Be sure to check out the feature currently on Perfect Game USA's homepage that breaks down Baseball America's top prospects team by team to determine where the top minor league prospects were drafted or signed from, whether it be from high school, college or as a non-drafted free agent. With so much talk about "Moneyball," and whether or not college players are a safer bet to make it to, and be more productive, at the Major League level, I think it's an interesting study to try and determine if that is indeed true.

Recently, I conducted my own study to determine where the best players in Major League Baseball were procured. I wanted to break it down not only by high school vs. college, but I also wanted to determine how many players were drafted versus those that were signed as non-drafted free agents, and what rounds typically produce the best and brightest Major League players. I tallied up my data by ranking the top 110 hitters from the 2004 season according to OPS (on-base percentage plus slugging percentage), and the top 110 pitchers according to ERA. Here is that story at Brewerfan.net:

http://www.brewerfan.net/ViewArticle.do?articleId=198

I think the biggest thing I took from the study was the success of first-round picks. While many may look at the baseball draft and call it somewhat of a crap-shoot since so few players actually make it to and prove to be productive at the big league level, more former first-round picks are represented on the list than any other player category. While 29% may not seem like much at first glance, that is nearly one third of the list, and the success rate of players round-by-round significantly drops immediately after the first round. In other words, there's a reason why the players drafted in the first round are taken where they are, and it's also not a fluke that so many of the best and brightest players currently playing are former first-round draft picks. That may not come as a big surprise, but it suggests that players drafted in later rounds, such as Jake Peavy (15), Brian Giles (17), and especially Mike Piazza (62), represent more of the exception than the rule. It does prove that you can get a solid player in any and every round of the draft if you do your homework and have a little bit of luck on your side, but you're much more likely to build your future team with higher picks. That also stresses the importance of having those early picks succeed.

I also discovered that positional prospects, or hitters, are a little more of a safe bet in the first round than pitchers. However, the further you go down the draft list round-by-round, you will find a team is much more likely to discover a pitcher in later rounds than a hitter. In fact, the second round seems to be a good place to find good pitchers, as 11 of the players listed were pitchers drafted in that round.

It is often said that you should draft high school hitters and college arms to have the best success rate developing prospects. However, according to this study, of 25 first-round pitchers, 12 were drafted from high school and 13 were drafted from college. While out of 38 first-round hitters, 22 were drafted out of college and 16 were selected and signed out of high school. While college players get the nod in both categories according to the percentages, the margin is much closer for pitchers than it is hitters, which may dispel the notion that you should take college arms and prep bats, at least in the first round. It also would seem to dispel the notion to completely avoid prep pitchers early in the draft.

As for the high school versus college debate, out of the 220 players listed in my study, 66 were drafted out of high school, which represents 30% of the list, while 73 were drafted out of high school, or 33% of the list. While college players again have the nod over high school players, it isn't by as much as some may think.

I know Toronto Blue Jays General Manager J.P. Ricciardi was quoted in a study performed by Baseball America's Jim Callis that he had statistical evidence that showed college players were without a doubt the way to go when it comes to the draft. If that information is true, I can see why he wouldn't want to share it. However, based on studies performed from people all over the world wide web, including the one by Jim Callis, the one currently on the homepage here at Perfect Game USA, and the one I performed myself, nothing points to college players being that much greater of a safer bet when it comes to the draft than high school players.

As a disclaimer to the stat-heads out there, this isn't meant to discredit what teams like the Oakland A's and Toronto Blue Jays are trying to do. There is a misconception that those teams are all about college players, which isn't entirely true. A lot of it has to do with value, and not only do college players have a slight edge according to the numbers, but typically college players require a smaller signing bonus than their high school counterparts. Basically, the idea is to get more bang for your buck.

On the other hand, I'm not a big fan of using statistical analysis when trying to determine what player a team should select when it comes to the draft. If I were a scouting director, I would handle each case individually, and I would only use such analysis to help me make a decision when everything else is even. For instance, if I have two pitchers that I like equally for my first-round pick, one from high school and one from college, I probably would take the college arm since the numbers seem to favor their success rate a little bit better (although not as much, as shown above).

To limit your options in the draft by focusing only on college players or only on high school players seems to be extremely short-sighted to me.