2022 1st Round Pick Comp A (#33): Dylan Beavers - OF - (Jr) California University

[Sports Guy]

1 minute ago, MurphDogg said:

Yeah, I overstated it somewhat, not knowing for sure whether they would save $500K on Holliday. If so, they could have taken Fabian as well, taken Porter in McLean's ($800K) slot and punted rounds 4-10 to save $1.8M.

Sure.  Point being they could have done it.

As I have said, the bonus pool is like the nfl salary cap.  It’s real but easily manipulated.

[LookinUp]

9 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Would you trade Westburg for the group of guys ranked 11-20 in our organization? 

Yes. I'd definitely take 11-20 over Westburg. It's not even close.

[Sports Guy]

4 minutes ago, LookinUp said:

Yes. I'd definitely take 11-20 over Westburg. It's not even close.

Wow.  Ok.

[LookinUp]

Just now, Sports Guy said:

Wow.  Ok.

I really like Westburg, but don't think he's a transcendent talent or anything. Heck, with Mayo, Henderson, Norby, Wagner and Holliday, there's an argument he could be essentially replaceable (or very close to it) from that list. Add Prieto, Basallo, Baumler. Yeah, it's not even close.

[Sports Guy]

1 minute ago, LookinUp said:

I really like Westburg, but don't think he's a transcendent talent or anything. Heck, with Mayo, Henderson, Norby, Wagner and Holliday, there's an argument he could be essentially replaceable (or very close to it) from that list. Add Prieto, Basallo, Baumler. Yeah, it's not even close.

Well, Basallo is a top 10 guy.

I agree he’s not transcendent but he’s far more likely to be an impact player than basically all of those guys.  Most won’t even sniff the majors or have an impact at all. 
 

I would much rather have the higher ranked, better talent.  Those spare parts are always replaceable.

[Tony-OH]

42 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

The Os easily could have signed Porter and Beavers if they wanted to.  

Sure, just had to punt basically the next few picks.

[Sports Guy]

I would easily trade Porter for our draft picks in rounds 4-10 and probably could throw Fabian and maybe even Wagner in there too.

 

Caveat being that you really like Porter.  

[LookinUp]

Just now, Sports Guy said:

Well, Basallo is a top 10 guy.

I agree he’s not transcendent but he’s far more likely to be an impact player than basically all of those guys.  Most won’t even sniff the majors or have an impact at all. 
 

I would much rather have the higher ranked, better talent.  Those spare parts are always replaceable.

If Basallo is top 10 (which I agree he should be, but maybe not quite yet), depending on other changes, that also means Beavers and/or Kjerstad/Stowers would fall too. Then you have Vavra, whatever pitching creeps in and up and coming international guys. 

Either way, I'm taking 11-20, which for the O's is pretty stacked IMO. 

And to be clear, I love Westburg and hope he's a fixture here for years to come. I think he's a Rutschman-like leader and a damn good ball player.

[baltfan]

2 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

I would easily trade Porter for our draft picks in rounds 4-10 and probably could throw Fabian and maybe even Wagner in there too.

 

Caveat being that you really like Porter.  

Every team in the draft almost could have done what you are proposing and none of them did.  

[LookinUp]

5 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

I would easily trade Porter for our draft picks in rounds 4-10 and probably could throw Fabian and maybe even Wagner in there too.

 

Caveat being that you really like Porter.  

BTW, I think Porter's potentially a higher rated prospect than Westburg, and that our rounds 3-10 picks are not as highly rated as our 11-20, so I'm closer to agreeing that Porter would have been worth punting the rest of the draft than I am with trading Westburg for the O's 11-20 prospects.

[Sports Guy]

2 minutes ago, LookinUp said:

If Basallo is top 10 (which I agree he should be, but maybe not quite yet), depending on other changes, that also means Beavers and/or Kjerstad/Stowers would fall too. Then you have Vavra, whatever pitching creeps in and up and coming international guys. 

Either way, I'm taking 11-20, which for the O's is pretty stacked IMO. 

And to be clear, I love Westburg and hope he's a fixture here for years to come. I think he's a Rutschman-like leader and a damn good ball player.

The top 10 is Gunnar, GRod, hall, Cowser, Stowers, Kjerstad, Basallo, Holliday, beavers and Mayo in whatever order.

so norby, Prieto, Vavra, Rom, et al.  I’ll take my chances with Westburg and the next group we get to replace those guys over those guys.  
 

Just as I’ll take my chances with Porter (or whatever highly ranked, but overslot guy you like) over Handley Jr and a bunch of arms that are questionable at best.  

[Sports Guy]

1 minute ago, LookinUp said:

BTW, I think Porter's potentially a higher rated prospect than Westburg, and that our rounds 3-10 picks are not as highly rated as our 11-20, so I'm closer to agreeing that Porter would have been worth punting the rest of the draft than I am with trading Westburg for the O's 11-20 prospects.

It was a back of napkin analogy but you get the basic premise.  I personally prefer the better, more elite guy over the big group of maybes.

Both are maybes but the value difference is a lot. 
 

You aren’t getting Soto for our prospects in the 11-20 range but you could get Him for the top 3 or 4.  

[Jammer7]

6 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

I would easily trade Porter for our draft picks in rounds 4-10 and probably could throw Fabian and maybe even Wagner in there too.

 

Caveat being that you really like Porter.  

Yeah, me too. I think we are at the point where it is time to make plays like that. If nothing else, it would be nice for the fan base to get excited about a move like that.  But that is not in the plan for Elias, apparently. I wonder how much the Aiken kid stung him going forward. 

Elias must be adding more depth to replace those he is about to promote or trade. I know nothing about Porter beyond the public info, and how he relates to Sig’s model. Or how Elias’ interview with him went. Or maybe Porter said he didn’t want to come to Baltimore. Who knows?

Maybe they like McLean that much as well. I mean, beyond the hype and polish relative to age and experience, McLean is a power arm and a tremendous competitor. Raw clay to put into the hands of their PD peeps. The Auburn kid has me intrigued too. 

[Sports Guy]

2 minutes ago, Jammer7 said:

Yeah, me too. I think we are at the point where it is time to make plays like that. If nothing else, it would be nice for the fan base to get excited about a move like that.  But that is not in the plan for Elias, apparently. I wonder how much the Aiken kid stung him going forward. 

Elias must be adding more depth to replace those he is about to promote or trade. I know nothing about Porter beyond the public info, and how he relates to Sig’s model. Or how Elias’ interview with him went. Or maybe Porter said he didn’t want to come to Baltimore. Who knows?

Maybe they like McLean that much as well. I mean, beyond the hype and polish relative to age and experience, McLean is a power arm and a tremendous competitor. Raw clay to put into the hands of their PD peeps. The Auburn kid has me intrigued too. I 

 

I agree.  I like those 2 arms.  I’m sure there is a scenario where you could have had both of them, Holliday, Beavers and Porter.  after that, I don’t really care what you can put together.  Can you still have Wagner or Fabian?  Not sure.  
 

 

[LookinUp]

I think the question of whether to tank several rounds of a draft for one very talented guy comes down to this:

1. Does the org have a mature farm system with depth? While the O's aren't fully there yet because the international guys haven't really arrived, I think that answer is close to a yes.

2. Do your models project you to get more value from that elite talent than from spreading the money around? I assume the O's models say no.

3. Is the spread out model a better approach to future trades where you can get elite, mature, talent through trades? I think that answer is yes.

So I'd bet the O's think they aren't necessarily skipping on that elite talent as much as building a better way to acquire it, in their own eyes.