Keith Law on Machado

[Stotle]

Might just be something about his release point. Have you seen him live Stotle? Everything I've seen is video and you just can't get the same read from that.

Yes, I've seen Taillon live. He flashes some in the back and brings up early. He can clean some of it up -- I wouldn't think it's the type of thing you are supremely concerned with when it comes to a coachable 18 year old with plus stuff, but Law has a background in this. I'm sure you can find plenty of evaluators that agree with Law, and plenty that think it's a bogus knock.

[allstar1579]

Yes, I've seen Taillon live. He flashes some in the back and brings up early. He can clean some of it up -- I wouldn't think it's the type of thing you are supremely concerned with when it comes to a coachable 18 year old with plus stuff, but Law has a background in this. I'm sure you can find plenty of evaluators that agree with Law, and plenty that think it's a bogus knock.

Yeah, I thought you did. I figured you would have said something if it was something that glaringly obvious. I mean, I've heard people say that a guy has a "hittable" fastball or not enough life to it, but seemed a bit odd. I mean, is he having a lot of his pitches fouled off or something? Weird terminology choice from Law of all people, then again, I know I tend to disagree with him once or twice a season, so who knows.

I'd be more interested to see how many of those people that would agree with Law that said the same thing before Law came out and said it. Not trying to say that there are a lot of "lemmings" in the industry or anything, but especially with digital media these days it seems like one guy will come out and say something and then there are a ton of people that suddenly agree. I just know a lot of people that are GLOWING about this kid, this is really the first negative I've heard at all. Eh, who knows, I'm sure more will be said over the next 8 weeks.

[Stotle]

Yeah, I thought you did. I figured you would have said something if it was something that glaringly obvious. I mean, I've heard people say that a guy has a "hittable" fastball or not enough life to it, but seemed a bit odd. I mean, is he having a lot of his pitches fouled off or something? Weird terminology choice from Law of all people, then again, I know I tend to disagree with him once or twice a season, so who knows.

I'd be more interested to see how many of those people that would agree with Law that said the same thing before Law came out and said it. Not trying to say that there are a lot of "lemmings" in the industry or anything, but especially with digital media these days it seems like one guy will come out and say something and then there are a ton of people that suddenly agree. I just know a lot of people that are GLOWING about this kid, this is really the first negative I've heard at all. Eh, who knows, I'm sure more will be said over the next 8 weeks.

He has had a couple of starts this spring where teams squared him up some. I guess I'd point to the summer/fall where he faced some of the best competition in the nation and had little trouble. Granted, multiple looks over a game will expose this weakness some, but I'm not sure it's a huge deal. Also, didn't Law rank him second anyway? I think he's just pointing out something that hasn't been written about (or that he thinks will be an issue that affects his chances for success). I don't see it as Law panning Taillon.

[allstar1579]

He has had a couple of starts this spring where teams squared him up some. I guess I'd point to the summer/fall where he faced some of the best competition in the nation and had little trouble. Granted, multiple looks over a game will expose this weakness some, but I'm not sure it's a huge deal. Also, didn't Law rank him second anyway? I think he's just pointing out something that hasn't been written about (or that he thinks will be an issue that affects his chances for success). I don't see it as Law panning Taillon.

I didn't actually read it, but I thought he bumped him down to 4th because of it. I'm just nit-picking really I guess, I know something negative had to be said about the kid eventually. Heck, I liked Cole more than him in the beginning. Just been hearing a lot of really great things about J.T. from some really high up guys in MLB.

[Arthur_Bryant]

didn't Law rank him second anyway?

Taillon #4, Machado #2

http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2115432&postcount=10

Totally agree w/allstar1579 on the Internet reverb effect.

[Stotle]

Taillon #4, Machado #2

http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2115432&postcount=10

Totally agree w/allstar1579 on the Internet reverb effect.

Oh, thanks AB. I guess I remembered him saying Taillon is the best prep arm and assumed he'd be second based on my own feelings that other than Harper the absolute top talent is on the mound this year. Regardless, you can argue for a fair amount of machinations of a top 10 and have strong arguments for each. As long as you have an argument, I think any multitude of evaluational rankings are legit.

I agree with reverb as relates to the blogosphere. I also wouldn't be surprised if the "talkative" scouts tended to speak to multiple sources. Shrug -- fortunately guys like you understand the effect and will read critically.

[Stotle]

I didn't actually read it, but I thought he bumped him down to 4th because of it. I'm just nit-picking really I guess, I know something negative had to be said about the kid eventually. Heck, I liked Cole more than him in the beginning. Just been hearing a lot of really great things about J.T. from some really high up guys in MLB.

Yeah, I see no issue with Law making this point -- certainly a defensible critique, and I would assume he has good reason to make this a sticking point. I would counter that Pomeranz has command issues and lesser raw stuff, and that Machado is as much projection as anything else (making him a pretty risky #2 pick), but those are all just opinions, as well. Keith usually provides his thinking, and I think does a decent job of explaining his position. It's not ALWAYS the case, but generally I think he's good about this.

[waroriole]

I've always felt Machado will get the nod at #3... unless Angelos meddles again and makes us take Pomeranz because he likes college arms.

What?? That makes absolutely no sense, but I'm not surprised.

[clapdiddy]

What?? That makes absolutely no sense, but I'm not surprised.

Angelos (reportedly) is the reason we took Wade Townsend a few years back. He wanted a college arm and went against what the people who know a little more about baseball wanted to do in the draft.

[Stotle]

Angelos (reportedly) is the reason we took Wade Townsend a few years back. He wanted a college arm and went against what the people who know a little more about baseball wanted to do in the draft.

Come on, clip. That was six drafts ago and before Jordan was SD. I think it's pushing it to use that in relation to any argument pertaining to the draft now.

[Oriolesfan8]

1) Nats - Harper

2) Pirates - Machado

3) Orioles - Taillon

Some interesting tidbits in there:

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=10704

[mex-bird]

1) Nats - Harper

2) Pirates - Machado

3) Orioles - Taillon

Some interesting tidbits in there:

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=10704

This is a VERY likely scenario, and one i wouldn't be upset about.

[ChaosLex]

This is a VERY likely scenario, and one i wouldn't be upset about.

That's the nice thing about picking #3 this year. At least one of these guys will still be on the board.

[Stotle]

1) Nats - Harper

2) Pirates - Machado

3) Orioles - Taillon

Some interesting tidbits in there:

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=10704

I know Goldstein relies on sources, so I'm actually pretty happy that the "take from scouts" matches-up with what I've been writing (for the most part). Agree with the questions on Machado and Ranaudo dropping. I would also say his source in CLE is very good.

Disagree with his stat analysis on Choice. You can bring up walks totals (I guess) but there is no one else scary in that line-up, and the couple games I saw this spring of UT-Arlington, most of what was thrown to Choice wasn't even close. Agree he moves well and could possibly profile to RF, but think his arm is decent, not great, for right. fringe plus for me.

[mcgraw238]

I know Goldstein relies on sources, so I'm actually pretty happy that the "take from scouts" matches-up with what I've been writing (for the most part). Agree with the questions on Machado and Ranaudo dropping. I would also say his source in CLE is very good.

Disagree with his stat analysis on Choice. You can bring up walks totals (I guess) but there is no one else scary in that line-up, and the couple games I saw this spring of UT-Arlington, most of what was thrown to Choice wasn't even close. Agree he moves well and could possibly profile to RF, but think his arm is decent, not great, for right. fringe plus for me.

I hope things develop as Goldstein suggests. I'd like to stuff the system with another elite caliber arm. I think the time may be approaching where AM has to deal from the pitching depth to improve the offense.