Keith Law on the Orioles draft

[LookinUp]

6 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

He does..ownership doesn’t.  

Meh. I don't think ownership picked Cowser. Ownership's budget was certainly more than enough to draft Lawler. 

I'm not a fan of this ownership necessarily, but Cowser was Elias' decision, not Angelos.

[Sports Guy]

8 minutes ago, 7Mo said:

2 points: One is I don't feel as though there's enough talent in place now. I don't think you can look at MiLB infielders and say we're set. To me, you count Henderson and Westburg (and they're no where close to sure things). Then you hope for Jones, Vavra, Ortiz, Hernaiz and some younger guys. That's not enough. If every one of those guys were playing great at Bowie or Norfolk, ok, maybe you have enough but not given where they are today. 

As to elite talent, clearly everyone wants to add every elite talent possible. But you're relying on the draft projection guys to make your decisions. You mentioned Lawlar was projected at or near the top for a year. Yes he was. But he also was dropping for the last 30-45 days before the draft. But either way, it's Mayo and Callis, etc placing him there. 

If 3 years from now, Lawlar is playing better than Cowser, fine, you win. But I think there's a ton of information that GM's have that we don't to make those type decisions. 

I agree with the theory........take elite talent. Agreed. I just don't think it's that easy to identify and project over the next 3-4-10 years.

He wasn’t dropping on overall rankings.  He was just dropping on draft position, which has as much to do with money and philosophy (some favor pitching or college guys) as anything else.

[Sports Guy]

5 minutes ago, LookinUp said:

Meh. I don't think ownership picked Cowser. Ownership's budget was certainly more than enough to draft Lawler. 

I'm not a fan of this ownership necessarily, but Cowser was Elias' decision, not Angelos.

Ownership has nothing to do with the draft.  Ownership has everything to do with organizational philosophy, not spending money, not keeping the ML team more competitive, etc…

Again, this conversation is about way more than who they picked.  It’s over the philosophy of the organization, the lack of a competitive ML team to obtain these draft picks, etc…
 

Every one is assuming that we have this talent, it will come up and everything will be good.  I think to make that assumption, you are assuming ownership is going to come through when needed.  Call me skeptical on that one until they show differently.

[LookinUp]

19 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Ownership has nothing to do with the draft.  Ownership has everything to do with organizational philosophy, not spending money, not keeping the ML team more competitive, etc…

Again, this conversation is about way more than who they picked.  It’s over the philosophy of the organization, the lack of a competitive ML team to obtain these draft picks, etc…
 

Every one is assuming that we have this talent, it will come up and everything will be good.  I think to make that assumption, you are assuming ownership is going to come through when needed.  Call me skeptical on that one until they show differently.

No, this conversation is specifically about who they picked. 

You say they should do more at the ML level. I agree. You say they're tanking just to get a better draft slot. I disagree. You say ownership's stance means they don't take Lawler. I disagree. 

Ownership sucks for whatever reason. Maybe it's because they're sinking millions into the DR. Maybe it's terrible MASN ratings (separate and apart from the team itself) and maybe it's the MASN settlement. Maybe they're preparing for sale. It's a lot of things, but they still had enough to get Lawler if they wanted him. They chose a different path. That's not on ownership.

[Sports Guy]

2 minutes ago, LookinUp said:

No, this conversation is specifically about who they picked. 

 

Not for me it’s not.  There is a bigger picture here for me.

[7Mo]

2 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

The question after that is, if he was the best pick, did the Os capitalize on the rest of the draft to the level they should have, knowing they had more money to spend?

That's a fair question.

Here's something to watch. The Padres just signed their second round guy, James Wood, for $2.6M. The O's will sign their second round guy (Connor Norby $1.7M) plus CB-B pick Reed Trimble for likely $2.8 or maybe a little more for the 2 combined.

Let's check back in 3 years and see who brings the most value, Wood or Norby plus Trimble. Wood is clearly a high ceiling guy. And I know nothing about Wood other than if they paid him $2.6M, they think very highly of him.

That's the crux of the argument, right? You like the very high ceiling guy and Elias is going the other direction, spreading money to many. Fair?

[Frobby]

Let’s say you’ve got two types of players.   One has a midpoint projection of 6 and a ceiling of 8.    The other has a midpoint projection of 5 and a ceiling of 9.   Which do you take?   

If you are Elias, you consistently take the first type, because over many players that gets you the best overall result, even if you miss out on the occasional 9.

[Can_of_corn]

14 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Let’s say you’ve got two types of players.   One has a midpoint projection of 6 and a ceiling of 8.    The other has a midpoint projection of 5 and a ceiling of 9.   Which do you take?   

If you are Elias, you consistently take the first type, because over many players that gets you the best overall result, even if you miss out on the occasional 9.

I think one ceiling nine guy (out of ten) is going to be worth a couple eights and a six so I'd go that route.

[Sports Guy]

56 minutes ago, 7Mo said:

That's a fair question.

Here's something to watch. The Padres just signed their second round guy, James Wood, for $2.6M. The O's will sign their second round guy (Connor Norby $1.7M) plus CB-B pick Reed Trimble for likely $2.8 or maybe a little more for the 2 combined.

Let's check back in 3 years and see who brings the most value, Wood or Norby plus Trimble. Wood is clearly a high ceiling guy. And I know nothing about Wood other than if they paid him $2.6M, they think very highly of him.

That's the crux of the argument, right? You like the very high ceiling guy and Elias is going the other direction, spreading money to many. Fair?

Well, the only thing I will say is that the Os could have taken two Wood type guys.  So the comp would need to be 2 Woods vs Norby and Trimble.

But again I don’t mind the Norby and Trimble picks.  I’m not saying they are the best picks but I think they are fine.  
 

Let me put it another way….would you rather have 2 Gunnar Henderson type picks or 2 Kyle Stowers? 

[7Mo]

10 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

 

Let me put it another way….would you rather have 2 Gunnar Henderson type picks or 2 Kyle Stowers? 

Those guys aren't comparable though. Henderson signed for $2.3M and Stowers signed for $880,000. Comparable would be 1 Henderson or 2 and a half Stowers.

For the O's to take 2 of James Wood, they would have to punt the rest of the draft. Total O's allotment = $11.8M. Cowser costs $4.9 and 2 James Wood cost $5.2 which would leave $1.7M for the remaining 18 draft picks. 

[Sports Guy]

1 hour ago, 7Mo said:

Those guys aren't comparable though. Henderson signed for $2.3M and Stowers signed for $880,000. Comparable would be 1 Henderson or 2 and a half Stowers.

For the O's to take 2 of James Wood, they would have to punt the rest of the draft. Total O's allotment = $11.8M. Cowser costs $4.9 and 2 James Wood cost $5.2 which would leave $1.7M for the remaining 18 draft picks. 

Well, Stowers was picked 29 picks after Henderson.

Wood got picked 62nd, so closer to Stowers and well after Henderson.  
 

That being said, the Orioles essentially took 2 “safer guys” ala Stowers or someone similar vs going with the higher ceiling guys.

And I’m not sure the Orioles didn’t already punt most of the draft…or at least “punt” being defined as paying slot.

As I said before, I would have been fine with going with 3-4 high upside guys and a bunch of relief prospects.  

[Jammer7]

2 hours ago, 7Mo said:

That's a fair question.

Here's something to watch. The Padres just signed their second round guy, James Wood, for $2.6M. The O's will sign their second round guy (Connor Norby $1.7M) plus CB-B pick Reed Trimble for likely $2.8 or maybe a little more for the 2 combined.

Let's check back in 3 years and see who brings the most value, Wood or Norby plus Trimble. Wood is clearly a high ceiling guy. And I know nothing about Wood other than if they paid him $2.6M, they think very highly of him.

That's the crux of the argument, right? You like the very high ceiling guy and Elias is going the other direction, spreading money to many. Fair?

Wood is a guy that has a good bit of swing and miss. At 6'-06" 215lbs. he has a ton of athleticism. One scout said he was in consideration for 1-1 if not for the swing and miss. This is an extremely high risk pick, not very Elias-like.

Obviously, Sig and Elias' model values less risk and more stability in the first few rounds. I will be curious to see if that changes when there is more depth to the system and the international guys start proliferating through the system. Ideally, I think you have to have a mix and take a chance on a higher ceiling guy with extreme risk. Maybe now is not the time. I agree with SG, in that I was a little surprised by how it shook out this time as well. I thought they might have taken a shot at Bubba Chandler, Wood or the Clemson football kid from South Carolina. That said, after learning a lot more about the Trimble and Rhodes picks, I am elated at what they did.

[Sydnor]

4 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Well, Stowers was picked 29 picks after Henderson.

Wood got picked 62nd, so closer to Stowers and well after Henderson.  
 

That being said, the Orioles essentially took 2 “safer guys” ala Stowers or someone similar vs going with the higher ceiling guys.

And I’m not sure the Orioles didn’t already punt most of the draft…or at least “punt” being defined as paying slot.

As I said before, I would have been fine with going with 3-4 high upside guys and a bunch of relief prospects.  

I agree with you on almost everything in your draft related posts. I think (and certainly don’t want to put words into your mouth their mouths) that they have a higher opinion of the system than we do.

I see depth, but limited upside. I’ve seen posts penciling Westburg and Vavra into starting positions on the MLB team. It is an easy thing to say that I’ll be shocked if either is an above average regular, but I’ll say it because that’s why I think they needed to add higher ceiling talent. I wasn’t as high on Lawler as you, but was high on Rocker, House, and Watson. If people think Westburg will be a quality starter at SS, Vavra (24 in AA) the will be a quality starter at 2b, and Bradish will be a 3, they probably think we have high ceiling talent. I just disagree.

[Frobby]

3 minutes ago, Sydnor said:

I agree with you on almost everything in your draft related posts. I think (and certainly don’t want to put words into your mouth their mouths) that they have a higher opinion of the system than we do.

I see depth, but limited upside. I’ve seen posts penciling Westburg and Vavra into starting positions on the MLB team. It is an easy thing to say that I’ll be shocked if either is an above average regular, but I’ll say it because that’s why I think they needed to add higher ceiling talent. I wasn’t as high on Lawler as you, but was high on Rocker, House, and Watson. If people think Westburg will be a quality starter at SS, Vavra (24 in AA) the will be a quality starter at 2b, and Bradish will be a 3, they probably think we have high ceiling talent. I just disagree.

I personally will never believe any Orioles pitching prospect short of Grayson is a 3, until they prove it on a major league field.   Even with Grayson I’m crossing my fingers, knowing our team’s history.   

[7Mo]

2 minutes ago, Jammer7 said:

Obviously, Sig and Elias' model values less risk and more stability in the first few rounds. I will be curious to see if that changes when there is more depth to the system and the international guys start proliferating through the system. Ideally, I think you have to have a mix and take a chance on a higher ceiling guy with extreme risk. Maybe now is not the time. I agree with SG, in that I was a little surprised by how it shook out this time as well. I thought they might have taken a shot at Bubba Chandler, Wood or the Clemson football kid from South Carolina. That said, after learning a lot more about the Trimble and Rhodes picks, I am elated at what they did.

I agree with all of that and I "think" they'll adjust when the system is filled out but that's just a guess.

I thought they'd take a big shot somewhere along the line but I'm guessing it's 1-2 years too early for that.