Would you take Jones Jr at full slot (or close to it) or Termarr Johnson at $1.5M under slot?

[Sports Guy]

26 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

 

The thing is, he's positioned himself to have fabulous draft positions.

You give any GM a 1-1, 1-2, 1-5 set of drafts and the results should look solid.

The question is, are they as are good as they would have been if he had played the last two conventionally?

We don't know.

 

And the aspect of all of this that everyone keeps overlooking is that he has thrown seasons on purpose.  He is intentionally putting a product on the field that can’t compete.

And again, the ONLY advantage to doing that is the draft.  The high pick and the pool.  You rarely get the first pick..you don’t flush that opportunity away, especially when you are intentionally losing games for several years in a row just to have this chance.  It’s the only thing you lose for and going cheap on the first pick so that you can draft someone unlikely to make the majors later on in the draft is awful, especially when you don’t need to do it!

[Just Regular]

Termarr is I think benefiting some from Betts, Altuve and Ramirez's brilliant success.

The Clubs are good even before 18 at identifying best pitches, best power, etc.    Bryce as a 1-1 prep (yeah, GED JuCo, whatev) had all the power and physicality alongside the Hit tool.

I wouldn't call it a blind spot as it is art more than science, but as the last decade has seen you might be an 80 Bat in a little guy, but at your affiliation moment you might not have separated yourself from dozens or hundreds of others in your affiliation group.     So sweet for your Club if you get that guy, but at top of the draft not really Buy Low value on the profile.   

In low profile IFA Altuve and Ramirez's cases (ibid Albies-Acuna), also super amazing to have that guy at 21 without millions in the bank; it makes the marginal value of those first millions in earnings very high.

[RZNJ]

19 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

And the aspect of all of this that everyone keeps overlooking is that he has thrown seasons on purpose.  He is intentionally putting a product on the field that can’t compete.

And again, the ONLY advantage to doing that is the draft.  The high pick and the pool.  You rarely get the first pick..you don’t flush that opportunity away, especially when you are intentionally losing games for several years in a row just to have this chance.  It’s the only thing you lose for and going cheap on the first pick so that you can draft someone unlikely to make the majors later on in the draft is awful, especially when you don’t need to do it!

Please set us straight because you said you were okay doing it with the #2 pick and Kjerstad.   You very rarely get the #2 pick in the draft as well.   Are you saying it's okay to do with the #2 pick but it's not okay to do with the #1 pick?    

 

[Sports Guy]

4 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

Please set us straight because you said you were okay doing it with the #2 pick and Kjerstad.   You very rarely get the #2 pick in the draft as well.   Are you saying it's okay to do with the #2 pick but it's not okay to do with the #1 pick?    

 

No, I’m not saying that.  

[Sports Guy]

There are players out there that have done well as short players. There are also far more that failed.

There is no one way for every single player but it’s about playing the odds. 

[RZNJ]

9 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

There are players out there that have done well as short players. There are also far more that failed.

There is no one way for every single player but it’s about playing the odds. 

News alert!  Most good players tend to be bigger and taller.  It certainly doesn't hurt but at some point it becomes about skill.    Did anyone think about all of the 6'4 210 lbs players who have also failed!    It's a lot more than the short guys!!!!

 

[LookinUp]

12 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

There are players out there that have done well as short players. There are also far more that failed.

There is no one way for every single player but it’s about playing the odds. 

Well, isn't that your problem with Elias' draft strategy? He's playing the odds by picking COFers instead of high upside high school SS's and pitchers.

I do wonder if there's ever a time where Elias deviates and takes several pitchers in the top rounds or if he's always just going to flood our system with position players.

[RZNJ]

26 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

No, I’m not saying that.  

What are you saying?  It's tough to tell because you're talking out of both sides of your mouth at the same time and it's not very clear.   Were you against going underslot with Kjerstad at #2?   That's a very simple question.

[Sports Guy]

10 minutes ago, LookinUp said:

Well, isn't that your problem with Elias' draft strategy? He's playing the odds by picking COFers instead of high upside high school SS's and pitchers.

I do wonder if there's ever a time where Elias deviates and takes several pitchers in the top rounds or if he's always just going to flood our system with position players.

I don’t care that he has takes a COFer if it’s the BPA.

 

[Sports Guy]

10 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

What are you saying.  It's tough to tell because you're talking out of both sides of your mouth at the same time and it's not very clear.   Were you against going underslot with Kjerstad at #2?   That's a very simple question.

Ok

[jabba72]

If Temarr is really 5-8 like some are saying no I dont want him 1-1, especially with questions about how he looks against high velocity. And also questions about how good he is defensively. No thanks. The game has changed and only a select few of players that size succeed, and even fewer succeed with the added expectations of going 1-1. 

[RZNJ]

Just now, Sports Guy said:

Ok

Hmmm.   That's two posts in a row with no answer to the question.   We all know why you aren't answering.  Hahahahahaha.

[btdart20]

Height and body type matters.

Height - The average 2B today is 5'11".  But broadening the timeline, the average height for a HOF 2B is 5'875" (and most of the old schoolers were "scrappy", "hit 'em where they ain't", "rabbits").  Johnson would be on the shorter side.  Yes, Altuve is smaller and is basically the exception that proves the rule.  Only 27 of the top 200 HR list are under 6' tall.  From a probability/projection perspective, size is an indicator.

Body type - Body type matters less for hitting, but it does for everything else.  I can't think of any 2Bs with thicker body types.  The average HOF 2B weighed 170.4 lbs.  The bar for body control and agility needed there is higher than other positions.  2B is less linear and more dynamic.

Baseball Players: Does Size Matter? - AZ Snake Pit

Starting with hitters, BA does not appear to be affected significantly by height or weight. OBP shows a weak correlation. That runs counter-intuitive to what you might expect: shorter players have a smaller strike-zone, more difficult for pitchers to hit [see Eddie Gaedel, below]. But it seems large guys do tend to walk more often, perhaps because they're being pitched more carefully. That would make sense, since in SLG, larger players have a clear advantage (they also K more often). This becomes even more pronounced when we look at just HR rate, where we see the largest correlations of all. Big guys hit more home-runs. I wonder why I had to look at stats to prove that.

 

[Just Regular]

15 minutes ago, LookinUp said:

I do wonder if there's ever a time where Elias deviates and takes several pitchers in the top rounds or if he's always just going to flood our system with position players.

If that time is 33-42-67 twelve nights from now, that'll amp my excitement up quite a bit more relative to say DL Hall's small sample size performances in his next couple turns.

It'll give us data that on reflection is Elias' assessment of the whole portfolio.    I believe at those selections the algorithms will have similar values on some of the members of the second-tier of NCAA Arms and NCAA Bats.

[RZNJ]

Just now, jabba72 said:

If Temarr is really 5-8 like some are saying no I dont want him 1-1, especially with questions about how he looks against high velocity. And also questions about how good he is defensively. No thanks. The game has changed and only a select few of players that size succeed, and even fewer succeed with the added expectations of going 1-1. 

Do yourself a favor and read actual experts instead of only posters.      Most reports say he has no trouble with high velocity.   Most say he'll be average "at worst" at 2B.    Now Keith Law said he saw too much swing and miss against good competition to give him a 70 hit grade.  He gave him a 60.   But show me one report that says he has trouble against high velocity or is going to be below average at 2B.   You won't be able to.

I'm not even advocating Johnson for #1 but can we please try to be ACCURATE with the stuff we post.