The problem there is that it makes no sense to have to depend on your #1 pick to get extra money. All we would have to do is sign scrubs for 10-25 K a pop during some/all of the rounds between 4-10 and we could easily afford whoever we wanted at pick 2. Given that picks in that range have a horrible hit rate anyway, it'd be far more effective to draft BPA at 1 and do that. If we had multiple picks in the second round range and actually needed the money to sign someone that would be one thing, but we don't.
Official pre-Draft thread
- Thread starter Hudson2
- Start date
- Status
The problem there is that it makes no sense to have to depend on your #1 pick to get extra money. All we would have to do is sign scrubs for 10-25 K a pop during some/all of the rounds between 4-10 and we could easily afford whoever we wanted at pick 2. Given that picks in that range have a horrible hit rate anyway, it'd be far more effective to draft BPA at 1 and do that. If we had multiple picks in the second round range and actually needed the money to sign someone that would be one thing, but we don't.
UNCBlue012
Well-known member
I think we end up with Wright.
cajunrevenge
Well-known member
Cant even agree with you without an argument. Again, lets just fire the scouts to save that money and draft BPA according to BA.
I still don't get it. BA gets its info from the scouts you are so cleverly suggesting they fire. The entire cleverness of your comments hinges on the false conclusion that we are saying these scouts are not needed now that prospect rankings are so prevalent.
Your "jokes" can't even follow consistent logic haha.
cajunrevenge
Well-known member
I only suggested we fire our scouts. I doubt the entirety of prospect "experts" get all their info from our scouts.
It is logical to draw the following series of conclusions:
1. Sites that post prospect rankings gather info from sources employed by many different teams, therefore....
2. Those rankings are a pretty good approximation of the general consensus of the quality of prospects by the industry, therefore,
3. If the Braves value players differently than those rankings, the Braves are either,
A. Smarter than everyone else, or,
B. Dumber than everyone else, or,
C. Blowing smoke up your asses about who they consider BPA, and you bought it due to the fact you are either,
a. Stupid, or,
b. A blind posi-Barve.
1. Sites that post prospect rankings gather info from sources employed by many different teams, therefore....
2. Those rankings are a pretty good approximation of the general consensus of the quality of prospects by the industry, therefore,
3. If the Braves value players differently than those rankings, the Braves are either,
A. Smarter than everyone else, or,
B. Dumber than everyone else, or,
C. Blowing smoke up your asses about who they consider BPA, and you bought it due to the fact you are either,
a. Stupid, or,
b. A blind posi-Barve.
I hope so. Better not reach again.
Southcack77
Well-known member
At this point, the debate is not going to change anyone's minds, but the math absolutely can make sense.
There is more money to be saved at the top of the draft than there is further down.
Saving money at the top means you sign more prospects overall, which theoretically will spread the risk.
Quite possibly a team could rate several players as equivalent prospects and choose to sign the one who will sign for the least. if that's truly their rating doesn't that make perfect sense?
cajunrevenge
Well-known member
I will play your game Spok.
1. Sites using sources employed by many teams would make their rankings an average of what teams think.
2. If one team thinks Mike Trout is the #1 player in the draft and another thinks he is 45th that would average out to 22/23. Some teams can think highly of a player and others less, so we might be one of 10 teams that thinks a player is a top 10 pick whereas 10 think the player is a top 15 pick and 10 more think he is top 20. Just because a player averages ranked 15th does not mean we are the only team to think that player should be ranked higher. And I think we should strive to be better than average. In theory if they take input from every team
3. Why would teams employ scouts that give away their work for free to be posted online? I would be wary of the intentions of the people giving out the info.
4. Rankings change rapidly. Soroka was rising up rankings at the last second last year that wasnt reflected on "experts" rankings.
5. If your so damn smart try a shadow draft of the Braves picks and we can see how that works out over the years.
1. Sites using sources employed by many teams would make their rankings an average of what teams think.
2. If one team thinks Mike Trout is the #1 player in the draft and another thinks he is 45th that would average out to 22/23. Some teams can think highly of a player and others less, so we might be one of 10 teams that thinks a player is a top 10 pick whereas 10 think the player is a top 15 pick and 10 more think he is top 20. Just because a player averages ranked 15th does not mean we are the only team to think that player should be ranked higher. And I think we should strive to be better than average. In theory if they take input from every team
3. Why would teams employ scouts that give away their work for free to be posted online? I would be wary of the intentions of the people giving out the info.
4. Rankings change rapidly. Soroka was rising up rankings at the last second last year that wasnt reflected on "experts" rankings.
5. If your so damn smart try a shadow draft of the Braves picks and we can see how that works out over the years.
I already have. We will see how Kyle Lewis turns out compared to Ian Anderson. I have never waivered from that preference.
I'll go ahead and set my preference for the Braves this year as Wright/Lewis tied, with Gore right behind them. We can compare those picks to whichever under slot guy the Barves take this year.
Meanwhile, you can keep on posi-Barving day after day.
I'll go ahead and set my preference for the Braves this year as Wright/Lewis tied, with Gore right behind them. We can compare those picks to whichever under slot guy the Barves take this year.
Meanwhile, you can keep on posi-Barving day after day.
cajunrevenge
Well-known member
Theres a lot more to the draft than the first pick. And silly me I thought a Braves forum was a place to root for the Braves. Your as much a Braves fan as I am a Yankee fan.
Yeah, there is tons of discussion about who the Barves are going to take after pick 5. That was sarcasm by the way.
Folks are talking about pick 5, and sometimes make a small mention about pick 41. But feel free to bring up irrelevant points as usual haha.
Southcack77
Well-known member
Are Beck and Adell now "underslot" guys for you? Two weeks ago they were among the best players available in your view.
cajunrevenge
Well-known member
Thats only because we dont know who will be available at those picks. There will be a lot of discussion about all those picks when we get closer to them.
If not for the injury issues, he's probably the first college bat taken. And it's a valid concern and a reason I don't want to draft him at 5. But some team will get a steal if he falls out of the 1st 15 picks and he doesn't need TJS.
Southcack77
Well-known member
It is a little ironic to see so many people upset that the Braves might take the best college bat available. Granted, the injury is significant.
Two weeks ago we didn't have the information we do now. Things have stabilized and a clear Top 5 have emerged.
Notice how I changed my views based on assimilating new info? Notice how that's different than being a posi-Barve?
Yeah, why wouldn't an NL team want a position player with no true position on defense?
I suppose the team who runs Kemp out in LF and never subs for him defensively would value a player like that haha.
Maybe from your blog that's full of amazing info, like your Sale trade proposal and your claim the Braves would have already traded guys like Garcia by now.
Derp!!
- Status