2019 MLB Draft Thread

striker42 said:
My biggest beef with this draft is that the Braves violated the cardinal rule of drafting: take the best player available. That's even more true in baseball than other sports. If you doubled the draft number of each player, you'd still say that was a reasonable spot. So if Langeliers went 18, that would seem right. If Shewmake when 42, that would be right too. And I think round 4 may have still been a reach for Philip.

We prioritized position of need and speed of getting them to the majors over quality. I don't like that.
Click to expand...

Langeliers is totally reasonable where he was taken.

Shewmake is a slight reach at best.

Philip ... well he looks like a bigger reach, but I guess they must have liked something.
 
mqt said:
We have no reason to think this is the case. Langeliers was ranked around 9 and Shewmake was ranked in the 20s by a few places, it’s entirely reasonable they were the top guys for us. I disagree, but that’s a weird statement to make.
Click to expand...

What I'm saying is that if Langeliers went 18 or Shewmake at 42, no one would bat an eye. FG had Langeliers at 14 so him going at 18 wouldn't be a shock. Shewmake was at 54 on the Fangraphs board.

We almost certainly had these guys higher on our board but our board seemed to put more weight on position of need. Brown said as much last night after drafting Langeliers. That's the problem.

It's just difficult to make the argument that these guys were the best players available. They weren't.
 
Southcack77 said:
Langeliers is totally reasonable where he was taken.

Shewmake is a slight reach at best.

Philip ... well he looks like a bigger reach, but I guess they must have liked something.
Click to expand...

Langeliers was reasonable but there's a good argument against him being the BPA there. When Brown was out selling the pick he was saying how he answers the catcher question for us. Position of need played a big role here.

I disagree about Shewmake. I think he was a big reach. He was a second rounder at best. The hit tool might be there but he's not got a position.
 
clvclv said:
Awwww, does it hurt your feelings that I was right too?
Click to expand...

Amazingly, I don’t have particularly strong feelings in either direction on whether or not you were correct about this draft pick. I just think it’s amusing that you’re taking a victory lap on something that has been rumored to be possible for the same amount of time you’re claiming to have suggested it.
 
not even close to every team takes "BPA" with their picks. some do, some take their own BPA which obviously tends to differ, and some have other strategies. to say "BPA is a cardinal rule" is kinda dumb, because 1). there's rarely consensus, especially beyond the first few picks 2). other strategies employed involve *not* taking the perceived BPA.
 
Super said:
not even close to every team takes "BPA" with their picks. some do, some take their own BPA which obviously tends to differ, and some have other strategies. to say "BPA is a cardinal rule" is kinda dumb, because 1). there's rarely consensus, especially beyond the first few picks 2). other strategies employed involve *not* taking the perceived BPA.
Click to expand...

Baseball is really different than most sports in that the pool of eligible draftees is spread much further in developmental terms. It's much more difficult to discern who is the BPA in different spots because you really don't know how an 18-year-old is going to develop physically. If the kid was shaving in 8th grade, he probably is who is going to be physically by the time he graduates. For kids who are developing at the normally-projected pace, it's difficult to know.

The other thing with baseball is that more than any other sport, it is finite skill-based and a much more static game. Some guys who aren't particularly gifted in terms of size/speed can develop a great hit tool. Some guys who are strong or fast never can. So of all the drafts, it's the biggest crap shoot for a variety of reasons.
 
thewupk said:
I don't see why everyone is upset. By these scouting reports it's clear to me we drafted the next Molina and Zobrist with our 1st round picks.
Click to expand...

Not Molina... better framer than flowers, catch and throw equal to JTR, and .750 ops hitter. Should start the ASG at suntrust
 
striker42 said:
What I'm saying is that if Langeliers went 18 or Shewmake at 42, no one would bat an eye. FG had Langeliers at 14 so him going at 18 wouldn't be a shock. Shewmake was at 54 on the Fangraphs board.

We almost certainly had these guys higher on our board but our board seemed to put more weight on position of need. Brown said as much last night after drafting Langeliers. That's the problem.

It's just difficult to make the argument that these guys were the best players available. They weren't.
Click to expand...

I’m not one to blindly trust in the FO and assume they know more than everyone else, but I also think it’s frankly absurd to go out on a limb and say they specifically drafted players they didn’t have rated as the proper value for that pick. Signability does matter, so it’s likely they had some prep guys rated a bit higher that wouldn’t fit the rest of their plan, but pointing to a BA draft ranking doesn’t mean Atlanta agreed with it. As I’ve said, I didn’t like our Day 1, and would grade it similarly to you. I just think we’re assigning a lot our own opinions to the FO by claiming they went way off board.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top