An Early Look at the 2019 Draft

[baltfan]

1 hour ago, Jammer7 said:

I am a big fan of Rutschman. I am just a bit leery of taking a catcher at 1:1, not saying I wouldn’t, just leery. As with Wieters, the legs take a beating at C. The legs are where the power comes from. That said, Buster Posey sure would be worthy. The only knock I had on Rutschman was that I don’t see him as more than average defensively. Solid receiver, just not a real difference maker defensively. That means, to me, the bat has to be extraordinary. Not sure I would say his bat is at that level just yet.

You could make an argument that a catcher 1:1 is the best kind of investment.  You don't pay much for his best years and then you let him go.  I know that is cruel, but for a team like the Orioles that can be crushed by big contracts there is some merit to the argument.

[Can_of_corn]

16 minutes ago, baltfan said:

You could make an argument that a catcher 1:1 is the best kind of investment.  You don't pay much for his best years and then you let him go.  I know that is cruel, but for a team like the Orioles that can be crushed by big contracts there is some merit to the argument.

That was always my line with Wieters, catch him into the ground and let someone else pay for the decline.

Would have worked too if not for that pesky UCL.

[UpstateNYfan]

If it comes down to a toss up, one being a pitcher, the other everyday at a key position, wouldn't an everyday player be more valuable than a 1/5 player?

[Frobby]

37 minutes ago, UpstateNYfan said:

If it comes down to a toss up, one being a pitcher, the other everyday at a key position, wouldn't an everyday player be more valuable than a 1/5 player?

You can debate that all day.   You can look at it this way - a batter will get 600-700 plate appearances if he plays almost every day, but a pitcher who throws 200 innings probably faces about 800 batters in a season.   Of course, both the batter and the pitcher also field the ball, and a non-DH will have a lot more chances than a pitcher (and varying depending on the position he plays).    So, I’d give the position player the edge on importance, but it’s pretty close.  

[now]

19 minutes ago, Frobby said:

You can debate that all day.   You can look at it this way - a batter will get 600-700 plate appearances if he plays almost every day, but a pitcher who throws 200 innings probably faces about 800 batters in a season.   Of course, both the batter and the pitcher also field the ball, and a non-DH will have a lot more chances than a pitcher (and varying depending on the position he plays).    So, I’d give the position player the edge on importance, but it’s pretty close.  

Good post, sensible approach to compare plate appearaces, and factor in fielding chances. So, isn't this what WAR is designed to do, compare pitchers and players of different positions (and parks, and eras) with a single comprehensive, adjusted, weighted metric?

[Ohfan67]

14 minutes ago, Frobby said:

You can debate that all day.   You can look at it this way - a batter will get 600-700 plate appearances if he plays almost every day, but a pitcher who throws 200 innings probably faces about 800 batters in a season.   Of course, both the batter and the pitcher also field the ball, and a non-DH will have a lot more chances than a pitcher (and varying depending on the position he plays).    So, I’d give the position player the edge on importance, but it’s pretty close.  

As you say, you can debate it all day. A ML staff throws about 1440 innings a year. If a pitcher throws 200, then that's almost 14% of the innings. No position player will get 14% of hits or 14% of many other key stats (but some will get >14% of stats like a team's HRs). So from some viewpoints a top starting pitcher will have a larger effect than any position player.  And the debate goes round and round and round. But of course, having really good position players and pitchers is key, so the O's need to get/develop quality as much as possible when they can, regardless of position. 

[Ohfan67]

1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:

That was always my line with Wieters, catch him into the ground and let someone else pay for the decline.

Would have worked too if not for that pesky UCL.

Or that pesky qualifying offer!

[Can_of_corn]

6 minutes ago, Ohfan67 said:

Or that pesky qualifying offer!

My thinking is that if he had stayed healthy he would have played well enough that he would have refused the QO.

I could be wrong.

[now]

8 minutes ago, Ohfan67 said:

As you say, you can debate it all day. A ML staff throws about 1440 innings a year. If a pitcher throws 200, then that's almost 14% of the innings. No position player will get 14% of hits or 14% of many other key stats (but some will get >14% of stats like a team's HRs). So from some viewpoints a top starting pitcher will have a larger effect than any position player.  And the debate goes round and round and round. But of course, having really good position players and pitchers is key, so the O's need to get/develop quality as much as possible when they can, regardless of position. 

Another factor is injury risk... Which I imagine is far greater for pitchers. So I would think it makes the most sense to draft high for position players (lower risk) and then fill lower slots with pitching depth. And if you have the cash, sign or trade for TOR pitchers when they prove (relatively, of course) their durability.

[Ohfan67]

45 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

My thinking is that if he had stayed healthy he would have played well enough that he would have refused the QO.

I could be wrong.

Definitely. I agree. 

[Ohfan67]

43 minutes ago, now said:

Another factor is injury risk... Which I imagine is far greater for pitchers. So I would think it makes the most sense to draft high for position players (lower risk) and then fill lower slots with pitching depth. And if you have the cash, sign or trade for TOR pitchers when they prove (relatively, of course) their durability.

It's so variable that there's no one way to do it. Take the most talented player available and keep your fingers crossed. Teams can assess talent, but the future is a big ole shrug.  If the best player is a hitter, draft the hitter. If the best player is a pitcher, draft the pitcher. The rest is pretty much fool's gold.

[OriolesMagic83]

I would like the O's to avoid drafting a HS pitcher with the 1st pick or even the 1st 5 picks.  There's just too much chance that a young pitcher will suffer a career altering or even ending injury.  When's the last time the O's drafted a pitcher in the top of the first round and they had multiple years as an ace pitcher?  Jim Palmer?  I believe Bedard was a HS pitcher too, but he had one great year.  Unless a HS pitcher has "best talent in a generation" attached to his arm, I want no part of picking him 1st.  If his arm was abused in high school like Bundy's was, I still don't want to pick him 1st. 

[sevastras]

1 hour ago, OriolesMagic83 said:

I would like the O's to avoid drafting a HS pitcher with the 1st pick or even the 1st 5 picks.  There's just too much chance that a young pitcher will suffer a career altering or even ending injury.  When's the last time the O's drafted a pitcher in the top of the first round and they had multiple years as an ace pitcher?  Jim Palmer?  I believe Bedard was a HS pitcher too, but he had one great year.  Unless a HS pitcher has "best talent in a generation" attached to his arm, I want no part of picking him 1st.  If his arm was abused in high school like Bundy's was, I still don't want to pick him 1st. 

Bundy was suppose to be. 

[Frobby]

1 hour ago, OriolesMagic83 said:

When's the last time the O's drafted a pitcher in the top of the first round and they had multiple years as an ace pitcher?  Jim Palmer?  I believe Bedard was a HS pitcher too, but he had one great year.  

There was no draft when Palmer was signed.   Bedard was drafted out of community college.   

Other than Dylan Bundy, the most successful high school pitchers we’ve drafted are Josh Hader (19th round, 2012), Zach Davies (26th, 2011), Zach Britton (3rd, 2006), Jim Johnson (5th, 2001), Arthur Rhodes (2nd, 1988), John Habyan (3rd, 1982), Storm Davis (7th, 1979), and Don Hood (1st, 1969).

The O’s have used a first round pick (including supplemental) on a HS pitcher 17 times.   Only 7 of those made the majors and only four had positive WAR,  topped by Don Hood at 5.1.   Of course, the jury is still out on Hunter Harvey, DL Hall and Grayson Rodriguez.   

[OriolesMagic83]

1 hour ago, Frobby said:

There was no draft when Palmer was signed.   Bedard was drafted out of community college.   

Other than Dylan Bundy, the most successful high school pitchers we’ve drafted are Josh Hader (19th round, 2012), Zach Davies (26th, 2011), Zach Britton (3rd, 2006), Jim Johnson (5th, 2001), Arthur Rhodes (2nd, 1988), John Habyan (3rd, 1982), Storm Davis (7th, 1979), and Don Hood (1st, 1969).

The O’s have used a first round pick (including supplemental) on a HS pitcher 17 times.   Only 7 of those made the majors and only four had positive WAR,  topped by Don Hood at 5.1.   Of course, the jury is still out on Hunter Harvey, DL Hall and Grayson Rodriguez.   

Those are terrible odds when the O's have had zero TOR years from any HS pitcher they drafted.