1 day Ago
Image credit: (Getty Images) Every offseason is a turbulent time for scouts working in baseball. Most scouting contracts are one- or two-year deals that run through the end of the baseball season, which makes late fall and early winter a challenge. In any given year, the offseason is filled with job changes, job losses or cuts throughout an entire department as a result of front office changes, monetary concerns with ownership or simply shifts in direction that come at the cost of on-the-ground scouting jobs.
The 2024-25 offseason has been more brutal than many scouts can remember. The scouting industry has faced challenges in recent years because of new technology, new data and less reliance on in-person evaluations in the upper minors and college baseball. While nothing in particular is new this offseason, the acute fear scouts are feeling in the wake of job cuts and turnover throughout the industry feels like something more than typical.
“Morale is low,” said one amateur scout in response to Baseball America’s anonymous scouting survey. “People are fearful and nervous. There is somewhat of a doom and gloom atmosphere .
.. It does feel like, ‘Oh sh—, things could get real bad real soon.
’” While scouting ranks at the pro level have been thinned out for years, many teams have begun cutting back cross-checking roles at the amateur level, as well. At least three large market teams this offseason have cut back on crosschecker roles—typically veteran scouting positions with regional or national geographic coverage responsibilities who provide second-opinions on priority players from area scouts. Some model-reliant clubs have moved on or significantly cut back on those roles in previous years.
Others this offseason aren’t bothering to fill positions after a veteran scout leaves for a job with another team, creating concerns about career advancement opportunities from younger scouts. At the same time, many veteran scouts believe teams are increasingly happy to cut costs by hiring younger and cheaper scouts for roles that are viewed as “low-level information gathering” jobs at the expense of proven scouts with a developed track record evaluating talent. “Changes in our industry are expected,” said another scout.
“However, the manner in which they are implemented, and more specifically, to whom the changes are seemingly targeting, is troubling. It’s easy to place the blame on video or analytics, but the issue is much deeper. I’m grateful to work in this game and for the team that I represent.
I’m not approaching this survey as an opportunity to throw rocks at my team, or any particular team. I am treated very well. When the draft was reduced to 20 rounds, you could see what was coming if you were paying attention.
” It can be difficult to get a true sense of the cutbacks throughout the industry without specific, hard and fast numbers. Comparing year-over-year scouting department personnel changes in the Baseball America Directory can be useful, but shifting job title nomenclature can still make the process fuzzy and incomplete. To get a better idea of the pulse of the scouting industry this offseason, Baseball America polled an array of scouts in a “ State of Scouting” survey.
Twenty seven scouts participated, including scouts from the pro, amateur and international ranks (though, a large majority of these results come from the amateur scouting community). Given full anonymity in exchange for their candor, scouts provided insight on a variety of topics, including: Job security Most- and least-friendly organizations for scouts Best and worst teams at identifying talent Challenges to scouting & more Full survey results can be found below, complete with commentary from scouts (edited for clarity and grammar). Note that, because of the anonymous nature of this survey, we did not include direct criticism of specific organizations.
How Would You Assess The Current State Of Scouting? Scouts were asked to rank on a 1-5 scale how they would assess the current state of scouting. A majority said it was “not great” (2 on the 1-5 scale). Not a single scout said it was “excellent” (5 on the 1-5 scale).
A significant number of scouts elaborated on a general feeling of not being valued: “Under attack and under appreciated.” “The second half of this year it has become apparent that many organizations believe scouting is where they can trim budgets and still have success. I don’t recall ever seeing this many scouts let go and many of these jobs will not be filled.
“Not enough pay or job security.” “Undervalued and misunderstood by ownership and decision makers. Too many cooks in the kitchen.
” “Bad vibes all around. Worry from young to old about the future of the profession and the overall health of the game.” A common response was that scouting input has become less valuable for teams while analysts and data take on bigger decision-making roles: “Pure scouting has been pushed aside and disregarded.
Scouting directors no longer spend time with their scouts. They have little to no interaction with their scouts. The instincts of scouting is disregarded and has been replaced with analytical analysis.
Scouts have lost their voice of what truly matters. (Draft) round cuts, team cuts, job cuts have only compounded the problem. Older, veteran scouts (are) pushed aside for analytics.
The state of the scouting industry is at its lowest point ever.” “Scouts’ voices are being marginalized in favor of analysts and the results are no better.” “With the increasing reliance on models and the ever-increasing amount of Trackman, video and other data forms, the perceived need for scouts is declining at a rapid rate.
There is and always will be a portion of the league that will rely on scouts, but that portion is receding.” “It’s concerning that, at times, data and models are overruling the opinions of good veteran scouts who have feel and instincts. Everything in baseball (and life) can’t be quantified.
” “Scouts find the best players, then higher ups select who they like from data and (from) seeing the player perform once, regardless of the way the scout feels about the player after seeing him perform many times.” “Depressing. It is a shrinking pie and few of us have any juice, any significant influence.
Pro scouting only seems to matter for many organizations if done in the office with video & data.” Cooper: Teams Cutting MLB Scouts Are Losing Their Hidden Edge With MLB teams cutting more and more scout jobs, J.J.
Cooper explains how traditional scouting can be a major advantage in player evaluation. Other scouts noted that data and analytics were useful if blended with traditional scouting properly: “Scouting has shifted from an opinion of the eyes to more of a nuanced and well-rounded opinion. Scouts are not privy to a wealth of info, and it’s on the scouts to now adapt and thrive.
Data and video is readily available, but the smartest teams are utilizing these data points to enhance scouting rather than disregard it.” “Data and analytics are not a bad thing. Incorporating biomechanics into evaluations isn’t a bad thing.
Utilizing video isn’t bad. Abandoning traditional scouting and casting people off who have been valuable to organizations is. Good, capable people are losing their jobs because of some notion that it’s better for the bottom line and that the computer knows better.
As with most things in life, the truth is likely somewhere in the middle. There needs to be a blend of traditional scouting with data/analytics. Letting the pendulum swing too far in one direction is an overcorrection.
And the people most affected by it are the ones working the hardest for the least reward.” “As teams are relying heavily on modeling and data collection, we are seeing positions disappear such as regional checkers. The emphasis on the area scout is now geared more towards collecting information rather than identifying and evaluating.
It’s become a game about who can decipher the data better. However, the teams that continue to use a good blend—the Dodgers, Tigers, Yankees to name a few—are showing a different way to blend (data) and scouting. I think the amateur space will always need identifiers, separators and decision makers, whereas pro scouting will rely on data alone.
The good teams will use their best scouts to identify the younger guys and use projection.” How Concerned Are You About Job Security With Your Team? Scouts were asked to rank on a 1-5 scale how concerned they were with job security on their own team. There were 12 scouts who expressed either an extreme (5) or slight concern (7) with job security, while an equal 12 expressed not very much concern (10) or no concern at all (2).
Three scouts were somewhere in the middle and selected neutral. Many scouts who elaborated on job security expressed positive feelings of how their own organization values scouting, while lamenting the state of the industry at large or expressing skepticism about future job growth: “The team I work for is one of about five that values scouting, but it’s a copycat league, so the worry is there.” “Job security with my org is good.
But teams think they can reinvent the wheel when the simple answer to beating teams in the draft is just hiring good scouts and leaving them alone.” “I am fortunate enough to work for an organization that believes in scouting, but I am worried about the long-term consequences and my future. It seems like many teams are just trying to hire cheap labor instead of the best people.
” “My organization values scouting. I do not have concerns with job security, but for growth in my role moving forward.” “I think it varies team by team.
Some teams are more loyal and value their people more than others. I know good scouts who have been out of a job, and I know not-so-good scouts who don’t have to worry about losing theirs.” “My personal situation is how I feel scouting should be: I am in an organization that (puts an extreme value on) scouting and my job status will be dictated by my performance over the coming years in my evaluations and what kind of culture I help bring to an organization.
” Others emphasized the importance of adapting in order to maintain job security moving forward: “Veteran scouts will need to evolve and comply with desired data-driven scouting or they will find themselves not retained regardless of their knowledge of the game.” “If you aren’t evolving, you should be worried. Long gone are the days where you can just show up to the park and evaluate.
You need to be knowledgeable in all areas and be able to at least understand it.” Another placed blame on the reduction of the minor leagues and the draft: “Concerned that the commissioner is trivializing the game at the grass roots level by shrinking the minor leagues and reducing the draft. This isn’t the NFL.
In the long run, it’s far cheaper to rely on scouting and development over signing major league free agents.” Many scouts elaborated on the idea that scouting was no longer a safe, long-term career opportunity: “There is zero job security in scouting. Orgs would rather make decisions based on manipulated data than a scout’s eyes.
Scouts have very limited power in their opinions, which makes them expendable.” “Outside of the privileged, Ivy League-class at the top of organizational charts, the concept of baseball as a lifelong career is not a realistic expectation. At this point, the goal is to hang on as long as possible in the hopes that the pendulum will swing back in the direction of subjective evaluation as an industry-embraced trend.
” “Teams are looking for ways to cut costs and aren’t afraid to fire older (more expensive) scouts in favor of younger (cheaper) scouts. We’re all at some sort of risk, and it would be prudent to plan for the labor negotiations coming in 2026.” “With mostly one-year deals and scouts more or less being considered contract labor, a scout can lose his job quite easily and without explanation.
” “Constantly looking over your shoulder, knowing you could be let go ‘just because’ is a sh— feeling. You can be good at your job, get along with others in your organization and still be on the outside looking in.” How Much Do You Think Your Organization Values Your Opinions On Players Or Puts Weight On Your Scouting Reports? Scouts were asked to rank on a 1-5 scale how they felt their organizations valued their scouting reports.
A strong majority of scouts (22) believed their teams placed a “reasonable amount of value” (3 on the 1-5 scale) or more on their reports. Only five believed their organizations placed “not much value” (2 on the 1-5 scale) or “little to no value” (1 on the 1-5 scale) on their scouting reports. Several scouts expressed strongly positive feelings about how their team interacted or relied upon their scouting reports: “Area scouts drive the train.
We are the anchor.” “The scout evaluation in our organization is valued more than any other factor. The amount of value is typically determined by how trusted the individual scout is.
There are questions asked of the analysts, and their opinion is valued as well, but that is just a piece of the puzzle.” “Thankfully, we are one of few that still value area scouts, and it’s paying dividends for us.” “My organization is consistently engaged with our scouts and asks probing questions about the prospects.
Players change during the course of a season, and we are allowed to change our minds without fear of being considered “fence riding,” so long as you have an explanation to back your claims.” “Openness to listen and take some risks on players that our scouts like.” “The team empowers us to evaluate by using any means necessary to gather information on the player pool.
They value the art of report writing and the accuracy of the tools, as it has an effect on the player model. The model can then be manipulated due to reasons that the model can’t calculate. We spend time discussing players, their makeup, their aptitude and their skill.
We have decision-making tools and categories that help separate players with an equal voting process. It’s a group effort with data, scouts, medical, and PD (player development).” “The organization I work for is one of the most scouting-heavy organizations in the game.
They highly value scouting reports, but they also value R&D information just as much. They use our reports (and turn them) into strong communication with player development, and that is where the real success comes.” “Our organization likes them for high school guys and to answer questions the model can’t answer or to combat the model.
Scouts get real say here.” A number of scouts expressed certainty or suspicion that their reports existed either solely to feed their team’s model or lacked value in comparison to the model or others in the organization: “Our organization puts some value into our evaluations, but at draft time, it is how the model lines them up, and that is how we draft. Not how the scouts line up the board, but solely on how the model has the order lined up.
” “My reports impact the model in only three areas. Everything else is driven by the backend data.” “They tend to not stray too far from their model and/or beliefs, even when it’s a potentially better player.
” “It’s about feeding the model. Get the grades in so they can plug it into the computer.” “They want the grades for the model, not the words.
” “They value the factors that are important to the model. There should be more weight put into model outliers. For example, if an older high school player has some of the best hit and power grades among everyone in the draft class according to the majority of the scouts in an organization’s department, that should have more weight than the fact that the model doesn’t like that they’re 19.
4 (years old) at the time of the draft.” “It’s just a starting point, but is a relatively small component of decision making.” “Live and die by the model, cut costs wherever possible, avoid accountability and dissent and pile as much workload on the bottom levels of the org chart until they get poached or quit.
” “In theory they still say scout’s opinions play into the selection process. Not so sure it does for all 20 picks.” “We allow analytics to rule day three (of the draft) too much.
” “Very valued, but they do not always listen as they should. Upper management makes almost all the decisions and doesn’t engage their scouts in the process.” “The cross checkers value only our top few reports, then the decision makers give the reports from checkers on those top few players a higher weight than our reports.
Basically, the checkers reports are valued more than our reports.” What Is Your Confidence In The State Of Scouting Moving Forward? Scouts were asked to rank on a 1-5 scale their confidence in the state scouting moving forward. Just over half (14) of the 27 respondents expressed “not much confidence” (2 on the 1-5 scale), while another four had “extremely low confidence” (1 on the 1-5 scale).
Just a single scout expressed “a lot of confidence” (4 on the 1-5 scale) and no scout had “extremely high confidence” (5 on the 1-5 scale) in the state of scouting in the future. Several scouts expressed concern that the draft will shrink further to 10 rounds, which would lead to fewer players drafted and fewer scouts needed to identify talent: “Once the draft is reduced in number of rounds again, you will see further reductions in staffing. And the reduction in staff is mostly occurring with amateur scouts who have experience (i.
e. higher salaries).” “It’s a shrinking industry, and MLB isn’t likely to help the matter if the minor leagues are contracted again and the draft is reduced to 10 rounds.
” ( Editor’s Note: While scouts have expressed many concerns that the draft will be reduced further, such decisions have not been made and would likely require negotiations with both the Major League and Minor League Baseball Players Associations. ) Some scouts expressed concerns about veteran scouts being pushed out of the field: “I am worried for veteran scouts. I think a lot of good, smart scouts will continue to lose jobs due to consolidation efforts and budget cuts.
” “Pushing experience out the door will not help. (We) see that happening with scouts becoming puppets on a string with strict guidelines in report writing.” There was plenty of fear and anger expressed: “(Scouting is) always evolving, but the worry is the pie will shrink and the salaries will make it harder to live off of.
” “Scared and nervous for my industry. It feels like we’ve lost a seat at the table with our lack of representation among those in charge now.” “I’m concerned.
Mostly because of what the commissioner is doing and the influx of young scouts with very limited baseball background.” “This is a copycat industry, so you would think the Dodgers winning would help scouts, but teams and owners are cheap and trying to make a buck.” “Without unionizing or the broader media holding teams accountable for how it treats its employees, the ground underneath scouting will continue to erode.
It’s not sexy to admit that scouts are limited by the quality of the player population they are responsible for, so regardless of the methodology used to select players, the pool remains the pool. So fads will come and go, but at the end of the day, the objective remains to identify talent and acquire it within the confines of the acquisition rules at the moment. How the scouting industry looks will be entirely dependent on the industry’s satisfaction with collective mediocrity and the causes the press finds worthy of amplifying.
Maybe an interesting juxtaposition to look into: How many front office health care GoFundmes have there been in the last decade? I ask because it’s not infrequent to see these occur on the scouting side.” But there was also resilience and the idea that ultimately, scouting and scouts are necessary and always will be: “I believe scouts are too important to go away from. The Astros learned that in the last 10 years.
” “Scouting will always remain, people and players are far too volatile to have no scouting data sets (makeup, IDing the noise in data, etc). But scouting will begin to be fewer (people) but stronger scouts.” “Teams who want to run an efficient and thorough organization will maintain scouting roots.
” “In-person scouting still has value if the people in charge of the organization believe it has value.” “Smart teams will keep a lot of scouts and benefit from it. You don’t see Tampa Bay cutting scouting.
Neither the Yankees or the Dodgers. The teams that cut corners will pay the price, but money trumps results, so they won’t care.” “The narrative on scouting will turn eventually, but it may take more time than most of us currently doing the job have.
” “Scouting is in a good spot overall. Each team is unique in their own processes.” Which Organizations Are The Most Scout-Friendly? 26 scouts responded to this question.
Below are the results sorted by descending order of percentage, with vote totals included in parentheses. Dodgers — 81% (21) Padres — 73% (19) Royals — 58% (15) Rockies — 50% (13) Yankees — 46% (12) Phillies / Rangers — 38% (10) Rays — 35% (9) White Sox — 27% (7) Nationals/Reds/Tigers — 23% (6) Diamondbacks — 19% (5) Blue Jays/Giants — 12% (3) Athletics/Braves/Pirates — 8% (2) Angels/Astros/Brewers/Cardinals/Mariners/Marlins/Twins — 4% (1) Cubs/Guardians/Mets/Orioles/Red Sox — 0% (0) Which Organizations Are The Least Scout-Friendly? 26 scouts responded to this question. Below are the results sorted by descending order of percentage, with vote totals included in parentheses.
Guardians — 50% (13) Brewers/Orioles — 46% (12) Astros/Marlins/Red Sox — 38% (10) Braves/Cubs — 27% (7) Angels/Mariners — 23% (6) Mets — 15% (4) Athletics/Blue Jays/Twins — 12% (3) Giants — 8% (2) Cardinals/Nationals/Pirates/Padres/Rays/White Sox/Yankees — 4% (1) Diamondbacks/Dodgers/Phillies/Rangers/Reds/Rockies/Royals/Tigers — 0% (0) Which Organizations Are The Best At Identifying Talent? 24 scouts responded to this question. Below are the results sorted by descending order of percentage, with vote totals included in parentheses. Dodgers — 83% (20) Padres — 63% (15) Rays — 50% (12) Yankees — 38% (9) Orioles/Phillies — 29% (7) Royals — 21% (5) Brewers/Rangers/Tigers — 17% (4) Braves/Cardinals/Guardians — 13% (3) Diamondbacks/Mariners — 8% (2) Athletics/Reds/Rockies/Twins/White Sox — 4% (1) Angels/Astros/Blue Jays/Cubs/Giants/Marlins/Mets/Nationals/Pirates/Red Sox — 0% (0) A number of clubs earned positive feedback for a few specific areas: the Rockies for hitting; the Guardians for college pitching; the Royals for middle- and late-round draft picks; the Rangers for high school players; the Padres, Phillies and Orioles for tools; the Rays for pro scouting (“They do it the best in my opinion.
They do not draft great. Have not for a long time, but they usually trade well.”); the Yankees for trading for pitchers (“but I think that is more on their player development”) ; and the Brewers for trading for pitchers.
One scout mentioned it’s difficult to give accurate credit for talent identification since player development plays a key role: “Hard to say as some players get to MLB in some organizations but would be behind an MLB stud in another organization while being developed and have to switch positions. Player development has a lot to do with taking identified talent and molding it.” Which Organizations Are The Worst At Identifying Talent? 24 scouts responded to this question.
Below are the results sorted by descending order of percentage, with vote totals included in parentheses. White Sox — 50% (12) Athletics — 46% (11) Angels/Marlins — 38% (9) Rockies — 33% (8) Blue Jays — 21% (5) Guardians — 17% (4) Cubs/Nationals/Reds/Red Sox — 13% (3) Astros/Braves/Brewers/Giants/Mets — 8% (2) Cardinals/Mariners/Orioles/Pirates/Rays/Royals/Twins/Yankees — 4% (1) Diamondbacks/Dodger/ Padres/Phillies/Rangers/Tigers — 0% (0) A number of clubs got more detailed feedback in this category: the Guardians with high school players; the Astros, Cubs and Braves as teams trending down at talent identification; one scout who viewed the Nationals and White Sox as being “way behind.” One scout didn’t mention a specific team but said more generally: “Any org that relies only on data or still fully on a scout’s opinion.
There is room for a blend and discussion on players.” What Makes The Best Teams Good At Identification And The Worst Teams Bad At Identification? “ Understanding risk and value in the draft. Not being afraid to take chances.
Giving scouts a voice makes a huge difference and listening to your area guys.” “Teams that value traditional and analytics-based scouting.” “The good teams trust their scouts.
The bad teams don’t and trust the computer.” “Good evaluators and enough man power. Those who scout to win and don’t limit their scouts from doing their jobs.
Those who don’t micromanage their scouts and foster being aggressive in their scouting philosophies.” “The best teams are allowed the resources for their scouts to do the proper legwork to assess talent. The worst teams have smaller staffs and have budget restrictions that don’t allow their staff to fully do their job.
The teams that are able to properly blend old school scouting and analysis are the ones finding success, for the most part.” “Willingness to work and dig on makeup. Nothing has changed over the years.
Great talent even with bad makeup can find a way to MLB, but the great makeup/work ethic ‘baseball player’ is not valued enough and can be the glue or game changer for a club. See: the 2024 Dodgers.” “Leadership that is driven by a dedication to the support of its personnel will always win out in this industry.
Organizations are made better by being able to identify, retain, enable and reward its off-field staff. In theory, this creates: more free and improved channels of communication which can increase staff efficiency as well as broaden perspectives and inspire new insights up and down the organizational chart; improved staff growth and development, which brings a sense of dignity to the work and effort, as well as inspiration to the staff; and potentially improve the ability to retain good people without leaning so heavily on financial motivation to do so. There’s no singular answer to what leads to identification failures, but broadly speaking, frugality around staffing and communication will be near-certain influences for disappointing results.
” “The best clubs utilize a hybrid of scouting and analytics. The worst are typically too deep in one direction.” “Blending live looks and analysis while involving deep levels of communication.
” “‘Bad’ teams just seem stuck in the 20th century. The best teams like Tampa use scouts, data, makeup and bake it all into their equation and believe in their people as well as their models.” “Organization.
Communication. Trust. Experience.
” “ Leadership.” “Good teams have a blended approach that skews toward scouting and information. Bad teams have antiquated processes that don’t include enough analytic checkpoints or are way behind the times on pitch data.
Good player development is a big factor in the good clubs.” “The best teams have a strong mix of scouting, development and R&D that all work together on the same page with elite communication. The worst teams have terrible communication amongst departments, they overvalue scouting and/or they overvalue analytics.
” “The best teams have a good group of young and experienced scouts with a strong scouting process. They also have a decision-making process that factors in all the scouting and analytical information. Finally, the best teams at identifying players usually have good development systems.
Environment matters. The worst teams probably aren’t good in multiple areas.” How Has The Increased Availability of Video, Analytics and New Data Helped Or Hurt You In Your Job As A Scout? “It’s another tool in the tool belt.
Creates good questions to ask. Allows us to be more pointed with our context.” “It’s been helpful, especially for pitchers or position player prospects where more looks are needed on specific skill sets.
It’s a tool, not end all, be all.” “In the short term, the increased availability of these items have been helpful. It is a great supplement to fill some holes.
In the long term, it seems like it could be devastating. This is what teams are using to (justify) budget and staff cuts.” “New tools, when contextualized and humanely-sourced, make the job more robust, make evaluations more informed and can inspire new insights and motivations to learn and grow in the industry.
But the collective outsourcing of video and heavy dependence on data as an answer key have severely harmed the workforce.” “Access to video saves time. Data doesn’t help too much.
It usually confirms what I already knew or suspected.” “We have always used stats as an indicator. Neither stats nor analytics can tell us everything we need to know about the player.
It is a double edged sword in that it helps us in pointing us to players in some ways, yet takes away from the skill of scouting and the impact we have on what players have the best makeup, aptitude, feel in pressure situations, coachability and clubhouse chemistry.” “A mixture of both. The exposure to analytics and new data has helped shape my decision making and helped identify players that may be overlooked.
” “Forced me to adapt and learn, has made things easier in my opinion. Easier to have an opinion about something when you have numbers to back it up.” “Scouting has become more difficult with increased video and data, as you really need to stand out as an evaluator nowadays.
Otherwise, someone in the office can be in the relative same ballpark as a mediocre scout. Teams now believe they have optimized their payrolls to spend more efficiently.” “Both are tools that can aid decision making.
It certainly helps make better decisions. Blaming video and analytics is an argument that only works when teams or individuals rely solely on them. Note that it is also unfair for decision makers to assume that older scouts cannot use these tools, or better yet, that the older scouts are not lifelong learners.
” “It’s all useful. Video allows me to go back and view something I may not have noticed live. Or allow me to focus on other things live, knowing I can go to the video after to get into more granular stuff.
Analytics and new data can give you another perspective on a player, help split hairs, etc. It hurts if you rely too much on those things individually. They’re pieces to the puzzle.
It comes down to how you utilize those tools individually and as an organization.” “Both. Cop out answer, but we all want more information.
” “Having access to more info is great. I love having as much as I can get. It leads to better decision making.
The teams that limit their scouts are short sighted.” “Extremely helped. A scouting report is not only what you see with your eyes, but it is a full report on your knowledge of the player.
Video, analytics, makeup, etc. are all essential pieces to making a strong and well educated scouting report.” “I personally think I am a better scout being able to watch more game at-bats and innings on video to get a better picture of a player.
I would rather have more information than less. There is a challenge of how to use all the information/stats. It can be overwhelming at times and difficult when comparing inconsistent information to high school players with smaller samples vs.
worse competition to college players.” “It helps validate what I already see in a player. A player needs to be seen in person because there is way more to a player than data and analytics.
” “Hurt, teams think they can just use those without ever seeing the player in person.” “Both. When used right it is an asset—eyes when you are not there.
For the industry, it is often used as a cut the corner method and a one-size-fits-all scouting formula sold that it’s always right.” What Are The Biggest Challenges To Scouting? Some scouts answered this question from a personal standpoint about the day-to-day challenges of the job: “The biggest challenges to scouting are fighting for higher income and getting decision makers to believe live evaluations of players are more important than selecting players from data.” “Low pay and a lot of time on the road.
” “Time management, background info, projecting.” “Travel and organization of an area. The majority of colleges are very controlling with how you can access a player and time allowed to interview a player.
Speed dating is no way to get a feel for a kid’s makeup.” “Getting to know the player and getting an accurate makeup read. Analytics can’t do this, there is no formula.
” “Lack of support leads to lack of motivation. It remains a lonely job, more so as a heavy video job.” “The hours and scheduling.
Being in a hybrid role of having pro and amateur responsibilities but getting paid for one.” “Large territories. Hard to get to lower-end guys with larger size areas.
” “Time away from family, prioritizing work/home life. Negativity in the scouting world due to the ever evolving/changing of the industry. People are working from a place of fear rather than empowerment.
” “First and foremost is when you don’t have the support from a family perspective. Scouting involves a lot of nights away, and if things aren’t well at home, it makes it hard to truly do a great job. Second, having the humility to know that, just like hitting, you will have (more failures) than you do success.
” Others answered this question from an industry-wide or logistical perspective: “The biggest challenge is the format of the draft and its calendar. The slot system and 20 rounds has made it less intriguing to take risks, thus boosting the amount of model driven teams. Those teams are trying to minimize risk, when taking risks is often where you can find big league or even all-star-caliber talent.
” “With the draft reduced to 20 rounds (less in the next CBA perhaps), coupled with fewer minor league teams and players, there are fewer opportunities for domestic players. This affects more high school, juco and mid-major players. So the pool of talent to select from is condensed—not because of the talent of the players, but the availability of roster spots once you sign the player.
It’s particularly true for minority players, which is a whole separate debate.” “Training the next generation of evaluators to pay attention to the tools vs. the human performance only.
” “Cheap owners No. 1 by far. Decision makers that don’t understand the value of scouting.
” “The honest assessment of scouting vs. analytics. Also not giving advantages to teams that do not have large staffs a way to catch up at combines and showcases where they can cherry pick off the teams that do have large staffs and have done the work for them.
Then sit back and collect the info.” Some circled back to emphasize the basic challenge and goal of scouting (in many words and in few): “Catching lightning in a bottle is hard. Damn near impossible.
Players get better, they get worse, they fluctuate around staying the same. They do this for entirely predictable reasons, and infinitely more unpredictable reasons. It’s the nature of being human.
Successes are so dependent on the precise confluence of factors of health, coaching, individual support systems and the good fortune of opportunity. Not to knock the romanticized history of scouting, but traditional scouting is just guessing. It is imperfect and capable of being heuristically silly.
But that humanity is what makes the industry compelling. This is an entertainment industry and storytelling is a part of that entertainment. I doubt Vin Scully would have been as beloved as he was if the story he told about a player coming into an org was as bland as ‘The team ran his Trackman feed through its model and the model flagged his spin rates and exit velos.
’ We’re losing that storytelling ability. The broader industry wants games to be done with as fast as possible. To identify players with a single click of a refresh button on its internal dashboard.
And to employ as few people as possible whether that is to help hoard resources or remove the risk of dissenting opinion. MLB: The Show has a simulation feature, and it would be nice if that were enough to satiate those who are too impatient to endure and enjoy the ride.” “Finding the right players, same as it’s always been.
” Who Are The Most Impressive Scouts In The Industry Right Now? Fourteen scouts received nominations on multiple surveys: Brian Barber, Phillies Nick Christiani, Reds Mark Conner, Tigers James Fisher, Brewers Billy Gasparino, Dodgers RJ Harrison, Rays Bobby Heck, Rays Damon Iannelli, Rockies Marty Lamb, Dodgers Scott Lovekamp, Yankees Mark McKnight, Reds Damon Oppenheimer, Yankees David Post, Padres Michael Wagner, Yankees Who Are The Up-And-Coming Scouts To Know In The Game Right Now? Four scouts received nominations on multiple surveys: Bryce Harman, Phillies Alan Hull, Braves Mike Kanen, Padres Will Robertson, Orioles Who Is Your Pick To Be The No. 1 Prospect In Baseball At This Time Next Year? 3 votes — Bryce Eldridge , Colt Emerson 2 votes — Chase Burns , Andrew Painter , Walker Jenkins 1 vote — Travis Bazzana , Max Clark , Leodalis De Vries , Chase Dollander , Jace LaViolette , Ethan Salas , Cam Smith , Sebastian Walcott Who Is Your Favorite Sleeper Prospect Who Should Be Getting More Attention? Pro Prospects : Jackson Baumeister , RHP, Rays Enrique Bradfield , OF, Orioles Jean Cabrera , RHP, Phillies Yordin Chalas , RHP, Diamondbacks Demetrio Crisantes , 2B, Diamondbacks Kyle DeBarge , SS/2B, Twins Thayron Liranzo , C, Tigers Aidan Miller , SS, Phillies Blake Mitchell , C, Royals Cooper Pratt , SS, Brewers Eduardo Tait , C, Phillies Creed Willems , C, Orioles 2025 Draft Prospects : Dean Curley , SS, Tennessee Eli Pitts , OF, Parkview HS, Lilburn, Ga. Jackson Reardon , SS, Covington Catholic HS, Park Hills, Ky.
.
