O's 2020 MLB Draft Chat: Picking #2/30/39/74

[hoosiers]

I would think there would be some slot savings with Lacy, but not too much - maybe $500k-$1M.  

The interesting thing to me is that I would consider spending that $ on our third round pick - which has a slot value near $850k - to perhaps sign a HSer for $1.5M - potentially adding a fourth strong prospect to our first three picks. 

Or giving that slot savings to sign our fifth round pick for near $1M.  

IMO, THAT is how the team with the most $ walks away with the most talent - not a big two or big three picks, but four big ones!

[Frobby]

On 5/16/2020 at 1:57 PM, hoosiers said:

Tillman/Matusz were once both mid-season top 15 prospects per Baseball America and they led a decent wave of arms, but there was a drop-off after those two and the next guy.

The next guy was Arrieta.   

[Big Mac]

17 hours ago, Frobby said:

The next guy was Arrieta.   

It's amazing to look back at how differently we handled pitching prospects.  Brian Matusz was called up after 19 minor league starts, 11 at Frederick and 8 at Bowie.  How is he handled under the current regime?  I would think it's Frederick/Bowie the year after he was drafted (assuming similar levels of success) and then at least 10 starts in Norfolk the year after.  Would it have made a difference?  Who knows. 

[MachoMachadoMan]

On 5/17/2020 at 9:27 AM, Greg Pappas said:

Excellent post. This draft is more intriguing than the typical year, due to the circumstances, and there are a myriad of ways things could play out. Lacy would be a very good pick, if the O's love him, though Martin seems like a sure-fire quality bat and is projected to be an above average CF'er (if we see him there). Comparisons to Mookie Betts are not surprising, though Mookie has a cannon, and Martin's arm is perhaps average. How Elias and staff work this draft will be very interesting to watch.  It's exciting.

I'm on board for "Draft Martin and see where things fall after that" strategy instead of getting tricky with an underslot at #2, but I don't like Mookie Betts comps. If Mike Trout never existed, we'd talk about Mookie as  the greatest player of his generation. By his age-26 season he's won an MVP, finished top 10 4 times, In just 6 seasons he has the 13th most WAR of any active player, the fewest years of anyone in the Top 50. 

Martin has been my favorite player in this draft since last summer because of his positional versatility, OBP skills and top-of-the-order potential, but I'm not ready to saddle him with a lofty and likely unachievable comp like that. I'll take Starling Marte or maybe Ender Inciarte with some pop. 

Edited May 18, 2020 by MachoMachadoMan

[Greg Pappas]

2 hours ago, MachoMachadoMan said:

I'm on board for "Draft Martin and see where things fall after that" strategy instead of getting tricky with an underslot at #2, but I don't like Mookie Betts comps. If Mike Trout never existed, we'd talk about Mookie as  the greatest player of his generation. By his age-26 season he's won an MVP, finished top 10 4 times, In just 6 seasons he has the 13th most WAR of any active player, the fewest years of anyone in the Top 50. 

Martin has been my favorite player in this draft since last summer because of his positional versatility, OBP skills and top-of-the-order potential, but I'm not ready to saddle him with a lofty and likely unachievable comp like that. I'll take Starling Marte or maybe Ender Inciarte with some pop. 

Strong post. I wasn't making the comparisons (not saying you said I did) but I think some see that kind of upside.  Betts is special, and like you said, if Martin becomes even close to that, we'd have a heck of a player. 

[MachoMachadoMan]

59 minutes ago, Greg Pappas said:

Strong post. I wasn't making the comparisons (not saying you said I did) but I think some see that kind of upside.  Betts is special, and like you said, if Martin becomes even close to that, we'd have a heck of a player. 

Most fans on this board lived through the Johnny Bench comps for Matt Wieters who by all metrics had a successful major league career despite never reaching "greatest catcher ever" standards and being called a bust. 

[wildcard]

I think it would be hard to argue with if Elias picked Hancock or Lacy.    Both project as top of the rotation starters.

Camden Yards is a hitter's park.  Its very hard to get FA pitchers to come to pitch in Camden Yards.  Its also very expensive to get a top of the rotation FA pitcher to sign with the O's as a mid to small market team.  So the O's probably have to grow the arms.   Pitching is the most important element of a playoff team.

On the other hand, FA hitters will sign with O's to play in a hitter's park.   Especially if the O's have a good pitching staff.   Martin is a  very good OBP hitter who could play at several positions.   But its easier  for the O's to acquire a good hitter than a good starter.

I hope the O's go for Hancock or Lacy to go with Rodriguez, Hall and Means.   That sounds like a winning formula for the 2023 playoffs.

[MountUrCastle]

3 hours ago, wildcard said:

I think it would be hard to argue with if Elias picked Hancock or Lacy.    Both project as top of the rotation starters.

Camden Yards is a hitter's park.  Its very hard to get FA pitchers to come to pitch in Camden Yards.  Its also very expensive to get a top of the rotation FA pitcher to sign with the O's as a mid to small market team.  So the O's probably have to grow the arms.   Pitching is the most important element of a playoff team.

On the other hand, FA hitters will sign with O's to play in a hitter's park.   Especially if the O's have a good pitching staff.   Martin is a  very good OBP hitter who could play at several positions.   But its easier  for the O's to acquire a good hitter than a good starter.

I hope the O's go for Hancock or Lacy to go with Rodriguez, Hall and Means.   That sounds like a winning formula for the 2023 playoffs.

I treat pitchers just as I treat goalies in hockey- they are easily one of the most, if not the most valuable position to their respective team and make the difference between the O's being a perennial wildcard/1st round team and a perennial contender in the future. The other side of the coin, however, is that they are wildly variable and the best you can do is look for a couple of good traits and hope the rest fills in, while positional players have more concrete things across the whole scope that you can accurately and directly manage and change. So, while I do agree- that the Orioles focus should be pitching given the physiological circumstances surrounding their home, but I disagree with ever taking a pitcher in the top 5 unless they are clearly far and away the best player available. Hancock and Lacy are not that, and Martin, hell even Gonzales, make a lot more sense there just simply playing odds. Anything after #2 however I am cool with pitching. and actually would not see them taking a huge run of pitchers starting at 30.

[Greg Pappas]

Drafting Strategies based on Analytics.... an interesting topic and review:

https://scholarship.tricolib.brynmawr.edu/bitstream/handle/10066/6936/2011CarluccioC_thesis.pdf?sequence=2

[hoosiers]

On 5/17/2020 at 6:15 PM, Frobby said:

The next guy was Arrieta.   

Thanks for this.  Jake made the BA Top 100 twice including reaching 66.  It was a big 3 back than.  I expect all of Hall, GRod and Lacy (whether or not we draft him) to all be ranked better than 66, but may not reach the ratings of Tillman/Matusz.  The separate trios would be comparable IMO, certainly much more so than I implied in my earlier post that Frobby corrected.  Not sure who the fourth prospect-wise would be after Jake, maybe DHernandez, but I expect Baumann has a better profile as a prospect.

[hoosiers]

3 hours ago, Greg Pappas said:

Drafting Strategies based on Analytics.... an interesting topic and review:

https://scholarship.tricolib.brynmawr.edu/bitstream/handle/10066/6936/2011CarluccioC_thesis.pdf?sequence=2

This paper is nine years old.  It was likely posted here a long time ago. 

I really dislike such papers because IMO the purpose of improving one's drafting should be to find better or value differently the traits/characteristics of prospects instead of making extremely general statements like - college hitters provide more productive returns between picks 1-50.  Major league teams don't draft HS flamethrowers like Mark Rogers in the very early first round anymore.  There is now equipment and video to track the movement on a FB or the spin of a CB and the depth of a changeup.  There is much more video to show which pitchers have poor mechanics that could lead to injury or could be changed to improve results.  Teams have databases to compare prospects to historically similar prospects and, I suspect, much more.  I mean, if most every team followed the advice in the paper and drafted college hitters exclusively, and only one or two teams drafted the very cream of the HS crop, I suspect the data would start to tilt in the direction of the HSers.

I will tell you what would be an interesting study.  Compare the top 25 or so college hitters taken in a draft to the top 25 hitters from their HS class drafted three years earlier.  See who has progressed more and why.  Same for the pitchers.  That would be interesting to me and could provide information on traits of HSers to draft.  I am sure this has been done by FOs with intern time and $ to burn.

Thanks for providing, Greg.

[ShoelesJoe]

14 hours ago, wildcard said:

Camden Yards is a hitter's park.  Its very hard to get FA pitchers to come to pitch in Camden Yards.  

I've heard this statement ever since Camden Yards opened, but is there any real evidence to back it up? I know in the mid '90s David Wells apparently had some harsh things to say about pitching at Camden, but if memory serves his ERA at home was actually lower than it was on the road. Not that most pundits let facts get in the way of their opinions. I remember during one broadcast Joe Morgan ranting about Camden Yards being homer heaven, and pointing to Brady's 50 HRs as evidence. When his partner pointed out that Anderson hit more home runs on the road than at home Morgan responded something to the effect that he didn't care what the numbers said. Stats back then indicated Camden Yards was pretty neutral wrt offense, but people pointed to the short fences and closed their minds to everything else. So the Camden Yards legend became fact and over the years they printed the legend. Such as it is (perhaps) with free agent pitchers not wanting to sign with the Orioles. 

PS -- I understand that the construction of the Hilton just beyond left-center changed the home field factors and it now appears that Camden Yards does help the offense more so than it used to. But the whole "FA pitchers won't sign with the Orioles" thing started 25 years ago, long before that hotel was built. 

PPS -- do teams that play in parks that favor offense really have a harder time signing FA pitchers? I doubt it. Certainly the Cubs had no problems signing big name pitchers to start half their games at Wrigley Field. IMO the biggest factors in acquiring FA players is how much money the team is offering, and how good is that team likely to be going forward. For most of the last 20 years the Orioles have been bad and/or cheap, which is not a combination that would appeal to most free agents looking for big contracts and the chance to win a ring. Certainly those factors would weigh much more heavily on a player and his agent than what his home vs road ERA will be for the next five years. 

 

[Frobby]

1 hour ago, hoosiers said:

Thanks for this.  Jake made the BA Top 100 twice including reaching 66.  It was a big 3 back than.  I expect all of Hall, GRod and Lacy (whether or not we draft him) to all be ranked better than 66, but may not reach the ratings of Tillman/Matusz.  The separate trios would be comparable IMO, certainly much more so than I implied in my earlier post that Frobby corrected.  Not sure who the fourth prospect-wise would be after Jake, maybe DHernandez, but I expect Baumann has a better profile as a prospect.

Britton was in the system, but a bit behind the others.    He was ranked no. 63 in the 2009-10 offseason.   By then, Tillman and Matusz had debuted in the majors but Matusz still qualified as a prospect.    Arrieta was still in the system but had slipped a bit in the rankings after having a difficult mid-season adjustment to AAA.   

[hoosiers]

15 hours ago, Frobby said:

Britton was in the system, but a bit behind the others.    He was ranked no. 63 in the 2009-10 offseason.   By then, Tillman and Matusz had debuted in the majors but Matusz still qualified as a prospect.    Arrieta was still in the system but had slipped a bit in the rankings after having a difficult mid-season adjustment to AAA.   

Foiled again by Frobby!  That was quite a collection of SP prospects especially at the high end.  

[waroriole]

Is Tork a given at #1? If so, I’d go with Martin. Too unsettling using the #2 pick on a SP