Grade the Orioles’ draft

[Otter]

I gave it a B.  Love the Bradfield pick; he was my pick before the draft and I was pleasantly surprised he was there and we took him.  High upside, and also filled our biggest need in the system after pitching.  I also liked going after high upside projectable pitchers even though many had poor stats in college.  This will be a great test for our player development on the pitching side to see if they can match the outstanding development of hitters in the system.  The only reason I didn't give an A is we didn't draft/sign any high upside HS kids, and I think we ended up with too many college CF in the same draft.  I'd prefer a little more diversity so there isn't a logjam of kids the same age and position at the same level.  

[LookinUp]

I gave it a B, but agree that I have no idea.

This org drafts for traits, so they get some benefit of the doubt. I like that they added some good arms and expect that they'll have a fair chance to develop them. I don't love Bradfield because I'm not sure about the hit tool/hard contact and I'm not confident it can be taught THAT well. We'll see.

I don't actually have Fabian as high as many here do for that reason. I know they're different types of hitters, but it's just not that easy to teach them how to hit after they've already been through high school and a couple of years of college. So I guess the proof will be in the pudding. 

[Frobby]

8 hours ago, Tony-OH said:

I'm going to Keith Law this one (Sorry Frobby) and not give it a grade since I don't think you can grade drafts.

No problem!  I have directly said in the past that I don’t see how you can grade a draft until years after the fact.   But, I know a lot of people like to do it so I thought I’d give them their chance.  (You’ll note that I myself haven’t voted, or even given substantive comments!)

[Gurgi]

How long does it take to get a real grasp how the draft worked out?  2 years?  

Edited July 27, 2023 by Gurgi

[LookinUp]

10 hours ago, Gurgi said:

How long does it take to get a real grasp how the draft worked out?  2 years?  

I'd think by the end of 2024 we'll start to have a decent sense of how it's going. Last year's draft had Holliday, Fabian, Wagner and Beavers. Holliday's an outlier, but we're at least starting to get a sense of what others are capable of, working on, etc. But then you look at guys like Bright, Beck and Carter Young and again we have a sense, but there's more that needs to happen for sure.

But there's little doubt that most of them will fizzle out along the way, and we won't know that for another couple of year's I'd imagine.

So 3 years is my answer for being able to draw conclusions.

[Sydnor]

I have no idea how to grade the draft at this point, so I voted B+. If I gave them an A, I feel like my expectations would be too high. My favorite pick was Lord. I watched some video and think absent his rough end to the season, he goes higher. I actually like him better than Baumeister (don’t dislike Baumeister). For me, Lord is easily the most exciting pitcher the Elias regime has drafted. I don’t really have a least favorite selection.

[RZNJ]

17 minutes ago, LookinUp said:

I'd think by the end of 2024 we'll start to have a decent sense of how it's going. Last year's draft had Holliday, Fabian, Wagner and Beavers. Holliday's an outlier, but we're at least starting to get a sense of what others are capable of, working on, etc. But then you look at guys like Bright, Beck and Carter Young and again we have a sense, but there's more that needs to happen for sure.

But there's little doubt that most of them will fizzle out along the way, and we won't know that for another couple of year's I'd imagine.

So 3 years is my answer for being able to draw conclusions.

Good post.  Yeah, I think one full season gives you a pretty good idea but 2 or 3 years to really make a final conclusion.

[Otter]

27 minutes ago, LookinUp said:

I'd think by the end of 2024 we'll start to have a decent sense of how it's going. Last year's draft had Holliday, Fabian, Wagner and Beavers. Holliday's an outlier, but we're at least starting to get a sense of what others are capable of, working on, etc. But then you look at guys like Bright, Beck and Carter Young and again we have a sense, but there's more that needs to happen for sure.

But there's little doubt that most of them will fizzle out along the way, and we won't know that for another couple of year's I'd imagine.

So 3 years is my answer for being able to draw conclusions.

I agree with most of what you say, but I'd say 5 years to draw clearer conclusions.  5 years will give the high school draftees time to develop, or not develop.  Then again, we rarely draft HS kids so for the O's specifically I agree that 3 years should give us a pretty good idea of our prospects.

[Jammer7]

As far as grading a draft that just concluded, of course it will not be accurate over time. This is just a fun exercise to give us something to talk about. An early assessment like this has a different grading process than you would use years later. It’s about perception at this point. 

It takes 3-5 years to really get a clearer picture, depending on how many high school picks. No posters should have their feet held to the fire about an impression of draft performance in July of the same year. If you don’t want to give a grade, fine. If everyone does that, it will get a little boring around here.  

[RZNJ]

More of my two cents.

1.  Bradfield- A chance to be a combination of Mullins/Loftin/Billy Hamilton

I think the upside is a .280 hitter who Weill walk 60-70 times, 15 home run, 30 double, 10 triple,  60+ stolen bases GG caliber CF.

2. Horvath and Cunningham -  Upside is a George Springer type.   Power, speed and plus OF defense.

3.  Josenberger and Etzel -     Austin Hays type with more speed.  Some pop but not power hitters.  Guys who can be valuable 4th outfielder types or possible starters.   15-20 homer types who can steal a base and handle all 3 outfield spots.

[Tony-OH]

13 hours ago, Gurgi said:

How long does it take to get a real grasp how the draft worked out?  2 years?  

5 to 6 years is the typical time where you can get a real "final" grade for the draft, but after about 2 or 3 years you can get a good feel based off the performance of the players.

[CaptainRedbeard]

 

This explains why the Orioles didn’t go into their overage (and why they have historically been reluctant to do so). At least they planned well enough to use every dollar of their pool, unlike some of those other teams. 

Also explains why Baumeister went down to the wire - he was almost certainly trying to dip into the overage but the Orioles held the line.

[CharmCityHokie]

58 minutes ago, CaptainRedbeard said:

 

This explains why the Orioles didn’t go into their overage (and why they have historically been reluctant to do so). At least they planned well enough to use every dollar of their pool, unlike some of those other teams. 

Also explains why Baumeister went down to the wire - he was almost certainly trying to dip into the overage but the Orioles held the line.

Interesting, I had no idea that's how that worked. 

[btdart20]

2 hours ago, Jammer7 said:

As far as grading a draft that just concluded, of course it will not be accurate over time. This is just a fun exercise to give us something to talk about. An early assessment like this has a different grading process than you would use years later. It’s about perception at this point. 

It takes 3-5 years to really get a clearer picture, depending on how many high school picks. No posters should have their feet held to the fire about an impression of draft performance in July of the same year. If you don’t want to give a grade, fine. If everyone does that, it will get a little boring around here.  

Agreed.  I graded based on how we did with the first two picks and then it was about the strategy (pitcher heavy, signability, and a few dice roles) from then on.  Less about the players later because I just don't know.

[LookinUp]

3 hours ago, RZNJ said:

More of my two cents.

1.  Bradfield- A chance to be a combination of Mullins/Loftin/Billy Hamilton

I think the upside is a .280 hitter who Weill walk 60-70 times, 15 home run, 30 double, 10 triple,  60+ stolen bases GG caliber CF.

A combination of their strengths is a first ballot hall of famer.

A combination of their weaknesses is a 4th outfielder type. Basically Billy Hamilton.

There's a very wide range of potential outcomes for Bradfield. I'm kind of skeptical.