MLB Pipeline: Austin Martin

[hoosiers]

On 6/7/2020 at 8:19 PM, Roll Tide said:

Mewleski mentions Cecconi who they drafted real late a couple years ago. He went to Miami and now throws 96-97! He’s ranked 31 by BB America according to the article

Cecconi would be an excellent addition.  I have seen multiple outlets thinking the Twins will take him toward the end of the first round.  

[TommyPickles]

I'm with Wildcard.  Go for Lacy.

[wildcard]

The way I look at  it is that Elias and his scouting team have worked on this for a year.  That's much more info than any one of us have.   So I have to trust that they will make the right picks.

From what Elias has said I think it will be Tork,  Martin or Lacy.  No underslot guy at #2.

[Ruzious]

BPA all the way.  I'd lean toward Lacy over Martin, because a healthy Lacy seems to be pretty much a sure thing - if a pitcher can be a sure thing.  I've heard Martin compared to Rendon, and that doesn't seem likely, but he should be a big-time OBP guy - maybe a little better version of Brian Roberts (with a bit more pop)?  I'd be ok with that.     

[Moose Milligan]

All in on Martin.  Or Tork, if he's there.

I'm not down on Lacy but quite frankly, I don't trust the Orioles to draft someone so high that has control concerns.  Yeah, it's a new regime, I get that and ANALYTICS AND SIG AND MAGIC FAIRY DUST but...I just don't trust it.

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, Moose Milligan said:

All in on Martin.  Or Tork, if he's there.

I'm not down on Lacy but quite frankly, I don't trust the Orioles to draft someone so high that has control concerns.  Yeah, it's a new regime, I get that and ANALYTICS AND SIG AND MAGIC FAIRY DUST but...I just don't trust it.

Look how much Hall's command improved last season.

[Moose Milligan]

Just now, Can_of_corn said:

Look how much Hall's command improved last season.

If by improved, you mean walking more...yes.  He improved a lot at walking more.

[Jammer7]

2 hours ago, hoosiers said:

Cecconi would be an excellent addition.  I have seen multiple outlets thinking the Twins will take him toward the end of the first round.  

The only real knock on him is that he does not have a track record of durability. The stuff and his frame are excellent. I know the young man a little bit as my son played against him for years both travel and high school. 
Sophomore eligible too, so not sure if signability is an issue. 

[Enjoy Terror]

1 hour ago, Ruzious said:

BPA all the way.  I'd lean toward Lacy over Martin, because a healthy Lacy seems to be pretty much a sure thing - if a pitcher can be a sure thing.  I've heard Martin compared to Rendon, and that doesn't seem likely, but he should be a big-time OBP guy - maybe a little better version of Brian Roberts (with a bit more pop)?  I'd be ok with that.     

Plus, this would be in line with the Orioles long standing incredibly successful philosophy, "grow the arms, buy the bats"

[Number5]

1 hour ago, wildcard said:

The way I look at  it is that Elias and his scouting team have worked on this for a year.  That's much more info than any one of us have.   So I have to trust that they will make the right picks.

From what Elias has said I think it will be Tork,  Martin or Lacy.  No underslot guy at #2.

At 12:30 is where Elias is asked about the possibility of going under-slot at 2.

If we listen carefully to his answer, he doesn't really exclude guys like Veen or Gonzales.  He says that he doesn't go under-slot at 2 unless we think the difference is negligible or if we secretly think that the guy is actually better that the higher touted guys.  He goes on to say that if that allows us to leverage that into better picks later, so much the better.  

I was reading an article somewhere the other day about the Orioles possibly going deeper under-slot to a guy rated in the 11-15 range to really have a lot of extra money for the 30/39 picks, but that is what I think Elias is excluding here.  As far as the guys like Gonzales, Hancock, and Veen, I don't see that what Elias said excludes them at all.

Yes, I think whichever one of Tork and Martin the Tigers don't take is the most likely choice, and Lacy is a possibility, as well.  I'm just saying that Elias couched his answer well enough that the guys that seem to be the 4-6 rated guys are certainly not out of the picture, based on what he said.

[Roll Tide]

5 minutes ago, Number5 said:

At 12:30 is where Elias is asked about the possibility of going under-slot at 2.

If we listen carefully to his answer, he doesn't really exclude guys like Veen or Gonzales.  He says that he doesn't go under-slot at 2 unless we think the difference is negligible or if we secretly think that the guy is actually better that the higher touted guys.  He goes on to say that if that allows us to leverage that into better picks later, so much the better.  

I was reading an article somewhere the other day about the Orioles possibly going deeper under-slot to a guy rated in the 11-15 range to really have a lot of extra money for the 30/39 picks, but that is what I think Elias is excluding here.  As far as the guys like Gonzales, Hancock, and Veen, I don't see that what Elias said excludes them at all.

Yes, I think whichever one of Tork and Martin the Tigers don't take is the most likely choice, and Lacy is a possibility, as well.  I'm just saying that Elias couched his answer well enough that the guys that seem to be the 4-6 rated guys are certainly not out of the picture, based on what he said.

I read an article on MASN where I believe It was mentioned that underslot strategies wouldn’t matter in the year With only 5 rounds and no ability to pay more than $20,000 per player for the nondrafted guys

[Number5]

8 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:

I read an article on MASN where I believe It was mentioned that underslot strategies wouldn’t matter in the year With only 5 rounds and no ability to pay more than $20,000 per player for the nondrafted guys

Well, yes, that's right, but those traditional types of strategies aren't what's being discussed.  We aren't talking about drafting college seniors at #6-10 and signing them for $5,000 so we can draft guys later and use the savings from the seniors to sign them.

We are talking about the possibility of saving, say, a million or so at number 2 by drafting a guy you think is deserving, but has a consensus rank slightly lower at 4-6 in order to have a better chance at be able to sign a guy like Nick Bitsko if he falls to 30.  Bitsko, for example, figures to go to UVa if he isn't offered enough to sell him on going pro.  Perhaps he will be drafted high enough to where the slot number is enough for him, but if he isn't, a team would most likely need to be able to go over slot to sign him.  Elias is saying we would only do that if we think the slightly under-slot guy we take at #2 is as good or better than the guys that the consensus ranks that highly.

 

[eddie83]

1 hour ago, Enjoy Terror said:

Plus, this would be in line with the Orioles long standing incredibly successful philosophy, "grow the arms, buy the bats"

All jokes aside that philosophy doesn’t work anymore anyway. You better develop impact bats from within. 

[DrungoHazewood]

37 minutes ago, Number5 said:

Bitsko, for example, figures to go to UVa if he isn't offered enough to sell him on going pro.

Someone needs to save him from the indignity of being a Wahoo for the rest of his life.

[Ruzious]

12 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Someone needs to save him from the indignity of being a Wahoo for the rest of his life.

Indeed, they do seem to have rather cavalier attitudes.