if Bishop is the best Bishop he can be we should draft him...but he could end up being like a lot of other prospects with an impressive power tool but a fair amount of swing and miss in their game who have not done well as they have moved up the minor league ladder...the concern about Bishop has to do with how many failed prospects with similar profiles that have preceded him
"I am a victim, I will tell you. I am a victim."
"I am your retribution."
Gorman is a good recent example of a player that probably fits your hypothetical; but the big thing with him is it looks like the swing&miss concerns were overrated. I was a fan of Stewart over him because of those concerns (and Stewart’s insane curve rpms); but hindsight makes that preference look silly.
Hopefully the Braves’ evaluators have better foresight, and, if they pick Bishop, are confident he’s going to make enough good contact to leverage his other hitting tools. The downside, though—especially because he plays a less premium position than Gorman (and I’ve read he’ll basically be confined to LF because of his arm)—is that Bishop needs to hit at a high level for the pick to be a hit.
Last edited by jpx7; 05-29-2019 at 02:27 PM.
"For all his tattooings he was on the whole a clean, comely looking cannibal."
Jaw (05-29-2019)
jpx7 (05-29-2019)
And Carrol can be like a lot of athletic smaller guys with high school hit tools that never goes anywhere.
These people who ask scouts which players are good have Bishop rated higher than Carrol for a reason.
Personally, I wouldn't be thrilled and wouldn't hate either one of them at 9.
The thing that made Stewart appealing wasn’t just the high ceiling, but the fact that his off-the-charts spin rates suggested he’d have a high floor, as well.
But I’m not suggesting the Braves avoid high-ceiling pitchers simply because of Stewart (though there are obviously other reasons for reticence); all I was really saying re Stewart/Gorman is that Gorman currently looks like a better prospect / draft-outcome than Stewart—but maybe 9/21/60 makes us forget about either player really quickly.
"For all his tattooings he was on the whole a clean, comely looking cannibal."
One thing that I think is important but is mostly overlooked is the age of HS prospects. In many cases, HS guys rated highly are not only late in the year 18 YO but for some, actual 19 YO. There's a trend around the Country where parents hold their kid back a year on purpose to get an extra year of maturity on their peers. And it works most of the time.
Because of that, I've given extra credit to HS guys who are young for their class but still top prospects. There's a good chance that with additional development that time alone brings they will be an even better prospect than they appear at draft. That's one of the reasons that I was so high on Gorman last year. He was a top ten guy who was extremely young for his class. I was also not very high on Blake Rutherford for the inverse. He was old for his class but wasn't a slam dunk star.
This is really just an extension of the thinking that used to concern everyone about international FA - how old are they really?
With HS guys, you know. But it's just not focused on in evaluations that much apparently.
You can extend that to College as well but not as much. If a 23 YO Junior still has questions, then chances are those answers are negative. If a 20 YO Junior still has questions, there may be development time ahead for positive answers.
Any managers available at pick 60?
Coppy
jpx7 (05-29-2019), The Chosen One (05-29-2019), zedsdead (05-30-2019)
Kyren Paris is the youngest guy projected to go within the first couple rounds. The Indians are the team that emphasizes age the most.
A few years ago the Royals took Starling in spite of his being a year older than his draft class. Looks like they will doing the same thing with Witt. God bless Dayton Moore.
"I am a victim, I will tell you. I am a victim."
"I am your retribution."
jpx7 (05-29-2019)