organization and controls, its vital breath is individual liberty.
- Charles Evans Hughes
The Yankees signed Robinson Cano for $150,000.
That was in 2001, though. So I don’t know whether that situation would play out the same today. It seems like there’s greater visibility for DR prospects and there maybe would have been a bidding war to drive up the price. Plus, again, no idea how much money changes hands under the table to get that $150,000 signing, then or now.
But even if it costs $500,000 to sign a less-heralded guy from there or anywhere, and maybe half as much again in palm greasing, again, it’s a case where you can sign five guys for less than you paid Garrett Atkins. I use that as my reference point just because it was pretty much the ultimate frustrating, expensive failure. If you sign five DR guys (who are worth signing but aren’t on the tier where everyone goes crazy over them like Aroldis Chapman or Miguel Sano or whatever) and that’s your price figure, then you control those guys for six years in the minor leagues, plus you get six potential years of major league production from them that’s cost-controlled.
The Yankees have paid about $20 million to Robinson Cano thus far. He has been worth $75 million dollars.
"What the hell is a Baltimore knot?" "I don't know, but it's never the same thing twice." - The Wire
by Eat More Esskay on May 11, 2011 12:52 PM EDT up reply actions
the response of course
is that Robbie Cano isn’t the norm, not even close. You can’t just say “well, Cano cost this much, how is this not a worthwhile game to play?” because he is very much not the average return but rather the best case return. How much did the guy you’ve never heard of cost? Because that’s just wasted money. And how many of those guys do you have to go through to get to Robbie Cano, who is one in, what? A million?
Free Nolan Reimold!
It comes back around to the player development question from yesterday's draft post as well.
Suppose the Orioles spent $5 million in bonuses over, I don’t know, seven guys with some promise. If one of them gives you one good major league season at some point then the expenditure was collectively worth it, yes? Though of course it’s not that easy to say it’s a 1:7 chance or whatever.
Then the question is whether the Orioles are properly identifying talent, and whether they’re properly developing the players they do sign. Which, again, I don’t know that we can easily judge.
"What the hell is a Baltimore knot?" "I don't know, but it's never the same thing twice." - The Wire
by Eat More Esskay on May 11, 2011 1:15 PM EDT up reply actions
and I think what the Orioles are trying to say
is that sure you can spend 5 million on 7 shitty foreign players or 1 shitty guy who used to be good in the majors but there’s a tiny chance any of those 7 guys will even sniff the bigs. They know that folks who get their sports perspective from ESPN are going to be very excited about Vladimir Guerrero but won’t ever even KNOW about signing seven guys who are now scattered among delmarva and aberdeen.
I really don’t have much faith in the Orioles farm system’s ability to develop anything but the top level talent anyways, which is expensive whether it comes from the draft or anywhere else.
"Initially thought I had BieberFever but turns out I have pneumonia."
-Guts
All the "excitement" over signing Vlad still gets you 11,000 fans on Tuesdays in May
"What the hell is a Baltimore knot?" "I don't know, but it's never the same thing twice." - The Wire
by Eat More Esskay on May 11, 2011 2:00 PM EDT up reply actions
yeah, if the orioles seriously think
that Vlad generated excitement (and I honestly do not think they honestly thought signing Vlad would generate serious ticket sales) then they should hire someone to determine the ROI on that sort of thing, too.
Free Nolan Reimold!
there was considerable excitement among fans about the vlad signing on the blogsphere.
Folksy literate type.
irrelevant to the Orioles perspective if it doesn't sell tickets
and I mean a lot of tickets
Free Nolan Reimold!
One guy alone isn't usually going to increase ticket sales.
Vlad’s impact at the box office will be if he contributes to improved performance on the field. And while he isn’t hitting as well this season as he did through the same point last year, he’s not doing exceptionally poorly.
So far, it has been Reynolds and Lee who are underperforming, along with most of the guys already here – Roberts, Markakis and to some extent, Adam Jones and Matt Weiters. (Matt gets some slack for his average w/ guys on base. )
While democracy must have its organization and controls, its vital breath is individual liberty.
- Charles Evans Hughes
Sure, I thought you were saying that it was wrong for the front office to think that the signing would generate excitement.
It did generate excitement. Whether that excitement boosts ticket sales is a separate issue.
Folksy literate type.
I'd be interested to know how much money exactly
We’re talking about to increase international scouting. If we’re talking like $20 or $30 million more per year, then I guess if their analyst says it’s not worth it, it might not be a sound investment. But if we’re talking like $5 million more per year to take a stab at finding some good international talent, we have got try to that. Rolling the dice on the international market is absolutely worth half a Derek Lee.
Less big words and more exclamation marks
by Astronaut Mike Dexter on May 11, 2011 12:05 PM EDT reply actions
I assume that means
Reynolds was whiffing on half of his BP balls, but launching the other half into the Hilton.
Free Nolan Reimold!
The domestic draft trap
The Os are doomed if they rely on the domestic draft to resurrect the team unless they find a way to get a haul (like Tampa Bay has this year) or they can get an extra few high round picks a year by manipulating the roster. The Orioles do the opposite. They have fewer high picks because of their propensity to sign high risk relievers like Gonzales who cost them a second round choice.
The Orioles don’t get good players from the free agent market. They don’t get good players from the international market. They don’t get enough good players from the domestic draft to make a difference. As a result, they will be bad forever and ever. Isn’t the only way out of this cycle to sell everyone with value for prospects and field an AAAA team for several years while the prospects mature in the minors. That would be more fun than the “keep digging the hole deeper” that they follow now.
Also
I don’t see any evidence that the Orioles are doing much to set themselves apart from other organizations in scouting the Rule 4 draft if that’s where they expect the best ROI. Generally, where the Orioles have done well with their picks (Machado and Klein in 2010, Matusz in 2008), it’s been in picking players that were well-regarded by the consensus of scouts and talent evaluators; i.e., in “running with the herd.”
Where the Orioles have run against the herd and used independent judgment, it’s almost always been disastrous — that is, Xavier Avery and L.J. Hoes as 2nd and 3rd rounders in 2008, the Hobgoblin as a first rounder in 2009, and Connor Narron in the 4th in 2010.
That tells me that when the O’s scouts have a “hunch” about an amateur player, it’s almost always wrong, thus minimizing their ability to find gems buried deeper in the draft (and maximize ROI that way). There’s always the option of overpaying beyond slot for later-round draftees, but a) the Orioles haven’t done that, historically, and b) the new CBA will probably eliminate that option anyway.
So I guess I’m saying: I don’t get it.
by AndrewTorrez on May 11, 2011 3:18 PM EDT up reply actions
Can you really call
Avery and Hoes “disastrous” picks?
I am eating you, motherfucker. You cannot hurt me. - PhilR8
Fair enough
“Disastrous” is a strong word that should be reserved for Hobgood. My point is that nobody besides the Orioles saw those guys as 2nd and 3rd rounders, and, by the look of things, it’s ‘everybody else’ who was right and the Orioles who were wrong.
by AndrewTorrez on May 11, 2011 3:42 PM EDT up reply actions
I think I better go home and lay down. I can't be feeling well if I'm
in agreement here.
Seriously though, I don’t see any problem with either guy. I’m a bit biased about Hoes, as he graduated from my HS, but he looks like he could make it to the ML. He’s got aways to go before he does so as an everyday player, but I think he’ll at least sniff a big league roster. I’ve never been that big a fan of “raw, tools” guys. One reason I love baseball so is that it is one sport that still requires a certain amount of thinking and one where fundamentals still can keep pace with athleticism. You don’t have to be 6’7" and able to leap out of the gym or 6’3" 300 lbs with above average foot speed. That said, Avery seems to be learning and progressing. Anytime you have a tools guy that shows you he can learn, you have to like it.
While democracy must have its organization and controls, its vital breath is individual liberty.
- Charles Evans Hughes
One day proves nothing
but Avery looked like a weak pick today at Bowie. Totally lost at the plate with three strikeouts.
Like a bad, suave dude. You know what I'm sayin'. COOL. SC 7/24/08
by 33 on May 11, 2011 5:41 PM EDT up reply actions
Perspective man ... perspective.
Don’t live and die by one day’s performance.
While democracy must have its organization and controls, its vital breath is individual liberty.
- Charles Evans Hughes
haha thanks for the wisdom
I was really broken up over his one game until you said that.
I am eating you, motherfucker. You cannot hurt me. - PhilR8
I need to dust off some hard drives and find it, but the last I checked (I found my data source to be too holey to be entirely trusted, so I did not publish it) the cost of an international prospect would be twice what it would be for the same domestic prospect. It is pushed up to 2.5 to 3 times when considering how a more shotgun approach is needed to find these guys.
That said . . . the issue is more about supply and demand in two seperate markets as opposed to only operating in a single restrictive market.
why?
the costs of putting up a guy in most latin american countries is a fraction of what you’d pay for them to stay at Holiday Inn Expresses across Southern California, Texas and the Southeast. Better yet hiring a local guy to be “our man in havana” so to speak (which is probably the smarter approach), is a fraction of what you’d pay a full time scout in the US. why is it so expensive to operate in countries where basically everything is a bargain and a half compared to the US?
Fan-dabby-dozy.....tastic.....
I think the players cost more because it's an open market.
Anyone can sign anyone, therefore there is competition, which can drive up prices. This doesn’t exist domestically because players are subject to the draft, where they ultimately have to take what one team offers them or they don’t get to play professional baseball just now. Players have some leverage based on their age, talent and school situation but there’s not a bidding war kind of situation.
I think you’re right that there would be less overhead to have a scout operating in a Latin American country though. I imagine that it’s difficult to find a person who’s competent and trustworthy to take that over. It’s frustrating to see the team seeming to refuse to pursue that avenue at all.
"What the hell is a Baltimore knot?" "I don't know, but it's never the same thing twice." - The Wire
by Eat More Esskay on May 11, 2011 4:27 PM EDT up reply actions
Seems to me...
…a lot of these places are going to have a wild, wild west business atmosphere – and there are all kinds of ways to develop and sign prospects out of them. I hate when I hear these GMs complaining about the buscones or local agents in the DR. It’s like here you are, running a multimillion dollar franchise in the US, and you’re upset because you can’t find it in yourself to match wits with some guys with some hustle to them down in the DR?? Stop being lazy. Open some baseball academies. Do some real business. Get creative and get the talent out of these places. Money talks and bullshit walks. That’s true anywhere in the world. The clubs that can get it done, end up signing the Pedro Martinez quality players of the world.
Fan-dabby-dozy.....tastic.....
I too am interested in why.
But I’m not going to assume reasons why it shouldn’t be. What i know about international scouting pretty much extends to being able to name other countries where baseball is popular and who have produced players making it into the big leagues.
Does anyone’s knowledge about it extend beyond that?
While democracy must have its organization and controls, its vital breath is individual liberty.
- Charles Evans Hughes
Well, of course they are more expensive
You don’t have the draft artificially diminishing the demand for their services and therefore their value.
Of course, the reason to be involved internationally at the high end is because you don’t get unlimited picks of players in the top three rounds. If you need more than one elite prospect a season, then international is the only place you CAN go. For example – say you’re the Orioles and you’d like an extra second round pick. Well, you can’t have one. But if you sign an international prospect like a Jose Vinicio you can have him at roughly 2.5 to 3 times the cost of a second round shortstop, which is about what Vinicio is comparable to.
To be understood is to be a prostitute. ~ Fernando Pessoa
I think lumping the international markets is painting with too broad a brush,
Big ticket international items might be a colossal waste of money, but that doesn’t mean that the international market should be ignored. The Orioles front office can point to Dice-K and Jose Pett and they’d be right to shun those guys, but how much did interesting guys like Jonathan Schoop cost to sign?
Doing the exact opposite of the Red Sox do, rather than on a smaller scale akin to the Pirates, feels like the wrong move. I mean, why even open a Dominican facility?
If you look at those UZR ratings or whatever
I've been a consistent critic of the Oriole's failure ... at least as I perceive it ..
.. on the international market. But my opinions are colored by a view of that market that is more 80’s to 90’s centric. It appears now that the market has perhaps changed significantly.
What if it is no longer a case of young (15 – 19 yr old) raw talent just dying for mentoring and a chance? What if “smart” players have moved in on an opportunity to take advantage of that “resource” to the point that it no longer is the virgin gold mine waiting for someone with vision willing to risk the capital to develop it?
While democracy must have its organization and controls, its vital breath is individual liberty.
- Charles Evans Hughes
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Official Sponsor of Camden Chat GameThreads
