Grade the first 20 rounds

[JTrea81]

I got a hunch we're going to spend some major dollars during the international signing period....

That would be a refreshing change.

[Stotle]

Are people even reading the descriptions while complaining about picking the guys who slipped?

Tolliver - fifth round - 146 overall - per BA - had chance to go in top 89

Harris - 8th round - could go in the first five rounds for a team that likes his bat

Berry - 9th round - seen as supplemental first round less than three months ago

Cowan - 10th round - potential second rounder in fall, now a fourth to sixth rounder

Ohman - 11th round - could go in fourth to sixth round range

Joe Jordan has drafted PLENTY of talent that slipped - just not what people perceive as the expensive first round guys who slipped. It's my opinion, but I believe there is better value in scooping up the guys JJ did draft.

I'm completely open to Jordan's selections, and I generally like the guys he drafted that I have seen. But don't you sort of then have to consider these:

Summarized rom BA:

Max Stassi - Available in 4th Round - Listed as first round talent, exceptionally advanced hitter capable of using the whole field and has above-average bat speed. Defensively, scouts agree that Stassi should have no difficulty remaining behind the plate.

Madison Younginer - Available through 7th Round - Could go from 1st to 3rd round.

Brody Colvin - Available through 7th Round - Fastballs up to 94 mph, and more velocity remaining in 6-foot-4, 190-pound frame. Scouts project that he'll sit at 92-94 mph and touch 96 once he fills out. Colvin's fastball dances and sinks so much that he has trouble controlling it. His No. 2 pitch is a hard curveball with 11-to-5 break that can be unhittable at times.

Ian Krol - Available through 7th Round - projected as a possible third-rounder at the start of the season

ANdrew Susac - Available through the early teen rounds - Susac's catch and throw skills alone will carry him into the early rounds of the draft.

I understand your point -- and I think we need to see who signs and for how much -- but it's a bit much to not allow folks to question why some of these other guys weren't targeted when they ended up coming off the board around the same time.

Again, this is completely independent of whether or not the Baltimore picks work out. I think had one of these supposed "top talents" been selected, the fallout wouldn't be as passionate from some posters.

Subbing out one of the 4-12th round picks for someone like Younginer, Stewart, Colvin or Cain would have meant a lot to some, I think.

[hoosiers]

but it's a bit much to not allow folks to question why some of these other guys weren't targeted when they ended up coming off the board around the same time.

When did I do this?

[Stotle]

When did I do this?

That's how this rubbed me:

Are people even reading the descriptions while complaining about picking the guys who slipped?

[Lucky Jim]

I will not really attempt to grade them too seriously until after a year or 2, but one thing I do question is the confidence people have with Jordan.

Not exactly hard to pick a Wieters or Matusz...Some act as though this guy is an Ozzie Newsome type evaluator and that we should 100% give him the benefit of the doubt.

I don't think Jordan is some joke but he's not in the very top of his profession like some are suggesting in my opinion.

Interesting. And what do you base your opinion on?

He's been here for how long? And how many rungs of the ladder has this organization climbed? (Of course, we need to regress that to account for the trades.)

[Miller192]

I will not really attempt to grade them too seriously until after a year or 2, but one thing I do question is the confidence people have with Jordan.

Not exactly hard to pick a Wieters or Matusz...Some act as though this guy is an Ozzie Newsome type evaluator and that we should 100% give him the benefit of the doubt.

I don't think Jordan is some joke but he's not in the very top of his profession like some are suggesting in my opinion.

Not saying you are, but grading an NFL draft is completely different than grading an MLB draft.

NFL players are always going to be alot closer to contributing than an MLB draftee.

I don't know how anyone can grade a MLB draft and give someone an A or and F when that grade can't truly be reached for years down the line.

[hoosiers]

That's how this rubbed me:

People were taking issue that we did not take guys who slipped when, in fact, we did. We drafted several of them. That's all.

I do not see how I denied or did "not allow folks to question" why other players were not targeted instead.

[Stotle]

People were taking issue that we did not take guys who slipped when, in fact, we did. We drafted several of them. That's all.

I do not see how I denied or did "not allow folks to question" why other players were not targeted instead.

I didn't mean to offend you. I think my point was more along the lines of the players that dropped weren't necessarily considered the "top" players that dropped -- and I think that's what some were counting on (right or wrong) when Baltimore went with Hobgood at 1:5.

Further the point, to see teams like OAK, TAM, PIT go after these guys raises some eyebrows (mine included) regarding how much they are really asking for and how signable they are. It would be odd to me that OAK would spend a single-digit pick on Krol if he isn't quite signable. Stassi I understand in that OAK didn't have a second round pick, so MAYBE his asking price isn't too high over what they would have otherwise selected there plus what they would otherwise have selected 4th.

[hoosiers]

We'll see how it goes. Joe Jordan has a budget and was working off the same bonus demand information the other scouting directors were privy to.

These past two drafts are pure Joe Jordan, IMO. He takes his guys and some of them are way out of line with national consensus (or so that's the speculation by the national media) - and he takes those guys he likes a bit early perhaps - like with Townsend and Henry, but those are the guys he really wanted and if he overdrafts - that's fine. Then, around rounds five or six, he circles back and starts picking off guys who slipped - kind of drafting in reverse.

The whole thing is a crapshoot. The biggest care I have is the spend above slot in total after the fifth round on multiple guys as I think that's where the additional talent and value is really gathered relative to other teams.

It's ironic that some people like Pittsburgh's draft after they took the catcher in the first round. They had the same idea as Joe Jordan (try to get value and savings for later with that first round pick) and yet we picked up a substantially better prospect, IMO.

[Stotle]

We'll see how it goes. Joe Jordan has a budget and was working off the same bonus demand information the other scouting directors were privy to.

These past two drafts are pure Joe Jordan, IMO. He takes his guys and some of them are way out of line with national consensus (or so that's the speculation by the national media) - and he takes those guys he likes a bit early perhaps - like with Townsend and Henry, but those are the guys he really wanted and if he overdrafts - that's fine. Then, around rounds five or six, he circles back and starts picking off guys who slipped - kind of drafting in reverse.

The whole thing is a crapshoot. The biggest care I have is the spend above slot in total after the fifth round on multiple guys as I think that's where the additional talent and value is really gathered relative to other teams.

It's ironic that some people like Pittsburgh's draft after they took the catcher in the first round. They had the same idea as Joe Jordan (try to get value and savings for later with that first round pick) and yet we picked up a substantially better prospect, IMO.

I think it's because some of the PIT prep pitchers had slightly more heat around them. Generally, I agree with what you say, though I don't think this style is "Joe Jordan". I think it's "good drafting". The Red Sox do this every year and arguably do it better than anyone (getting talent past the fifth round).

[Lucky Jim]

I think it's because some of the PIT prep pitchers had slightly more heat around them. Generally, I agree with what you say, though I don't think this style is "Joe Jordan". I think it's "good drafting". The Red Sox do this every year and arguably do it better than anyone (getting talent past the fifth round).

I'm interested to see how this year plays out. It seems like there were some counter-intuitive or counter-consensus choices, and that's both scary (what if we're wrong?) and exciting (what if we have a guy w/ a great, singular nose for talent?).

We'll see.

I've come around on Hobgood - I like his package. And if they don't think fitness is an issue, then I think we could have something good. I mean, how many guys carry that kind of stuff late in games?

He's a workhorse already.

[JTrea81]

The whole thing is a crapshoot. The biggest care I have is the spend above slot in total after the fifth round on multiple guys as I think that's where the additional talent and value is really gathered relative to other teams.

And in this draft, we are barely doing just that, much less than previous drafts under Jordan.

There is no Arrieta or Bundy in this bunch of picks this year IMO.

BP has apparently been knocking this entire draft as "leaning cheap," and I'd agree as there is no reason for it. The Orioles are blowing an opportunity to augment their system with some serious talent.

Jordan will hopefully have a "Hail Mary" pick somewhere in Day three because this is his worst draft since he's been Scouting Director IMO.

[mikezpen]

First day - B

Second day - D

We could have gone after more talented players for above slot money in the second day. Signability was too much of a factor in this draft IMO.

I'll say C first day and C- for the second.Givens is obviously a great talent, but we need that shortstop of the future sometime before 2015. And I still don't like Hobgood's weight. I love the third pick but not the first two.

The second day there are just too many reaches. Too many guys with injury histories, too many HS or junior college types, not many college guys with track records.Very little hitting. Very little.

I also sense the dreaded word "signability" here. That equals "cheap" which equals "Angelos sitting on his wallet again". Under the curcumstances, maybe Jordan did as well as he could.

Hope I'm wrong here

[BaltimoreFan]

These quotes from a thread last year after Avery and Matusz were the two top draft picks,

Boy, this draft is not going as I wanted at all.

I don't like this pick at all...Too many better prospects there for them to take a project right here, especially one who sounds like another Lorenzo Scott/Darnell McDonald guy.

Not to mention our hitting instruction sucks in the minors. We don't need another "project."

Not a good draft so far...

I'm not trying to mock anyone, and questioning moves made by a front office is fine, but virtually no one on this board knows anything about the high school/college kids, and therefore the vast majority of opinions on the draft are irrelevant.

Don't be down on our selections this year simply because a few guys with laptops can play Monday morning quarterback with absolutely no legitimate insight.

There are definitely quality posts about the ML club, but in regards to the draft, most discussion here, outside of the first hand/professional opinions, is meaningless.

Just because a similarly toolsy prospect failed ten years ago doesn't mean that a particular player taken in 2008, whom no one has ever seen, is at all comparable.

Joe Jordan and his staff know the strengths and weaknesses of our system/player development, not hardcore internet fanatics.

[Tony-OH]

I will not really attempt to grade them too seriously until after a year or 2, but one thing I do question is the confidence people have with Jordan.

Not exactly hard to pick a Wieters or Matusz...Some act as though this guy is an Ozzie Newsome type evaluator and that we should 100% give him the benefit of the doubt.

I don't think Jordan is some joke but he's not in the very top of his profession like some are suggesting in my opinion.

Well, everyone is allowed an opinion but I would tell you that people in the industry would disagree with you.