Potential 1st over pick info: Druw Jones - HS

[RZNJ]

6 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

CBS had the O's take Johnson.

https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/2022-mlb-mock-draft-orioles-take-termarr-johnson-with-no-1-pick-kumar-rocker-to-padres/

That count?

So did prospectslive.

https://www.prospectslive.com/prospects-live/2022-mlb-mock-draft-n78w7-st9r4-wa35p-2n5ls

Somebody named AS had Berry but I have NO IDEA who they are.

https://en.as.com/mlb/2022-mlb-mock-draft-first-round-predictions-and-pick-projections-n/

I just looked at the first one.  Surely, you are smart enough to know the difference between guessing who we would take versus advocating who the #1 choice should be on merit alone?

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

I just looked at the first one.  Surely, you are smart enough to know the difference between guessing who we would take versus advocating who the #1 choice should be on merit alone?

If they didn't think the O's were going to take him #1 than he wasn't the universal top pick.

Like I said I'm not really interested in throwing down over this but you decided to keep at it.

[RZNJ]

Just now, Can_of_corn said:

If they didn't think the O's were going to take him #1 than he wasn't the universal top pick.

Like I said I'm not really interested in throwing down over this but you decided to keep at it.

You’re just being difficult.   CBS mocked Johnson to us.   They had Jones ranked as the #1 guy, like everyone else which is all I ‘ve said all along.  I never said it was like Harper or Strasberg but EVERYONE said they would take him at 1:1  without taking an underslot absent of some kind of underslot strategy.

1. Druw Jones, CF, Wesleyan HS (GA)

Jones, whose father Andruw is a borderline Hall of Famer, was in the running for the top spot entering the spring. He's since emerged as the industry's preferred choice. It's not hard to understand why. He's a good to great defender at a premium position who could finish his development arc with five plus or better tools, including both components of his bat. Indeed, he has the kind of projectable frame and handspeed that should allow him to add muscle and power as he matures. Jones might end up losing a little speed as a result, but he's believed to have the instincts and innate feel for the position that should enable his game to remain lush with secondary value. There's legitimate All-Star potential here, and he's worthy of the No. 1 pick, even if he ends up going No. 2 or No. 3 instead because of the Orioles' financial strategy

[Jammer7]

21 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

Find one well-known reputable source who did not advocate him as the #1 pick on merit alone.   I’m sure it should be easy to find one.   I just can’t think of one.

Mike Elias

Seriously, you’re right. Some mocks had others, but their lists were pretty much Jones at #1. The Orioles perceived penchant for college bats, like Lee and Berry, had as much as anything to with the mocks. Some also thought Termarr’s “70 hit tool” was enough to draft a 2B at 1-1.

All of these lists are what these pundits hear from scouts and execs. They do not get all of the info teams have, obviously. Sometimes, these lists are used for propaganda for teams to cause guys to rise or fall. They do not reflect the read on intangibles, which is really hard to know. Jones is an elite premium athlete, but that is only part of the picture in the development world. He’s the son of one of the best CF’s of the last 50 years. He’s a big personality and easy to hype.

I wanted Jones, to be honest. I thought they would take Holliday, based on his improvement and reported make up. I had no idea he would be like this. And who could have known?

[RZNJ]

1 minute ago, Jammer7 said:

Mike Elias

Seriously, you’re right. Some mocks had others, but their lists were pretty much Jones at #1. The Orioles perceived penchant for college bats, like Lee and Berry, had as much as anything to with the mocks. Some also thought Termarr’s “70 hit tool” was enough to draft a 2B at 1-1.

All of these lists are what these pundits hear from scouts and execs. They do not get all of the info teams have, obviously. Sometimes, these lists are used for propaganda for teams to cause guys to rise or fall. They do not reflect the read on intangibles, which is really hard to know. Jones is an elite premium athlete, but that is only part of the picture in the development world. He’s the son of one of the best CF’s of the last 50 years. He’s a big personality and easy to hype.

I wanted Jones, to be honest. I thought they would take Holliday, based on his improvement and reported make up. I had no idea he would be like this. And who could have known?

Agree with everything you say here.  I wanted Jones based on the “experts” I read.  My point being, that our experts, Elias/Ciolek/Migdal seem to have a leg up on them, or have just been incredibly lucky (Kjerstad/Cowser/Holliday)

[RZNJ]

2 minutes ago, Alasdaire said:

The way I would think of it is that Druw Jones was number one because the nature of ranking anything means someone has to be number one and no one else really stood out.

I also think it's worth noting that the way the media regards draft prospects can be very different from the way front offices value them. That's sometimes why draftees go early/fall, which are really just manifestations of professional organizations having different opinion than the media.

Even if 95% of the media had Druw Jones at number one, it's conceivable you could poll front offices and that number would not be remotely similar.

Totally agree.  Again, my point was that the consensus and NEARLY unanimous opinion of the media was that Joes was the choice at 1:1.   I, personally, don’t recall one media outlet not endorsing him as the 1:1.

[Alasdaire]

Just now, RZNJ said:

Totally agree.  Again, my point was that the consensus and NEARLY unanimous opinion of the media was that Joes was the choice at 1:1.   I, personally, don’t recall one media outlet not endorsing him as the 1:1.

Deleted this because I wanted to re-post and credit @Jammer7for making the point about the media/front office dichotomy that I only read after I posted, but you caught me in 4k with the quote

Anyway, I absolutely agree that our front office deserves a ton of credit for picking Holliday. If nothing else, Druw Jones would have been the easy pick in terms of fans/media feeling like the O's did what was expected of them.

And they didn't just avoid what might have been a pitfall with Jones, they hit a home run with Holliday. Time and again in the draft they've managed to avoid the tidal wave of mediocre MLB draft prospects and found the few with talent.

[Frobby]

On 7/14/2023 at 10:54 AM, Can_of_corn said:

While I 100% agree that Holliday was not a slam dunk for 1-1 I think saying that Jones was the clear consensus is also overstating things a bit.  I saw a number of names at the top of the draft board.

 

I’d say the solid majority of pundits had Jones no. 1.   Certainly not everyone, but I don’t think that’s what “consensus” means in this context.