If Elias doesn't select Rutschman...what would your reaction be?

[mdbdotcom]

7 minutes ago, Luke-OH said:

That's a nihilist approach, it'd be a pretty boring world if everyone's success was pre-ordained.  

Huh? Don't see what nihilism has to do with any of it.

ni·hil·ist

/ˈnīələst,ˈnēəlist,ˈnihilist/

noun

 

1. a person who believes that life is meaningless and rejects all religious and moral principles.

   "it is impossible to argue against a nihilist"

   • HISTORICAL

     a supporter of an extreme Russian revolutionary party c. 1900 which found nothing to approve of in the established social order.

[atomic]

13 hours ago, mdbdotcom said:

Ben McDonald was called the best college pitcher ever available in the draft. Dylan Bundy was the best high school pitcher ever available in the draft. Injuries made both careers far less than all the hype of the scouts and writers. No matter whom they choose, there is no way of knowing what the outcome will be.

Ben Mcdonald had 21 career WAR.  21st total WAR out of 53 #1 overalls.  A couple of guys already drafted will pass him in career WAR but he will still be better than over half the guys picked #1 overall.  And compare that to guys like Appel and Aiken who Elias drafted who had zero WAR and it looks pretty good.

Bundy never had any such hype pre-draft. I think his hype went up after his first year in the minors.  But Bundy is just another example of avoiding hard throwing high school pitchers with high first round picks. 

The trick is avoid the Appel and Aiken types and go for guys who are going to contribute I will take Wieters and McDonald types over any of these guys who do nothing.  Rutschman's floor is going to be higher than any of the other picks. And he has a higher chance of being a star.  There are no gurantees in baseball but I think Rutschman is as about as  good as the odds get. 

[atomic]

26 minutes ago, sevastras said:

With Bundy, it wasn’t that he was regarded as the best pitcher to come out of high school, it was he touched 100 mph and had a work ethic that you never see from a high school kid. There were stories that his dad had him and his brother dig holes and push the wheel barrel across the yard and fill up another hole. There was video of him as a kid doing boxing exercises. He worked out in a heated gym with a hoodie on.   Might all be part of why he broke down. If I remember correctly, he was quite the hitter as well. Batting something like just over .500. I will have to look it up to make sure I remember correctly. 

.474 hs batting average.  And coming into the draft, he went 11-0 with a 0.30 era

Then why was he picked fourth overall and not first? 

[Luke-OH]

6 minutes ago, mdbdotcom said:

Huh? Don't see what nihilism has to do with any of it.

ni·hil·ist

/ˈnīələst,ˈnēəlist,ˈnihilist/

noun

 

1. a person who believes that life is meaningless and rejects all religious and moral principles.

   "it is impossible to argue against a nihilist"

   • HISTORICAL

     a supporter of an extreme Russian revolutionary party c. 1900 which found nothing to approve of in the established social order.

a person who believe the draft position is meaningless and rejects all scouting or analytical principles of prospect valuation sounds like a draft nihilist to me

[mdbdotcom]

2 minutes ago, Luke-OH said:

a person who believe the draft position is meaningless and rejects all scouting or analytical principles of prospect valuation sounds like a draft nihilist to me

Fine, but that's not what I said. I was just pointing out that no matter who we pick there is no way to be certain about the outcome. That doesn't mean draft position is meaningless or that I reject scouting or analytical principles. Every piece of information helps, but there are no guarantees.

[Luke-OH]

11 minutes ago, mdbdotcom said:

Fine, but that's not what I said. I was just pointing out that no matter who we pick there is no way to be certain about the outcome. That doesn't mean draft position is meaningless or that I reject scouting or analytical principles. Every piece of information helps, but there are no guarantees.

I didn't mean to offend, I was just trying to reject the "it's all pretty much a crap shoot" idea. In no way did I mean to imply you had nihilistic views in general and I apologize if it came off that way.

 

[Redskins Rick]

1 minute ago, Luke-OH said:

I didn't mean to offend, I was just trying to reject the "it's all pretty much a crap shoot" idea. In no way did I mean to imply you had nihilistic views in general and I apologize if it came off that way.

 

Luke, while I will agree it probably not a crap shoot, but on the other hand, its far from an exact science, and one that involves a bit of luck from the baseball Gods.

Just looking at the facts, of who missed and who hit for every team is a puzzlement on some, and some of the bigger misses, are laughable now.

 

[Moose Milligan]

6 minutes ago, Luke-OH said:

I didn't mean to offend, I was just trying to reject the "it's all pretty much a crap shoot" idea. In no way did I mean to imply you had nihilistic views in general and I apologize if it came off that way.

 

[Luke-OH]

1 minute ago, Redskins Rick said:

Luke, while I will agree it probably not a crap shoot, but on the other hand, its far from an exact science, and one that involves a bit of luck from the baseball Gods.

Just looking at the facts, of who missed and who hit for every team is a puzzlement on some, and some of the bigger misses, are laughable now.

Kind of like looking at batted balls from hitters, sometimes dying quails fall for doubles and sometimes guys hit it 118mph into right someone's glove. But over a significant sample, better hit balls have better results, same as higher draft positions have better results. 

[mdbdotcom]

5 minutes ago, Luke-OH said:

I didn't mean to offend, I was just trying to reject the "it's all pretty much a crap shoot" idea. In no way did I mean to imply you had nihilistic views in general and I apologize if it came off that way.

 

Okay, so I'll go a little deeper into the "It's all pretty much a crap shoot" statement. I didn't mean to imply that all drafter players are equal and you can pick any of them by tossing a dart at a board. Rather, what I was trying to say was that having the 1:1 position is very important because you get to select from among the very best amateur players. But, even if you make the best choice, you aren't guaranteed the best outcome. So, within that pool of best available players it is somewhat of a crap shoot as to which will work out and which won''t. 

[Redskins Rick]

Just now, Luke-OH said:

Kind of like looking at batted balls from hitters, sometimes dying quails fall for doubles and sometimes guys hit it 118mph into right someone's glove. But over a significant sample, better hit balls have better results, same as higher draft positions have better results. 

My apologies to @Frobby if I miss quote him.

But, I seam to recall a lengthy post of his, last year, with lots of facts and mathematically averaged out over the decades and I thought the the avg rate for failure/success was pretty much the same.

[Luke-OH]

Just now, mdbdotcom said:

Okay, so I'll go a little deeper into the "It's all pretty much a crap shoot" statement. I didn't mean to imply that all drafter players are equal and you can pick any of them by tossing a dart at a board. Rather, what I was trying to say was that having the 1:1 position is very important because you get to select from among the very best amateur players. But, even if you make the best choice, you aren't guaranteed the best outcome. So, within that pool of best available players it is somewhat of a crap shoot as to which will work out and which won''t. 

That's fair.

I personally like to try and distinguish (if possible) between bad process and misfortune. If you use a good process with good scouting and use of data and for one reason or another a particular player doesn't develop (injuries, personal issues that weren't present at the time, flaw in their game that was part of an acknowledged and built in risk profile), that's misfortune. If you do all that and then the owner wants to pick someone different, that's a whole different beast. 

[mdbdotcom]

Just now, Luke-OH said:

That's fair.

I personally like to try and distinguish (if possible) between bad process and misfortune. If you use a good process with good scouting and use of data and for one reason or another a particular player doesn't develop (injuries, personal issues that weren't present at the time, flaw in their game that was part of an acknowledged and built in risk profile), that's misfortune. If you do all that and then the owner wants to pick someone different, that's a whole different beast. 

I also think that when you have a player who grades as being heads and shoulders above the rest, you take that player. That leaves the next four or five teams hoping their process will help them choose the right player out of a handful of guys who all grade highly.

[jrobb21613]

I have a tough time getting excited about a drafting a catcher high in the draft let alone 1-1. I mean what do they play 120 games? The position itself isn’t exactly known for producing true difference makers that justify a 1-1 selection. When I think of drafting a guy 1-1 I want that guy to hopefully one day be in the conversation as being the best to ever play the game. When has a catcher ever been in that conversation? I’m not talking best player of all time but in his generation or just the league for the year? Has there ever? 

[Number5]

1 hour ago, atomic said:

The trick is avoid the Appel and Aiken types and go for guys who are going to contribute I will take Wieters and McDonald types over any of these guys who do nothing.   

So, you're saying that you would rather draft the guys that turn out rather than those that don't, right?  (smacks forehead)  Wow, wish I had thought of that.