How Much Does the Hobgood Pick Affect Your Opinion of Joe Jordan?

[Art Wing]

I'm not trying to take away from the good discussion in the other Hobgood thread but I'm curious how much this one pick influences your overall opinion of Joe Jordan.

Is the power of one vastly unpopular and likely failed pick enough for you to look past Jordan's entire body of work? Yes? No? Somewhere in between?

Keep in mind, I'm well aware of the inherent risk any prospect holds to produce and succeed at the major league level but it was pretty clear at the time Jordan isolated himself with such a risky choice. I believe Frobby said something along the lines of Jordan would eventually either look like a genius or a failure.

How much does this one pick shadow Jordan's career? Anyone calling for his head or do you give him a pass?

[Can_of_corn]

It certainly does color it. To me two of his picks were no brainers, Wieters and Machado. I do think he made the right call with Matusz. Obviously the Arrieta pick was a huge hit, but overall I am not highly impressed with the results of his picks after the first round.

Overall I feel pretty meh about him, he certainly doesn't appear to be much better or much worse at his job then league average.

[JDubs]

For me, it will depend on how good Matzek ends up being. I know drafting is hit or miss, but misses such as the Rowell/Lincecum debacle (an example only) cannot be forgiven. On the other hand, if Matzek busts, then I can get over it pretty easily.

Matzek will likely fall somewhere in the vast space between bust and Lincecum caliber, so that will determine just how bitter I will be about the pick.

[Art Wing]

but misses such as the Rowell/Lincecum debacle (an example only) cannot be forgiven.

Although the Rowell pick looks to have failed he was aligning himself more with the general consensus of experts with being so high on Rowell. With the Hobgood pick, he was pretty much alone.

[JDubs]

Although the Rowell pick looks to have failed he was aligning himself more with the general consensus of experts with being so high on Rowell. With the Hobgood pick, he was pretty much alone.

I agree and that is a factor that magnifies the level of fail if Hobgood busts and Matzek does not.

[eb45]

I'm probably alone on this, but if he wasn't injured, I'm not sure I wouldn't still rather have Hobgood than Matzek or Green at this point in time based only on the stats. Matzek's walk rate is very alarming, as is Green's K rate. Hobgood isn't getting a ton of Ks himself, but his GB rate is outstanding, even without his best stuff. Given the choice between Green's discipline or Matzek's control improving, or Hobgood regaining his HS velocity, I could be persuaded to bet on Hobgood. Of course, if I had the choice to not bet, I'd take that before any of the three options.

That's not to say Hobgood was the right pick, but Matzek might not have been either, especially factoring in the latter's exorbitant bonus demands. If I was redrafting the Hobgood pick, I would probably take Leake or Turner based on 2010 stats.

[JDubs]

I'm probably alone on this, but if he wasn't injured, I'm not sure I wouldn't still rather have Hobgood than Matzek or Green at this point in time based only on the stats. Matzek's walk rate is very alarming, as is Green's K rate. Hobgood isn't getting a ton of Ks himself, but his GB rate is outstanding, even without his best stuff. Given the choice between Green's discipline or Matzek's control improving, or Hobgood regaining his HS velocity, I could be persuaded to bet on Hobgood. Of course, if I had the choice to not bet, I'd take that before any of the three options.

That's not to say Hobgood was the right pick, but Matzek might not have been either, especially factoring in the latter's exorbitant bonus demands. If I was redrafting the Hobgood pick, I would probably take Leake or Turner based on 2010 stats.

I'm not sure if I would prefer Hobgood over Matzek right now, but my point dovetails with yours. I've been using Matzek as the example because he was the logical alternative to Hobgood. This way we can avoid revisionist history by comparing Hobgood to the pitcher who fared the best in 2010, but which we never considered drafting or were very long shots (i.e. Leake or Turner).

If both our first (Hobgood) and second (Matzek, presumably) choices both bust, then which cares which one we drafted or who was the consensus pick.

[Stotle]

At the time, I liked Shelby Miller's best of the HS pitchers and he, arguably, put up the best numbers of the HS pitchers last year. To answer the OP, I think first round picks are certainly important, and if Hobgood doesn't develop, then Jordan has whiffed on two pretty high first round picks in Rowell and Hobgood. Of course, that hurts his overall reputation, especially when considering that Jordan has more personal input on those picks. On lower round picks, even within the top ten, I"m guessing that he's relying almost exclusively on his scouts and their reports. The really high picks are the ones that he goes to personally check out.

Overall, I think the Jordan era has been pretty solid overall, with most top 5 round picks moving through the system. Unfortunately, we haven't had that Matt Kemp or Ryan Howard type pick, a later rounder, that really hits it big. In the end, I think Jordan's last three drafts are going to really sway my opinion of him one way or the other. A lot depnds on Avery, Hoes, Givens, Hobgood, Henry, Machado, Klein, etc. If Jordan comes away from those drafts without any real difference makers then I'll declare him a disappointment as scouting director.

Good call on Miller. I had him behind Matzek and Wheeler and Miller was easily the most impressive this year. I wouldn't be surprised to see him in the top 20 of at least one of the top 3 "100 lists" (BA, Goldstein, Law).

[eb45]

I'm not sure if I would prefer Hobgood over Matzek right now, but my point dovetails with yours. I've been using Matzek as the example because he was the logical alternative to Hobgood. This way we can avoid revisionist history by comparing Hobgood to the pitcher who fared the best in 2010, but which we never considered drafting or were very long shots (i.e. Leake or Turner).

If both our first (Hobgood) and second (Matzek, presumably) choices both bust, then which cares which one we drafted or who was the consensus pick.

For whatever reason, I didn't follow the 2009 draft like I had in 07 and 08 (and would in 2010 as well), but from what I recall, Crow, Matzek, and Gibson were the names mentioned a lot leading up to the draft, and in the last couple days Wheeler or Turner seemed like the consensus until Hobgood came out of nowhere.

Maybe Wheeler should be the comparison point for Hobgood. In which case I think it's still too early to make any sort of decision, though I would give the edge to Wheeler. Only Miller and Turner have really been outstanding among HS pitchers taken in the first 30 picks.

[Stotle]

For whatever reason, I didn't follow the 2009 draft like I had in 07 and 08 (and would in 2010 as well), but from what I recall, Crow, Matzek, and Gibson were the names mentioned a lot leading up to the draft, and in the last couple days Wheeler or Turner seemed like the consensus until Hobgood came out of nowhere.

Maybe Wheeler should be the comparison point for Hobgood. In which case I think it's still too early to make any sort of decision, though I would give the edge to Wheeler. Only Miller and Turner have really been outstanding among HS pitchers taken in the first 30 picks.

Don't forget Gibson was injured right before the draft -- shoulder.

[Frobby]

It definitely affects my opinion, but it is just one piece of a growing body of work that, to me, is not all that impressive. I'm not saying Jordan is a poor scouting director, but I don't see any evidence that he's outstanding.

[sangar]

I'm not yet convinced Hobgood was a bad choice but it's starting to look that way. As for Jordan's entire body of work many perceptions are probably colored by the overslot selections from last year. Given the amount of injuries among these overslot pitchers I'm giving him this year to see what happens. As of right now though I'm with Frobby in that I see nothing that lifts my expectations above average.

[crawjo]

Somewhere in between...I'm of the opinion that it is almost always a dumb idea to draft a high school pitcher with a high first round pick, so I think Jordan was just stupid to take that kind of gamble.

[QBsILLEST1]

It isn't the Hobgood pick itself that has me down on JJ, it is more basis of his other draft picks. I don't like his style that Stotle has repeatedly pointed out with going after the value picks.

What has to be understood with the Hobgood pick is the strategy that he used. He thought Hobgood was under appreciated among scouts and overdrafted him in the 1st to sign more signability guys later. I have no issue with that really, but the signability picks he chose is where my issue is.

Signability picks are already risky, but when your signability picks are injury risks, the risk expands seven fold......Had we drafted a safer college guy in the 1st, it'd help kinda counter balance the risk taken later, but we didn't.....

[hoosiers]

I have little issue with the Hobgood pick. Yes, there is risk to a HS pitcher in the first and, yes, Hobgood was a bit of an overdraft per the expects that early in the first round, but I believe JJ thought of Hobgood as a relatively safe pick. I think JJ saw a RHP with mid-90s gas who was going to be at worst a 3 and upside to something much better.

My issue, voiced during the draft by Stotle, was that JJ was spending $1M on Ohlman and Coffey instead of spending that $ on what was perceived as more premium prospects who slipped into the third to eighth rounds.