2020 Orioles draft review: Elias ends up with three first round talents

[Can_of_corn]

3 minutes ago, Big Mac said:

Richie Martin was drafted in the 1st round.  He was drafted in the 38th out of high school. 

#20 to Oakland in 2015.

[Yossarian]

3 hours ago, sportsfan8703 said:

So we get rid of a lot of scouts and go with more analytics. That scares me considering there wasn’t really a season to compile numbers this year. 

There wasn't any baseball being played for a scout to watch, either.

[Just Regular]

50 minutes ago, weams said:

https://twitter.com/GlennClarkRadio/status/1271523864342822913?s=20

My listen takeaways:

-Dellucci's a good SEC company man, equated the league's pitching to AA, suggesting K/BB ratios there won't degrade as much.

-thought Servideo's bad Cape could have been fatigue-induced as he hadn't sprouted man strength yet ala Hjerstad/Westburg.

I was surprised to hear him say Servideo 5'11" 180 (B-Ref says 5'10" 170) - I had a bad anchor on a Belanger-ish build.  Anyway, there I got my first look at the bad Cape numbers and wow - yes very bad.  

39/4 SB/CS across all 3 levels in SEC/Cape seems excellent - Mullins's draft year was 23/4 at a smaller school

-less Westburg detail despite the higher pick, but overall reinforced the impression he is raw for a NCAA player.

[Philip]

6 hours ago, Roll Tide said:

Money really shouldn't be a factor in taking the BPA. Passing on a the BPA in order to select a better prospect in the 4th or 5th round is counter productive since the player most likley to hit is the 1st rounder.

I don’t know enough about the individual players to agree, although I’ve read enough comments that I understand the argument. However, it’s not just “the guy we passed at 2 was drafted at 5.”

Taking the guy we took at two made it possible for us to invest in two guys who slipped so far because other teams did not have any remaining money and could not afford their demands. Those guys were all set to go on to college unless they got their dough, That was possible because we saved money on our number two. So when complaining, it is incomplete to complain about not getting the best player at number two. It is much more accurate to think about the total acquisitions. Who did Toronto take with their fourth and fifth round picks? What kind of upside do those players have?

I don’t know, I don’t know anything about drafting. But there is a logic to the Elias process that doesn’t seem to have existed with past regimes, and I am perfectly willing to give the benefit of the doubt to the guys who know more than we do.

Edited June 12, 2020 by Philip

[lovetoaster]

1 hour ago, Roll Tide said:

How would folks feel if Elias had passed on AR last year and drafted the 10th ranked player? I don’t think this is much different.

I mean...this is absurd. There was no player in the draft this year that was close the prospect Rutschman was last year. And Martin obviously wasn't even the clear-cut second best player. Otherwise he wouldn't have gone fifth. It is a very different scenario. 

You're really reaching on this one. 

[linedrive]

I desperately want to love this draft, but I'm sold on the idea that you can't win a Championship without elite pitching. We need to draft guys like a Madison Bumgarner, David Price, Stephen Strasburg, Max Scherzer, Gerrit Cole and Chris Carpenter in the first round. Teams like the Nationals, Dodgers and Royals all drafted four pitchers this draft, and the Braves, who only had four picks, took three. In my opinion, that's what we should be doing. Sure, we can get to the playoffs by knocking the ball out of the park, but we're not going to go deep into the playoffs or win a World Series without 2 or 3 top starters to carry us to the end. If we don't draft them, where are we going to get them??? Do we have deep enough pockets to outbid NY, LA, Boston, etc.?

This draft was okay, but if Baumler doesn't pan out, I don't like our chances of winning a Championship this decade. 

[Roll Tide]

55 minutes ago, ArtVanDelay said:

Richie Martin was a 1st round draft pick. 

Your right .... Did he have a hot tool graded at 65 or 70?

 

[Roll Tide]

55 minutes ago, Big Mac said:

 

No he isn't. 

Source? I've seen him rated at 65 and 70 on a few different sites. I believe the 70 was on the underarmour scouting site. Everyone calls him the best pure hitter in the draft. I posted a few of the reviews. Read them!

[Roll Tide]

26 minutes ago, Philip said:

I don’t know enough about the individual players to agree, although I’ve read enough comments that I understand the argument. However, it’s not just “the guy we passed at 2 was drafted at 5.”

Taking the guy we took at two made it possible for us to invest in two guys who slipped so far because other teams did not have any remaining money and could not afford their demands. Those guys were all set to go on to college unless they got their dough, That was possible because we saved money on our number two. So when complaining, it is incomplete to complain about not getting the best player at number two. It is much more accurate to think about the total acquisitions. Who did Toronto take with their fourth and fifth round picks? What kind of upside do those players have?

I don’t know, I don’t know anything about drafting. But there is a logic to the Elias process that doesn’t seem to have existed with past regimes, and I am perfectly willing to give the benefit of the doubt to the guys who know more than we do.

Regardless of the approach and theory the hit rate on 4th/5th round players is less than that of the 1st. Your best chance to hit is the 1st round

[Big Mac]

2 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:

Source? I've seen him rated at 65 and 70 on a few different sites. I believe the 70 was on the underarmour scouting site. Everyone calls him the best pure hitter in the draft. I posted a few of the reviews. Read them!

I've ready plenty of them and seen lots of video.  I don't doubt there are 70s out there but 60-65 seems like more of the consensus.  I question how much the hit tool ultimately ends up playing if he doesn't end up hitting for much power.  I like him as a prospect but I don't think he's anywhere close to a generational or franchise altering type of prospect some are making him out to be.  

[Roll Tide]

24 minutes ago, lovetoaster said:

I mean...this is absurd. There was no player in the draft this year that was close the prospect Rutschman was last year. It is very different. 

You're really reaching on this one. 

No I'm not

Best Pure Hitter in the draft ... Every scouting report I read says the same thing ...Over and Over

 

From the Blue Jays Via Forbes

 

Quote

Shane Farrell said he was “surprised,” but also “prepared.” And then, eventually, “ecstatic.”

In a wildly unpredictable first round of the MLB draft on Wednesday night, Vanderbilt utility man Austin Martin fell to the Toronto Blue Jays at No. 5. That meant Farrell, Toronto’s amateur scouting director, had the honor of taking the player many believed to be the best pure hitter in the 2020 class.

 

So how exactly did Martin, who MLB.com’s Jim Callis deemed the “best pure hitter in the draft,” fall to Toronto? A pick-by-pick breakdown helps to explain.

It happened because the Orioles and Marlins went underslot and KC took the best available pitcher

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, Big Mac said:

I've ready plenty of them and seen lots of video.  I don't doubt there are 70s out there but 60-65 seems like more of the consensus.  I question how much the hit tool ultimately ends up playing if he doesn't end up hitting for much power.  I like him as a prospect but I don't think he's anywhere close to a generational or franchise altering type of prospect some are making him out to be.  

If he is why was a right handed 1B ranked above him?

[Roll Tide]

2 minutes ago, Big Mac said:

I've ready plenty of them and seen lots of video.  I don't doubt there are 70s out there but 60-65 seems like more of the consensus.  I question how much the hit tool ultimately ends up playing if he doesn't end up hitting for much power.  I like him as a prospect but I don't think he's anywhere close to a generational or franchise altering type of prospect some are making him out to be.  

Your Wrong!

I dont subscribe to Baseball America.... But

 

Quote

 

2020 MLB Draft: Top 10 Toolsiest Prospects In This Year's Class

www.baseballamerica.com › stories › 2020-mlb-draft-t...

 

 

May 19, 2020 - Austin Martin, OF ... Some scouts go as high as 70 on Martin's hit tool, while his athleticism could allow him to settle in ... Hendrick won the home run derby at the Under Armour High School All-American Game last summer at ...

 

[Big Mac]

1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:

If he is why was a right handed 1B ranked above him?

Right.  Also, he probably was the "best pure hitter in the draft".  That doesn't make him an elite or generational prospect.  It just means he had the best of one tool in a draft that was weak at the top.  Kjerstad also probably was the best left-handed power in the draft.  Some people value different tools differently.  

[Big Mac]

1 minute ago, Roll Tide said:

Your Wrong!

I dont subscribe to Baseball America.... But

 

 

"Some scouts go as high as 70"...how is that different than me saying I don't doubt there are 70 grades?  Also that quote implies those 70 grades are outliers.