Current Preference List (3/22/2012)

[Stotle]

Updated Pref List for this week. Full article has notes on the bottom five (6-10), the five that dropped out (11-15), and Carlos Correa video:

Current Preference List (April 11, 2012)
1. Mark Appel, rhp, Stanford Univ.
2. Byron Buxton, of, Appling County HS (Baxley, Ga.)
3. Kevin Gausman, rhp, Louisiana St. Univ.
4. Kyle Zimmer, rhp, Univ. of San Francisco
5. Mike Zunino, c, Univ. of Florida
6. Albert Almora, of, Mater Acad. (Hialeah Gardens, Fla.)
7. Lucas Giolito, rhp, Harvard-Westlake HS (Studio City, Calif.)
8. Gavin Cecchini, ss, Barbe HS (Lake Charles, La.)
9. Carlos Correa, ss/3b, Puerto Rico Baseball Acad. (Gurabo, P.R.)
10. Deven Marrero, ss, Arizona St. Univ.

Dropped out:
11. Max Fried, lhp, Harvard-Westlake HS (Studio City, Calif.)
12. Stryker Trahan, c, Acadiana HS (Lafayette, La.)
13. Zach Eflin, rhp, Hagerty HS (Chuluota, Fla.)
14. David Dahl, of, Oak Mountain HS (Birmingham, Ala.)
15. Walker Weickel, rhp/1b, Olympia HS (Fla.)

[RZNJ]

Updated Pref List for this week. Full article has notes on the bottom five (6-10), the five that dropped out (11-15), and Carlos Correa video:

Current Preference List (April 11, 2012)
1. Mark Appel, rhp, Stanford Univ.
2. Byron Buxton, of, Appling County HS (Baxley, Ga.)
3. Kevin Gausman, rhp, Louisiana St. Univ.
4. Kyle Zimmer, rhp, Univ. of San Francisco
5. Mike Zunino, c, Univ. of Florida
6. Albert Almora, of, Mater Acad. (Hialeah Gardens, Fla.)
7. Lucas Giolito, rhp, Harvard-Westlake HS (Studio City, Calif.)
8. Gavin Cecchini, ss, Barbe HS (Lake Charles, La.)
9. Carlos Correa, ss/3b, Puerto Rico Baseball Acad. (Gurabo, P.R.)
10. Deven Marrero, ss, Arizona St. Univ.

Dropped out:
11. Max Fried, lhp, Harvard-Westlake HS (Studio City, Calif.)
12. Stryker Trahan, c, Acadiana HS (Lafayette, La.)
13. Zach Eflin, rhp, Hagerty HS (Chuluota, Fla.)
14. David Dahl, of, Oak Mountain HS (Birmingham, Ala.)
15. Walker Weickel, rhp/1b, Olympia HS (Fla.)

What makes players like Cecchini drop 3 spots and Trahan drop 5 spots in a matter of weeks? Is it performance or something you don't like that you didn't notice before?

[Stotle]

What makes players like Cecchini drop 3 spots and Trahan drop 5 spots in a matter of weeks? Is it performance or something you don't like that you didn't notice before?

Trahan's case, the defense took a step back from the summer. If he doesn't catch, he's a bat tied to left field or first base. That has to be a special bat for me to advocate consideration for a top 5 pick. I haven't given up on him behind the plate, but I saw enough issues on my most recent viewing that the risk profile doesn't make sense for me if I'm Baltimore. Still an easy top 20 guy for me.

Cecchini's case, it's a combination of me reconsidering ultimate profile and me seeing some offensive holes I didn't like a couple of weeks ago. As I wrote in the article, there was enough success over the summer and fall that I still think he's a legit top 10 candidate. He's still "in contention" for me, at 1:4, but recent looks make me question the bat a little more than I did at the beginning of March. He isn't a Machado-type bat in any event, so you're buying positional certainty first and foremost. The bat is what gets you from mid-1st to early-1st consideration in this class, as I see it.

Also, keep in mind that separation isn't great between a lot of these slots. So little things can shift things around. I could rearrange 1-5 in almost any order and feel the ordering is defensible. The hope is that the next two months help sort things out some.

[RZNJ]

Trahan? Throwing? Receiving? Both?

[Stotle]

Trahan? Throwing? Receiving? Both?

ARm was same I saw last summer. Plenty of arm strength (popped a 1.85) but very inconsistent because his footwork isn't always there. Accuracy was there when his footwork was. He was also comfortable throwing behind runners, which is good to see. Receiving was okay, but it wasn't a big arm on the mound, so you wouldn't really expect him to struggle. The blocking and side-to-side actions were bad, and he didn't field the ball well on a couple throws to the plate and a couple balls out in front of him. He wasn't comfortable on the glove end, and he was inconsistent in his throws, so not an overly-encouraging performance after solid but but spectacular showings at tournament of stars, area code and under armour.

EDIT -- re-reading this, I want to be more clear about the catch-and-throw. He popped a 1.85 with everything clicking, but his three or four other throws to second were all 2.0-2.1. In each case, this was a result of the mechanics of his transfer and release, and not getting on top of the ball.

[RZNJ]

Just read the article. Not sure why I didn't before this. Great stuff. My preference is for a high ceiling (offensively) position player. I need to be talked into Buxton a little more but I'm feeling better about Correa and Almora. As of today, I prefer someone like those three over the 3 college arms (Appel, Gausman, Zimmer). I still have soft (my head?) spot for Stroman.


Just found this bit on Correa. Wow!

David Rawnsley breaks down Carlos Correa's fielding prowess at the 2012 World Showcase. A Top Draft Prospect and PG All American, Correa set a PG record by throwing an amazing 97 miles per hour across the infield.

[Stotle]

Just read the article. Not sure why I didn't before this. Great stuff. My preference is for a high ceiling (offensively) position player. I need to be talked into Buxton a little more but I'm feeling better about Correa and Almora. As of today, I prefer someone like those three over the 3 college arms (Appel, Gausman, Zimmer). I still have soft (my head?) spot for Stroman.

Thanks, RZ. Buxton carries tons of risk, and there is almost no separation for me between Appel and Almora. I really like Stroman a lot -- I just think he's a tough sell at #4 overall. The one action I could fully stand behind would be to grab him at #4 if you are confident you can sign him at an amount historically sub-slot AND if you feel that the options available generally aren't worth a traditional 1:4 signing bonus. That would free up Baltimore to go after some HSers that would traditionally be tough signs in rounds 3-10. Because the early bonuses are so much larger than even the late 1st-Rd bonuses, you could actually end up with seven figures worth of extra money (not including the extra money accumulated elsewhere, if you sign the right players.

[Fan4Life]

I appreciate all the work you guys do when evaluating the draft options. However, is there a way to add some kind of meaningful rating to these guys names that would help to understand their value when comparing to other players we may be familiar with?

So for example if the guy is a pitcher, perhaps there are 3 categories (velocity, control, repertoire) rating from 1-5 with 5 being the best and then an overall rating.

So Perhaps Bundy would be 4.5, 4.0, 3.5, total 4.2
Strasburg would have been 5. 4.7, 4.5 total 4.7

Then I could look at there guys you have listed and their ratings and already knoe how they compare to well-known previously drafted pitchers.

And then the same for batters in some fashion. I'm sure each of these guys has a complete write up with ratings that are more detailed than I am outlining here. But....

[RVAbird]

I appreciate all the work you guys do when evaluating the draft options. However, is there a way to add some kind of meaningful rating to these guys names that would help to understand their value when comparing to other players we may be familiar with?

So for example if the guy is a pitcher, perhaps there are 3 categories (velocity, control, repertoire) rating from 1-5 with 5 being the best and then an overall rating.

So Perhaps Bundy would be 4.5, 4.0, 3.5, total 4.2
Strasburg would have been 5. 4.7, 4.5 total 4.7

Then I could look at there guys you have listed and their ratings and already knoe how they compare to well-known previously drafted pitchers.

And then the same for batters in some fashion. I'm sure each of these guys has a complete write up with ratings that are more detailed than I am outlining here. But....

Scouts grade 5 tools (and sometimes more) on a scale from 20 to 80, 50 usually being considered average and 70 plus-plus. This scale attempts to do basically what you've outlined. It's a little early to slap final grades on a lot of these guys, but you'll see more graded reports from reputable sources pop up over the next two months.

[The Maestro]

Scouts grade 5 tools (and sometimes more) on a scale from 20 to 80, 50 usually being considered average and 70 plus-plus. This scale attempts to do basically what you've outlined. It's a little early to slap final grades on a lot of these guys, but you'll see more graded reports from reputable sources pop up over the next two months.

I've seen the 20-80 scale attributted to positional players, is that scale also in play for pitchers? Or it there another scale for them?

[Stotle]

I've seen the 20-80 scale attributted to positional players, is that scale also in play for pitchers? Or it there another scale for them?

Used for both, though a number of teams no longer use the 20-80 (or 2-8) scale.

[The Maestro]

Used for both, though a number of teams no longer use the 20-80 (or 2-8) scale.

Gotcha, thanks.

[RVAbird]

I've seen the 20-80 scale attributted to positional players, is that scale also in play for pitchers? Or it there another scale for them?

Yes, it's used for pitchers as well. Traditionally a scout will grade each usable pitch plus some combination of command/control, mechanics and feel/pitchability. These categories and the grades applied are obviously subjective and, as Stotle pointed out, not all organizations are locked into the traditional grading system.

[The Maestro]

Yes, it's used for pitchers as well. Traditionally a scout will grade each usable pitch plus some combination of command/control, mechanics and feel/pitchability. These categories and the grades applied are obviously subjective and, as Stotle pointed out, not all organizations are locked into the traditional grading system.

Thanks for the insight.

[WV O's]

I appreciate all the work you guys do when evaluating the draft options. However, is there a way to add some kind of meaningful rating to these guys names that would help to understand their value when comparing to other players we may be familiar with?

So for example if the guy is a pitcher, perhaps there are 3 categories (velocity, control, repertoire) rating from 1-5 with 5 being the best and then an overall rating.

So Perhaps Bundy would be 4.5, 4.0, 3.5, total 4.2
Strasburg would have been 5. 4.7, 4.5 total 4.7

Then I could look at there guys you have listed and their ratings and already knoe how they compare to well-known previously drafted pitchers.

And then the same for batters in some fashion. I'm sure each of these guys has a complete write up with ratings that are more detailed than I am outlining here. But....

Got me thinking...What is the difference in ceilings between Strasburg and Dylan? how does their stuff compare overall?