2024 MLB Draft

Chico said:
It’s been discussed many times that the drafts will focus on pitching due to the high attrition rate and the fact we’re set at the major league level. We have 4 SS and 3 CF in the system we’re going to give playing time to in the lower levels. Drafting Corner OF or Corner IF doesn’t make sense.
Click to expand...

This is exactly backwards logic. Why invest capital on the thing most likely to not pan out? Why not spend capital on the surer bet, then trade those resources for established pitching?

The best 4 SP on the roster were acquired via trades, the conversion of a FA BP arm, and another FA signing.

All the drafted SPs in the organization except Schwelly are injured and/or ineffective. So...yay? Great strategy?

So....why continue to spend so much draft capital on the risky asset type?
 
Last edited:
Enscheff said:
Based on the state of the farm, I think it's fair to criticize the AA regime for their drafting strategy.

Being the #23 ranked farm and blaming it on "drafting late" doesn't hold much water when teams like the Dodgers and Yankees are #3 and #6. Of all the things AA does well, drafting isn't at the top of that list. I would rate this FO as very mediocre in the amateur acquisition department.

And no, we shouldn't just "give the scouts the benefit of the doubt". Look outside the bubble, and resist the urge for homer group think. That's exactly how the "Nacho is a SS" narrative gains traction.
Click to expand...

I mean, yeah I get it and I don’t necessarily differ. But people acting like this is some incompetent franchise based on 3 draft picks is a little ridiculous.
 
CyYoung31 said:
I mean, yeah I get it and I don’t necessarily differ. But people acting like this is some incompetent franchise based on 3 draft picks is a little ridiculous.
Click to expand...

It's a pretty well established pattern of less than stellar drafting by now.

So yeah, it's reasonable to be upset by the latest instance of it. The hyperbole may be silly, but the overall point is sound:

The Braves are not very good at drafting or signing international players. The system is poor for a reason, and that reason is poor player acquisition. Simple as that. Every good team drafts late, and every good team trades for MLB players, so that excuse is invalid.

The defenders of these drafts are nothing more than homers who lack the self awareness to realize they are being homers.
 
Last edited:
Enscheff said:
It's a pretty well established pattern of less than stellar drafting by now.

So yeah, it's reasonable to be upset by the latest instance of it. The hyperbole may be silly, but the overall point is sound:

The Braves are not very good at drafting or signing international players.
Click to expand...

We both know the outburst was mostly due to the Braves being 11 games over .500 this year as opposed to 20.
 
Enscheff said:
Based on the state of the farm, I think it's fair to criticize the AA regime for their drafting strategy.

Being the #23 ranked farm and blaming it on "drafting late" doesn't hold much water when teams like the Dodgers and Yankees are #3 and #6. Of all the things AA does well, drafting isn't at the top of that list. I would rate this FO as very mediocre in the amateur acquisition department.

And no, we shouldn't just "give the scouts the benefit of the doubt". Look outside the bubble, and resist the urge for homer group think. That's exactly how the "Nacho is a SS" narrative gains traction.
Click to expand...

It's a mixed bag for sure. Some clear successes and a couple of unexpected meteoric rises on the plus side, so it hasn't been abysmal. I think they tend toward metrics over ceiling which discounts tools and may result in a bunch of mid-ceiling guys and when they do go tools over skills it hasn't translated that much. It's an inexact science whichever approach one uses.
 
CyYoung31 said:
We both know the outburst was mostly due to the Braves being 11 games over .500 this year as opposed to 20.
Click to expand...

This board is mostly unreadable due to folks throwing tantrums over this being a 91 win team rather than a 105 win team.

But the point being discussed in this thread is sound: AA's regime is not very good at acquiring amateur talent.
 
Last edited:
bravesfanMatt said:
I don't know if I would ever draft a true 1B.. I guess there would be some scenario (FF type player), but usually 1B is a pretty easy position to fill with free agents or trade or even some DH level players.
Click to expand...

I think Ceballos and McCabe probably end up as 1Bs, so your point is valid. My point was the system is really bare of INF corner prospects at the moment.
 
Tapate50 said:
Does hitting on Acuna count for more than just one hit ?
Click to expand...

Not for AA it doesn't. And AA is who we are discussing here...because he's the current GM in charge of the current draft producing players for the current farm system that currently is pretty bad.
 
50PoundHead said:
I think Ceballos and McCabe probably end up as 1Bs, so your point is valid. My point was the system is really bare of INF corner prospects at the moment.
Click to expand...

yeah, it really is.. I don't remember if FF was even drafted as a true 1b..

I do think it is an interesting topic being discussed. You look at an org like the Phillies, who rarely draft pitching and really have a great pitching staff mostly made up of trades/FA signings... then you have a team like the Braves who draft mainly pitching (even before AA) and they have done a decent job of trading that for valuable pieces...

I get what Cheff is saying, but then you think about half of the league is literally pitchers and that makes those prospects soooo valuable. I feel the safest way would be to mix your draft more than Braves and Phillies do... but both teams are successful and each seem to have different approaches.
 
Enscheff said:
It's a pretty well established pattern of less than stellar drafting by now.
Click to expand...


Uhhh...is it? Farm rankings aren't everything. We have drafted and developed better major league talent than the Dodgers or Yankees have since 2019. That is simply a fact that cannot be challenged. You can call it luck all you want, but 5 years is a fairly decent sample size. And we keep churning out quality major league players seemingly every year, as well as consistently having enough prospect ammo to make significant trades to supplement the team.

I wish we would draft more offensive players as well. But we our drafting philosophy is doing better than most.
 
Last edited:
Enscheff said:
This is exactly backwards logic. Why invest capital on the thing most likely to not pan out? Why not spend capital on the surer bet, then trade those resources for established pitching?

The best 4 SP on the roster were acquired via trades, the conversion of a FA BP arm, and another FA signing.

All the drafted SPs in the organization except Schwelly are injured and/or ineffective. So...yay? Great strategy?

So....why continue to spend so much draft capital on the risky asset type?
Click to expand...

Not saying it's a good strategy, but I think the logic is that it's a risky asset type for everyone so if you think you have an edge developing it teams will always have a need.
 
Tapate50 said:
Does hitting on Acuna count for more than just one hit ?
Click to expand...

A few things get lost in this discussion and the main one is that Anthopoulos inherited an All-Star core of players and a deep farm system that he has used effectively augment the core and replace core players that moved on. That needs to be totally divorced from the amateur player acquisition discussion. Anthopoulos has clearly had his hits--Strider and Harris in particular--but he has spent a lot of bonus money going above slot on guys who simply have yet to turn out.
 
Carp said:
Uhhh...is it? Farm rankings aren't everything. We have drafted and developed better major league talent than the Dodgers or Yankees have since 2019. That is simply a fact that cannot be challenged. You can call it luck all you want, but 5 years is a fairly decent sample size. And we keep churning out quality major league players seemingly every year, as well as consistently having enough prospect ammo to make significant trades to supplement the team.

I wish we would draft more offensive players as well. But we our drafting philosophy is doing better than most.
Click to expand...

Strider, Harris, and Schwellenbach isn't a plethora of talent. We can add guys they traded like Langeliers, Estes, and Malloy and guys who look like fringe players in Dodd and Elder (and Shuster and Shewmake), but simply getting guys to the big leagues doesn't ensure a rock-solid record.
 
The only position players we should draft are CF/SS/C. We should not be drafting 1B/3B or Corner OF types. We’re stocked with teenagers at SS/CF and they’re going to need at bats if you want to see them mature. You don’t write them off at 19 to draft a 21 year old with a lower ceiling unless you’re desperate to fill out a major league team.
 
I think it's a bit unfair to call Elder a fringe player. He's had his struggles early this year, but he was legitimately a quality starting pitcher last year and has the stuff to be mid-to-back end caliber SP through most of his 20s. You are also missing Grissom and Vines among those fringe guys.

You also did not mention AJSS and Waldrep as guys guys that have had a cup of tea in the majors and have a lot of promise. That's 14 players in 5 years to reach the majors. And at least half of them showing a good bit of promise. I would imagine that more than half the league can not match that. Certainly the Yankees and Dodgers can't. And that is without noting of some of the promising guys we have in the minors like Murphy, Ritchie, Nacho, and even Hackenberg.
 
Correct. If they are relegated to a corner spot at that age it says a lot about their athleticism. Many players at those positions will naturally move to less valuable defensive positions as they get older. A players hit profile has to be very good to be drafted high as a corner player in HS/college.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top