Jump to content

Who the O's pick at 4... a no brainer.

Wingman

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 40
  • Created
  • Last Reply
wineball A-Ball

wineball

Posted
Posted
From what I"ve read there are 4 "elite" prospects in the draft this year...

Alvarez, Beckham, Matusz, and Crow...

Take which ever one falls to us... I'd be happy with any of them.

I think you have to add Justin Smoak and Eric Hosmer into the equation. Smoak is a switch hitting, slick fielding first baseman that should be on the same track as Wieters. Hosmer is considered by some to be the best pure hitter to come out of High School in several years. If Alvarez, Beckham, and Matusz go 1,2,3 I think that Crow would be in play, but so will the other two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mapierce AAA

mapierce

Posted
Posted
I can't see Crow getting past KC. Local product, talent to go number 1, it just makes too much sense.

Alvarez still probably wouldn't fall to us, correct? If Crow goes to KC, the Rays don't need a 3B, but I'm sure the Pirates would select him. Does anybody know how likely Alvarez is going to stick at 3B in the pros' and if not there what other position (SS or LF?). I subscribe to the take the best talent available philosophy but I'd love for us to take an offensive player with the 4th pick after we stockpiled so many arms (albeit not really any #1 or #2 potential) in the Bedard and Tejada trades. Then again, we might have an even higher pick in the next draft. Any thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
clarence Major Leaguer Cup of Coffee

clarence

Posted
Posted

I think we should take the best college hitter available in the next draft, and use our top 5 pick in 2009 (it seems to be a lock we will have one) on the best available pitcher.

I would spend our second and third round picks next season on shortstops and go with pitchers in 2009.

Obviously, it would mean that a talent would have to be there, but I'd like to see us stockpile a few shortstops in the upcoming draft.

In 2009, it will be time to really focus on pitching, again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChaosLex Hangout Grand Counsel

ChaosLex

Posted
Posted
Alvarez still probably wouldn't fall to us, correct? If Crow goes to KC, the Rays don't need a 3B, but I'm sure the Pirates would select him. Does anybody know how likely Alvarez is going to stick at 3B in the pros' and if not there what other position (SS or LF?). I subscribe to the take the best talent available philosophy but I'd love for us to take an offensive player with the 4th pick after we stockpiled so many arms (albeit not really any #1 or #2 potential) in the Bedard and Tejada trades. Then again, we might have an even higher pick in the next draft. Any thoughts?

I'd be shocked if the Rays didn't take Alvarez with the #1 pick. I have a feeling we'll draft either Beckham or Smoak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
allstar1579 Hangout Grand Counsel

allstar1579

Posted
Posted
I'd be shocked if the Rays didn't take Alvarez with the #1 pick. I have a feeling we'll draft either Beckham or Smoak.

Isn't there some reason that the Rays have avoided a ton of the consensus top overall picks (Drew, Miller, etc.)? Is it a Boras thing? I thought they avoided him and thats why a lot of guys started to drop, same with KC and PIT. That is the only reason I think we have a shot at top talent here, because we seem to be the worst team willing to deal with Scottie B. (at least as of last year)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChaosLex Hangout Grand Counsel

ChaosLex

Posted
Posted
Isn't there some reason that the Rays have avoided a ton of the consensus top overall picks (Drew, Miller, etc.)? Is it a Boras thing? I thought they avoided him and thats why a lot of guys started to drop, same with KC and PIT. That is the only reason I think we have a shot at top talent here, because we seem to be the worst team willing to deal with Scottie B. (at least as of last year)

That's a very good point. Here's hoping Alvarez does fall to us at #4! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
allstar1579 Hangout Grand Counsel

allstar1579

Posted
Posted
Considering what the Rays paid for Price last year, I don't think Boras representing anyone will be much of a factor for them.

Many times, save for drafting Townsend, the Rays have dished out big $ with their top pick.

Yeah, but it's not about the money, some teams have policies not to deal with Boras. Mostly because Boras is the agent that has no regard for the "slot price" that MLB sets, and dealing with him is saying choose between your draft pick or MLB. Check what they signed for and see how much IF any of those signings were above slot. Guys like Brackman, Porcello, Drew, Weaver...all guys these teams could have used and had, but walked away from. I wouldn't be surprised to see at least 2 of those top guys slide because of the same reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Posts

    • DrungoHazewood
      Time Gunnar's triple

      By DrungoHazewood · Posted

      Oh, I don't know. I thought when accusing someone of wild malpractice over possibly, maybe, slightly speeding up highlights that kind of opened the door to a little goofy exaggeration.
    • interloper
      The A's Series

      By interloper · Posted

      I was going to post something about this after reading about that on MLBTR this morning. That gives me a lot of hope for Bradish if this kid can come back from a UCL sprain and throw 103. Obviously, reliever vs. starter so who knows. But uplifting to read nonetheless. 
    • DrungoHazewood
      Colton Cowser 2024

      By DrungoHazewood · Posted

      Hollocher hit almost exclusively 2nd in the order. The Cubs' 3rd hitters (and it was the Cubs, not the Indians as I previously stated) were mostly Marty Krug, Zeb Terry, and John Kelleher. Krug was awful for a 1922 3rd-place hitter, with an 83 OPS+ in his only season as a MLB regular, but he only struck out 43 times in 524 PAs. Terry was worse, OPS+ing 74, but with just 16 Ks in 571 PAs. And Kelleher was the worst of the bunch, OPS+ing 60, while striking out 14 times in 222 PAs. Cubs manager Reindeer Bill Killefer stuck hard and fast to the old rule of thumb that the catcher should bat 8th, even if it's Bob O'Farrell and he hit .324 with an .880 OPS. Ray Grimes had a 1.014 OPS and batted cleanup. But Hack Miller and his .899 OPS batted mostly 6th. Statz wasn't a terrible leadoff hitter, was one of only a couple players who had a SB% higher than 50%, but was 6th among their regulars in OBP. That's as bad a bunch of #3 hitters as I've seen in a while, yet the Cubs finished 80-74-2. Just goes to show you batting order doesn't really matter. Anyway, back to the main point... yes, I'm sure some of Hollocher's CS were busted hit-and-runs. But nobody that regularly batted behind him struck out in even 7% of PAs so they shoulda been putting the ball in play the vast majority of the time.    
    • interloper
      Time Gunnar's triple

      By interloper · Posted

      Bobby needs to git gud. 
    • Frobby
      4/25: Bowie Wins, Only Team Above .500

      By Frobby · Posted

      How many people actually said they were one of the greatest teams ever?   They did hit the snot out of the ball the first 9 games of the year, mostly in a 6 game series in a very hitter-friendly ball park against a bad pitching staff.  That said, they’re still second in the league in runs per game.  Their pitching has been problematic, yielding 6.50 runs per game.  
    • RZNJ
      Time Gunnar's triple

      By RZNJ · Posted

      Gunnar’s base running is in the 99th percentile.  That mess is in the 98th percentile.
    • interloper
      Speculating on how the O's handle the pitching logjam

      By interloper · Posted

      Yeah, the highlighted section here is really why I agree that the O's will look to minimize losing players to waivers just yet. Things could blow up on them pretty quick. There's a ton of risk with these moves, but they have to find out. The best way to do that is to utilize the options for Akin and Tate, IMO. We'll see! 

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...