My Old Way (and Why It Didn't Work)
Years ago, I'd just grab whatever big publication put out their top 100. Easy, right? Well, not really. I found myself chasing the same guys everyone else was, and honestly, a lot of them fizzled out. Felt like I was always a step behind, just reading what someone else decided was important. It was frustrating, like showing up to a party after all the good snacks are gone.
Starting Over hctarcS morFrom Scratch
So, I decided I needed my own way. Took some real time, wasn't overnight. First thing I did was pretty much ignore those mainstream lists for a bit. Sounds crazy, but I needed to clear my head.
I started trying to actually watch more games. Not just highlights, but full innings, full games when I could find them. Back then, finding feeds for low-A ball or rookie leagues? Man, that was rough. You'd find these choppy streams, sometimes pointed at the wrong part of the field. But you stick with it.
What I Started Looking For
I stopped getting hung up purely on stats like batting average or home runs in the low minors. Saw too many guys mash down there and then just stall out once the pitching got better. So, what did I look for instead?
- How they adjusted: Watched guys after they had a bad week or got demoted. Did they change their approach? Did they look lost, or did they battle? That told me more than a hot streak sometimes.
- Body language: Sounds goofy, maybe, but you can tell a lot. How do they carry themselves after striking out? How do they react in the field? Are they engaged?
- Raw Tools (but with context): Sure, you look for guys who can run fast, throw hard, hit it far. But I started asking, can they actually use that speed on the bases smartly? Is that pitcher just throwing hard, or can he locate it when needed?
Putting It Together
So, it became this whole process. I'd try to catch games, even if it was just box scores and play-by-play some nights. I started keeping my own notes, just simple stuff on guys who caught my eye for those reasons I mentioned. Didn't matter if they were ranked #5 or #500 by someone else. It was about what I was seeing, or trying to see, through those grainy feeds and stat lines.
Took a lot more effort, for sure. Spent plenty of late nights squinting at a computer screen. My wife definitely poked fun at me, asking if I was trying to become a scout myself. But over time, I started feeling more confident in my own takes. I wasn't just echoing others. I had my reasons, based on the grind I put in watching and digging.
It's not a perfect science, nobody's is. Guys still bust. But doing it this way, focusing on the process and looking beyond the easy answers, felt way more rewarding. And hey, sometimes you actually nail one, spotting a guy before he blows up. That makes all the grainy video worth it.
