MLB Pipeline: Austin Martin

[DrungoHazewood]

15 hours ago, weams said:

 

I trust the scouts, but when I hear stuff like this I want to yell out "take the best player available, not the guy who OPS'd 1.400 in a little league park!!"

[wildcard]

16 hours ago, Moose Milligan said:

Well where I disagree with @wildcardand what he seems to not want to understand...is that Lacy/Hancock aren't out of the Strasburg/Verlander mold.  There's not a Strasburg/Verlander in this draft.  If you had a sliding scale, it appears that Lacy/Hancock are closer to Matusz/Gausman territory.  Great pitchers with lot of upside but I don't think anyone here would be excited for Matusz part 2.  Some here like Gausman, I never saw him as anything great.

I'd prefer to take the consensus pick for the best bat in the draft (Martin) or the biggest power bat (Tork) if he fell to us rather than taking a shot on a pitcher that's not at a Verlander level if I'm picking #2 this year.  And then going with arms at 30 and 39.

Austin Martin and Rutschman in our system, you really gotta like that.  

I do agree with you that there is no Strasburg/Verlander in this draft.   That is true in most drafts.   Then again Martin  does not have the potential that a team would normally want in a #2  pick either.  Not at lot of power and 2nd basemen are rarely picked #2.   As has been pointed put, Rickie Week is the only 2nd baseman that has been picked that high since 2000.

I put Martin, Lacy and Hancock on the same level in terms of talent and odds of being successful.  I also think its harder to find high quality pitchers for Camden Yards then to find a good hitter.

[ChosenOne21]

I can't believe the Orioles are seriously considering Nick Gonzales at #2. This has to be a ploy to aid in their negotiations with Martin

[Just Regular]

1 hour ago, DrungoHazewood said:

I trust the scouts, but when I hear stuff like this I want to yell out "take the best player available, not the guy who OPS'd 1.400 in a little league park!!"

I hope afterwards Tony or weams might have a Luke insight or two whoever we end up with, but I double hope that if we end up going Gonzales as I remember Luke being pretty bullish on him before signing on.  I am sure Sig has the park effects thing in the Decision Sciences toolkit.

[weams]

9 minutes ago, OrioleDog said:

I hope afterwards Tony or weams might have a Luke insight or two whoever we end up with, but I double hope that if we end up going Gonzales as I remember Luke being pretty bullish on him before signing on.  I am sure Sig has the park effects thing in the Decision Sciences toolkit.

I think Boras may be a factor. I believe that 30 and 39 are a big deal if we have money. 

[Yardball85]

37 minutes ago, ChosenOne21 said:

I can't believe the Orioles are seriously considering Nick Gonzales at #2. This has to be a ploy to aid in their negotiations with Martin

I sure hope so.  Gonzales had a monster year in a park that I believe the team averaged (AVERAGED!) 11 runs per game.

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, Yardball85 said:

I sure hope so.  Gonzales had a monster year in a park that I believe the team averaged (AVERAGED!) 11 runs per game.

But if he hadn't been on the team they only would have averaged 10.6 R/G.

[Yardball85]

1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:

But if he hadn't been on the team they only would have averaged 10.6 R/G.

Lol.  He carried them to that nice 11 number!

[Moose Milligan]

51 minutes ago, wildcard said:

I do agree with you that there is no Strasburg/Verlander in this draft.   That is true in most drafts.   Then again Martin  does not have the potential that a team would normally want in a #2  pick either.  Not at lot of power and 2nd basemen are rarely picked #2.   As has been pointed put, Rickie Week is the only 2nd baseman that has been picked that high since 2000.

I put Martin, Lacy and Hancock on the same level in terms of talent and odds of being successful.  I also think its harder to find high quality pitchers for Camden Yards then to find a good hitter.

It appears to be an overall weak draft.  That there was no spring season this year helps that along.  

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

It appears to be an overall weak draft.  That there was no spring season this year helps that along.  

I think Hancock might end up being the steal of the draft. 

[Moose Milligan]

2 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I think Hancock might end up being the steal of the draft. 

Welp, it'd be cool if we got the steal of the draft for once.

[Can_of_corn]

19 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

Welp, it'd be cool if we got the steal of the draft for once.

Markakis was a steal.

Mancini was a steal.

Hader was a steal.

Arrieta was a steal.

I think Hancock is going to go around #4-6.

Edited June 2, 2020 by Can_of_corn

[Moose Milligan]

15 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Markakis was a steal.

Mancini was a steal.

Hader was a steal.

Arrieta was a steal.

I don't think Hancock is going to go around #4-6.

A steal of THE draft.  And Arrieta was a steal of the draft, we just screwed it up.  And so was Hader.

 

[Can_of_corn]

3 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

A steal of THE draft.  And Arrieta was a steal of the draft, we just screwed it up.  And so was Hader.

 

Mancini was an 8th round pick and is up over 6 WAR.  Markakis was the best player in his draft class. 

 

[makoman]

3 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

A steal of THE draft.  And Arrieta was a steal of the draft, we just screwed it up.  And so was Hader.

 

I believe Markakis had the most WAR in his draft class. (Adam Jones was second). So we did pretty well there.