Lewis went 2-4 with 2 more walks and a strikeout in yesterday's finale vs. the Cats.
6-9, no XBH, 1 RBI, 8 BBs, 3 runs scored for the series.
Lewis went 2-4 with 2 more walks and a strikeout in yesterday's finale vs. the Cats.
6-9, no XBH, 1 RBI, 8 BBs, 3 runs scored for the series.
Has there EVER been a statement and question a certain someone should absolutely never have made and asked publicly more than...
Kinda pathetic to see yourself as a message board knight in shining armor. How impotent does someone have to be in real life to resort to playing hero on a message board?
fits perfectly for our team..Originally Posted by clvclv
Childress Field isn't exactly Petco either. That said, he was pitched around all weekend for the most part.
Has there EVER been a statement and question a certain someone should absolutely never have made and asked publicly more than...
Kinda pathetic to see yourself as a message board knight in shining armor. How impotent does someone have to be in real life to resort to playing hero on a message board?
I actually like seeing that he went 6-9 with 6 singles while being pitched around. This kid has legit power. I don't think there's much question of that. What hitting 6 singles in 9 ABs tells me is that he wasn't trying to do too much with the ball. They weren't about to give him anything he could drive so he took what they gave him and racked up the hits.
50PoundHead (05-02-2016), Tapate50 (05-02-2016)
Good point. I don't think any of us were there to see how he was being pitched and the situations he faced. If he can go 6-9 while being pitched around, I think it says a lot about a solid approach at the plate.
Tapate50 (05-02-2016)
My broad sense of how I think we should approach #3:
1. We have a really strong farm system. It's deep, we have a ton of good prospects. So we can afford a miss with the third selection. Obviously, you never want to draft a bust that high, but we're not in a position where we need to infuse talent into the farm. We've done that for the last year. And, frankly, we're going to get another shot at a high pick next year.
2. As such, we should aim high and go for the big ceiling. Bust potential matters less than star potential.
3. In a very broad sense, the weakness of the system is high ceiling position players. Again, that's a very broad statement- please don't rush in to nitpick it. Albies and Swanson are elite prospects, but more because they project to be solid hitters at premium positions. Aside from Riley, who's a long way off and far from a sure thing, we lack potential big impact bats, especially in the outfield.
All that considered, my preference is to see us take the highest ceiling outfield bat available to us at 3. Whether that's Ray, Lewis or Rutherford, I'll leave up to the scouts and execs. But this strikes me as the perfect situation in which to take a big swing.
50PoundHead (05-02-2016), Tapate50 (05-02-2016)
Agreed, but wonder if the heavy investment in Latin America for hitters is going to change our approach to the draft at all. I think a high-ceiling offensive player is the way to go at #3. I would stay away from Senzel.
clvclv (05-02-2016)
http://m.mlb.com/news/article/175743...icid=151437456
Both Callis and Mayo have Lewis going second to the Reds. Looks like he's drawn a lot of attention with his dominance. They also both have Puk going first.
That would leave us with some interesting choices. Groome is perhaps the best player in the draft but he'd be 4+ years away. Still, it would be hard to pass on him.
Ray would be okay but I still see him as having the most value in center and center is an area we're actually looking pretty good at.
Callis has us taking Ray and Mayo has us taking Groome.
Interesting Rutherford isn't in that convo.
Ivermectin Man
clvclv (05-02-2016)
If the choice comes down to Ray and Groome I think the clear pick is Groome.
bravesfanMatt (05-02-2016), clvclv (05-02-2016)
I agree.
I hope it doesn't come to that. I just don't see Ray as a difference maker and that's what you are shooting for at #3.
Would Groome, being a HS pitcher, be an under slot guy?
HS players have leverage of going to college instead of signing, so they typically sign at slot or over. College players, especially seniors, tend to sign under slot because they don't have any leverage...they either sign with the team that drafted them or stop playing ball and get a real job.
Lewis and Ray would possibly sign for $2M+ under slot, which is certainly a pro to drafting one of them. Groome will almost assuredly cost the full slot value to sign.
I doubt it, and that would play a big role in my decision to take Ray over him.
He'd have college as leverage... That high he'd be a slot guy in my opinion.
But those mocks don't necessarily mean anything. It doesn't mean the Reds want Lewis or anything, just that he's improved his stock and is now a legitimate option there.
I believe the Reds also have some other picks in the same range as ours, so getting a guy under slot could be intriguing, so that is a concern. But my guess is still that Lewis is available at 3.
For me, at that point it would come down to Groome and Rutherford. I don't dislike Ray, but my guess is that he becomes a guy whose primary value is his speed. I think he'll be a 15-20 HR guy who strikes out a lot.
tomahawkchop (05-02-2016)
Same, if Lewis is off the board, I would draft either Rutherford or Groome.. but I'd still prefer Kyle Lewis since he has the highest chance of signing underslot (since he IS from GA and was a Braves fan growing up)..
Mickey Moniak is a high school LHH OF out of La Costa Canyon, CA, who has passed Rutherford in some rankings. Great hit tool, but more of a line drive hitter than power prospect. Plays CF now and scouts believe he fields well enough to stick there.
If Groome is there, I don't know how one passes on him except that he won't go for under slot, which could impinge flexibility later.
Tapate50 (05-03-2016)
JMO (and I realize you're not saying it should matter 50), but it could easily turn out to be a huge mistake NOT to take Groome at that point - possibly even if someone else you "like" is willing to sign under slot. We all HOPE that a Daz Cameron type of situation will work out and we'll be able to get two premium talents instead of one. As others have pointed out before though, it's a long way from #3 to #40, and the chances of someone swooping in and gobbling up someone we think we could get with that second pick are good.
The cardinal rule has always been to take the BPA, and if he were to slide to us at #3 I can't imagine many would argue that Groome wouldn't absolutely be that BPA (regardless of who's left on the board). If you believe (and I think most of us do) in the old adage that you just don't draft with your MLB club in mind, passing on an arm like Groome's when he falls into your lap seems crazy. We all know about the attrition rates of pitching prospects, but the way you eventually win that battle is by having enough of them to weather the storm. If you believe (and only the brass truly knows) that we simply aren't ever going to play at the high-end of the free-agent market (especially Pitchers) then we've got to eventually develop an "Ace" or two.
I hope we can work out backroom deals with two players we KNOW will be available when it's our turn, but...
1.) They better BOTH be there, and
2.) you better be right about BOTH of them
because passing on a "surer thing" with higher upside really would be something everyone ought to bitch about - especially when you'd still get two pretty good players with those two later picks to begin with.
Has there EVER been a statement and question a certain someone should absolutely never have made and asked publicly more than...
Kinda pathetic to see yourself as a message board knight in shining armor. How impotent does someone have to be in real life to resort to playing hero on a message board?
Posting Permissions
