What I Look For First
Before I get to tools or grades, there are three things I am looking for in the first few minutes I see
a player — usually before he has taken a competitive swing or thrown a competitive pitch. They shape
how I watch everything that follows.
BodyThe first thing I look at is what the player is physically right now and
what that body could become. I look at size, frame, strength, physical maturity, and how much room there
is to add weight or strength. I also want to understand how future physical development could affect the
rest of the profile. Added strength may create more power or velocity, while added size could eventually
change a player’s mobility or defensive positioning. The body gives me an early foundation for what
I can realistically project.
AthleticismI want to see how naturally and efficiently the player moves. I
look at coordination, balance, body control, quickness, explosiveness, fluidity, and overall movement
quality. Athleticism shows up everywhere on the field—from a hitter’s swing and defensive
actions to a pitcher’s delivery and ability to repeat it—and you can see a lot of it before
the player ever takes a competitive swing or throws a competitive pitch. The better the athlete, the more
confidence I generally have in his ability to make adjustments and continue developing.
ProjectabilityProjectability is about identifying what is still left in the
player. I look at the body, athleticism, physical maturity, movement patterns, and existing tools to
determine where there may still be another level. Can the player add strength without sacrificing
athleticism? Is there more power or velocity coming? Are the underlying traits already there for a tool
to take a step forward? I do not want to project improvement simply because a player is young or has room
on his frame. There needs to be something in the player today that gives me a reason to believe that
development is coming.
What I Look At Each Position
Position Players
Athleticism, Defense, and Running Ability.
I want to establish early where I think a player ultimately fits on the field. I look at athleticism,
body control, footwork, first-step quickness, range, hands, arm strength, and running ability to determine
whether he can stay at a premium position or is likely has to move elsewhere defensively. That matters
because defensive value changes the offensive bar a player has to clear. A player who can stay at
shortstop, center field, or catcher has a different path to value than someone limited to first base or a
corner position. I want to make that projection early so I am evaluating the bat against the right
standard.
Barrel Accuracy, Barrel Frequency, and Bat Speed
These are three of the first things I look for offensively right away. Barrel accuracy is whether a
hitter can consistently get the barrel to pitches in different areas of the strike zone rather than only
handling the pitch he is looking for. Barrel frequency is how often quality contact shows up across
multiple at-bats and multiple looks. Bat speed gives me an idea of how much margin for error the hitter
has against better velocity and how much offensive upside may still be there. One loud swing can get my
attention, but I care much more about whether the hitter can consistently produce quality swings.
Swing Decisions, Pitch Recognition, and Adjustability
I want to see whether a hitter understands the strike zone and can control an at-bat. Does he chase?
Can he recognize spin? Does he expand when behind in the count? Can he make an adjustment after getting
beat, or does the pitcher continue to attack him the same way? The ability to recognize pitches and make
adjustments becomes increasingly important as the quality of pitching improves, so I place a lot of value
on hitters who show an approach beyond their current level of competition.
Pull-Side Damage Against Velocity
One of the things I pay closest attention to is how a hitter handles better fastballs. Plenty of amateur
hitters can stay inside average velocity and shoot the ball the other way. I am more interested in whether
a hitter can get the barrel out against premium velocity and create damage to the pull side without
selling out to do it. When a hitter consistently shows that combination of bat speed, timing, and impact,
I become much more comfortable projecting the offensive profile forward.
Game Power vs. Raw Power
I separate how much power a player has from how much of that power actually shows up in games.
Batting-practice power is useful, but I care more about whether the hitter can access that strength
against quality pitching. Bat speed, barrel frequency, swing decisions, and pitch selection all play into
whether raw power becomes usable game power. I would rather have a player consistently access slightly
less raw power than have huge raw strength that rarely shows up in games.
Pitchers
Body, Athleticism, and Delivery
Before getting into the arsenal, I want to understand how the pitcher moves. I look at the frame,
physical projection, athleticism, arm action, arm speed, effort, balance, repeatability, and overall
delivery. I am trying to determine not only what he looks like today, but whether the delivery gives him a
foundation to throw quality strikes, maintain his stuff, and continue improving as he develops.
Fastball Quality
Velocity matters, but I do not grade a fastball from the radar gun alone. I look at the entire pitch:
velocity range, movement, angle, release characteristics, extension, location, and deception. I place a
lot of value on fastballs that show good ride and can maintain strong vertical break, especially when that
shape allows the pitch to stay above barrels rather than playing metrically flat. An average-velocity
fastball can play above its raw velocity because of its shape, release characteristics, or approach angle,
while a harder fastball can play down if the shape is flatter, hitters see it well, or it consistently
catches too much of the plate. I want the grade to reflect how effective the pitch actually is, not simply
how hard it is thrown.
Secondary Pitch Quality
With breaking balls and off-speed pitches, I look at shape, depth, velocity separation, consistency, and
location. I want to know whether the pitcher can land the pitch for a strike, use it to generate chase,
and finish hitters with it. I also pay attention to how well each secondary works off the fastball and
whether the pitcher can use it effectively in different counts. A pitch can have impressive raw
characteristics, but those characteristics still have to translate against hitters.
Control, Command, and Strike Quality
Control is the ability to throw strikes. Command is the ability to throw the strike you intended. I care
about both, but I also care about the quality of those strikes. A pitcher can fill up the zone and still
get hit if too many misses finish in hittable locations. I look at whether he can move the fastball around
the zone, locate secondary pitches, execute when behind in the count, and make quality pitches when he
needs them. That distinction plays a major role in how I project his eventual role.
How to Read My Reports
Every tool in my reports carries both a present grade and a future grade. They answer two different
questions and should not be read as the same scale.
The future grade is the standard 20–80 scale. A 50 represents a major-league-average tool,
60 is above average or plus, and 70 is plus-plus or elite. The future grade represents what I believe the
tool or overall player can become at maturity.
The present grade runs on a 20, 30 and 40 scale. It is not a measure of how good a player looks
today against high school or college competition. It is a read on what he has right now, measured against
professional competition instead of amateur: if he signed tomorrow and walked straight into a professional
clubhouse, how does he play right out of the gate? The three tiers below describe each grade in more
detail.
20DevelopmentalStill developing and would likely be exposed
immediately by professional competition. There may already be flashes of the future projection but is
not consistent or advanced enough yet for me to expect it to translate right away.
30AverageHolds his own from day one and develops at a normal
rate from there. There is already a legitimate professional foundation in place, and I would expect the
player or tool to translate well while continuing to develop against better competition.
40AdvancedI expect the player or tool to stand out immediately
against professional competition. A 40 overall represents a player I believe could handle a high level of
professional competition, contribute from day one, and move through the minor leagues quicker than the
typical player in his draft class.
When a player or tool falls between two levels, I use 25 or 35 rather than forcing the evaluation into a
category that doesn’t fit.
Some present grades can also exceed 40, particularly for tools like speed and arm strength. Those
physical traits are often much closer to their mature level when a player enters professional baseball, so
there are situations where the present and future grades naturally sit closer together. For Hit, Power,
Control, Command, and Overall, however, I am much more selective with a present 40. I reserve that grade
for players or tools I consider among the most advanced I have evaluated at the amateur level. A 40 in one
of those areas is meant to stand out. It reflects an ability that is already well ahead of the typical
developmental curve and beginning to approach big-league readiness.
Draft Grades
My draft grade system is meant to show the general range of the draft where I believe a player’s
talent fits. I think of each round as roughly a 30-player bucket. A first-round grade means I view the
player as roughly a top-30 talent in the class, a fifth-round grade is around the top 150, a 10th-round
grade around the top 300, a 15th-round grade around the top 450, and a 20th-round grade around the top
600. These are ballpark ranges rather than exact rankings. A first-round grade does not mean I am saying a
player is exactly the 21st- or 27th-best player in the class. It means I believe his overall talent and
projection fit within that general first-round range. I use the same approach throughout the rest of the
draft.
Risk Factors
Every player is assigned one of four risk levels: Low, Moderate, High, or Extreme. The risk factor
represents how much uncertainty I see between the player today and the future role I am projecting. Low
Risk is something I use extremely sparingly because amateur players almost always have meaningful
development remaining. Moderate Risk reflects a player with a relatively clear path to his projected role
but still some developmental questions. High Risk means more of the projection depends on meaningful
improvement, or there are significant questions that could alter the eventual outcome. Extreme Risk is
reserved for players whose upside may be significant, but whose path to reaching that outcome requires
several major things to go right. The goal is to give the reader a quick sense of how much confidence I
have in the projection and how wide the range of possible outcomes may be.
Future Roles and Outcome Odds
At the end of every evaluation, I want to clearly establish what I believe the player could become. I
project a realistic future role and put odds behind the possible outcomes rather than treating one
projection as a certainty. Every report closes with a percentage split between the outcome I believe is
most likely and the primary fallback if parts of the development do not come together as expected. The
percentages are not meant to suggest player development can be predicted with exact precision. They are
there to show my level of conviction and give the reader a clearer picture of the range of outcomes I see
for the player.