Sometimes its worth paying slot

[baltimoreO's22]

2 hours ago, osravensfan78 said:

The two I’ve seen the most are Cowser and Frelick. Both considered in the 10-15 area and and usually described as secondary college bats. I prefer Cowser to Frelik, but don’t think either should be talked about at pick 5 IMO. 

Those would be the underslot guys, I'm curious as who they could/would target with their savings. 

[osravensfan78]

9 minutes ago, baltimoreO's22 said:

Those would be the underslot guys, I'm curious as who they could/would target with their savings. 

Sorry for misunderstanding. I know on Twitter yesterday, 2 names I saw mentioned was HS pitchers Thatcher Hurd and Joshua Hartle. I’d be lying if I said I knew much about them other than what’s on sites, but those are two names I’ve heard. I like some of the HS hitters like Baez or Wood or a college bat like Tyler Black in the second, but I haven’t heard any association. I’m pretty excited about that 2nd round pick. I think we can get a good player. 

[wildcard]

3 hours ago, Frobby said:

Jim Callis:  “I do think that the only pitcher the Orioles would take at five would be Jack Leiter. I don’t think they take Kumar Rocker. I don’t think they take Jackson Jobe, the high school pitcher from Oklahoma. But after that, picking (next) at 41, if the best guy there is a pitcher, they might take him.

https://www.masnsports.com/steve-melewski/2021/06/feeling-a-draft-jim-callis-on-the-os-at-no-5.html

But Callis did not say why he does not think the O's will take Rocker.   Maybe someone will reveal this in the next two weeks. 

[7Mo]

2 hours ago, wildcard said:

But Callis did not say why he does not think the O's will take Rocker.   Maybe someone will reveal this in the next two weeks. 

The most clear statement I've seen is below, but without a reason given. Here's what Keith Law says:

7. Kansas City Royals: Kumar Rocker, RHP, Vanderbilt

The market for Rocker is weirdly specific — it’s Texas, Boston, KC and Washington, with the Mets a possibility, too. The Royals have also been heavy on House and are naturally linked to Jobe since he’s sort of local, although they haven’t taken a high school pitcher in the first round since they took Ashe Russell in 2015.

[Jammer7]

10 hours ago, wildcard said:

But Callis did not say why he does not think the O's will take Rocker.   Maybe someone will reveal this in the next two weeks. 

Rocker is a talented guy, but the risk profile is bad. Elias still is not in a position where he can gamble like that. Rocker’s mechanics are not what they should be. Sometimes his conditioning is not that great. And I wonder about his health with his velo down most of the year. 

I get why you like him. I think we all like him, and want to be believe he can be like the guy who struck out 18 against Duke. But that guy has not shown up much. If they take him, he has to sign for less than our slot. It would still be a big risk. I would not like it much, and they would have their work cut out with him. The reward could be huge, of course. 

My son competed against this kid for a few years in travel ball. I have seen him many times over the years since the age of 13. Him, Shane Baz, Matt Liberatore, Max Denaburg, Nolan Gorman, Lyon Richardson and our own Grayson Rodriguez, along with many more. 

[Can_of_corn]

15 hours ago, Jammer7 said:

Rocker is a talented guy, but the risk profile is bad. Elias still is not in a position where he can gamble like that. Rocker’s mechanics are not what they should be. Sometimes his conditioning is not that great. And I wonder about his health with his velo down most of the year. 

I get why you like him. I think we all like him, and want to be believe he can be like the guy who struck out 18 against Duke. But that guy has not shown up much. If they take him, he has to sign for less than our slot. It would still be a big risk. I would not like it much, and they would have their work cut out with him. The reward could be huge, of course. 

My son competed against this kid for a few years in travel ball. I have seen him many times over the years since the age of 13. Him, Shane Baz, Matt Liberatore, Max Denaburg, Nolan Gorman, Lyon Richardson and our own Grayson Rodriguez, along with many more. 

Kjerstad wasn't a high risk profile at 1-2?  They put a lot of faith in a rather small sample size.

I would think that Rocker would be an ideal pick for a team with a strong analytics department with all the bells and whistles cutting edge tech. 

[Frobby]

1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:

Kjerstad wasn't a high risk profile at 1-2?  They put a lot of faith in a rather small sample size.

I would think that Rocker would be an ideal pick for a team with a strong analytics department with all the bells and whistles cutting edge tech. 

What if their analytics don’t like him?

[Can_of_corn]

7 minutes ago, Frobby said:

What if their analytics don’t like him?

Then you don't pick him.

 

[Jammer7]

2 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

Kjerstad wasn't a high risk profile at 1-2?  They put a lot of faith in a rather small sample size.

I would think that Rocker would be an ideal pick for a team with a strong analytics department with all the bells and whistles cutting edge tech. 

No, he wasn’t a high risk profile. They believed in the sustainable process he showed, and the small sample size you mentioned was all they had to go on for all of them. It wasn’t as though he wasn’t thought of as a premium talent prior to that. 

Pitchers break easy. I think he is dinged up now. His grades right now do not show a value at 1-5 slot. If he wanted to take a $2 million cut like Kjerstad did, that might be worth it more so. But I doubt that happens. 

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, Jammer7 said:

No, he wasn’t a high risk profile. They believed in the sustainable process he showed, and the small sample size you mentioned was all they had to go on for all of them. It wasn’t as though he wasn’t thought of as a premium talent prior to that. 

Pitchers break easy. I think he is dinged up now. His grades right now do not show a value at 1-5 slot. If he wanted to take a $2 million cut like Kjerstad did, that might be worth it more so. But I doubt that happens. 

You're kidding right?

He had an OPS of 972 and 975 in his first two years of college, as a corner outfielder.  His K/BB ratio those first two seasons were over 2/1.

The opposition he faced in his abbreviated junior season wasn't highly regarded.

What part of that doesn't seem high risk for a 1-2 pick?  As a point of comparison, as a Sophomore Austin Martin more walks than strikeouts and a higher OPS.

Are you suggesting that if they had no college season at all in 2020 Kjerstad would have been seen as a first round talent?  I'm not sure he would have.

I never have understood why folks gloss over Kjerstad's issues making contact in college.  He could bust and bust hard in the pros.

[7Mo]

30 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I never have understood why folks gloss over Kjerstad's issues making contact in college.  He could bust and bust hard in the pros.

Yes he could, as could Austin Martin, or Mark Appel or any number of guys. 

You've suggested Elias didn't do his due diligence with Kjerstad which is not correct. You've posted that Kjerstad may not have the interest in playing which is false. 

I don't really understand your enthusiasm for tearing down the pick from every angle before the guy takes the field.

I've never been more anxious for a player to excel than for Kjerstad just because of the constant criticism of the pick. It seems you'd rather the pick be a fail. That confuses me.

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, 7Mo said:

Yes he could, as could Austin Martin, or Mark Appel or any number of guys. 

You've suggested Elias didn't do his due diligence with Kjerstad which is not correct. You've posted that Kjerstad may not have the interest in playing which is false. 

I don't really understand your enthusiasm for tearing down the pick from every angle before the guy takes the field.

I've never been more anxious for a player to excel than for Kjerstad just because of the constant criticism of the pick. It seems you'd rather the pick be a fail. That confuses me.

I am not suggesting that!

Where did I suggest that?

I am saying he was high risk.

Can you, with a straight face, look at his college stats and not say he was high risk at 1-2?

Over his college career he had 54 walks and 129 strike outs, that is over 691 plate appearances.  The major league leader in PA in 2019 had 747 so it's comparable to one (very full) season.

How does that translate to pro ball?

At 20 Kjerstad (SEC) 65 strikeouts in 300 PA.  At 20 Mountcastle (A+ and AA) had 96 strikeouts in 538 PA. 

 

[Jammer7]

1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:

You're kidding right?

He had an OPS of 972 and 975 in his first two years of college, as a corner outfielder.  His K/BB ratio those first two seasons were over 2/1.

The opposition he faced in his abbreviated junior season wasn't highly regarded.

What part of that doesn't seem high risk for a 1-2 pick?  As a point of comparison, as a Sophomore Austin Martin more walks than strikeouts and a higher OPS.

Are you suggesting that if they had no college season at all in 2020 Kjerstad would have been seen as a first round talent?  I'm not sure he would have.

I never have understood why folks gloss over Kjerstad's issues making contact in college.  He could bust and bust hard in the pros.

Reread what I wrote. He made some improvements to make more contact. Specifically, he swung less at balls outside the zone. His swing decisions became much better, and he did more damage. Minor swing adjustments as well. He improved every year. He competed at a high level, against top competition in the SEC and Internationally. He improved each year. Have we not talked about this enough?

They did play a moderate schedule, like all teams. They did play Texas, Baylor and Oklahoma though. And he hit well against them, including a 445 foot home run and a bunt single. 

So no, I am not kidding. Are you kidding? Or just pushing the same tired anti-Elias schtick? 

[7Mo]

1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:

Can you, with a straight face, look at his college stats and not say he was high risk at 1-2?

 

I can say that I've read articles saying the O's felt good that he had fixed a lot of the swing and miss in 2020. 

Yes, I understand SSS. And I understand lesser comp in the early season. But I also understand the O's had the iceberg of information where folks "not in the industry" didn't. 

The primary argument seems to be "well, he was mocked at 13" and he was. And the MLB draft is notorious for misses. All of us agree on that. So why the reverence for where Mayo or Callis or Law mocked a guy?

We have a first round pick (Tate) and we have productive players, Means, Mullins, Mancini who were drafted below that. 

Just let the guy play for 2 years before you tear him and Elias to shreds. If he and Mayo and Baumler suck in 2023, I'll send you your favorite bottle of wine or steak or whatever.

But not both....

[Jammer7]

19 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I am not suggesting that!

Where did I suggest that?

I am saying he was high risk.

Can you, with a straight face, look at his college stats and not say he was high risk at 1-2?

Over his college career he had 54 walks and 129 strike outs, that is over 691 plate appearances.  The major league leader in PA in 2019 had 747 so it's comparable to one (very full) season.

How does that translate to pro ball?

At 20 Kjerstad (SEC) 65 strikeouts in 300 PA.  At 20 Mountcastle (A+ and AA) had 96 strikeouts in 538 PA. 

 

The risk profile for any pitcher is much higher than a college position player. Injuries end a lot of pitchers' careers before they get started. The risk in Kjerstad's case is mitigated by the under slot signing. What was it again, a $2.1 million savings? They looked closely at the data of his swing and miss and found that he did not miss many pitches that he should swing at. In fact, his contact rate was excellent on pitches in the zone, according to Elias. This is something they feel they can continue to teach him. They felt his pitch recognition was excellent. And, they felt that he was about to explode into the top of the draft like Bleday and others have done in the recent past. 

Not that I put much into mock drafts, especially last year, but he was mocked by many to go around 7th. The group of players after the first few could have gone in any order up to about 15. And after the draft, the same publications came out and said they did not value Kjerstad as well as they should have. They found out that teams liked him after all, just that no one was talking about it before the draft. Callis said this about two weeks after the draft. I posted the podcast here when it came out. 

If it makes you happy, I'll say that Rocker is EXTREME RISK, and then I'll say that Kjerstad was a MEDIUM RISK. I would say, for the sake of argument, that Leiter is a HIGH RISK. I believe their profiles are that different. My opinion. 

Can we just wait about three years and see if Elias is pretty good at this? He has surely made mistakes, and he'll make more. But to judge Kjerstad with no professional sample data seems silly.