2015 June Draft Results Thread

Tapate50 said:
Not gonna lie, if they thought that Ga boy would sign, it's a no brainer
Click to expand...

This just infuriates me. These players are getting their ultimate dream. You get to play baseball for a living. Not signing because you don't want to play for team "x" just really angers me. I am pretty sure all of us would love to play baseball for money. Yeah we would all want to be Braves, but that would just be icing on the cake.
 
jpx7 said:
I guess anyone with a contrary opinion to the organization's should just drop out from posting, since it's such a burden for [MENTION=35]yeezus[/MENTION] (et al).
Click to expand...

no, not every single disagreement. but when every single move is disagreed with, and when things like, "no, they should've taken hitter because they're a better bet" are said, it's just silly. sorry, you don't know better (despite how much you know).
 
KB21 said:
Mike Nikorak is still there. He may be the Braves next pick if he doesn't go in the next few. I'm going with Nikorak, Everett, or Beck.
Click to expand...

If the Braves could get Allard and Nikorak I'd be freaking ecstatic! The best RH and LH HS pitchers imo.
 
Look: [MENTION=33]Tapate50[/MENTION] may very well be right that Allard was far-and-away the best-player-available left on the board for the Braves, at least in their estimation, and that's fine. And yet, when you read things like, "Look for the Braves to keep picking high-school arms," that indicates the organization may not be looking best-player but best-pitcher-available, which is a different philosophy and one whose merits (at this moment in the team's trajectory) are entirely fine to debate. I also think it's entirely fine—welcome, even, on such a forum as this—to say, "Well, I wish they'd look to some high-upside offense in the first seventy-five," or even argue that specific bats represented better values or better bets at a given spot in the draft.
 
jpx7 said:
Look: [MENTION=33]Tapate50[/MENTION] may very well be right that Allard was far-and-away the best-player-available left on the board for the Braves, at least in their estimation, and that's fine. And yet, when you read things like, "Look for the Braves to keep picking high-school arms," that indicates the organization may not be looking best-player but best-pitcher-available, which is a different philosophy and one whose merits (at this moment in the team's trajectory) are entirely fine to debate. I also think it's entirely fine—welcome, even, on such a forum as this—to say, "Well, I wish they'd look to some high-upside offense in the first seventy-five," or even argue that specific bats represented better values or better bets at a given spot in the draft.
Click to expand...

Dude I guess you think you know more than all the people whose job it is to do this!!!!!!!!!
 
Lucas Herbert -- he was Allard's catcher in high school. #52 rated player in the draft according to MLB Pipeline.
 
I never argued you can't disagree with what the FO does (I have before, plenty of times). It's the tone of "we should have done this, they made a mistake, we don't need pitching (as if the org. isn't aware of the players they have in place for the present and future), we should have taken the equal upside bat (as if we know how the org. had the players rated)." When your opinion always always always contradicts the FO's (giles) you must think you know better (I truly believe giles thinks he knows better. this is pretty obvious).
 
yeezus said:
no, not every single disagreement. but when every single move is disagreed with, and when things like, "no, they should've taken hitter because they're a better bet" are said, it's just silly. sorry, you don't know better (despite how much you know).
Click to expand...

Well, you seem to grumble like this in every single dispute, so I'd like to read which debates meet your wondrous validity-threshold.

Moreover: saying "they should've taken hitter because they're a better bet" is not "just silly," as plenty of intelligent people—people outside this board, who've been cited and linked, and who are paid for their analysis (and are, hence, professionals)—have argued and evinced as much, at least on the whole. Now, for the Braves' organization specifically, who knows: that's what we're ostensibly here to debate.

But if you're not here for those sorts of debates, I'm not sure what you are here for—Fearless Leader isn't dipping into our dues-pool anytime soon, and certainly not to invest you with a Silly-Disagreement Sheriff silver-star.
 
So if the "if you have putchers, you can trade for hitters" is accurate, why isnt the reverse true?

Obviously, you need balance, but we arent balanced righr now. Position players are scare.

I believe the best strategy is to load up on hitters and use them and free agency to acquite pitchers if need be. If you take 10 pitchers and 2 work out, thats a lot of wasted resources. Chances are more than 2 out of 10 hitters work out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top