KB21
Where's My Cup of Coffee?
Where is this article?
- STARTS TODAY AT 7PM - 2016 June Amateur Draft Discussion
- Thread starter rico43
- Start date
- Status
Where is this article?
It's not really worth reading. All it says is the Braves could give $300k to a real prospect and then give another $300k to a non-prospect who is represented by the same handler. The handler will (for example) keep 10% of the prospect's cash and 50% of the non-prospect's cash, and the non-prospect could give some of his cash to the real prospect. In the end the prospect and handler get paid, while the non-prospect makes a few bucks out of the deal.
The whole article basically spelled out the same scenario over and over with different dollar amounts attached, but you should be able to get the idea.
True. All of this obviously comes down to scouting and there are outliers. That's just kind of generally the way I see value. And college RPs are a little different.
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
I've looked at a couple decades of Braves drafts. For picks right after the first round (#31 to end of third round) we have done best with college pitchers and HS hitters. Doesn't mean we should not consider other types of players with those picks, but we should be aware of yield by type at different parts of the draft.
As for the contention we are stacked with pitching in the minors, I don't agree. Attrition is quite high for pitching prospects.
In particular our rotation in High A is a bit weak outside of Povse. A couple college pitchers taken at 40 and 44 could join Povse in the AA rotation next year.
If you don't consider the Braves stacked with pitching prospects, then you just don't believe you can ever be stacked with pitching prospects...which is your prerogative, but by any measure we are loaded with them.
If Puk and Lewis are both gone, I'm fine with taking Groome, though. If we come out with the most talented pitcher in 2 straight drafts and neither of them are Mike Soroka, then we're on our way.
Horsehide Harry
<B>Mr. Free Trade</B>
Some of those were seen as injury threats from the beginning for various reasons: Hanson, Beachy and Medlen were all considered high risk (as was Wood). Minor was unusual. Delgado was traded.
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
Well, would Allard fall under high injury risk? Is Toussaint high risk? Newcomb? Fried? Really any pitcher is.
As a rough rule with pitching you lose one very good starting prospect per level. That means if you have two good ones in AAA only 1 will make as a quality ML starter. If you have three in AAA, one will make it, and so forth.
As I see it, we started this year with one established ML starter--Teheran. We had 2 who had proven themselves in AAA--Wisler and Blair. The odds are one will make it. I would expect one more out of the group of Sims, Newcomb (and two semi prospects in Gant and Folty). So three so far. And one more out of the group in A ball or lower (Povse, Soroka, Allard, Sanchez, Toussaint). Four is my expected number of quality ML starters based on what we have. For some of the ones who fall by the wayside, it will be injuries. For others, lack of talent or failure to develop. Attrition is high for pitching prospects, espcially those in the lower levels.
Maybe we'll do a little better and develop five quality starters. But there is risk in the other direction too. So we need to add some more via high draft picks. I would note that in another thread there is a discussion of of our likely top international signings. It is a list highly skewed toward hitters, five out of six. So the draft has to be used to balance that out. If our #1 pick is a hitter, the next two should be pitchers. And our draft record suggests we will do better if picks 40 and 44 are college pitchers.
In my mind there is little doubt we need to keep adding some relatively high picks on the pitching side.
I think we're interpreting 'stacked with prospects' differently. You seem to interpret it as 'will likely result in being overflowing with good major league starters'. I'm simply saying that we have far more good pitching prospects than is normal, even for a pretty good farm system.
It's not like you need to have a likely 5-man rotation inside your farm system at any one time. Our pitching prospects all basically cover a 5-year range in age. We don't need to produce a loaded major league staff out of just those prospects in order to be 'stacked with prospects'....we just need to be stacked with prospects. And we are.
Obviously we need to continue to draft pitching, no one is suggesting otherwise. My assertion from the beginning has only been that if all else is equal, at the top of this one draft, we need to take a big college bat that can be ready soon. I think Lewis fits the bill there. If he is gone and Groome is available, then all else is no longer equal, and I would favor Groome at that point.
It's not like you need to have a likely 5-man rotation inside your farm system at any one time. Our pitching prospects all basically cover a 5-year range in age. We don't need to produce a loaded major league staff out of just those prospects in order to be 'stacked with prospects'....we just need to be stacked with prospects. And we are.
Obviously we need to continue to draft pitching, no one is suggesting otherwise. My assertion from the beginning has only been that if all else is equal, at the top of this one draft, we need to take a big college bat that can be ready soon. I think Lewis fits the bill there. If he is gone and Groome is available, then all else is no longer equal, and I would favor Groome at that point.
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
Our High A rotation consists of Povse, a 22 year old with a strikeout to walk ratio of 12 to 5, a 23 year old with a strikeout to walk ratio of 18 to 8, a 22 year old with a strikeout to walk ratio of 22 to 15 and a 22 year old with a strikeout to walk ratio of 15 to 9. When you are a bit old for the level you really need to have a terrific strikeout to walk ratio to be considered a real prospect. Some of these guys not named Povse might make the majors. But they are not going to be quality ML starters.
So we have a bit of a soft spot in High A. We also have a soft spot in the majors where we have a grand total of 1 established ML starting pitcher. That's two levels where we have significant weaknesses. I liked the group that we started the year with in AAA and AA. So two strong levels. In Rome and extended spring training you have some good talent in Allard, Soroka, Sanchez, Fried and Toussaint. But we need to be realistic about how far away they are and how steep the climb is for young pitchers and how great the injury risk is.
I don't think anyone is being unrealistic. This is my point - you seem to believe when someone says 'stacked with pitching prospects' they mean 'we will be stacked with major league aces soon'. That's not the case. It's precisely because of the attrition that we like the sheer volume of good pitching prospects we have. There is a high likelihood that we can produce at least 3 good major league SP out of our current group...that is very good for any one point in time for a farm system.
Do you truly believe we need to have the number of top-end pitching prospects we have at Rome at every single level to warrant saying that we are stacked with pitching prospects? That farm system would be literally the most stacked any farm system has ever been in pitching prospects...so it seems like too high a standard to require that before saying that we're loaded with prospects.
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
I think in evaluating what we will have in the next few years, we have to take into account what is there at the ML level in the way of established starters that we have control over during the next few years. And looking at it this way I see weakness at two levels (including arguably the most important one when it comes to projections for the next 3-5 years) and 3 strong levels. When you look at it that way, what you get is an average or slightly above average system when it comes to starting pitching. It is hard to escape the conclusion that we will have to continue investing heavily in pitching at the top of the draft. I expect we will go either hitter pitcher pitcher or pitcher hitter hitter with our first three picks.
I'm not going to look at our current major league pitching too much when deciding whether or not to take an 18-year-old pitcher at the top of the draft. Our pitching staff will soon consist of a lot of guys who are currently prospects, one way or another. And honestly, that's true of most teams, especially given contract realities.
I'm evaluating solely our farm system, not our major league team. And we are stacked with pitching prospects there. Again, that doesn't mean we can now stop drafting pitching, of course that's not the case. Because we need to continue to replenish the farm. But when you look at our system, it is blatantly obvious which side we are in greater need of high-end prospects...and that's on the offensive side. If we take a hitter at 3, I'm fine with pitchers at 40 and 44 (though I'd absolutely prefer HS pitching there). But I would prefer not to take pitching with all of our first 3 picks. Because we need hitting talent, and we're not likely to add big-time hitters either via trade or FA. We need to draft them.
KB21
Where's My Cup of Coffee?
Man! Can you imagine having Jason Groome, Kolby Allard, Mike Soroka, Max Fried, Touki Toussaint, and Ricardo Sanchez as very young arms in the system?
But you have to account for the fact that Medlen and Beachy weren't really heralded as prospects. So we likely have a couple of lesser heralded guys on the farm like Ellis, Bird, etc who'll torn into quality starters.
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
Beachy had a 9 to 1 strikeout to walk ratio in AAA. Medlen was a slacker at 5 to 1. Let me know when one of Ellis, Bird, etc approaches that. I kinda like Brandon Barker who is at a bit better than 3 to 1 in AA at age 23. Both Beachy and Medlen were at better than 4 to 1 in AA, with Medlen a year younger at that level.
I don't see how that disputes anything I said.
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
My point is that while Beachy and Medlen might have lacked the stuff and pedigree that helps a pitcher get recognized as a top prospect, that their results in the upper minors were in fact elite even adjusted for age. Moreover, our current group of "unheralded" pitchers are not producing those kinds of results. But I do think Gant and Barker, and maybe Ellis, bear watching. It is not out of the realm of possibility that one of them becomes an established major league starting pitcher. Not likely collectively or individually likely, but possible.
- Status