Number 16 Prospect: SS - Mychal Givens

[Stotle]

This guy was projected to be a definite first rounder and some scouts thought top ten pick going into the year. 8th or 9th pick? Come on... you don't fall from first round to 9th. Are there questions about his bat and glove? Sure. But this was a fine second round pick. If he totally flails at SS and with the bat for 3 years, we have an instant closer who can reach 97 MPH.

Great pick.

Yeah, starting to develop him on the mound at 23 would be far from instant, I think. Also, if they adjust his arm action (as Craw suggested above) there is really no telling how his velocity would be affected.

[LookinUp]

Yeah, even though he wasn't drafted as a pitcher, it is obvious that is the back up plan, and no pitchers from HS that throw into the upper 90's will drop that low unless injury or signability is a factor.

He has the tools of a 2nd rounder, no doubt, the problem is that he IS project. Other teams took more safer prospects in the 2nd round whose skills are more refined, and its mroe obvious what kind of prospect you have with them. With Givens, it is going to take some time to mold him, but if we put in the time, it seems that he could turn into something great. He could also go the opposite way and falter. Personally I will be interested to see how he does vs. Avery and even Hoes at other levels. Also Michael Ohlman and Kyle Hoppy will be good ones to compare Givens' successes with IMO just because theyare both out hitters out of HS.

Well said. Jordan seems to value the potential to be a major difference maker over the more sure thing who doesn't really have much upside. Considering that we only have a 25 man ML roster, and we get 50 draft picks every year, I think it's a smart strategy. It certainly carries a significant downside risk though.

[Stotle]

Well said. Jordan seems to value the potential to be a major difference maker over the more sure thing who doesn't really have much upside. Considering that we only have a 25 man ML roster, and we get 50 draft picks every year, I think it's a smart strategy. It certainly carries a significant downside risk though.

It isn't central to your post, I guess, but I'd disagree that the 25 picks that followed Givens in the second round are sure things that don't have much upside. It isn't like Givens was the only high upside guy left and Jordan decided that was worth more than the less talented, safer options.

[thundercleetz]

Does anyone have any scouting reports on Adam Jones when he was drafted? I would like to compare what was said about Adam in comparison to Givens. Jones was drafted in similar area (I think he was a first round comp. pick) and was a shortstop. Givens has Adam's build, and I am sure Jones was not the most polished hitter coming out of high school either. I just see a lot of Adam Jones in Givens. Yes, Adam was moved off of short, but not because he outgrew the position, but because there was organizational depth. Jones might have been able to handle the position had he stayed there.

[Stotle]

Does anyone have any scouting reports on Adam Jones when he was drafted? I would like to compare what was said about Adam in comparison to Givens. Jones was drafted in similar area (I think he was a first round comp. pick) and was a shortstop. Givens has Adam's build, and I am sure Jones was not the most polished hitter coming out of high school either. I just see a lot of Adam Jones in Givens. Yes, Adam was moved off of short, but not because he outgrew the position, but because there was organizational depth. Jones might have been able to handle the position had he stayed there.

One big difference is that Jones didn't turn 18 until August of his first pro year, while Givens turned 19 this May.

That said, there are similarities. Both were shortstops that many thought would play better as pitchers. Both were considered good athletes. There are some pretty big differences, though. Givens's arm action is not as clean as Jones's was, in the field or off the mound. Jones projected to good power right off the bat and had a fairly sound swing, mechanically. Givens doesn't hit or project for much power and his swing needs some clean-up. Both were a bit raw in their approach and strikezone command.

I think Jones outgrew shortstop, even if he moved a little prematurely in the Mariners system. I also think he'd agree he's much better in centerfield than he could have been at shortstop.

But I think it's an interesting comparison to keep in mind -- thanks for pointing it out.

EDIT -- I re-read and realized I was coming off as way to "this is how it is" in my comparison. That is just my take on the two. I could be off, and I'm sure there are others (particularly more skilled evaluators) who would disagree with some or all of what I said. These are just my thoughts on Jones vs Givens.