Taking a Different Approach to the Draft

[Stotle]

I totally understand your point and it is very valid and legit in my mind. Don't get me wrong, I would have loved to select Melville, and throughout ESPN2's coverage and watching the rest of the first day on the computer I was really hoping to draft Melville. It just turned out that either they weren't very confident in being able to sign him or they weren't all that high on him or they had guys that they rated higher than Melville. There's so many things going on with the draft that I would have loved to be in the draft room listening to all the discussions.

And while Melville is the "surer" thing let's not forget that he is a high school pitcher so a lot could go wrong. Among high school eligible pitchers, say Melville were given an A-/B+ grade. Then say that given the talent we selected that these 4 or 5 arms have thirds round grades of B/B-/C+. I'd rather take the quantity and hope the they develop and fulfill their ceilings. Its a tough call though, because I really could go either way on the issue.

Oh and our talks about money are probably moot because if last years draft were any indication, we most likely would have the money to go over slot for guys like Melville, Bundy, and the rest of our later fallen talents.

Well put. I'm not sure I am 100% in favor of my approach, but I know it is the better strategy for me personally since I do not have the wealth of information, or the benefit of an army of scouts, to try and identify the lower-round guys that are currently B-/C+ and will be A-/B+ in 2011. I also think that as applied to the draft as a whole, my approach (I believe) has a higher chance of successfully producing ML players, though this would not be true if a particular organization proves itself capable of consistently identifying and selecting value.

Oh well...if there were a "right" answer we wouldn't have anything to knock around on these boards, right?

[Duke2010]

Well put. I'm not sure I am 100% in favor of my approach, but I know it is the better strategy for me personally since I do not have the wealth of information, or the benefit of an army of scouts, to try and identify the lower-round guys that are currently B-/C+ and will be A-/B+ in 2011. I also think that as applied to the draft as a whole, my approach (I believe) has a higher chance of successfully producing ML players, though this would not be true if a particular organization proves itself capable of consistently identifying and selecting value.

Oh well...if there were a "right" answer we wouldn't have anything to knock around on these boards, right?

Yup, we both obviously would take different approaches to the draft, but in the end, I think we both see the value in each others arguments. Really, I could go either way on the issue, and I wouldn't be complaining about our draft if we added Melville, just as I am not complaining about our draft now. Good discussion Stot, you definitely know your stuff that's for sure.