Spl51

Ya the more I watch and read about Kjerstad, the more it makes sense, it's just not a sexy pick. I'm more disappointed with the options that are left, and I'm pretty sure the Rays took Bitsko from us. If we get Wilcox or Kelley and a Fulton or Winn, then I'll be satified

Kiley McDaniels latest mock draft has us taking Martin at 2, Bitsko at 30, and Jordan Westburg at 39. I would be ecstatic if we could do that, but I don't see how we can do that unless we go with a senior in the 4th and maybe even 5th.

Man social media is scary. Permanent record of everything you do for the rest of your life. We have mobs of people digging up dirt on anyone they can find. This country is going down a bad road.

I have liked tweets dozens of times accidentally without even knowing I did it until I look back at my liked tweets. It's really easy to like a tweet when you are just scrolling.

Just talking about the general trend that analytic teams realize that arms are more risky, so they're ranking gets slightly dinged to compensate for that. He also didn't pick a pitcher until the 8th round last year. Things like on base skills are harder to mold using modern training, places like driveline are much more effective for pitchers.

I think he has enough faith in him that he doesn't have to give him the top top talent in order to have a system full of promising arms. So far he's been proven right. I think recent history has shown that it's much harder to mold position players than arms.

The comp is more to do with them having similar stances, slightly pull heavy swings, and profile than production. I googled Mookie Betts as a prospect and his scouting grades: Hit: 65 | Power: 45 | Run: 60 | Arm: 45 | Field: 55 https://www.mlb.com/news/mookie-betts-leads-bostons-updated-top-20-list/c-85946126 Here is Martin's scouting grades from the same place: HIT: 65 POWER: 50 RUN: 55 ARM: 50 FIELD: 55 https://www.mlb.com/prospects/draft/austin-martin-668885 Pretty similar profiles. Of course 95% of players with those scouting grades don't produce like Mookie Betts will.

Only way this makes sense (in how I rank them) #2 - Veen Gonzales #30 - Hendrick Hassell Soderstrom (maybe) Any of the 3 prep arms Veen/Hendrick would be the only combo that I personally think it would be worth to forgo Martin and pick the best player at #30. I just don't think any risk you would take that your target wouldn't reach your pick at 30 is not worth the upside, and I'm a huge Veen fan. There's been some smoke that we are interested in Gonzales, but I am just not a Nick Gonzales guy, as I have said before. This of course is looking at it as though it would be an underslot deal. They could view Gonzales as truly as good as or better than Martin, and that they could save money while getting the player they want. How much money Gonzales would save vs Martin is debatable, probably between 1-2 million. Just go with Martin, there are going to be plenty of college arms available at 30 and 39, and you might still be able to squeeze in a prep player anyway.

Man I miss Luke giving us great draft thoughts. Of course his skills will be put to use for exactly that purpose for the Orioles in this draft, especially since so much of it is going to be video scouting. It looks like all signs are pointing to Torkelson going 1-1. Pretty funny mock draft here that I've said could be a possibility before: https://fansided.com/2020/05/06/5-prospects-to-watch-orioles-rebuild/

Preference list for pick #2- 1. Martin 2. Torkelson 3. Veen 4. Hancock 5. Gonzales 6. Lacy Torkelson and Martin are pretty close, but obviously the positional value is the clincher. Martin's power just hasn't taken that next step like you would hope for, and his pull happy approach gives me a little hesitation. Torkelson has zero questions with the bat. Veen pushed himself into the top tier like I said he could, but unfortunately I think that means he doesn't have a chance to be picked by us to go underslot here and overslot on another pick. With the draft only getting 5 rounds, I think it means we have to go with a safer option from college and you don't lose much upside with the choices from college. To me Hancock is a much more complete pitcher than Lacy. Hancock more consistently throws above 95 with ease. Lacy's slider is slightly better than Hancock's, but Hancock's changeup is plus and Lacy doesn't even have a third pitch. Hancock's command is just a lot more refined than Lacy's, and his delivery just screams starter. Lacy's delivery is just more high effort. If I'm picking a college pitcher, a two pitch pitcher with effort in the delivery just scares me.

Wish we traded him last year. Sorry, I get that people deserve a fair trial, but in domestic abuse cases 99 times out of 100 it's exactly what you think.

Any reason why? Have you watched both of them? I would take the pitcher who has above average command now vs the guy who has below average command at the same velocity and age 9 times out of 10.

Yeahhh... let's just say Law's opinion doesn't hold too much weight with me.

Just caught up with the game. I don't care what Zimmmerman's final line was, he looked just as good as Means did last spring training. Yusnial Diaz today looked like the player that excited us last spring training as well. Big arm, good plate discipline, sweet swing.

Our best hope is that the Tigers become enamored with Torkelson and Martin falls to us, but from everything I've read it's gonna take a lot for the Tigers not to pick Martin. I've been scouting a lot of player who could be available for us to pick in the 30 and 39 range. Hoping to make a list of preferred candidates soon. Keep in mind it's a lot harder to gauge which high school players would be available there though, and this would not account for any underslot/overslot shenanigans.

The amount of people buying into the delusion that Chris Davis is no longer a well below average major leaguer shows how easy it is to make people buy into media narratives.

Veen all the way up to 4. Not good for my idea of snagging him at a discount and getting someone else over slot. Unfortunately I don't think the risk you would take picking him second would be worth it when you can get proven college players with huge ceilings as well.

Mullins looking like the same player he was last year. Not much hope for him.

https://www.mlb.com/video/vanderbilt-vs-uconn Rocker pitching, Martin playing third and batting third. Start in 5 mins supposedly.

That’s like saying you could have used your spare hour to mow the lawn, when you used your time to change your brake pads. If you have to do both, swapping the order you then in doesn’t solve the problem.

Based on what? I've watched a lot of Hancock, there's not many holes you can poke in his game. He sits upper-mid 90's with a plus change, above average slider and command, both of which project to be plus. Obviously I would prefer a position player to avoid risk, but it completely depends tons of factors. College pitchers who have proven it have much less risk, and we have no knowledge of what his medicals look like. Ace pitchers don't grow on trees. If you'd avoid Hancock with your life, then a high school righty like Bitsko isn't worth consideration. Hancock is Bitsko's 10th percentile outcome in 3 years.

Wow the first thing we've agreed on.

Veen's stock is shooting way up. I actually picked him in November. I would consider reaching for him at 1-2, you might get a discount and be able to get a mid 1st round level talent in the comp round. I really like all 3 of the top 3 college players, but man I really like Veen's swing.

McCoy is nothing to be excited about. After watching him, I'm way down on him. I like Bannon a little bit though.