BoA Mock Draft v1.0, Callis has the O's picking Kyle Zimmer

[LookinUp]

I've wrapped my arms around the fact that we won't end up with a #1 overall type of prospect like Bundy, and likely won't end up with a top 10 overall prospect like Machado.

The college pitchers would probably fit right into our rotation by 2014. That would, theoretically, put Bundy/college P at #1/2 in our rotation, followed by whatever else we've kept/acquired by that time. They all seem able to maintain velocity over several innings, but it's not clear what effect going every 5 days would have on that over time. Without spiking 96 mph, they lose some upside.

The college hitter (Zunino) has a lot of value tied to a position that we don't really need. If I felt like he could play 3B, I'd like the pick. I just think that's not his profile, so he's not necessarily a good fit. He will be for someone though.

The high school hitters all seem to bring positional value to the O's (e.g., value beyond the bat). I'd be fine with any of Stotle's top 3 in our system. They'd slot right in as our #3 prospect and hopefully would hit the ground running.

The wild cards, to me, are Gioloto and Buxton. This is where the scouting director will make his money. Do they take relatively safer players like most of the ones listed above, or do they go for the home run pick? There is risk with each player, but the reward could make them the best two players in this draft when it's all said and done.

I have to say, I'm starting to favor us taking this risk. For whatever reason, maybe just a gut feeling, I feel like this org is now on the right track with respect to player development. I think with Brady, Bundy (yes, I'm giving him credit beyond his playing ability), Peterson, Bordick et al, we're in much better hands to prepare a young stud for the majors.

I'll be fine with just about any non-Hobgood type of pick here. The other guys above will all fit nicely into our plan. Still, at the top of my pref list, it probably goes like this:

1. Gioloto

2. Buxton

3-6. Gausman/Appel/Almora/Correa

I write all of this knowing that not one single tea leaf that I've seen has the O's linked to Gioloto, and most have Buxton gone before our pick. I think I'd go with the pitching over Almora/Correa, but don't feel strongly either way.

[waroriole]

How does Giolito compare to past top HS arms. For examplem the ones that come to my head are: Bundy, Taillon, Bradley.

[LookinUp]

How does Giolito compare to past top HS arms. For examplem the ones that come to my head are: Bundy, Taillon, Bradley.

I'm the last person who should be answering, but seem to remember some of our more knowledgeable people saying he's a tick behind Bundy and Taillon. Assuming health, I think he has a #1 starter upside. Electric arm. Just not as physically ready as Bundy...but who is?

[allstar1579]

How does Giolito compare to past top HS arms. For examplem the ones that come to my head are: Bundy, Taillon, Bradley.

I'd have him in between Bundy and Taillon. I also like him more than Jacob Turner, and maybe a smidge more than I liked Matzek.

[Stotle]

Behind Taillon, close to Bundy and Bradley (probably sandwiched in between), taking full risk profile into account.

[waroriole]

Behind Taillon, close to Bundy and Bradley (probably sandwiched in between), taking full risk profile into account.

Do you rate Taillon over Bundy?

[Stotle]

Do you rate Taillon over Bundy?

Yes, but very close. Same reason I had Cole ranked ahead of Bundy -- like the body a little more.

[allstar1579]

Yes, but very close. Same reason I had Cole ranked ahead of Bundy -- like the body a little more.

Hard not to, Taillon was so much bigger, should be nice and sound for years. He's another one that has been ripped a bit. It's like if they don't start off like Bundy has they are a bust.

[Stotle]

Hard not to, Taillon was so much bigger, should be nice and sound for years. He's another one that has been ripped a bit. It's like if they don't start off like Bundy has they are a bust.

I don't know how you can rip Taillon:

HiA at age 20:

IP - 36.2

H - 25

R - 6

ER - 6

BB - 7

SO - 36

HR - 0

WHIP - 0.873

H/9 - 6.1

BB/9 - 1.7

SO/9 - 8.8

ERA - 1.47

[eb45]

I think I'd have taken Bundy ahead of Taillon based on his polish and off-the-charts work ethic, but Taillon's body advantages are tough to argue against. Machado looks like the better prospect right now, but Taillon is a stud and the Pirates will be very happy with him. Not a bust at all.

I'd take both Bundy and Taillon over Giolito, but he's right there with them, slightly ahead of Bradley and all the arms from the 09 class for me.

Regarding the OP, I think Zimmer might be my favorite of the college pitchers, but I'd be slightly disappointed the O's pass on Correa and/or Giolito.

[allstar1579]

I don't know how you can rip Taillon:

HiA at age 20:

IP - 36.2

H - 25

R - 6

ER - 6

BB - 7

SO - 36

HR - 0

WHIP - 0.873

H/9 - 6.1

BB/9 - 1.7

SO/9 - 8.8

ERA - 1.47

No doubt, but all the stupid "what is wrong with Taillon" and "is Taillon another bust" questions from last year made me want to vomit.

[Mizerooskie]

Is there any actual empirical data that a pitcher with Taillon's body is more likely to have success than a pitcher with Bundy's?

Giving just a cursory look at the top 40 starters in each league in WHIP last year:

-In the NL, there were 12 pitchers 6'1" or under (Kennedy, Hudson, Marcum, Lilly, Leake, Lincecum, Kuroda, Stauffer, Sanchez, Rodriguez, Wolf, Norris), and 5 pitchers at 6'5" or over (Halladay, Latos, Bumgarner, Carpenter, Harang)

-In the AL, there were 9 pitchers 6'1" or under (Tomlin, Romero, Hellickson, Wlson, Colon, Vargas, Gonzalez, Danks, Guthrie) and 15 pitchers at 6'5" or over (Verlander, Weaver, Haren, Beckett, Fister, Pineda, McCarthy, Price, Floyd, Sabathia, Masterson, Pavano, Davis, Porcello, Hochevar)

The totals:

6'1" or under: 21

6'5" or over: 20

Obviously not a thorough, scientific study, but I thought it was interesting nonetheless.

[Stotle]

Is there any actual empirical data that a pitcher with Taillon's body is more likely to have success than a pitcher with Bundy's?

Giving just a cursory look at the top 40 starters in each league in WHIP last year:

-In the NL, there were 12 pitchers 6'1" or under (Kennedy, Hudson, Marcum, Lilly, Leake, Lincecum, Kuroda, Stauffer, Sanchez, Rodriguez, Wolf, Norris), and 5 pitchers at 6'5" or over (Halladay, Latos, Bumgarner, Carpenter, Harang)

-In the AL, there were 9 pitchers 6'1" or under (Tomlin, Romero, Hellickson, Wlson, Colon, Vargas, Gonzalez, Danks, Guthrie) and 15 pitchers at 6'5" or over (Verlander, Weaver, Haren, Beckett, Fister, Pineda, McCarthy, Price, Floyd, Sabathia, Masterson, Pavano, Davis, Porcello, Hochevar)

The totals:

6'1" or under: 21

6'5" or over: 20

Obviously not a thorough, scientific study, but I thought it was interesting nonetheless.

Larger body you tend to have mechanical issues (ability to repeat; body control). Shorter pitchers tend to have trouble with pitch plane, angles, and durability. I think you'd find (haven't looked it up) that the vast majority of the top MLB pitchers are between 6'2" and 6'5".

Also, top 40 starters in WHIP is kind of a weird breakdown. I'd imagine top 20 in fWAR/rWAR or something along those lines would make more sense. After all, we are focusing on front-enders.

[BobDylanBundy]

The wild cards, to me, are Gioloto and Buxton. This is where the scouting director will make his money. Do they take relatively safer players like most of the ones listed above, or do they go for the home run pick? There is risk with each player, but the reward could make them the best two players in this draft when it's all said and done. I have to say, I'm starting to favor us taking this risk. For whatever reason, maybe just a gut feeling, I feel like this org is now on the right track with respect to player development.

I think Buxton is definitely gone by the time the O's pick, but I'm also starting to favor Giolito. Ideally, you're only going to get so many opportunities to pick in the Top-5. A healthy Giolito would be the one arm in this draft who you could argue as an undisputed #1 overall pick. That's the kind of talent you should be aiming for with such a good pick.

Machado looks like the better prospect right now, but Taillon is a stud and the Pirates will be very happy with him.

Not really sure where you're coming from with the bolded. Machado looks like he'll develop into an impact everyday Major League SS and is an extraordinary prospect to nab with a #3 pick. However, I think the O's would have definitely chosen Taillon if their 2010 pick was one spot higher, and I think they'd accept if the Pirates offered a straight up swap today.

Is there any actual empirical data that a pitcher with Taillon's body is more likely to have success than a pitcher with Bundy's?

This should be fun

[Mizerooskie]

Larger body you tend to have mechanical issues (ability to repeat; body control). Shorter pitchers tend to have trouble with pitch plane, angles, and durability. I think you'd find (haven't looked it up) that the vast majority of the top MLB pitchers are between 6'2" and 6'5".

Also, top 40 starters in WHIP is kind of a weird breakdown. I'd imagine top 20 in fWAR/rWAR or something along those lines would make more sense. After all, we are focusing on front-enders.

So you're saying there isn't any empirical data? WHIP is just as good of a measure as fWAR/rWAR for performance, and the lists would likely overlap significantly anyway.