Elias: emulating the Rays?

[now]

1 hour ago, Philip said:

With a bad draft pick, you are only losing something that you hoped to get. The difference is obvious.

Fine to disagree on strategy. But your logic here is not obvious to me. Draft slots are concrete assets. If you lose out on drafting a prospective batter because you draft a pitcher who's likely to disappear from injury, it's just as tangible a loss as throwing a prospect away in a bad trade.

[Roll Tide]

3 hours ago, makoman said:

Like the guys he got for Cashner?

Maybe - Most Likely not!

[Roll Tide]

2 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

That’s exactly what he traded for.

Yeah ... it’s like putting brakes on your car and buying the cheap no name pad and hoping it will work like the premium Knorr brake pad 

[Philip]

2 hours ago, Il BuonO said:

Disagree. The Astros are not some big market behemoth. I think the last list I saw had them 8th or 9th in spending?

Adding guys like Verlander to get a team over the hump is worth the risk. If not then, when? The Orioles are not that far off the Astros payroll at the time that they can’t afford a meaningful acquisition if the situation arises.

Well I am certainly on record as opposing expensive trades or free agent contracts( So, answer your question, never) but if we ever get to the point where we are one superstar pitcher away from getting over the hump, we can revisit this Subject.

But that doesn’t really affect my contention that drafting pitchers is better than drafting hitters.

 

[Philip]

2 hours ago, now said:

Fine to disagree on strategy. But your logic here is not obvious to me. Draft slots are concrete assets. If you lose out on drafting a prospective batter because you draft a pitcher who's likely to disappear from injury, it's just as tangible a loss as throwing a prospect away in a bad trade.

Well the logic should be obvious, if you have a given draft pick, you have a certain amount of money to put spend on the pic, and every pic is risky. Every pic is potentially wasted, the reward for a good pitching choice is greater than the reward for a good hitting choice

[Il BuonO]

44 minutes ago, Philip said:

Well I am certainly on record as opposing expensive trades or free agent contracts( So, answer your question, never) but if we ever get to the point where we are one superstar pitcher away from getting over the hump, we can revisit this Subject.

But that doesn’t really affect my contention that drafting pitchers is better than drafting hitters.

Then, I’ll disagree from the standpoint that there is no formula that proves your point. 

You always take the best player available and Elias can argue that’s exactly what he has done.

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, Il BuonO said:

Then, I’ll disagree from the standpoint that there is no formula that proves your point. 

You always take the best player available and Elias can argue that’s exactly what he has done.

He can argue it, but would you believe him?

[Il BuonO]

3 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

He can argue it, but would you believe him?

Yes. Putting aside the draft order machinations and paying over-slot for lower picks. You could still argue it allowed him to pick the best draft class available. 

If another couple drafts take place and a clear pattern emerges, I’ll revisit.

[Philip]

Just now, Il BuonO said:

Then, I’ll disagree from the standpoint that there is no formula that proves your point. 

You always take the best player available and Elias can argue that’s exactly what he has done.

Regarding your second sentence, I don’t disagree with that. BPA should be on a T-Shirt. Regarding your first, I said earlier that theres probably some research somewhere, but just looking at how expensive good pitchers are should support my point. We have given tons of money to wrecks, not just because of bad judgement, but because even the wrecks have value.

we don’t need 8 superstars in the field. But we need 2-3 outstanding pitchers. If we focus on pitching( as much as possible. I do agree with BPA) we will probably be able to accommodate our needs without having to sign a huge FA contract, which we can’t afford anyway, or trade for an expensive star.

The Rays have a great system. There’s a lot here we should emulate.

[Philip]

4 minutes ago, Il BuonO said:

Yes. Putting aside the draft order machinations and paying over-slot for lower picks. You could still argue it allowed him to pick the best draft class available. 

If another couple drafts take place and a clear pattern emerges, I’ll revisit.

I didn’t follow the draft much beforehand, so I didn’t develop any sense of guys we “had to have”( although I sure remember the screaming)Three of the four picks after our #2 were pitchers, so obviously Mike didn’t want them, for whatever reason. We only picked one single pitcher, and that was a high school guy. Maybe for Mike, establishing a solid infield is key at this time? I dunno. We already have tons of pitching to evaluate? I just hope he drafts pitching wherever possible.

 

 

[Sports Guy]

3 hours ago, Roll Tide said:

Yeah ... it’s like putting brakes on your car and buying the cheap no name pad and hoping it will work like the premium Knorr brake pad 

No it’s not 

[Roll Tide]

12 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

No it’s not 

Sure 

 

What is the hit rate on the 17/18 year old DR prospects that get $80,000 Prado or $275,000 Romero.

The percentage is very low. In fact, only 2% of DR players end up making a living playing baseball. 
 

 

[Sports Guy]

10 hours ago, Roll Tide said:

Sure 

 

What is the hit rate on the 17/18 year old DR prospects that get $80,000 Prado or $275,000 Romero.

The percentage is very low. In fact, only 2% of DR players end up making a living playing baseball. 
 

 

So?  What’s the hit rate on any prospect?  Your chances are low regardless.

Instead of getting one or 2 Cody Carroll clones, he went with guys with a lot of room for growth in their games who could be big prospects down the road.

Give me as many as those guys as possible over the going nowhere Cody Carroll’s of the world.

[now]

5 hours ago, Philip said:

Well the logic should be obvious, if you have a given draft pick, you have a certain amount of money to put spend on the pic, and every pic is risky. Every pic is potentially wasted, the reward for a good pitching choice is greater than the reward for a good hitting choice

Now that does make sense: greater risk, greater reward. So do healthy pitchers make more than healthy batters? Serious question.

[Philip]

9 hours ago, now said:

Now that does make sense: greater risk, greater reward. So do healthy pitchers make more than healthy batters? Serious question.

Ummm I would imagine someone unhealthy wouldn’t make much at all.