Gausman or Appel?

[Pickles]

Yes. Those teams that draft at #8(?) who are targeting "average" sure are making a mistake.

I'm not agreeing w him, but I'll say this:

If you get average, you should be content w that at 8. However, I don't think you should be targeting it.

[Flash- bd]

I think Lucky Jim's point was that "average" is not exactly a good word to describe Appel. The guy profiles as a TOR starter if he fulfills his potential. Between the two, I'm inclined to go with Gausman, based primarily on what I've read and on Stotle's analysis from Camdendepot, but by all accounts there is not a great deal separating them, and in any case if they both pan out they are both probably #2's, which is not "average", but "fantastic".

Gio Gonzalez, Matt Cain, C.J. Wilson, Brandon McCarthy, Madison Bumgarner, Dan Haren....these guys are all in that #2 area. I don't think anyone uses the word "average" to describe them...

[Pickles]

I think Lucky Jim's point was that "average" is not exactly a good word to describe Appel. The guy profiles as a TOR starter if he fulfills his potential. Between the two, I'm inclined to go with Gausman, based primarily on what I've read and on Stotle's analysis from Camdendepot, but by all accounts there is not a great deal separating them, and in any case if they both pan out they are both probably #2's, which is not "average", but "fantastic".

Gio Gonzalez, Matt Cain, C.J. Wilson, Brandon McCarthy, Madison Bumgarner, Dan Haren....these guys are all in that #2 area. I don't think anyone uses the word "average" to describe them...

I should have been clearer, but that's what I meant when I said I'm not defending him: I wouldn't defend his classification of Appel as average.

I took Lucky Jim's point to be that even at 8 getting an average MLer should be considered a success. But, like I said, I do believe that to be the case, but I don't think you should be drafting somebody there who you project to be an average MLer.

[Flash- bd]

I should have been clearer, but that's what I meant when I said I'm not defending him: I wouldn't defend his classification of Appel as average.

I took Lucky Jim's point to be that even at 8 getting an average MLer should be considered a success. But, like I said, I do believe that to be the case, but I don't think you should be drafting somebody there who you project to be an average MLer.

No arguments with your point, though I think you could even make an argument that "average" is a failure at 8. Of course, if you go by the odds, "average" is beating the odds, but you have to beat the odds to succeed. So, yes, I think it's pretty self-evident that you should not be targeting an average player at 8, and I think there's an argument to be made that getting an average player at 1.8 still is not that successful of an outcome.

I still think Lucky Jim was speaking with a hint of sarcasm regarding section18's characterization of Appel as average, though, but the man himself can clear that up!