2015 June Draft Results Thread

smootness said:
Once again, if this is true, then the Allard pick was not a good one. He was good value at 14, but he wasn't a massive steal. If taking him costs us talent at our other draft slots, then why did we take him? Soroka was a huge reach.
Click to expand...

Depends on what his ceiling ends up being no?
 
thethe said:
The Cubs also got their stud prospects by spending money in the international market and drafting at the top of the draft. Without Bryant and Scwaber it doesn't look as good does it?
Click to expand...

Of course not, but they have a great front office, and they are clearly going all-in on hitters. It definitely makes me wary of the 'if all else is equal, go pitching' philosophy we are employing.
 
thethe said:
The Cubs also got their stud prospects by spending money in the international market and drafting at the top of the draft. Without Bryant and Scwaber it doesn't look as good does it?
Click to expand...

I think that's where we find our hitters. Better value
 
Tapate50 said:
Depends on what his ceiling ends up being no?
Click to expand...

Soroka or Allard? If Soroka, then no, it doesn't matter what his ceiling is; we could have easily had him with a later pick.

If Allard, then it depends to a degree, but it's still probably not worth it if it costs us talent later in the draft.
 
thethe said:
The Cubs also got their stud prospects by spending money in the international market and drafting at the top of the draft. Without Bryant and Scwaber it doesn't look as good does it?
Click to expand...

They have a clear philosophy of drafting position players and trading established starters for position players. Disagree with it or make wxcuse for it, but there arent many (if any) teams in better shape for the future than they are.

Rizzo and Russell is a heck of a start.
 
smootness said:
Of course not, but they have a great front office, and they are clearly going all-in on hitters. It definitely makes me wary of the 'if all else is equal, go pitching' philosophy we are employing.
Click to expand...

When you have that kind of money signing pitching is possible for sure. But again, without those top 10 picks then it doesn't look as good. Thats where you get the real studs.
 
gilesfan said:
They have a clear philosophy of drafting position players and trading established starters for position players. Disagree with it or make wxcuse for it, but there arent many (if any) teams in better shape for the future than they are.

Rizzo and Russell is a heck of a start.
Click to expand...

The Rizzo deal was an absolute brilliant move. But their whole philosphy is built on spending huge amounts of money on the international market and drafting in the top 10. Without sucking for the last 5 years then nobody is talking about how great their philosphy looks.
 
thethe said:
When you have that kind of money signing pitching is possible for sure. But again, without those top 10 picks then it doesn't look as good. Thats where you get the real studs.
Click to expand...

I'm not really talking about their individual talent. I'm talking about their philosophy. I like their philosophy because it makes sense and is smart. Taking pitching simply because we've had good pitching in the past isn't really smart.
 
Cameron to Astros at 37. Dang it. Good grief, what a draft for the Astros.

The Astros are also going all-in on the positional talent in terms of philosophy. It's working for them, too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top