Roch sheds some light on this year's draft

[Stotle]

The information I gave was that there are pitchers in the big leagues with slight frames who are dominant workhorses.

And yes, sarcasm is always needed. This board is full of sarcasm. Why did I just get called out for my little bit?

It's relevant that Gibson throws in the high-80s with questionable arm action and "slight stature". Lincecum and Lackey are low- to mid-90s regularly with relatively clean arm actions.

Your examples don't mesh with Gibson, making the sarcasm less biting and more....what's the word........confusing?

Stature isn't the only issue, but if you are projecting future health as part of the equation, slight stature + questionable arm action + trouble getting any bigger = issues.

[allstar1579]

The information I gave was that there are pitchers in the big leagues with slight frames who are dominant workhorses.

And yes, sarcasm is always needed. This board is full of sarcasm. Why did I just get called out for my little bit?

Sorry, but when you present your point to one of our draft experts in a way that makes it look like he could not possibly be right because of two examples of slight stature pitchers that are successful. He didn't say that if you are small you cannot possibly have success, so proving that there are smaller successful pitchers out there doesn't negate his point.

Anyways, just the way you said it came off kind of offensive like you were discounting one of the guys that knows the most about scouting and the draft because of the existence of smaller pitchers. Sorry about jumping on you, you just have to watch who you are seemingly calling out on their draft knowledge, especially when it's one of the most informed.

[Duke2010]

No, I totally get the sarcasm. What I missed was any other reason to remove Matzek from the conversation. To me, it makes his post nothing but pure, uneducated, conjecture.

I don't mean this as a slight to Roch, who I really like. I just think his post needs to be taken for what it is.

Yeah, I don't really understand is logic. He jokingly tosses Matzek aside for his name, but never really invites him back into the conversation. He's talks of Wheeler and Miller's mid-90s fastball, but Matzek flashes a mid-90s FB with 3 additional above average pitches.

If Matzek is available (and I pray that he is), I'd be very disappointed if we passed on him for Wheeler or Miller. I like both of these RHP's, but only if Matzek is off the board.

[dcterp]

Roch said at the top of hist post that this was for a mock draft for XM Radio. It's not his guess for whom the Orioles should or will select. I wouldn't take his dispatch of Matzek to mean anything.

[Big Mac]

Why hasn't there been more discussion about Purke?

How does he compare to guys like Turner, Wheeler and Miller?

Matzek is clearly the top HS arm for me, and I would love to grab him, but I'm curious about the other HS pitching options.

[Stotle]

Why hasn't there been more discussion about Purke?

How does he compare to guys like Turner, Wheeler and Miller?

Matzek is clearly the top HS arm for me, and I would love to grab him, but I'm curious about the other HS pitching options.

Talk on this board tends to center around what Baseball AMerica, Keith Law, etc. are writing about. Purke has been on the shelf for a while (since his HS season was cancelled) so he hasn't been written about much recently. So, he hasn't been talked about much, here.

There is word that he has a fairly strong commitment to TCU, which will require a hefty bonus even if he doesn't go until the mid-, late- or supplemental-1st round.