Orioles select SS Richie Martin with 1st pick of Rule 5 Draft

[Frobby]

11 minutes ago, wildcard said:

So MLB Pipeline has Martin at #13 and Jackson at #24.    Tony/Luke's list has Pop at #16. So you  would have Martin lower that #16?

Asked and answered several days ago.    

[Jammer7]

Martin has missed time with several knee injuries since being drafted. We may be getting him at a time where he begins figuring things out. Maybe Jeff Manto, if he’s still in the organization, can help him understand something and it clicks. But he is an instant improvement over who we already had. I like it. 

[wildcard]

3 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Asked and answered several days ago.    

If I am remembering correctly Luke said in the 20's.   He didn't say anything about be lower than 16.  Maybe he has thought about it more.

[Frobby]

1 minute ago, wildcard said:

If I am remembering correctly Luke said in the 20's.   He didn't say anything about be lower than 16.  Maybe he has thought about it more.

Isn’t the 20’s lower than 16?

[wildcard]

Just now, Frobby said:

Isn’t the 20’s lower than 16?

17 is also lower than 16.   

[Luke-OH]

41 minutes ago, wildcard said:

So MLB Pipeline has Martin at #13 and Jackson at #24.    Tony/Luke's list has Pop at #16. So you  would have Martin lower that #16?

Yes, I’ll post my personal list with the added players this weekend.  I have a FV 40 on both, they’d be towards the top of my FV 40 tier.

[wildcard]

5 hours ago, Luke-OH said:

Yes, I’ll post my personal list with the added players this weekend.  I have a FV 40 on both, they’d be towards the top of my FV 40 tier.

So 26th or higher for both of them.

[25 Nuggets]

9 hours ago, Frobby said:

ZiPS is projecting Martin for a .622 OPS, Jackson .616.    They’d better be defensive wizards!

They're likely not going to help the Orioles win in 2019.  The question is, will they improve enough to help the Orioles win once they're ready to start winning?

[mdbdotcom]

Jackson will turn 25 in July, which tells me he's not seen as a long-term solution. But, he's played 2B, SS, 3B and CF in the minors, which makes me think they will look at him as a utility guy. None of our other utility candidates can hit, so he might have a chance of sticking in that role.

[Luke-OH]

1 hour ago, mdbdotcom said:

Jackson will turn 25 in July, which tells me he's not seen as a long-term solution. But, he's played 2B, SS, 3B and CF in the minors, which makes me think they will look at him as a utility guy. None of our other utility candidates can hit, so he might have a chance of sticking in that role.

He'll turn 26 in July.

[Luke-OH]

So just some thoughts about the Rule 5 process and what teams are looking for.

Jon Shepherd tweeted about how the way teams are valuing players in the Rule 5 draft is converging, meaning they are mostly using the same type of analysis and probably removing most of the subjectivity from the process. 

Which got me thinking, are teams making a mistake here?

So teams are likely using similar data sets to analyze which players to protect, why would using a similar process be the best way to discover talent that teams have overlooked? I get that taking emotion and individual feelings out of portions of player selection (free agent market, the amateur draft, etc) leads to better outcomes over the long run. But when the talent pool is fringe by it's very nature, shouldn't teams be looking for the player who one scout thinks can be fixed or thrive in a new role or has recently made a mechanical change that's promising? 

[interloper]

The most interesting pick has to be the Jays grabbing that 18 year old pitcher who was available due to a loophole of some sort. If that somehow works for them (I can't see how it will, really), it's an incredible steal.

[weams]

4 minutes ago, interloper said:

The most interesting pick has to be the Jays grabbing that 18 year old pitcher who was available due to a loophole of some sort. If that somehow works for them (I can't see how it will, really), it's an incredible steal.

Quote

10. Blue Jays: RHP Elvis Luciano (from Royals)

At 18, Elvis Luciano is by far the youngest player taken in this year's Rule 5 Draft. He was only eligible for the Rule 5 Draft this year because his original contract had to be renegotiated, and, when that happens, the player automatically becomes Rule 5 Draft eligible in subsequent years. Luciano has a very live arm (mid-90 fastball, curveball, changeup) and good mound presence, but he's never pitched above rookie ball, and this past season he threw 67 innings with 70 strikeouts and a 3.90 ERA. Needless to say, a player this young sticking in the big leagues all of next season is extremely unlikely. The Blue Jays master plan is likely hiding Luciano as the last guy in the bullpen for a year, then sending him to the minors in 2020 to continue his development at a more age-appropriate level.

https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/mlb-rule-5-draft-orioles-take-two-shortstops-blue-jays-select-18-year-old-and-everything-else-you-need-to-know/

 

[Luke-OH]

3 minutes ago, interloper said:

The most interesting pick has to be the Jays grabbing that 18 year old pitcher who was available due to a loophole of some sort. If that somehow works for them (I can't see how it will, really), it's an incredible steal.

Yeah, that was the one weird pick. It's outside the box, maybe he's young enough that they don't kill his development. I like outside the box, but it isn't the direction I'd have gone. If I was doing a stash it would be Eusebio. 

 

[bobmc]

15 minutes ago, Luke-OH said:

So just some thoughts about the Rule 5 process and what teams are looking for.

Jon Shepherd tweeted about how the way teams are valuing players in the Rule 5 draft is converging, meaning they are mostly using the same type of analysis and probably removing most of the subjectivity from the process. 

Which got me thinking, are teams making a mistake here?

So teams are likely using similar data sets to analyze which players to protect, why would using a similar process be the best way to discover talent that teams have overlooked? I get that taking emotion and individual feelings out of portions of player selection (free agent market, the amateur draft, etc) leads to better outcomes over the long run. But when the talent pool is fringe by it's very nature, shouldn't teams be looking for the player who one scout thinks can be fixed or thrive in a new role or has recently made a mechanical change that's promising? 

If someone would back you, that's the way you would go for sure!  However, Elias has said that even though you make mistakes (former #1 pick that failed thus far), you stay the course and it all evens out if you continue the "process".  I guess ME and Sig will stay the course for now.