Keith Law on the Orioles draft

[Sports Guy]

39 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

His points aren't great, but you've been routinely blasting the team for taking forever in the rebuild.  I understand that you like a guy like Lawlar who has big upside potential but why are you mad at the Orioles for taking a guy who can get to the majors quicker?  You've said that you want this rebuild to happen faster, the Orioles took a guy who can help make it happen faster.  I don't see the downside there.  

I think they should have taken Lawlar because I believe he has the higher ceiling.  I also said that Cowser being the second pick there is perfectly fine with me.

My issue is, if you are taking Cowser, that you don’t take some higher upside talent after.  The Pirates took the lesser upside guy in Davis and paid him 2M under slot..and then they preceded to draft 3 high upside HS players with their next 3 picks.  That is what I wanted to see if you are taking Cowser.

As for your point about taking someone who can help sooner..that’s fine but let’s not act like you can only win with the players you have.  They could have taken someone who is 2 years further away and still win games soon.

On top of that, we have no idea how long they will keep him in the minors or anything like that.  So I don’t really see a ton of validity there either.

[Moose Milligan]

2 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

I think they should have taken Lawlar because I believe he has the higher ceiling.  I also said that Cowser being the second pick there is perfectly fine with me.

My issue is, if you are taking Cowser, that you don’t take some higher upside talent after.  The Pirates took the lesser upside guy in Davis and paid him 2am under slot..and then they preceded to draft 3 high upside HS players with their next 3 picks.  That is what I wanted to see if you are taking Cowser.

As for your point about taking someone who can help sooner..that’s fine but let’s not act like you can only win with the players you have.  They could have taken someone who is 2 years further away and still win games soon.

On top of that, we have no idea how long they will keep him in the minors or anything like that.  So I don’t really see a ton of validity there either.

Fair points.  I didn't hate the Norby pick either, again a college guy that should be closer to the majors.  

To your points, I was disappointed that they didn't go with more HS over slot upside arms.

[Sports Guy]

Just now, Moose Milligan said:

Fair points.  I didn't hate the Norby pick either, again a college guy that should be closer to the majors.  

To your points, I was disappointed that they didn't go with more HS over slot upside arms.

I don’t mind Norby either and it’s definitely possible he was the BPA on their board.  Hell, I don’t even mind Trimble, as he has an intriguing upside.

My issue is not enough higher upside guys when you went underslot early but the bigger issue is that they are losing on purpose for this reason and this reason only.  If you are doing that, you should be trying to bring elite talent into the system.  If All you are going to do is draft safe guys, then start being more competitive at the ML level and draft guys like you draft later in the draft.  
 

It is very possible that the team could have picked 13th this year and literally had the exact same draft they did…or something very similar.

 

[7Mo]

36 minutes ago, LookinUp said:

That doesn't mean Elias is correct, but damn, consider the source you're relying on. This dude might not be likable for some folks (I do), but if there's one thing he's done it is build the minors to a better level. If Kjerstad didn't have the worst luck in the world and was setting the world on fire, would be hemming and hawing about Elias' strategy? I say no. Instead, the kid gets myocarditis of all things. Absolutely not baseball related, so now it's a stupid draft pick and it calls into question all of the rest of Elias' strategy? That's just crazy talk in my opinion.

I think it might even be more simple than that. The O's at pick 5 take a guy ranked approximately 10th and the reaction is "the O's suck, they're dumb, I told you Hobgood was a bum, ownership is cheap, this team is getting ready for sale". And then a few default to "Elias thinks he's smarter than everyone else".

And the Rays pick at 28 and take a guy ranked 41 and the reaction is "I'm sure they've done their homework, the Rays rarely miss, give them time to develop him and watch out". 

I think Elias will be saddled with every O's mistake over the last 50 years until the ML team is challenging for a playoff spot in September. Then the narrative will shift to how ownership doesn't care about the fans enough to make one key acquisition to put them over the top. 

[Sports Guy]

18 minutes ago, 7Mo said:

I think it might even be more simple than that. The O's at pick 5 take a guy ranked approximately 10th and the reaction is "the O's suck, they're dumb, I told you Hobgood was a bum, ownership is cheap, this team is getting ready for sale". And then a few default to "Elias thinks he's smarter than everyone else".

And the Rays pick at 28 and take a guy ranked 41 and the reaction is "I'm sure they've done their homework, the Rays rarely miss, give them time to develop him and watch out". 

I think Elias will be saddled with every O's mistake over the last 50 years until the ML team is challenging for a playoff spot in September. Then the narrative will shift to how ownership doesn't care about the fans enough to make one key acquisition to put them over the top. 

Well, the thing is, the Rays have earned the benefit of the doubt.  They have put together arguably the best farm system we have ever seen right now, so they do know what they are doing and they have been doing that while winning and competing for division titles for much of the last decade+.

The Orioles, even with Elias being a massive improvement, don’t deserve a shred of benefit of the doubt.  
 

Now, that being said, Cowser isn’t a bad pick and those saying he is a bad pick are off base..as they were with Kjerstad.  The question isn’t, was he a bad pick.  The question is, was he the best pick?  That’s where the actual discussion should occur imo.

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?

There is a lot more to this (or any) draft than just one player.  Im happy that a lot of the guys the Os took are going to be in the system.  Show me any one player and I can make a case for being happy about the pick.  But it’s the overall draft, decision making and, most of all, losing on purpose that bothers me.

[Just Regular]

21 minutes ago, 7Mo said:

I think Elias will be saddled with every O's mistake over the last 50 years

Certainly the time horizon for fixing Latin America will be more like a decade than a few years.

When ESPN re-listed their 2019 Wander Franco story for his call-up, it had the tidbit about half the guys in the minors were Latin American.   We've got Maikol Hernandez and Samuel Basallo now, but are half a decade away good case from our pipeline at the MLB level being fed by what most of the 29 other teams presently enjoy.   Even if the new CBA created an international draft so that Koby and his counterparts didn't have to woo middle schoolers, it wouldn't accelerate Baltimore catch-up since all the best tooled-up prospects are affiliated already.

That said, even though its all domestic talent, the 10 best Orioles (and $$$ at the Buck/Machado level eventually) ought to yield something good-ish while those first two Latin American Oriole millionaires and those who follow climb the minors.

I'm sure the club will never give particulars about the DR complex price tag being $20M, $45M, $100M, but will give the impression that it is "a lot", and Elias will praise ownership support.

[7Mo]

2 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Well, the thing is, the Rays have earned the benefit of the doubt.  They have put together arguably the best farm system we have ever seen right now, so they do know what they are doing and they have been doing that while winning and competing for division titles for much of the last decade+.

The Orioles, even with Elias being a massive improvement, don’t deserve a shred of benefit of the doubt.  
 

Now, that being said, Cowser isn’t a bad pick and those saying he is a bad pick are off base..as they were with Kjerstad.  The question isn’t, was he a bad pick.  The question is, was he the best pick?  That’s where the actual discussion should occur imo.

I don't disagree with any of that. 

The Rays have definitely earned the benefit of the doubt.

My point is with your second paragraph. I don't think Elias should be saddled with O's failures that pre-date him. 

Obviously you liked Lawlar as the pick. No way to know for a few years. The one point you're making that I quibble with is we don't know (or I don't know, maybe you have the same inside information GM's do) whether the O's took high ceiling guys or not. The definition isn't limited to HS guys. Or maybe that's your definition. I think it's very possible the O's view Trimble and Rhodes as high ceiling guys as college soph's. 

You've said several times that a team picking this high needs to take the high upside guys now because if things work like they should, you won't be picking this high later. Agreed. But that assumes the draft projections are accurate in saying who the high upside guys are. We all know how many guys miss from the MLB draft. I don't want to start picking chalk or who Keith Law likes here or Callis or any of those guys. I'd rather that Elias and Sig take their guys based on what their analytics tell them and see where we are in a few years. Even when that means they're taking guys who aren't popular names. 

[7Mo]

9 minutes ago, OrioleDog said:

Certainly the time horizon for fixing Latin America will be more like a decade than a few years.

When ESPN re-listed their 2019 Wander Franco story for his call-up, it had the tidbit about half the guys in the minors were Latin American.   We've got Maikol Hernandez and Samuel Basallo now, but are half a decade away good case from our pipeline at the MLB level being fed by what most of the 29 other teams presently enjoy.   Even if the new CBA created an international draft so that Koby and his counterparts didn't have to woo middle schoolers, it wouldn't accelerate Baltimore catch-up since all the best tooled-up prospects are affiliated already.

That said, even though its all domestic talent, the 10 best Orioles (and $$$ at the Buck/Machado level eventually) ought to yield something good-ish while those first two Latin American Oriole millionaires and those who follow climb the minors.

I'm sure the club will never give particulars about the DR complex price tag being $20M, $45M, $100M, but will give the impression that it is "a lot", and Elias will praise ownership support.

I agree with every bit of that. Latin American will take a while because the relationships begin so very early. 

[Sports Guy]

7 minutes ago, 7Mo said:

I don't disagree with any of that. 

The Rays have definitely earned the benefit of the doubt.

My point is with your second paragraph. I don't think Elias should be saddled with O's failures that pre-date him. 

Obviously you liked Lawlar as the pick. No way to know for a few years. The one point you're making that I quibble with is we don't know (or I don't know, maybe you have the same inside information GM's do) whether the O's took high ceiling guys or not. The definition isn't limited to HS guys. Or maybe that's your definition. I think it's very possible the O's view Trimble and Rhodes as high ceiling guys as college soph's. 

You've said several times that a team picking this high needs to take the high upside guys now because if things work like they should, you won't be picking this high later. Agreed. But that assumes the draft projections are accurate in saying who the high upside guys are. We all know how many guys miss from the MLB draft. I don't want to start picking chalk or who Keith Law likes here or Callis or any of those guys. I'd rather that Elias and Sig take their guys based on what their analytics tell them and see where we are in a few years. Even when that means they're taking guys who aren't popular names. 

Sure and I don’t fall into line with BA rated a guy here, so therefore they are right.

That being said, Lawlar has been ranked high for over a year.  He wasn’t a helium guy that all of a sudden is now a highly ranked guy.  And while I agree with you about Trimble, there were still other high upside HS kids available as the draft went on even after those first 3 picks.  

In most years, I would say if you have a high pick, you need to hit on it.  That would mean Cowser should have been the pick since he’s more likely to succeed on some level than Lawlar is.

This year was different for me because I feel they already have those types of guys in place.  It’s now time to add elite talent.  The one consensus about the Os system is that it’s not deep in elite talent and I think the Os may have missed the ball on that this year.  

[MurphDogg]

20 hours ago, webbrick2010 said:

Yes, according to multiple draft ranking boards, none of the O's top 5 picks were ranked at above the position the O's took them.

According to BA

Cowser picked 5, ranked 10

Norby picked 41, ranked 58

Reed picked 65, ranked 148

Rhodes picked 76, ranked 135

Higgins picked 257, ranked 230

No one else ranked

You made similar posts multiple times during the draft and I pointed out multiple times that Fangraphs had Cowser #6, Norby #25, Trimble (who's last name is not Reed) #44.

Rankings aren't the be all end all, but if you are treating them as such, you can't create your own reality where facts that disagree with your opinion can be ignored.

[emmett16]

30 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

I don’t mind Norby either and it’s definitely possible he was the BPA on their board.  Hell, I don’t even mind Trimble, as he has an intriguing upside.

My issue is not enough higher upside guys when you went underslot early but the bigger issue is that they are losing on purpose for this reason and this reason only.  If you are doing that, you should be trying to bring elite talent into the system.  If All you are going to do is draft safe guys, then start being more competitive at the ML level and draft guys like you draft later in the draft.  
 

It is very possible that the team could have picked 13th this year and literally had the exact same draft they did…or something very similar.

 

Elias cut his teeth in the Cardinals organization who always picked mid pack to lower first round.  I think he is very comfortable assessing and projecting players.  I believe his draft philosophy is to make every pick count, spread budget evenly, and bring in as much under valued talent (college OF) as possible.  

 

I think we will have immediate feedback on this strategy by the end of next year.  He did the same thing in 2019 and some of the college OF bats are knocking down door on AA and AAA (Stowers & Rizer) after missing an entire season.  Top prospects will be arriving 2022-2024 and it looks like he's supplementing that group.  Perhaps he changes draft strategy in 2022 or 2023.  

[LookinUp]

Yeah. There's certainly more than one way to skin the draft cat, so opinions on strategies are fair game. I do still think that Elias deserves the benefit of the doubt more than any GM I can remember the O's having, and it's not even close. Even Gillick wasn't a minor league guy, though he was a great ML GM while he was given actual resources to work with.

[Sports Guy]

Just now, LookinUp said:

Yeah. There's certainly more than one way to skin the draft cat, so opinions on strategies are fair game. I do still think that Elias deserves the benefit of the doubt more than any GM I can remember the O's having, and it's not even close. Even Gillick wasn't a minor league guy, though he was a great ML GM while he was given actual resources to work with.

He does..ownership doesn’t.  

[Just Regular]

If I really want to put my orange colored glasses at maximum, I could strain that Sophomore and JuCo overslots like Rhodes, Trimble, Craig are "better" than High School Class of 2021 types for joining Adley's supporting cast (or becoming mid-minors trade chips) a little earlier in the timeline.

We'll see if the numbers agreed upon reflect Baltimore considering them higher than others suspect value players.    

[7Mo]

5 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

In most years, I would say if you have a high pick, you need to hit on it.  That would mean Cowser should have been the pick since he’s more likely to succeed on some level than Lawlar is.

This year was different for me because I feel they already have those types of guys in place.  It’s now time to add elite talent.  The one consensus about the Os system is that it’s not deep in elite talent and I think the Os may have missed the ball on that this year.  

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.