Jump to content

Looks like it will be Taillon or Machado


Recommended Posts

I agree he never makes its to FIU. Boras may be willing to send him to Juco but that is a calculated risk. I got a little loose with my words as far as being an "advanced" bat as you are right that much of that value is tied to his position as a SS. I supposed you could say the same about Colon, correct?

Yes, but Colon has a longer track record at short and is more physically developed. So you don't have "growth" as a concern to the same extent you do with Machado. He also has a history of success with the bat. So you can be a little more confident in projecting the bat (even if the ceiling is lower).

This isn't how every evaluator works, but it's how I (as an amateur) work and I have been told it's a common stance:

You need to identify ceiling, fall-back and floor. I have my own reasons that I can't share for feeling the way I do about Machado's fit with BAL, so I'll just stick to a general risk eval (this isn't my opinion):

Ceiling - ARod-lite (call it .300/25, solid defense at SS for a fair number of years even if he shifts later on)

Fall-back #1 - Body forces move to third - Little more pressure on the bat. If he hits his ceiling, still not an issue. If he ends-up .280/20 range, still decent.

Fall-back #2 - Bat doesn't develop - ends up .275/15 with solid average defense at shortstop. Still valuable and useful -- probably not an all-star but could have some nice seasons.

Floor - Defense bat don't develop - Third base with .275/15 isn't too valuable.

What would my thoughts be looking at this? I'm concerned that he doesn't have a better defensive fallback position. A HS shortstop like Lipka or Culver give you the chance to keep the glove in the middle of the field, which REALLY helps defray the risk associated with all prospects that the bat doesn't hit it's ceiling. For around a $6M investment, I'd want better fallbacks, as it looks to me like at least one of his aspects (defense or offense) have to get pretty close to ceiling for him to be a good MLer. I think there are better risks per dollar, not to mention this would limit the money BAL has to spend on talents later on in the draft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 37
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Of course, he is, especially if he stays at SS. That's a no-brainer. Of course, from what I've read, his power ceiling is probably higher than 15 homers. Some say he might have to go to 3rd if he fills out. Well, his strength and power might increase also. He does look like a kid who is going to fill out some and be pretty strong. Enough people think he can stick at SS, that I think he's worth the risk. Very few of these players are going to hit their ceilings, but Machado's seems to be as high as any others at the 3rd spot.

I am misunderstanding, I think. Let's clarify. Is your point that a #2 hitter can be worth $6M, or that if Machado doesn't become a #3/#4 he can still be worth $6M? They are different points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course, he is, especially if he stays at SS. That's a no-brainer. Of course, from what I've read, his power ceiling is probably higher than 15 homers. Some say he might have to go to 3rd if he fills out. Well, his strength and power might increase also. He does look like a kid who is going to fill out some and be pretty strong. Enough people think he can stick at SS, that I think he's worth the risk. Very few of these players are going to hit their ceilings, but Machado's seems to be as high as any others at the 3rd spot.

I think Machado would be a good pick...Judging by the way the Orioles develop hitters, I would prefer them to go with Colon but I certainly would be happy with the Machado pick.

I think the signing bonus is a weak argument myself...If he gets to the majors, its going to be pretty tough for him not to be worth 6 million and since we don't have a second rounder, I think you can spend more early.

That being said, I hope Taillon is the one who is there for us and I would prefer Colon over Machado...just because I don't have confidence in the O's, not because I dislike the pick or Machado himself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh boy, this kind of language is going to be tough to keep up with. lol

My point was that a solid, #2 hitting SS, is a very valuable commodity. The fact that he's not an exact replica of Derek Jeter was not my point. Nice try though. I thought we were moving on. This is a separate discussion from the Given's one. I won't bring any baggage to it if you won't but I certainly smell a lot of attitude already.

RZ, I am not trying to be difficult. But if you don't mean the comp just don't use it. It simplifies things, and there's really no reason to throw comps around if you don't mean them.

Would Machado be valuable at his general ceiling as a .300/20 HR shortstop with above-average defense? Yes. Would he be worth a $6M signing bonus? Sure -- I'm on board. Is that the "likely" outcome? I don't think so. Are his "fallbacks" likely to offer similar (though not the same) value? I'm dubious. I think if the offense comes up shy he will need to produce a high level of defense, and vice versa.

Matt Lipka could be a solid .280/15 HR shortstop. His fallback is easily as a centerfielder because of his big speed and good arm strength. If his bat and glove fall short I can still find some value in a very good defensive CFer. Not to mention I'm spending about 1/6th the amount (perhaps 1/12th) on Lipka that I am on Machado.

I don't think it's "waisted" money. But I do think it is not the best way to spend in this position. It isn't a disaster (to borrow my own word ;)) to spend on Machado, but I think his margin for error is slimmer than I'd like for someone who is looking to challenge the record signing bonus for a prep positional player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Machado just becomes a reall nice #2 hitter and stays at SS, it will have been worth the 6M signing bonus. Of course, that's not the hope. He's worth the signing bonus now because that scenario would be a little disappointing. He's worth 6M because he has a decent chance to become a power hitting SS. Are you saying that James Taillon is not worth 6M if he winds up becoming a 3rd starter?

I think Taillon is 1) more likely to hit his ceiling, and 2) has a more valuable fallback.

I'd feel differently if I saw potential for Machado to go to 2nd or CF. There wouldn't be as much pressure on his bat. But if he moves off of short you are stuck relying on big offensive development. This is why you see middle-of-the-diamond prepsters being more highly-sought than corner prepsters. It's like this in recruiting, as well. One college recruiter I do some scouting for tells me he doesn't even want a write-up or a corner HSer. Now, that's extreme. But the point is that a corner player loses his usefulness quickly once one aspect of his game doesn't come along. Machado would not be considered a Top 5 talent were he a 3B right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Machado would be a good pick...Judging by the way the Orioles develop hitters, I would prefer them to go with Colon but I certainly would be happy with the Machado pick.

I think the signing bonus is a weak argument myself...If he gets to the majors, its going to be pretty tough for him not to be worth 6 million and since we don't have a second rounder, I think you can spend more early.

That being said, I hope Taillon is the one who is there for us and I would prefer Colon over Machado...just because I don't have confidence in the O's, not because I dislike the pick or Machado himself.

Maybe this is because you haven't thought about the 3rd - 5th Round talent and what they are asking for. You realize $6M will leave money for maybe two STRONG overslots and some more of those low six figure guys BAL loaded up on last year.

Is this a solid strategy for you because you don't think the kids asking for 2nd Round money are worth it? I may be off, but my sense is that you just aren't concerned with the picks past round 1. That's fine -- I don't expect you to research a bunch of HS kids. But I do hope Jordan is taking a more global view of the draft (and I of course believe he is). If he is taking Machado it's because he believes he can be a good defensive shortstop that could hit #3 in a future O's line-up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by Stotle

He better be a #3/#4 hitter if you're giving him his asking price.

Maybe some people won't dissect it to death like you did. The question posed or the point made was that he'd better become a 3-4 hitter for that type of bonus. Derek Jeter is a SS. Derek Jeter is conisdered a really good #2 hitter. Manny Machado is a SS. If Manny Machado becomes a really good #2 hitter, he'll have two things in common with Derke Jeter. End of comparison. The fact that they wear different brands of underwear or whatever, might make it a bad comp to some people. :laughlol:

I've thought out my responses and have given what I consider to be respectful posts to further this discussion. I'm not getting into this type of exchange with you. I love the draft, high school baseball and projecting kids. I have better ways to enjoy that hobby than getting into a snark contest with you. "Moved on from Givens" indeed, RZ. Weak sauce....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe this is because you haven't thought about the 3rd - 5th Round talent and what they are asking for. You realize $6M will leave money for maybe two STRONG overslots and some more of those low six figure guys BAL loaded up on last year.

Is this a solid strategy for you because you don't think the kids asking for 2nd Round money are worth it? I may be off, but my sense is that you just aren't concerned with the picks past round 1. That's fine -- I don't expect you to research a bunch of HS kids. But I do hope Jordan is taking a more global view of the draft (and I of course believe he is). If he is taking Machado it's because he believes he can be a good defensive shortstop that could hit #3 in a future O's line-up.

A 6M bonus shouldn't stop them from spending big later in the draft.

I gotta think Taillon will require a big bonus as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A 6M bonus shouldn't stop them from spending big later in the draft.

I gotta think Taillon will require a big bonus as well.

Right. For me personally, I think Taillon's risk is less than that of Machado's. So, I am fine with the idea of $7M for Taillon and the fact that I probably only get one "high" six-figure overslot. This is because I feel very comfortable with a draft class headed by Taillon. I consider Machado the third best HS bat in the draft, so if he shifts off of short he's down in the 17-25 range for me. I know that's a minority opinion, but it is what it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You must feel pretty certain he won't stick at SS because you have him rated #10, right?

I think he's the third best HS bat. Were he a 3B I think he fits better in the range I have Josh Sale -- somewhere between 17-25. I think he may stick at SS, but there are other bats I prefer. Were he a surefire SS or at least had 2B/CF as a fallback, he'd be top 5 for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think he's the third best HS bat. Were he a 3B I think he fits better in the range I have Josh Sale -- somewhere between 17-25. I think he may stick at SS, but there are other bats I prefer. Were he a surefire SS or at least had 2B/CF as a fallback, he'd be top 5 for me.

So for you, the difference in range hinges on his ability to stick at SS? Otherwise, you have no problem with him listed as top 5 talent?

I think I understand the point your making on the signing bonus and the risk profile. Correct me if I'm mistaken, but your saying that $6 million is a poor risk allocation since it will consume so much of the overall draft budget and if you are going to tie up that much it needs to be for a guy that profiles as a #3/#4 type hitter. Is this correct? From a pure methodology of how most teams approach the draft I think this is a point that has a lot of merit.

Whereas, SG and RZNJ appear to be looking at the value as being a relative bargain if he reaches this #2 hitter value at the MLB level. I'll add that any draftee that reaches the bigs and settles in as a #2 hitter is of value from this standpoint. Not to mention, SG deeming it irrelevant since the $6 million should not stop them from spending big in other rounds regardless (though he should know better than this :laughlol:).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course, Taillon and even some others are probably going to require the 6M or more at #3.

I get it. I think. I would certainly be ok with Taillon at #3 if he's there. Speaking of risk though, you might have more risk of Machado reaching his ceiling (SS 3-4 hitter) than Taillon, but with Taillon, as with any pitcher, we have the health risks. When talking bottom ceiling for a pitcher, we have to take into acount a career threatening/ending arm injury. Certainly more injury risk with a pitcher. I don't think anyone would argue that.

Right. I was attempting to flush out the differences in respective positions as I sensed you guys were debating from varying plains. Your correct that the risk profile for a pitcher has to include career threatening injury, nevertheless, taillon does profile as a bona fide TOR pitcher so in that regard your paying the huge above slot bonus because you expect to get more (TOR pitcher v. #2 hitter) when all is said and done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So for you, the difference in range hinges on his ability to stick at SS? Otherwise, you have no problem with him listed as top 5 talent?

I think I understand the point your making on the signing bonus and the risk profile. Correct me if I'm mistaken, but your saying that $6 million is a poor risk allocation since it will consume so much of the overall draft budget and if you are going to tie up that much it needs to be for a guy that profiles as a #3/#4 type hitter. Is this correct? From a pure methodology of how most teams approach the draft I think this is a point that has a lot of merit.

Whereas, SG and RZNJ appear to be looking at the value as being a relative bargain if he reaches this #2 hitter value at the MLB level. I'll add that any draftee that reaches the bigs and settles in as a #2 hitter is of value from this standpoint. Not to mention, SG deeming it irrelevant since the $6 million should not stop them from spending big in other rounds regardless (though he should know better than this :laughlol:).

Yeah, this is pretty much it. I agree with using "value" to determine if a pick was a "bust". But that is a depressingly low bar to set. You honestly just need any kid to reach the majors and stay there for a few years for him to technically be "worth" his bonus. But that isn't how you build a strong organization. And drafting defensively (not to have a bust) is going to mean that you are losing out on a lot of talents. If you are consistently busting on "high risk" guys, you need better scouts and better analysts, not an aversion to taking some kids that may be seemingly more risky.

The specific issue I have with the "#2" analysis for Machado is that if you look at the kid, his game doesn't look like it's going to develop into that type of profile. I think a #6 hitter manning 3B is more likely, but of course that's just opinion. I agree that the potential ceiling is huge -- but my personal feeling is that 1) the risk is much bigger than is being acknowledged by the mainstream sources covering the draft and 2) the difference between ceiling and his fallback projection is much greater than I'd generally like to see if I'm investing around 2/3rds of my entire draft budget into the player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, this is pretty much it. I agree with using "value" to determine if a pick was a "bust". But that is a depressingly low bar to set. You honestly just need any kid to reach the majors and stay there for a few years for him to technically be "worth" his bonus. But that isn't how you build a strong organization. And drafting defensively (not to have a bust) is going to mean that you are losing out on a lot of talents. If you are consistently busting on "high risk" guys, you need better scouts and better analysts, not an aversion to taking some kids that may be seemingly more risky.

The specific issue I have with the "#2" analysis for Machado is that if you look at the kid, his game doesn't look like it's going to develop into that type of profile. I think a #6 hitter manning 3B is more likely, but of course that's just opinion. I agree that the potential ceiling is huge -- but my personal feeling is that 1) the risk is much bigger than is being acknowledged by the mainstream sources covering the draft and 2) the difference between ceiling and his fallback projection is much greater than I'd generally like to see if I'm investing around 2/3rds of my entire draft budget into the player.

Great analysis as I agree on all points. :laughlol: Time will tell. I agree the mainstream sources are kicking the hype into overdrive (as they usually do) with these guys, espcially regarding Machado. I just finished listening to Buster Olney describe him (again) as ARod-lite. This stuff rubs me the wrong way as it starts to take on a life of its own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • Posts

    • If Buck O’Neil were there yesterday, he’d tell Roch about how he heard a sound that he’d never heard before. And it was Babe Ruth hitting that ball. And then he didn’t hear it again until a few years later, and it was Josh Gibson hitting that ball. Then he didn’t hear it again until it was Bo Jackson hitting that ball. And then he didn’t hear it again until it was Kyle Stowers hitting that ball. 
    • Updated through leap year game. - Mateo keeps getting SS starts but no outfield time. - Basallo takes BP - Yennier Cano has been put on a milk carton - McKenna hitless while battling for a spot - Holliday has first good game at the plate - Burnes struggles - Kimbrel, Coulombe and Webb all scored upon. (Bullpen not looking strong in early going)  
    • Everyone excited about hot starts this spring.  Meanwhile, not a peep about Jorge who’s crushing the ball right now.   Looks like he’s in mid April form.   Jorge, if only this could last longer than a few weeks or a month or two.   When Jorge doesn’t commit too early he’s a dangerous (I didn’t say good) hitter.   He must drive the hitting coaches crazy.
    • Basallo stands a good chance to get some at bats too.
    • Roch: Kyle Stowers broke camp with the Orioles last spring. He’s trying to bust up every mock Opening Day roster that doesn’t include him. Stowers hit his second left-on-left home run today, this time against Bailey Falter, and it was an absolute missile - launched to right-center field at a sound that hurt eardrums. In his next at-bat, Stowers singled into center field against left-hander Ryan Borucki. It’s becoming a trend going back to live batting practice. Stowers held at 2-for-2 after his free pass in the sixth. The media again wanted to grill him about his success versus southpaws. "I'm surprised you don't wanna talk about the walk against the righty," he quipped. "I honestly haven't been seeing as many righties so far for whatever reason. As you guys know, I've been having a little more success against the lefties thus far, and so I was really happy to have that at-bat against the righty. Like I said, I feel confident against both lefties and righties, but it was nice to have a successful, positive result against the righty." Stowers has done a nice job staying on the ball against left-handers and erasing the advantage. "Left-on-left, I think most guys would tell you you're kind of forced to stay on it a little bit longer and it kind of cleans up a lot of lefties mechanically because of what you have to do to have success. ... Just not giving up on that front side." The outfield competition got a whole lot more interesting with Stowers' return to it after going 2-for-30 with the Orioles last year and injuring his right shoulder and fracturing his nose on a hit-by-pitch at Triple-A. He said his spring so far is "OK, I think it could be better." "I love what I'm doing in my work, I love what I'm doing off the field," he said. "I feel like I'm working really hard. Obviously, we all want the results to be better, but I'm really happy with the process I've been putting in and just have to stick to it."
    • I wonder if Lorenzen has some sort of injury that’s preventing him to sign?  Snell and Montgomery both want $30 million a year. Clevinger and Bauer have DV/SA issues. After looking into it, it looks like the only reason Clevinger pitched last year was because he signed his FA deal before the allegations came out.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...