Orioles 2nd round pick - CF Xavier Avery (HS)

[McLovin]

The kid is 19 at Hi A ball.

I think that's one of those levels where some learning can actually take place, but I might be wrong.

Low A ball.

[glenn__davis]

The other part of this discussion is do we feel the Orioles have the coaching and development system to turn Avery into a good player?

If we don't, then that is a problem we need to correct. One of the Trea's big criticisms of these type of picks is that we don't develop them well. If that is the case, then we can't stop drafting these types of guys, rather, we need to find out where the problem lies in our minor league instruction and correct it.

I'll say this - so far the guys that have come up this year look far, far more prepared than in the past. Night and day difference. Probably some of that is a differenc in talent, but hopefully it's also a sign that our minor league coaching and instruction has improved.

[Stotle]

He's a prospect, sure.

He's also still a project. A second round pick is a big deal. Look at Reimold. Reimold was a pick with a lot of tools and polish, and he mashed out of the gate. At the end of the day, right now, what are we looking at with Avery in terms of projecting? Joey Gathwright?

Look at what Carl Crawford and Adam Jones did at age 19. They were picked around the same spot. That's something to get worked up about.

There are still a lot of question marks with Avery.

This seems measured and appropriate. Good post.

[Sports Guy]

You've said yourself many times - I think - that foreclosing an avenue of acquiring talent is a mistake. This is true because it limits your ability to maximize talent - by definition.

It's the same thing here - just like saying you can't swear off FA completely, or whatever, you can't simply say that I don't want to draft "these types" of guys. You're going to lose out on very good talent. Satisficing is fine when you have limited information and have to make a generically probabilistic decision. But the O's aren't you or me - and Jordan is not you or me - the idea that he can't differentiate between "athletes" and pick out - more often than not - a successful one seems to me to be not only pessimistic, but also a bit narcissistic. Just because it's not a decision you're informed enough to make doesn't mean it's a decision that should be avoided altogether.

That's not meant as offense - because I think we all do the same thing. My response last year wasn't ecstasy at this draft pick. But I also trust that Jordan knows what he's looking for. I'm surprised by Avery's success, so this isn't a "told-you-so" at all. That said, there seem to be a lot of opinions generated by some kind of metapicture of the draft.

But if the best, most efficient, way to draft was simply to choose the guy who consensus said was the highest rated, it could be done by a computer program. There's a reason we have Jordan.

I also admit that you qualify your statements by acknowledging Jordan's better position. You're not really the best example of these overreactions - you have your opinions but they're tempered. The others, though...

And, just as a sidenote: how funny is it that Old Fan was in here clamoring about good and bad draft picks when he couldn't possibly have any idea what was going on?

Its cause I don't pay attention to this stuff and don't know much about it. Anything that I have to say on the matter is based off what i read, either on here or online since I haven't seen any of these guys.

But I do have a basic philosophy...Top 10 picks should be used on advanced college players unless there is an elite HS talent sitting there that you just can't pass up.

I feel the same way about the first few rounds...If there is some kind of top flight HS talent there, then go get them...No problem with that at all.

But if there are some solid college prospects sitting there vs HS projects with very good upside, I take the college player.

Its just what I prefer...Those picks are generally speaking going to cost you the most money...Because of that, i would rather the money be spent a little wiser.

That's just me.

Last night, Jordan made it perfectly clear that he likes using the second round pick on(and i am paraphrasing here) high risk, high reward type guys.

That's fine...Jordan likes that and he has seen these kids a lot...But that doesn't mean I will agree with him....perhaps if some of these guys end up good players, I will be swayed...But there are A LOT more Darnell McDonalds out there vs Carl Crawfords.

[Lucky Jim]

He's a prospect, sure.

He's also still a project. A second round pick is a big deal. Look at Reimold. Reimold was a pick with a lot of tools and polish, and he mashed out of the gate. At the end of the day, right now, what are we looking at with Avery in terms of projecting? Joey Gathwright?

Look at what Carl Crawford and Adam Jones did at age 19. They were picked around the same spot. That's something to get worked up about.

There are still a lot of question marks with Avery.

Carl Crawford got a slightly earlier start than Avery, so he was more advanced. Though the comparisons of a 19 year old Avery with an 18 year old Crawford and Jones aren't as far off as you might think. The fact that both Jones and Crawford played professionally at 17 matters.

Year Team Lg Age Org. Level Pos Ln G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB CS BB SO HBP IBB SH  SF DP  AVG OBP SLG OPS 2000 CHA SAL 18 Tb A of   135 564 99 170 21 11 6 57 55 9 32 102 3 1 9 1 1  .301 .342 .410 752 2001 ORL Sou 19 Tb AA 0f   132 537 64 147 24 3 4 51 36 20 36 90 4 2 6 2 3  .274 .323 .352 675 

Jones improved greatly at 19.

Year Team Lg Age Org. Level Pos Ln G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB CS BB SO HBP IBB SH  SF DP  AVG OBP SLG OPS 2003 MAR Ariz 17 Sea Rk ss   28 109 18 31 5 1 0 8 5 1 5 19 10 0 3 1 1  .284 .368 .349 717        EVE Nwst 17 Sea A- ss   3 13 2 6 1 0 0 4 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 1 1  .462 .467 .538 1005 2004 WIS Midw 18 Sea A ss   130 510 76 136 23 7 11 72 8 4 33 124 5 0 4 7 13  .267 .314 .404 718 2005 INL  Calif 19 Sea A+ ss   68 271 43 80 20 5 8 46 4 5 29 64 8 0 2 5 4  .295 .374 .494 868 

Avery:

Year Team Lg Age Org. Level Pos Ln G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB CS BB SO HBP IBB SH  SF DP  AVG OBP SLG OPS 2009 DEL SAL 19 Bal A     53 197 25 61 8 4 2 15 15 8 11 41 1 0 0 2 1  .310 .346 .421 767 

There's a vast, vast gulf between Adam Jones, Carl Crawford and Joey Gathwright, and to pretend like it's some kind of binary possibility is disingenuous at best.

Really, he's essentially Felix Pie - but a Felix Pie we got at 18 so that we could make sure he develops properly:

2002 CUB Ariz 17 Chc Rk of   55 218 42 70 16 13 4 37 17 8 21 47 4 1 1 4 1  .321 .385 .569 954  BOI Nwst 17 Chc A- of   2 8 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0  .125 .222 .250 472 2003 LAN Midw 18 Chc A of   124 505 72 144 22 9 4 47 19 13 41 98 6 2 3 0 3  .285 .346 .388 734 2004 DAY FSL 19 Chc A+ of   110 431 79 128 18 10 8 47 32 18 39 116 5 2 7 5 5  .297 .358 .441 799 

Sorry for the jumble. HTML isn't working well for me right now.

[Stotle]

You've said yourself many times - I think - that foreclosing an avenue of acquiring talent is a mistake. This is true because it limits your ability to maximize talent - by definition.

It's the same thing here - just like saying you can't swear off FA completely, or whatever, you can't simply say that I don't want to draft "these types" of guys. You're going to lose out on very good talent. Satisficing is fine when you have limited information and have to make a generically probabilistic decision. But the O's aren't you or me - and Jordan is not you or me - the idea that he can't differentiate between "athletes" and pick out - more often than not - a successful one seems to me to be not only pessimistic, but also a bit narcissistic. Just because it's not a decision you're informed enough to make doesn't mean it's a decision that should be avoided altogether.

That's not meant as offense - because I think we all do the same thing. My response last year wasn't ecstasy at this draft pick. But I also trust that Jordan knows what he's looking for. I'm surprised by Avery's success, so this isn't a "told-you-so" at all. That said, there seem to be a lot of opinions generated by some kind of metapicture of the draft.

But if the best, most efficient, way to draft was simply to choose the guy who consensus said was the highest rated, it could be done by a computer program. There's a reason we have Jordan.

I also admit that you qualify your statements by acknowledging Jordan's better position. You're not really the best example of these overreactions - you have your opinions but they're tempered. The others, though...

And, just as a sidenote: how funny is it that Old Fan was in here clamoring about good and bad draft picks when he couldn't possibly have any idea what was going on?

I also think "athlete first, ball player second" isn't 100% correct with Avery. There is a distinction to be made with someone who doesn't have a feel for the game and someone who simply isn't refined. Avery has a feel for the game -- that was clear on the summer circuit last year. He just hasn't had the instruction to be as far along in his development as someone like, say, Donavan Tate (from this year's class).

[Frobby]

But was he more worthy than other players that were there at the time we drafted him?

That was my other big complaint...Hate the idea of athlete first/baseball player second guys and that there was other talent there that seemed to be rated higher.

As I said then, obviously the kid has upside or he wouldn't have been rated as someone who should go within the first few rounds....but does that mean he should have been our pick over other players?

I don't think the "baseball player second" tag is really fair with this guy. He played a lot of baseball, and showed baseball skills, but the real knock was he hadn't had a lot of experience facing top-flight competition. I'm pretty sure that was discussed in detail by Tony and others.

Regarding your criticisms of Avery's plate discipine and other nitpicks, let's not forget where this guy is playing and how old he is. He's a pretty young 19 (just turned 19 in January). Without checking, I think the only Jordan draftees who reached Delmarva at a younger age were Erbe, Rowell and Hoes (who is 2 months younger than Avery). To me, what he's done the last 6 weeks is pretty phenomenal, and he seems to be getting better all the time.

[jerios55]

Low A ball.

Beat me to it

The one part I am curious about isn't whether Jordan makes good picks, it is more does he make picks to early. I don't know enough about each guy to be a talent evaluator, but it seems that many in the know think guys are reaches. If we picked Sirblahblah De Blahblah in the second round would Avery/Givens have still been there in the 3rd...and so on?

Everybody (many) seem to think that JJ could pick guys 10-15 picks later. Maybe this team should win a bunch and give him the 20th pick instead of the 5th.

[McLovin]

There's a vast, vast gulf between Adam Jones, Carl Crawford and Joey Gathwright, and to pretend like it's some kind of binary possibility is disingenuous at best.

I didn't pretend it was "some kind of binary possibility." My point is that Avery has done nothing special. He's a 19 year old in low A who is hitting for a nice average, with little power. Certainly nothing special enough to "in your face" somebody.

[Lucky Jim]

This seems measured and appropriate. Good post.

You think that saying Avery's "projection" is Joey Gathright is "measured"? Really?

Gathright has two professional homeruns. You yourself said you love Avery's power potential.

[McLovin]

You think that saying Avery's "projection" is Joey Gathright is "measured"? Really?

You see, in English, *statements* are terminated by periods. *Questions* are terminated by question marks.

Having said that, tell me where I said Avery projected to be Gathwright. Please.

[Arthur_Bryant]

Everybody (many) seem to think that JJ could pick guys 10-15 picks later.

That was the criticism of the Avery pick last year, that he was a reach at the 2nd round.

I suspect that Jordan's draft boards look different from many. In the early rounds he puts a premium on makeup and athleticism (in the later rounds he would have less of an idea about makeup). Believe it or not, I think intelligence matters a lot to him.

When your board looks somewhat different from others, you'll often get shifts where you're picking guys who are rated 10-15 slots lower, maybe even a round lower. The only way to judge is to see what you end up with a few years down the line.

FWIW I'm thrilled with what Avery is doing. If he continues, he'll end up on Top 100 lists this winter, and he won't have much company among 2nd round picks from 2008.

[Stotle]

You think that saying Avery's "projection" is Joey Gathright is "measured"? Really?

Gathright has two professional homeruns. You yourself said you love Avery's power potential.

I didn't read it as "Avery will be Gathright" at all. I read it as "Avery is having a nice season but he hasn't broken out to the point that I'd count on more then Gathright." That seems pretty measured to me.

I do love Avery's power potential -- and I also said whether or not it develops may depend on what type of hitter he's sculpted into. I'm thrilled with the idea that Avery has already progressed enough for us to discuss Gathright as a potential floor.

[Lucky Jim]

At the end of the day, right now, what are we looking at with Avery in terms of projecting? Joey Gathwright?

I obviously didn't realize you were asking Joey Gathright to answer the question, not suggesting Joey Gathright as the answer to the question. My bad.

[Lucky Jim]

That was the criticism of the Avery pick last year, that he was a reach at the 2nd round.

I suspect that Jordan's draft boards look different from many. In the early rounds he puts a premium on makeup and athleticism (in the later rounds he would have less of an idea about makeup). Believe it or not, I think intelligence matters a lot to him.

When your board looks somewhat different from others, you'll often get shifts where you're picking guys who are rated 10-15 slots lower, maybe even a round lower. The only way to judge is to see what you end up with a few years down the line.

FWIW I'm thrilled with what Avery is doing. If he continues, he'll end up on Top 100 lists this winter, and he won't have much company among 2nd round picks from 2008.

I really need to stop arguing this point - it's not really that big a deal. I take a wait and see approach, and I should quit wishing other folks would, too. It's just not going to happen.

Also, I'm supposed to be reviewing depositions and making counter designations. And that's just boring. Much more fun to argue with McLovin. Apologies, all...