- STARTS TODAY AT 7PM - 2016 June Amateur Draft Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm extremely skeptical of that. If it doesn't show up in 3 years of college, I'm not expecting it to ever show up.

Yeah. It's not ideal and something I'm sure the Braves will be looking at.

Honestly, a steady hitting 3B who isn't a thumper doesn't excite me at 3. I'm looking for a star at 3. Senzel seems to project more as a steady regular than a star.
 
My preference at the moment is Perez but I am intrigued by Senzel. We need to graduate as much talent in a small amount of time to be a championship team. If I would take him would have a lot to do with how much he would sign for. Being a lower ceiling college guy I could see him taking a below slot deal. Might also consider other lower prospects who might be willing to do the same.
 
My preference at the moment is Perez but I am intrigued by Senzel. We need to graduate as much talent in a small amount of time to be a championship team. If I would take him would have a lot to do with how much he would sign for. Being a lower ceiling college guy I could see him taking a below slot deal. Might also consider other lower prospects who might be willing to do the same.

I doubt we go after Perez. With Swanson and Albies in the pipe, SS isn't a need for us. Also, he's a high schooler so we'd have to wait a good bit longer to graduate him. As you said, we need to graduate as much talent as we can in a small amount of time. Coppy seems to agree with that by saying they'd prefer a college position player.

Our need at 3B, the fact he's right handed, and his overall polish does make me think Senzel is a legit possibility at 3. He's ranked all over the board. BA has him second overall, Fangraphs has him 22nd, and MLB.com has him 14th. Here's what Hudson Belinsky said about Senzel in a chat:

"Andy (Georgia): Do you guys run these lists by people employed by pro teams? What was their reaction to Senzel at 2?

Hudson Belinsky: Yes. To give you a better sense of our process… I started by parsing through our previous lists and merging them together. I then added in players who were on the rise and sent out a rough draft of the list to my most trusted sources, the best scouts I know. John Manuel and I spoke with crosscheckers, area scouts, college coaches, and scouting directors about how we had the players lined up, where they were likely to be picked, etc. I thought I would be the high man on Mr. Senzel. He was #2 in our first rough draft. I got great reactions to him being that high on our list. Some said they thought he was the best player in the class. I could see him going #2 to the Reds."

So guys in the business are really high on Senzel. Personally, I have two questions about him.

First, will he stick at third? He's a newcomer to the position and if he has to move to the OF then he loses a lot of his value. Third is a premium position and having a hitter there you can count on does have a lot of value. He has 3 errors at third in 16 games so far so that's not really inspiring. But you never know the circumstances. Maybe a better firstbaseman saves some of those.

Second, will he hit for power? He only hit 4 HRs last year with 12 doubles and 5 triples in 50 games. He followed that by leading the Cape Cod league in XBH (21) including 16 doubles. This year he's continued to be a doubles machine with 8 in his first 16 games. Still only 1 HR so far. So while he's showing more doubles power, he's still struggling to clear the fence. I expect that he probably tops out at 15 HR.

If he sticks at third, is a perennial .300+ hitter, gets on base at around a .375 clip, and hits 15 HRs a year, I'd be really happy with him at 3. However, if he has to move to the outfield or can't ever hit more than 5 or 6 HRs a year, I wont be very thrilled.
 
I doubt we go after Perez. With Swanson and Albies in the pipe, SS isn't a need for us. Also, he's a high schooler so we'd have to wait a good bit longer to graduate him. As you said, we need to graduate as much talent as we can in a small amount of time. Coppy seems to agree with that by saying they'd prefer a college position player.

I think the best player available criterion trumps (easily) all of the considerations you mention, especially with a very high pick. Now Perez might not be the best player. But that's another matter.
 
I think the best player available criterion trumps (easily) all of the considerations you mention, especially with a very high pick. Now Perez might not be the best player. But that's another matter.

If he was far and away the best player available, then you probably have to take him. Like if Groome somehow falls to 3 we almost have to take him. But a lot of times you have several guys that you rate as on a similar level. In that case you have to go after the one that makes the most sense for your organization. If you have Senzel, Ray, Lewis, and Perez all similarly graded, you have to look at other considerations. Which positions are we weak at? Who has the personality that fits our club best? What tools does our system lack? That kind of stuff.

People talk about taking the best player available a lot but I think that's more of a way of saying don't reach for a player at a position of need and pass on a clearly superior player that's available. And I fully agree with that. But if you have 5 or 6 guys graded similarly, it's not the best idea to simply take one guy because he graded out marginally better when that guy isn't really a fit for what your system needs.
 
People talk about taking the best player available a lot but I think that's more of a way of saying don't reach for a player at a position of need and pass on a clearly superior player that's available. And I fully agree with that. But if you have 5 or 6 guys graded similarly, it's not the best idea to simply take one guy because he graded out marginally better when that guy isn't really a fit for what your system needs.

This in a nutshell. This isn't a draft where there are a couple of clear elite players (outside of possibly Groome). So BPA isn't really something that applies. We are going to have a situation this year where need and BPA should closely align. Perez is not some sort of Correa type talent we should be grabbing when we are already stacked at the position.
 
Honestly, Olivera's swing was much, much worse when we traded for him. They're still working with him to try to eliminate the bat wrap. So if scouts were confident Olivera would hit with his flaws there's no reason why Lewis shouldn't be able to clean things up.

If anything, the fact that Lewis is a bit raw makes him all the more interesting. Gives him more ceiling.
 
The best part about Ray's homer last night is that it came against a lefty. He's had problems hitting them in recent years, and it was an opposite field homer.
 
If anything, the fact that Lewis is a bit raw makes him all the more interesting. Gives him more ceiling.

Agreed. No one really knows how good he can truly be. If he's already hitting like this in college, you would expect him to at least be solid, and then his ceiling is through the roof.
 
Went to see Lewis today. He ripped 3 hits and was intentionally walked twice. He looks to have pretty good speed; he was thrown out but also stole a base pretty easily later and also scored from 2nd on a single and took home on a passed ball that didn't get too far away from the catcher.

He didn't have to do much defensively, but he plays CF for Mercer and made a pretty nice diving trap of a ball. No errors on the year so far.

I definitely hope we take him at this point.
 
Went to see Lewis today. He ripped 3 hits and was intentionally walked twice. He looks to have pretty good speed; he was thrown out but also stole a base pretty easily later and also scored from 2nd on a single and took home on a passed ball that didn't get too far away from the catcher.

He didn't have to do much defensively, but he plays CF for Mercer and made a pretty nice diving trap of a ball. No errors on the year so far.

I definitely hope we take him at this point.

Want to see Rutherford's year first... and if Gromme falls we'd be nuts to not get him... unlikely I know
 
Want to see Rutherford's year first... and if Gromme falls we'd be nuts to not get him... unlikely I know

I wouldn't mind taking either of those guys, but I seriously doubt Groome falls, and I find it difficult to believe Rutherford has a clearly higher ceiling than Lewis at this point. I'd personally rather take the college guy, but regardless, we should be adding some serious talent.
 
So at this point, I would say our potential player pool to draft from at 3 would look like this:

Jason Groome
Corey Ray
Kyle Lewis
Blake Rutherford
Nick Senzel
Delvin Perez

It's hard for me to see anyone outside of this group being drafted by us at 3. Hansen has been awful so far, and Puk continues to be good but not great. There's an outside chance someone could really climb up boards late, like a Will Benson, but that's pretty unlikely. And Buddy Reed just hasn't ever hit enough to justify a top pick. So it looks like these 6 are probably our pool. Groome is likely to be gone, so I think it will come down to the 5 hitters. And if we're serious about taking a college bat, then it's Ray, Lewis, and Senzel. Ray are the only two I think that could justify a #3 pick, and I'd rather have Lewis' power than Ray's speed. That's what it comes down to for me.
 
I wouldn't mind taking either of those guys, but I seriously doubt Groome falls, and I find it difficult to believe Rutherford has a clearly higher ceiling than Lewis at this point. I'd personally rather take the college guy, but regardless, we should be adding some serious talent.

I'm not disagreeing at all... and I know Groome is a huge long shot since he seems to be the consensus best player on the board by a pretty large gap... I just am anxious to see Rutherford's year.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top