2022 MLB Draft Discussion (Use this thread to discuss all picks, not Orioles picks)

[RZNJ]

47 minutes ago, ShoelesJoe said:

Ya, I don't get it either. If you think he's got a one in four chance of growing into Alomar / Pedroia and a one in twenty chance of being Joe Morgan then you have to take that very seriously. There's a reason the teams those guys were on won a &%$# load of ballgames. 

Right.  SG said if his bat truly was a 70 he still wouldn't take him.   A guaranteed 70 bat at the ML level and you still wouldn't take him?   LOL

[Sports Guy]

3 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

Right.  SG said if his bat truly was a 70 he still wouldn't take him.   A guaranteed 70 bat at the ML level and you still wouldn't take him?   LOL

You do understand that a 70 hit tool right now doesn’t mean it will be one in the majors, right?

[Sports Guy]

I went back and looked and it doesn’t appear a second baseman has ever been drafted first.

[RZNJ]

7 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

You do understand that a 70 hit tool right now doesn’t mean it will be one in the majors, right?

You do realize that the ratings on these guys are based ML equivalencies.  So if you agree that he has a 70 hit tool than yes it would have the same 70 hit tool as a ML player.

Let me give you a hypothetical.   If you were guaranteed that Termarr Johnson would average a .300 average for his first 6 full seasons, with 20 homers and a .400 OBP, would you take him first or would you take whatever Andruw Jones becomes without knowing what that is?    I know you have trouble with hypotheticals so I'm not expecting an actual answer.

[Tryptamine]

1 hour ago, Frobby said:

I just will never understand this argument.  Finding a great hitting 2B is really hard.  The average 2B this year has a .651 OPS.  If you believe deeply in Termarr’s bat, the fact that he’s destined for 2B shouldn’t be a big impediment.   And, he’s expected to be a plus defender at 2B, not just some hack.

It's very easy to understand. Unless  you believe Johnson has a significantly better bat than Jones or Holliday, who both play positions at the top of the defensive spectrum, then you are not getting as much value. It's the same reason that you don't consider a 1B at 1.1 unless they are absolute monsters with the bat. Also, remember that Johnson is very young and already relegated to 2B in a draft where a huge amount of the players will be listed as SS and CFers but be immediately moved off that position once drafted. If he keeps falling down the defensive spectrum the bat needs to be better and better to justify the pick. 

[Can_of_corn]

4 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

I went back and looked and it doesn’t appear a second baseman has ever been draft first.

You have players like B.J. Surhoff, Jeff King and Justin Upton that were drafted as a SS but went on to play elsewhere in the majors.  How about they announce Johnson as a SS then just move him to 2B?

That solve the issue?

 

Did anyone think that Surhoff was going to stick at Short when he was drafted?

[Sports Guy]

16 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

You do realize that the ratings on these guys are based ML equivalencies.  So if you agree that he has a 70 hit tool than yes it would have the same 70 hit tool as a ML player.

Let me give you a hypothetical.   If you were guaranteed that Termarr Johnson would average a .300 average for his first 6 full seasons, with 20 homers and a .400 OBP, would you take him first or would you take whatever Andruw Jones becomes without knowing what that is?    I know you have trouble with hypotheticals so I'm not expecting an actual answer.

First of all, those grades change all the time.  A 70 now is a projection but hardly a guarantee for later. 

That hypothetical isn’t realistic but sure, I would probably Take Johnson in that scenario…assuming he is a good second baseman.

 

[Frobby]

7 minutes ago, Tryptamine said:

It's very easy to understand. Unless  you believe Johnson has a significantly better bat than Jones or Holliday, who both play positions at the top of the defensive spectrum, then you are not getting as much value. It's the same reason that you don't consider a 1B at 1.1 unless they are absolute monsters with the bat. Also, remember that Johnson is very young and already relegated to 2B in a draft where a huge amount of the players will be listed as SS and CFers but be immediately moved off that position once drafted. If he keeps falling down the defensive spectrum the bat needs to be better and better to justify the pick. 

I don’t really disagree with what you say.  You don’t draft Johnson unless you think he’s got the best bat by a clear margin.   But playing 2B isn’t the same handicap as playing 1B.   We’ve been over this multiple times.   If the offensive component is the same, the difference between the value of an average defensive 2B and an average defensive 1B is huge.   There is little difference between CF/3B/2B in terms of defensive value.  SS has the most value, but the gap between SS and 2B is much smaller than the gap between 2B and 1B.

[Sports Guy]

13 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

You have players like B.J. Surhoff, Jeff King and Justin Upton that were drafted as a SS but went on to play elsewhere in the majors.  How about they announce Johnson as a SS then just move him to 2B?

That solve the issue?

 

Did anyone think that Surhoff was going to stick at Short when he was drafted?

No but the point is, they had other positions they could go to.  Johnson isn’t thought of as a guy who can play other spots well but is a far better second baseman.  
 

It’s basically already written in stone that second base is the only position he can handle (maybe he could go to the CO spot depending on his arm but haven’t seen that mentioned).

 

[DocJJ]

15 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

You have players like B.J. Surhoff, Jeff King and Justin Upton that were drafted as a SS but went on to play elsewhere in the majors.  How about they announce Johnson as a SS then just move him to 2B?

That solve the issue?

 

Did anyone think that Surhoff was going to stick at Short when he was drafted?

Surhoff was actually drafted by the Brewers as a catcher.

 

[RZNJ]

2 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

First of all, those grades change all the time.  A 70 now is a projection but hardly a guarantee for later. 

That hypothetical isn’t realistic but sure, I would probably Take Johnson in that scenario…assuming he is a good second baseman.

 

Of course those are projections.   Johnson might be a .250 hitter with 10 home run power.     Why do you say that hypothetical is unrealistic?  Unlikely?   Yes.  Unrealistic?   There are many scouts who are projecting him to be that type of player.

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, DocJJ said:

Surhoff was actually drafted by the Brewers as a catcher.

 

MLB.com had him listed as a SS.

https://www.mlb.com/news/every-no-1-overall-mlb-draft-pick

Ultimately it doesn't change my point.

[RZNJ]

19 minutes ago, Tryptamine said:

It's very easy to understand. Unless  you believe Johnson has a significantly better bat than Jones or Holliday, who both play positions at the top of the defensive spectrum, then you are not getting as much value. It's the same reason that you don't consider a 1B at 1.1 unless they are absolute monsters with the bat. Also, remember that Johnson is very young and already relegated to 2B in a draft where a huge amount of the players will be listed as SS and CFers but be immediately moved off that position once drafted. If he keeps falling down the defensive spectrum the bat needs to be better and better to justify the pick. 

Most scouts believe Johnson has the best hit tool in the draft.   Baseball America has it rated as a 70.   Jones is rated at a 55.  Holiday is a 60.   Take those ratings with a grain of salt but there is a large number of scouts who believe his bat is significantly better.

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, RZNJ said:

Most scouts believe Johnson has the best hit tool in the draft.   Baseball America has it rated as a 70.   Jones is rated at a 55.  Holiday is a 60.   Take those ratings with a grain of salt but there is a large number of scouts who believe his bat is significantly better.

Present grade or future grade?

[RZNJ]

2 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Present grade or future grade?

I believe when they post those grades they are considered present grades but I'm not 100% on that.    When Law as talking about Johnson he said he considered his hit tool a 60 but that if he showed improvement in making contact he might upgrade to a 70.   So, I think they are talking presently.

I don't believe that means that they expect him to hit .300 in the majors today, just that he has the current talent to do it when he gets there in 3-4 years.