That really feels like the big takeaway right now.
2019 MLB Draft Thread
- Thread starter CJ9
- Start date
That really feels like the big takeaway right now.
Tapate50
Well-known member
But we get TWO sucky picks in the sucky first round!
bravesfanMatt
Steve Harvey'd
I’m starting to think we should just go high school on our first three picks and go for the homerun ball. At least with highschoolers they might project into something special
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
HS bat is a demographic I like in the second round. But with the two first round picks, I think we should mainly draft based on upside. And in the first round this year, there are a couple college pitchers (Thompson and Rutledge) who I think have some very good upside.
bravesfanMatt
Steve Harvey'd
I wasn’t suggesting high school bat. Just high schooler with projectabilty. There are a couple college pitcher that seem nice but none that scream TOR. Might snag one who could become legit closer I guess. ( Manoah). I don’t know Rutledge at all. So no opinion. Bishop and that catcher do nothing for me.
Last edited:
Tapate50
Well-known member
That's why I've come around to Carroll as a nice balanced pick. HS, projectable, and has solid tools.
no room with Riley here
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
We have taken a disproportionate number of HS pitchers in the second round with poor results. Data for other teams also show a poor yield for HS pitchers taken in the second round compared to other groups including HS hitters. So I would make a fairly sharp distinction between HS pitchers and HS hitters as far as which way we should tilt with our second round pick.
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
Riley, Waters, McCann, Freeman are examples of HS hitters we have done very well with picks that were either supplemental after the first round or second round. There is gold in dem dar hills. When you look at all the HS pitchers we have taken in similar spots, more like fool's gold.
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
I would take Thompson, Rutledge, Allen or Priester over Carroll in the first round.
But Carroll-like players are a very good bet come the second round.
The way I would summarize is this: The data (measured by WAR generated in the pre-free agency years) suggest there is a big drop-off for pitchers between the elite arms each year and those considered second-round worthy. And there is a much smaller drop-off between the elite hitting prospects and those considered second-round worthy. The teams are learning to adjust their draft boards based on this and other data which I have discussed elsewhere on bust risks associated with pitchers generally.
There are about a half dozen slightly inferior versions of Carroll who will be available in the second round.
Last edited:
Hudson2
Well-known member
Riley is in the outfield right now so Gorman could play 3b or use Gorman as trade bait for a better mlb piece.
Im just being facetious but riley will be our 3b next year. Donaldson's money hopefully goes to filling an OF spot.
Hudson2
Well-known member
I’d be fine with that. I was just looking at Gorman vurses anything we get at 9 this year.
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
non-trivial chance Donaldson accepts a QO and Riley stays in left for another year...but long-term yeah he is our third baseman
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
The 2015 draft (the first Coppy/Bridges draft) is a draft I keep coming to as one that not only produced good results but seemed to adhere to what I think should be best practices with respect to building a draft board. At the time, I thought Coppy/Bridges had really turned things around in terms of adopting best practices, but subsequent events indicate it was more of a one-off.
Still I want to list some of the lessons about the 2015 draft that I think are worth trying to replicate:
1) Having extra draft picks makes the draft more fun, but also is something worth striving for if you believe you are above average at scouting and development. For a mid or small market team it is especially important. This means being aggressive in trading for those competitive balance picks and being willing to let a good player play out his contract and leave via free agency. We did both in 2015. We traded for a pick between the 1st and 2nd rounds (taking Riley) and one between the second and third rounds (taking Minter). We had an extra first round pick (#28 overall) from losing Santana to free agency and used it to take Soroka. I might add that there is evidence that the value of draft picks is going up and that the studies that value picks with data going back 20 years or more might be undervaluing their current value. To the extent this is true and that some teams have not fully caught on yet, this adds to the case for trying to get some extra picks.
2) With respect to 2nd and 3rd round picks, the data are fairly compelling you want to go light on HS pitchers. We had four picks over those rounds and chose 2 HS hitters (Riley and Herbert), 1 college pitcher (Minter) and one HS pitcher (Guardado). I'm glad we avoided the tendency we have shown in other years to go heavy HS pitchers in this part of the draft.
3) With respect to rounds 4-10, the best returns come from college pitchers. In 2015, we used those picks exclusively on college pitchers. Our best pick from that group was Weigel (7th round). It remains to be seen if he comes back all the way from the Tommy John, but it was a very good pick for that part of the draft.
4) The rounds after round 10 are mainly for organizational fillers. Teams mostly draft college players in those rounds and that's fine. But I think it is a mistake to write off HS players completely and was pleased we took several (Keller, Hellinger, Suarez). You don't want to tell your scouts to write off HS players entirely in this part of the draft just because they are harder to find.
5) I want to circle back to our first round picks. The main point I want to make with respect to the first round is you really do want to draft for ceiling there. The interesting exception is that when you have a very high pick (the top 3 or 4) you should consider floor too, because those players have both high ceiling and high floor. That year our picks in the first round were #14 (Allard) and #28 (Soroka). Even though the results on Allard have been disappointing, I think we did focus on high ceiling in making that pick. We took a chance on a player who would not have dropped to that spot if not for some injury concerns. I think both the Allard and Soroka picks were consistent with a philosophy emphasizing ceiling in the first round. Sticking with that philosophy doesn't guarantee that every pick will work out but it does give you the best chances for success in the first round. In subsequent rounds, there is more evidence that certain types of players should be given disproportionate space on the draft board. In the first round, you go for ceiling (though this must be informed by an understanding of the injury/bust risks associated with pitchers and the inherent greater difficulty of projecting the power tool in hitters).
Still I want to list some of the lessons about the 2015 draft that I think are worth trying to replicate:
1) Having extra draft picks makes the draft more fun, but also is something worth striving for if you believe you are above average at scouting and development. For a mid or small market team it is especially important. This means being aggressive in trading for those competitive balance picks and being willing to let a good player play out his contract and leave via free agency. We did both in 2015. We traded for a pick between the 1st and 2nd rounds (taking Riley) and one between the second and third rounds (taking Minter). We had an extra first round pick (#28 overall) from losing Santana to free agency and used it to take Soroka. I might add that there is evidence that the value of draft picks is going up and that the studies that value picks with data going back 20 years or more might be undervaluing their current value. To the extent this is true and that some teams have not fully caught on yet, this adds to the case for trying to get some extra picks.
2) With respect to 2nd and 3rd round picks, the data are fairly compelling you want to go light on HS pitchers. We had four picks over those rounds and chose 2 HS hitters (Riley and Herbert), 1 college pitcher (Minter) and one HS pitcher (Guardado). I'm glad we avoided the tendency we have shown in other years to go heavy HS pitchers in this part of the draft.
3) With respect to rounds 4-10, the best returns come from college pitchers. In 2015, we used those picks exclusively on college pitchers. Our best pick from that group was Weigel (7th round). It remains to be seen if he comes back all the way from the Tommy John, but it was a very good pick for that part of the draft.
4) The rounds after round 10 are mainly for organizational fillers. Teams mostly draft college players in those rounds and that's fine. But I think it is a mistake to write off HS players completely and was pleased we took several (Keller, Hellinger, Suarez). You don't want to tell your scouts to write off HS players entirely in this part of the draft just because they are harder to find.
5) I want to circle back to our first round picks. The main point I want to make with respect to the first round is you really do want to draft for ceiling there. The interesting exception is that when you have a very high pick (the top 3 or 4) you should consider floor too, because those players have both high ceiling and high floor. That year our picks in the first round were #14 (Allard) and #28 (Soroka). Even though the results on Allard have been disappointing, I think we did focus on high ceiling in making that pick. We took a chance on a player who would not have dropped to that spot if not for some injury concerns. I think both the Allard and Soroka picks were consistent with a philosophy emphasizing ceiling in the first round. Sticking with that philosophy doesn't guarantee that every pick will work out but it does give you the best chances for success in the first round. In subsequent rounds, there is more evidence that certain types of players should be given disproportionate space on the draft board. In the first round, you go for ceiling (though this must be informed by an understanding of the injury/bust risks associated with pitchers and the inherent greater difficulty of projecting the power tool in hitters).
Last edited:
Russ2dollas
10 yr, $185 million Extension
I do not see a glaring hole on the team that the draft can fix outside of maybe catcher.
Riley, Swanson, Ozzie, Ff is an infield that does not suck. Acuna is Acuna. I do think in two years we'll have Pache and Waters. We still have Ender, Neck for cheap next year and Comargo as options.
We have a log jam of pitchers in AA and above.
I think loading up on HS talent and potential RPs from college seniors(low money signs) makes a lot of sense.
Riley, Swanson, Ozzie, Ff is an infield that does not suck. Acuna is Acuna. I do think in two years we'll have Pache and Waters. We still have Ender, Neck for cheap next year and Comargo as options.
We have a log jam of pitchers in AA and above.
I think loading up on HS talent and potential RPs from college seniors(low money signs) makes a lot of sense.
Southcack77
Well-known member
Over what time frame? If 2nd Round includes the extra picks surrounding it, then here is recent history:
2018 - Grayson Jenista (NCAA position player)
2017 - Drew Waters (HS position)
2016 - Wentz (#40, CBA HS pitcher), Muller (HS - Pitcher) , Cumberland (CBB - College position)
2015 - Riley (#41 CBA, HS Position), Lucas Herbert (HS position), AJ Minter (#75 CBB, college pitcher)
2014 - Garrett Fulenchek (HS pitcher)
2013 - Victor Caratini (HS position)
2012 - Alex Wood (college pitcher)
2011 - Nick Ahmed (hs position)
2010 - Todd Cunningham (hs position), Andrelton Simmons (college position)
2009 - None
In the last ten drafts, Atlanta has basically had one bust out of a high school arm. It doesn't even seem to be a favored strategy any more as they haven't taken them much. I'm not sure it makes a ton of sense to look back at 20 year old drafts for guidance. Things are very different now.
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
I've been mostly looking at the drafts since 2000
so to complement what you have listed above, these are the players taken from the end of the first round (which I define as pick #30) to the start of the third round:
2000: Kelly Johnson (HS hitter), Brian Digby (HS pitcher), Bubba Nelson (HS pitcher)
2001: Richard Lewis (C hitter), Robert Barthel (HS hitter)
2002: Dan Meyer (C pitcher), Brian McCann (HS hitter)
2003: Luis Atilano (HS pitcher), Jarod Saltalamacchia (HS hitter), Jojo Reyes (HS pitcher), Paul Bacot (HS pitcher)
2004: Eric Campbell (HS hitter)
2005: Beau Jones (HS pitcher), Yunel Escobar (other hitter), Jeff Lyman (HS pitcher)
2006: Cory Rasmus (HS pitcher), Steve Evarts (HS pitcher), Jeff Locke (HS pitcher), Dustin Evans (C pitcher), Robert Fontaine (C hitter)
2007: Jon Gilmore (HS hitter), Freddie Freeman (HS hitter)
2008: Brett Devall (HS pitcher), Robert Stovall (HS pitcher), Zeke Spruill (HS pitcher)
with respect to the list you have, Cunningham, Ahmed, Caratini were I believe all drafted out of college or JUCO.
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
Looking at the entire sample from 2000-2018:
The yield on HS hitters is impressive with 4 hits (Kelly Johnson, McCann, Salty, Freeman) out of 9 taken. I will withhold judgment on Riley and Waters.
The yield on C hitters is 1 hit (Simmons) out of 8 taken. Ahmed and Caratini are kind of in a nebulous zone of useful players but not hit or bust.
The yield on C pitchers is 1 hit (Wood) out of only 4 taken. Jury still out on Minter.
And so far no hits on HS pitchers out of 16 taken. Locke is probably the closest to a hit. And the jury remains out on Wentz and Muller.
We have reduced our tendency to take HS pitchers (as have other major league teams) in that part of the draft and that's a good thing. With respect to the 2nd (and I might add 3rd) rounds, I would argue for populating the draft board something along these lines: HS hitters 35%, C pitchers 30%, C hitters 20%, HS pitchers 15%. I am not advocating never taking a HS pitchers in those rounds but it should not happen often.
The yield on HS hitters is impressive with 4 hits (Kelly Johnson, McCann, Salty, Freeman) out of 9 taken. I will withhold judgment on Riley and Waters.
The yield on C hitters is 1 hit (Simmons) out of 8 taken. Ahmed and Caratini are kind of in a nebulous zone of useful players but not hit or bust.
The yield on C pitchers is 1 hit (Wood) out of only 4 taken. Jury still out on Minter.
And so far no hits on HS pitchers out of 16 taken. Locke is probably the closest to a hit. And the jury remains out on Wentz and Muller.
We have reduced our tendency to take HS pitchers (as have other major league teams) in that part of the draft and that's a good thing. With respect to the 2nd (and I might add 3rd) rounds, I would argue for populating the draft board something along these lines: HS hitters 35%, C pitchers 30%, C hitters 20%, HS pitchers 15%. I am not advocating never taking a HS pitchers in those rounds but it should not happen often.
Last edited: