My own mindset of this whole thing is. Framing ability is nice to have and can help you.
But there are so many other catcher attributes that I want them to have:
1. Cannon and accurate arm
2. General in charge of the players and where they need to be.
3. Ability to snap throw to first or 3rd from his knees.
4. keeping the ball in front of him, on bad pitches
5. Ability to communicate with the pitcher on the mound, keep them focused and calm.
But thats just me.
I wasn't implying CAREER .400 OBP. C'mon Wildcard. Seven hitters were above .400 OBP last year and a few others were nearly at .400. I don't expect Martin to have a career .400 OBP, but i think his upside and projection, based on everything I've read, indicate he has the capability to be a .400'ish OBP guy at least a few times during his prime. Whether or not he ever approaches that level is still to be determined. He may bust or just be a solid player with a .360 OBP. Time will tell... it always does.
Anyway, you have the most amazing way of taking one single part of a post and stretching it to fit your agenda. I'm tired of engaging you about it, frankly.
Probably because it's a thing now, and was then. It's a little like the ability to hide an extra ball in the tall outfield grass in 1890s. It's a little devious, and technology (gas mowers) came along that eliminated it. But if you couldn't do it back in the day you were behind the curve.
18th of 60-some #2 overall picks in career value. So top third of a really highly regarded group of ballplayers. In other words, 70% of #2 picks were worse, and almost half of them had careers worth less than Prior's best season.
But it's the draft, and if a top five pick doesn't go to Cooperstown he's a disappointment. Success is getting to the 95th percentile.
I think they might consider a cap if it's tied to a percentage of revenues that's significantly higher than today, along with a floor that's a lot higher than today's floor. A cap is kind of irrelevant if the teams have to pay out 47% of revenues in player salaries and they're paying out 41% today. The only thing it will really impact are the gargantuan contracts, because the big teams won't be able to add payroll without limits.
I am not a big Bowden fan and I don't like the claim in his article that one shouldn't draft a pitcher in the top five slots in the first round just because of who was drafted in that slot in prior years. The evaluation of a prospect should be a unique event, IMO. However, Bowden's generalizations of the recent historical failure rates of the pitchers taken at the very top of a draft class uses the same line of reasoning (again, which I don't like) as is used in the OP of this thread and provides a starkly different conclusion - that the failure rate of SPs who were thought to be the best of their class is quite high. A period which Bowden's article points out includes the Os selection of Brian Matusz.