DRAFT IN PROGRESS THREAD ... What's past is preamble

Here's what my complaint comes down to. When you pick in the top 3, I don't want slot considerations to be a factor. You pick the most elite talent you can get and figure out the rest of your picks later.

With Anderson, the first thing people talked about was how much slot money the Braves were saving. I don't like that at 3.
 
SJ24 said:
Two words at pick 80: Thomas Jones.
Click to expand...

jones-tom-photo-tom-jones-6227231.jpg
 
Interesting tidbit from John Manuel of Baseball America:

The Braves, picking third, were tied to college bats for much of the spring but preferred Nick Senzel to outfielders Kyle Lewis and Corey Ray. When the Tennessee third baseman went No. 2 to the Reds, the Braves decided to go for New York prep righty Ian Anderson, No. 11 on the BA 500 but a player long coveted by the Braves.
 
striker42 said:
Here's what my complaint comes down to. When you pick in the top 3, I don't want slot considerations to be a factor. You pick the most elite talent you can get and figure out the rest of your picks later.

With Anderson, the first thing people talked about was how much slot money the Braves were saving. I don't like that at 3.
Click to expand...

I think its obvious that Anderson was elite talent to the Braves.
 
striker42 said:
Here's what my complaint comes down to. When you pick in the top 3, I don't want slot considerations to be a factor. You pick the most elite talent you can get and figure out the rest of your picks later.

With Anderson, the first thing people talked about was how much slot money the Braves were saving. I don't like that at 3.
Click to expand...

Don't know what any of this means, but the organization is gonna be struggling if they are always looking for cheap options at everything. No clue what under slotting, over slotting, or any of that means.
 
nsacpi said:
Interesting tidbit from John Manuel of Baseball America:

The Braves, picking third, were tied to college bats for much of the spring but preferred Nick Senzel to outfielders Kyle Lewis and Corey Ray. When the Tennessee third baseman went No. 2 to the Reds, the Braves decided to go for New York prep righty Ian Anderson, No. 11 on the BA 500 but a player long coveted by the Braves.
Click to expand...

That actually fits exactly with what we were hearing prior to the draft. College bat, position of need, etc... Explains a lot.
 
striker42 said:
Here's a question, if Anderson wanted full slot to keep him from going to Vandy, is he the third pick? Personally, I don't think so.
Click to expand...

Yep the Braves are always looking to cut financial corners when it comes to their players. It's this mindset that will keep the Braves in the cellar for years.
 
striker42 said:
Here's a question, if Anderson wanted full slot to keep him from going to Vandy, is he the third pick? Personally, I don't think so.
Click to expand...

I think that has to play a factor though. Say we get Groome or Lewis or Pint. and they want almost full slot 5.5 +.... I am using 5.5 as my base since that is the slot amount for #4. Then you have your 'Elite' talent and the rest of the draft you figure out. looking back now.. who do you take at 40.. say everything plays the same.. Braves take Groome at 3 and BoSox Anderson at 12.. (or Lewis if you want a hitter)... who is your pick at 40 and 44.. No chance Wentz.. maybe Muller at 40?
 
NinersSBChamps said:
Yep the Braves are always looking to cut financial corners when it comes to their players. It's this mindset that will keep the Braves in the cellar for years.
Click to expand...

Yeah. That's why they took Joey Wentz and Kyle Muller, two top 20 prospects who dropped due to signability issues.

You guys are going to have to fabricate some new material to criticize the front office with. Brian Bridges proved yesterday why he is the best scouting director in baseball.
 
NinersSBChamps said:
Yep the Braves are always looking to cut financial corners when it comes to their players. It's this mindset that will keep the Braves in the cellar for years.
Click to expand...

if you don't understand, then don't make comments. The braves are going to spend the 10.4 million regardless.. The question is how that pie is divided. The FO felt this draft was top heavy in talent between 1-20... so they took three guys around there, instead of 1 plus another top 30 and who knows at 44... This isn't about the Braves being cheap..
 
striker42 said:
Here's a question, if Anderson wanted full slot to keep him from going to Vandy, is he the third pick? Personally, I don't think so.
Click to expand...

If you think there's not much difference between Puk, Groome, Pint, or Anderson (and I don't think the FO thought there was much difference)... and you really like Anderson, why wouldn't you go with him if you know he'll be cheaper. That's just smart. I'm not convinced there is much difference after watching him and reading the scouting reports.
 
KB21 said:
Yeah. That's why they took Joey Wentz and Kyle Muller, two top 20 prospects who dropped due to signability issues.

You guys are going to have to fabricate some new material to criticize the front office with. Brian Bridges proved yesterday why he is the best scouting director in baseball.
Click to expand...

They didn't go under slot to be cheap, they did it to spend more later. But in order to go under slot they passed on better talent.

Again, if Anderson was legitimately a top 3 talent then he should be the pick no matter if he was willing to go under slot or not. If he wanted full slot then I don't see any way he's the pick.
 
striker42 said:
If our first pick was 10 and we ended up signing these three, I'd be thrilled. I'd give this draft an A+. But I have about a dozen players ahead of Anderson. Anderson is very good but to me he's in the second tier of the first rounders in this draft.

Some people are acting like if we took Pint, Groome, or Puk at 3 we would lose the 40th and 44th picks or have to select utility infielders there. That's not the case. We were always going to get good talent there. People ignore that opportunity cost.

It wasn't a choice between one A+ player or three B+ players. It was a choice between three B+ players or one A+ player and two B- players.

I just don't like the strategy of reaching at 3 to get a small talent bump at 40.
Click to expand...

I think the approach you're advocating is reasonable. Just to put some names to it, maybe we take Ray or Lewis at 3 and pay them $1-2m more than Anderson. We then only take one over slot guy late in Kyle Muller and someone like Anfernee Greir with the other pick at slot value. I think that would have been seen as a fine draft for the Braves. However, I don't see that draft having a significantly better grade than the Anderson / Wentz / Muller approach.
 
zbhargrove said:
If you think there's not much difference between Puk, Groome, Pint, or Anderson (and I don't think the FO thought there was much difference)... and you really like Anderson, why wouldn't you go with him if you know he'll be cheaper. That's just smart. I'm not convinced there is much difference after watching him and reading the scouting reports.
Click to expand...

That's the way I see it, although I'm not thrilled with the picks that came after Anderson. I had no problem with the strategy.
 
nsacpi said:
That's the way I see it, although I'm not thrilled with the picks that came after Anderson. I had no problem with the strategy.
Click to expand...

Why? Joey Wentz and Kyle Muller are two of the best prep left handed pitchers in this draft. Both can touch the mid 90s with their fastball and have good secondary offerings. Both are among the best pure athletes at this position in the draft. They both can swing the bat as well. They were incredible picks!!
 
striker42 said:
I'd grade our day one as a C.

It was a good day for the organization no doubt, but that had more to do with having 4 picks. We were going to land a number of good players. The question is whether we used those picks wisely.

The fact that we had a top 3 pick and ended up without an elite talent limits the grade to a C. I just can't get on board with that strategy. If we can't sign one of Wentz or Muller then this grade falls to a D-.

This was a quantity over quality approach. We took three solid talents but no elite one. Maybe the numbers game works out and one of them hits big but I'm just not a fan considering our other options at 3.
Click to expand...

Calling all 3 'solid' is underselling them by quite a bit. They are HS pitchers with big upsides.
 
striker42 said:
They didn't go under slot to be cheap, they did it to spend more later. But in order to go under slot they passed on better talent.

Again, if Anderson was legitimately a top 3 talent then he should be the pick no matter if he was willing to go under slot or not. If he wanted full slot then I don't see any way he's the pick.
Click to expand...

I've also virtually heard all major evaluators say all 3 have extremely high ceilings.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top