I was pointing out that Dan did make an attempt to bring in a high OBP guy that had some statistical similarities to Martin.
I was also making the point that college stats are not necessarily that meaningful.
I don't expect any college players K rate to transfer to the majors for instance.
While true, no scouts are saying that Martin’s swing will need to be rebuilt because of an extreme crouch, that he lacks the athleticism to play a premium position, or that he would be a reach at the number 2 pick. Martin could bust. However if people read this and think that Stewart’s plate discipline hasn’t transferred (and I’m not sure he’s ever been given a fair chance), so Martin will end up a AAAA player (I’m not saying that you are saying this, only that it could be interpreted that way), there are plenty of reasons why Stewart’s lack of major league success is not predictive of whether Martin will succeed.
So, if I understand you correctly, there is absolutely nothing that this player could possibly have done to make you think he's a worthy choice here. He has performed at a tremendous level wherever he's been for several years, but it must be all smoke and mirrors, coupled with pure luck over a particular small sample size. Sorry, but you haven't shown me any reason whatsoever to agree with you that he isn't the player he seems to be. You asserted that his home park in college was the sole reason for his numbers, yet his performance away from that environment shouldn't be considered either, because the Cape Cod League's season doesn't last 749 games. You are certainly welcome to your feeling that something tells you that Gonzales isn't for real, but your feeling alone doesn't convince me to agree with you.
I am trusting Elias here. I'd be happy with any of Tork, Martin, Lacy, or Gonzales. I don't see any valid reason to eliminate Gonzales from that discussion. It comes down to what the Orioles' baseball people think, which is OK by me.
I think 1900 the average was about 45, although the distribution was very different because the infant and child mortality rate was many, many times higher than today. So if you got to 20 you had a good shot at 60 or older.