2015 June Draft Results Thread

sturg33 said:
Link to me where these guys were projected first rounders... I'd love to see it.

I don't know how many times I have to say this in this thread - but it will probably make for a good drinking game. I'm don't care about the individual players (I don't know them)... I care about the philosophy
Click to expand...

Here's more for you since you need more "proof"...

http://m.mlb.com/news/article/129269966/shortstops-remain-atop-latest-mock-draft

http://www.si.com/mlb/2015/06/08/mlb-mock-draft-first-round-draft-day-dansby-swanson

http://www.scout.com/mlb/scouting/story/1552956-final-2015-mlb-mock-draft-picks-1-105

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...raft-dansby-swanson-brendan-rodgers/28516965/

Enough yet???
 
Nothing but college arms for awhile, just as nscapi pointed out we did in 2008. Clearly a strategy going in. And it did work out well last time as he pointed out.
 
I don't claim to have any insights into the individual players taken. But historically the middle rounds (4-10) have been a sweet spot for taking college pitchers. The data show that once you get into the late rounds (11 onward) every type of player is very speculative, including college pitchers. By the middle rounds (4-10), picking HS players becomes quite speculative. Less so for college players, because they are further along in their development and you don't have to rely on projection as much. Going with college bats in the middle rounds is not bad, but for whatever reason we have been better at picking and developing the right college pitchers.

We have a good track record with college pitchers in those rounds (4-10). In recent years, we've picked up guys like Janas, Graham, Martin, Clemens, Oberholtzer, Gearrin. Going further back, Medlen was a 10th rounder. Our track record with college bats and HS players is not as good in the middle rounds.

As I've argued before, a balanced approach is probably best. But if you are going to go all in on college arms, the middle rounds are where you want to do it.
 
You are probably right in this analysis, but it just seems odd that we would draft 10 pitchers out of our first 12 picks when our farm system is already pitching heavy and position player weak.
 
Well it's pretty apparent that this organization fully backs Fredi and is moving forward with him at the helm, because that right now is the only logical reason why we selected so many bullpen arms, because Fredi goes through em like water.
 
 
It's hard to call this draft anything other than baffling after the Allard pick. Every single pick other than #14 is widely considered a reach, and most of them a big reach. Guardado wasn't even in the top 200-500 of most draft sites. The stats for most of the college pitchers taken are very mediocre.

I can understand getting some under slot guys so they can afford Allard, but it seems like every single other pick was very underwhelming. I certainly don't understand what's going on, but oh well, not like I know anything about any of these guys that can't be read on a fansite.
 
sturg33 said:
11 of 13 picks are pitchers... is that what we do normally? I thought I saw earlier we did like 55% of picks during Roy's last era
Click to expand...

Its 10 rounds out of 1 draft. Clark didnt draft 55% pitching exactly every year. I would bet by the end of the draft when all players are signed we are around 55-60% pitchers.
 
skillet said:
You are probably right in this analysis, but it just seems odd that we would draft 10 pitchers out of our first 12 picks when our farm system is already pitching heavy and position player weak.
Click to expand...

I agree with nsacpi on the notion that 4-10 is a solid place to grab college and juco players (especially pitchers), but all pitchers/all day doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

But I think this shows how the brass views the lack of pitching depth in the lower reaches of the system. A lot of guys on the Rome staff are probably a little nervous.
 
I don't know where this idea we are devoid of hitting is coming from. Albies/Peraza/Peterson/Davidson/Ruiz/Mallex is a pretty good group of hitters. We drafted a whole bunch of position players in the mid rounds the last few years and have squat to show for it. Braves do a much better job getting hitters from the international market.
 
Enscheff said:
It's hard to call this draft anything other than baffling after the Allard pick. Every single pick other than #14 is widely considered a reach, and most of them a big reach. Guardado wasn't even in the top 200-500 of most draft sites. The stats for most of the college pitchers taken are very mediocre.

I can understand getting some under slot guys so they can afford Allard, but it seems like every single other pick was very underwhelming. I certainly don't understand what's going on, but oh well, not like I know anything about any of these guys that can't be read on a fansite.
Click to expand...

I'm with you on the baffled part, but I don't see the early high school guys as reaches based on the rankings at BA, PG, MiLB, and other places. The Braves scouts see these guys and grade them accordingly. Soroka throws 92-94 with heavy sink and is considered to have a high ceiling. Riley is viewed as perhaps the best two-way player in the draft with big-time power potential. Herbert is a solid catch-and-throw guy whose bat is expected to carry. After that, I tend to agree with you, except that a lot of folks fell in love with Guardado late (and most of the lists were assembled a month ago).
 
I'm much more confident in this organization developing pitchers and helping them reach peak value, whether it be in the form of helping the major league team or acquiring something in a trade than I am a positional player. Taking that into consideration, we are building depth and should be able to and will be able to acquire hitting at other positions of need.

I didn't like the Drew trade, but without a Wainwright and Marquis we wouldn't have been able to acquire him. Same with Sheffield with Odalis, among many other moves that we made during that era.

And gone are the days where we can bring up a high impact bat year after year like we did in the 90's starting with Gant and Justice, than Klesko, Javy, Chipper, Andruw, etc. It would be nice to get to that point, but after the graduation of Freeman, Simmons, and Heyward and the recent evaluation and drafts of our previous regime has left the organization devoid of talent like that.

I'm not necessarily trying to defend the FO on this particular draft so far but appears that there is a game plan in place, and with the history and success that guys like Hart and Clark have had over the years, I'll give them the benefit of doubt...but it appears a couple of things are going on right now

1) allocating more bonus money for Allard, who clearly was on the Braves radar and they love and want to get into the organization and develop (Clearly was the Braves choice and could be an elite SP) &
2) drafting college relief pitchers that should be ready sooner and can provide the Braves to go on the cheap with high impact arms in the bullpen in the near future to contend while allocating more dollars at more pressing areas of need &
3) drafting hopefully more raw talent and taking on more risk in the later rounds that are farther away but could provide greater dividends in the long term
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top