Grade the Draft

[atomic]

1 hour ago, BohKnowsBmore said:

I want to put a slightly different framing here. How one defines BPA could be much more open to interpretation this year (with greater error bars). I think we may be collectively anchoring to media scouting reports/mocks too much in a year when their information is likely to be even more incomplete than normal.

They picked the best player available who was willing to take several million dollars less than slot value.

[FlipTheBird]

The number of people here that view Austin Martin as a can’t miss future stud is truly astounding.

[hoosiers]

14 hours ago, weams said:

I believe that this group of evaluators have different metrics and different scouting methods than any I have seen. Or those mock board guys have seen. Or other teams may have seen. I at least want them to try their methods before they get tossed out for the next flavor of the week. Sig is like YoYo Ma. You have to at lease let him play the cello. 

I appreciate the high tech and innovative or leading edge metrics our front office is bringing to the table.  It is very exciting to analyze and draft in this manner.

I would only say that our prior Scouting Director Gary Rajsich appeared to really be hitting his stride with major hits on GrayRod and Hall.  I really wanted Rajsich retained and, if he could have absorbed Elias' and Mejdal's influence, to see him become one of the best SDs in the game.

[fansince1988]

22 hours ago, sportsfan8703 said:

D
 

Too much risk with the #2 pick. It’s stupid to hate on an MLB draft so soon. So I’m not hating on the players, or the strategy. It’s a fine strategy if you were picking 3+. 
 

What’s the point of losing so much if we’re not going to draft Martin. 
 

It’s a fine draft strategy, just not with the 2nd pick. 

This was my initial thought as well. Could have had Lacy too.  

[DrungoHazewood]

12 hours ago, atomic said:

I have never seen any of the players play so I don't feel I am able to give a proper evaluation.  We will have to wait 4 years or so to know. 

That may be the nicest thing you've ever said about Mike Elias.

[DrungoHazewood]

22 hours ago, sportsfan8703 said:

What’s the point of losing so much if we’re not going to draft Martin.

- To save resources for development/infrastructure

- To allow for enough pool money to hopefully get five or six players who have a cumulative value better than just hoping Martin works out

 

[weams]

Mayo's agreement at 1.75 million was likely agreed to the day of the draft. Likely before drafting. 

[weams]

12 hours ago, DirtyBird said:

We basically stole the draft and you don’t even realize it.

Mayo. 

[foxfield]

I grade the draft as A/F. 
 

I appreciate the strategy and the balls to stick with it. If it pans out, then this is the draft where the legend of Mike Elias was born. And of course if it fails, then this is the draft where Mike Elias became an Oriole. 
 

 

[tntoriole]

I give them an A because I have no clue. 

[atomic]

1 hour ago, hoosiers said:

I appreciate the high tech and innovative or leading edge metrics our front office is bringing to the table.  It is very exciting to analyze and draft in this manner.

I would only say that our prior Scouting Director Gary Rajsich appeared to really be hitting his stride with major hits on GrayRod and Hall.  I really wanted Rajsich retained and, if he could have absorbed Elias' and Mejdal's influence, to see him become one of the best SDs in the game.

Gary Rajsich  had a lot more success than Elias did with the Astros after the first round. And easier to have success in first round when you are picking number one overall every year.

[sportsfan8703]

What would you rather have?

1) Herstad, Mayo, and Baumler(Mayo and Baumler being the overslot guys)

or

2) Martin and two NCAA “Sr signs”? 

I have no choice to accept it. I just don’t want to see Austin Martin be an Oriole killer for 10 years. 

[weams]

 

[Philip]

On 6/12/2020 at 7:55 AM, Frobby said:

OK, the picks are in, so what say you?    I didn’t leave a choice for “I have no idea” — take a stand!     (If that were a choice, of course I’d pick that one.)

It seems to me that through our first four picks most posters were pretty unhappy.   But most people really liked the last two picks, which would not have been possible except for how we structured our earlier picks.     So, was it worth it?

Every draft has to be given an incomplete, obviously. I mentioned in another comment thread that good pitching is more valuable than good hitting, and it is better to draft many pitchers and hope a few become great than to pay for a pitcher who Has several years of greatness behind him.

With that in mind, I can’t give an A because there must’ve been some fine pitching available for us. However, I don’t know anything about how strong this draft was so sure I give it a B.

Let’s talk again in 3 years.

[Frobby]

3 hours ago, Philip said:

Every draft has to be given an incomplete, obviously.  I mentioned in another comment thread that good pitching is more valuable than good hitting,and it is better to draft many pitchers and hope a few become great than to pay for a pitcher who Has several years of greatness behind him.

With that in mind, I can’t give an A because there must’ve been some fine pitching available for us. However, I don’t know anything about how strong this draft was so sure I give it a B.

Let’s talk again in 3 years.

I don’t think it’s objectively true that good pitchIng is more valuable than good hitting.  There are 9 pitchers with a career WAR over 100, and 26 over 80.   There are 21 hitters over 100, and 37 over 80.

At the end of the day, run scoring and run prevention are both equally important.    But position players do all the run scoring, while pitcher do only some of the run prevention.    

I do think that having a couple of dominant starters and/or back end relievers gives a team a big leg up in the postseason, when the games are spaced in such a way that you can rely on your best pitchers a higher percentage of the time compared to the regular season.