2015 June Draft Results Thread

emk418 said:
sure would be nice to pay attention to our offense
Click to expand...

these guys won't be here for 3+ years, anyway though. a lot can happen in that time. unless there was a college hitter with high upside that we knew we could sign that would help in less than 2 years, then what's the point? and those guys get drafted early.
 
I realistically want them to target Hayes, and if Cameron is there, then it's mean to be -- with the fourth pick.
 
yeezus said:
these guys won't be here for 3+ years, anyway though. a lot can happen in that time. unless there was a college hitter with high upside that we knew we could sign that would help in less than 2 years, then what's the point? and those guys get drafted early.
Click to expand...

I understand drafted players take time to make it through the ranks and actually make the ML club. Three years sounds like a safe and likely scenario. So I ask this because I don't know. Why is so important for the magical season of 2017? I realize we have a handful of high round selections to make, but they aren't going to be helping the club for at least three years.
 
smootness said:
I just got home. I was vocal about my opposition to selecting a pitcher at 14, and even I'm ok with taking Allard there. The bats I wanted (Happ, Stephenson, Randolph, Whitley) were all gone, and Allard is the best HS pitcher in the draft and could have easily gone 7-8 picks higher. Had one of those bats been there and we took Allard, I wouldn't be happy, but as it fell, it was the right move.

Now, I definitely want some high-upside bats early, though. We better take a bat here at 28.

And before I'm able to post, we take another pitcher. I am NOT a fan of that. The Allard pick is ok to me, but continuing to draft pitching is just stupid.

I'll only be ok with that pick if we sign him for under slot and luck out and can get Cameron at 41.
Click to expand...

See, this is pretty much my slant, too: if they think they got a mad-steal at #14, and the hitters worth being drafted that high were off the board, that's great. But to me it seems they've already decided they're going high-school pitching, hell or high water, and that's not best-player-available drafting. You can counter-argue it's simply playing to the organization's developmental strengths, but at a certain point you're further weakening a organizational deficit and receiving diminishing returns by adding to a super-strength.

Maybe Soroka again really was the BPA, and the hitters available at #28 weren't worth a pick there. I'll be honest: I know less than nothing about the amateur ranks, so I'm commenting on general direction than specific players—I'll leave the specifics to those of you more plugged into that world. But, based on some of the press-corps reports, the Braves have already decided they're looking almost exclusively at pitching with these first five picks, and I think that's not the best general direction to go with these resources.
 
Soroka definitely wasn't the BPA at 28. They clearly made that pick to allow them flexibility to sign for over slot elsewhere, so we'll have to wait and see. If we can get steals later and sign them, then great.

But if Soroka was drafted in order to be able to just sign Allard, then the value of getting Allard at 14 wasn't worth it because it made you take a player you may have been able to take at 75 at 28.
 
Mark Bowman ‏@mlbbowman 39s40 seconds ago
Soroka gained valuable experience as he faced the Blue Jays and some extended ST teams w/ the Canadian Jr. team this year.
 
Maybe Soroka again really was the BPA, and the hitters available at #28 weren't worth a pick there. I'll be honest: I know less than nothing about the amateur ranks, so I'm commenting on general direction than specific players—I'll leave the specifics to those of you more plugged into that world. But, based on some of the press-corps reports, the Braves have already decided they're looking almost exclusively at pitching with these first five picks, and I think that's not the best general direction to go with these resources.
Click to expand...

Your post and this paragraph in particular basically reflect my view. I would just add that I'm particularly troubled by all the talk coming out of the organization in the "this is what the Braves were built on!" vein. It's not really even an argument- it's an appeal to a mythos, a claim based on a simplified and nostalgic view of a distant past and an organization that existed in a league that's vastly different than it is now.

It's kind of like the world's most simplified decision tree. Is pitching the strength of the draft? TAKE PITCHING! Are position players the strength of the draft? PITCHING IS AT A PREMIUM- TAKE PITCHING! Does the organization have a lot of position players but not much pitching? PITCHING IS A NEED- TAKE PITCHING! Does the organization have a lot of pitching but not many position players? PITCHING IS THE STRENGTH OF THE ORGANIZATION- TAKE PITCHING!
 
I have no problem with the Braves sticking to what they do best. Develop pitching and you can use pitching to get other stuff.

With the slot system....you also don't know if there is some other motive. what if they have a signing deal with the second pick so they can spend more money on a later pick?

why draft a hitter? it's really hard to project MLB hitters that will have OBP higher than slugging percentage.......that's a rare combo and the future of the braves (peterson, Peraza, Markakis, Mallex Smith, etc).
 
I mean if you are gonna take an under slot guy, I like one that throws easy gas at 17, with probably another inch or two to go....
 
I judge draft picks based strictly on the player's names. If it sounds like a major league baseball player, it is a major league baseball player. I think we got two pretty good players here. Not sold on Daz.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top