i disagree
WEDNESDAY AUGUST 1ST MINORS FINAL: 9+ no-hit innings in FLA
- Thread starter rico43
- Start date
i disagree
Southcack77
Well-known member
Tapate50
Well-known member
People keep getting this so wrong. Fixed.
Hudson2
Well-known member
Wrights been the same way. Makes me think they had them working on some stuff.
meh. What I love about John Hart the most is that he slid back into an analyst role at MLB Network like nothing every happened.
Gotta love relying on hindsight to evaluate moves!
It's possible to call Anderson a sign-ability pick AND call him a good prospect at the same time...all without being a "h8er".
Nerfherders
Well-known member
Just noticed Brothers demoted to AA? It wasn't that long ago he was closing for the Rockies. Wow.
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
i would give my right arm to have him back
jpx7
Very Flirtatious, but Doubts What Love Is.
He was a little too good in signing amateur players, in fact.
jpx7
Very Flirtatious, but Doubts What Love Is.
Yea, Wilson’s right there for me amongst the top tier, above those other arms you listed (who are all second-tier).
the first part doesn't make sense to me. it's not hindsight if the people who chose him saw him developing into what he is now. did he just so happen to work out better than they thought, or is this what they thought when they drafted him, hence why they drafted him where they did? that's not hindsight.
i acknowledged his being a signability pick. he was. but if they also thought he'd develop really well, like he has, then shouldn't credit be given for that? or should they have taken somebody more highly ranked by FG even if they didn't like them as much?
i also don't think evaluating based on results is necessarily bad either. but you know.
Last edited:
Anderson signed for 60% of his slot value because the entire MLB industry other than the Braves valued him less than that. That's why he cut that deal. That's why he agreed to sign for that before the draft even happened. He and his agent knew what he was worth to everyone else in the league. His signing bonus is a direct reflection of his value, not some ranking on FG.
He was probably a Top 10-15 guy, and those guys are good pitching prospects. Those guys develop into good pitchers quite often (relatively speaking). We are seeing a #16 pick do exactly that right now as we follow Touki's progress.
To sit here and claim that the Braves knew something special about Anderson when they grabbed him at #3 is silly. They decided to get 3 good pitching prospects, and Anderson was the best one they could get with the money they wanted to use at that pick. If Wentz or Muller were dominating, I have no doubt you would be pimping how great those picks were.
ball4life32
Danville Rookie
Didn’t Wentz just recently go like 31.2 IP without giving up a run? Muller has been pretty dominant in July as well.
Plus the Braves were much higher on Soroka and Riley than the entire MLB Industry and both are now consensus top 50 prospects. I remember people complaining we took both too high in the 15 draft.
bravesfanMatt
Steve Harvey'd
Wanna know the pick I hated the most in 2015. Minty hippo. ��
Tapate50
Well-known member
They just should have asked us first before pulling the trigger on any of these guys. Easy fix for the FO from here on out.
This is lazy analysis. You are using industry perception to determine actual talent level. It's possible the Braves saw something that many other teams didn't. That happens sometimes in scouting. Otherwise, the only way to determine if a pick is a good one is how much the player signs for. Take a player at #1 who signs for less than #2 or 3? Then you didn't get the best talent in the draft. Oh, he turns out to be better than the other two? You got lucky.
The Braves spent less and got more talent at #3 than other teams around them. Isn't that the entire goal?
he had pre-draft helium; maybe the FO saw him and saw a trajectory as good as the guys seen as better at the time. so it's impossible the FO found Anderson to have as much upside as the guys supposedly a good bit better than him by industry consensus, and decided he would be not only worth the #3 pick, but also sign for less than the other guys?
this is a silly argument. that means when an org. goes off the "consensus" board and "reaches" for someone who ends up being well worth the pick, they don't get credit for it? what about soroka? can we not judge that pick in hindsight as a good pick because the FO couldn't have possibly seen something special in him?
muller and wentz have performed well overall and neither of them are 21 yet. neither of them are done being good prospects at this point. it was a good move to get Anderson+Wentz+Muller. Anderson has so far been worth the #3 pick, especially considering he signed so far under slot.
nope. not possible.
plus, we don't even know what other teams thought of him. who's to say he wouldn't have gone 4, 5, or 6? maybe a team behind us saw an opportunity to get a guy they viewed as very high upside for a cheaper price than the "consensus" guys. there's a lot we don't know. but we do know that anderson has performed extremely well, whether he was the #3 pick or the #15 pick. that's all you can ask for, and giving credit for that is hardly absurd.
jpx7
Very Flirtatious, but Doubts What Love Is.
Funny that the consensus, at the time, was that at least one (if not both) of Wentz and Muller needed to end up great prospects to make the Anderson gambit worth it. Instead, he’s been far-and-away the best of the three, professionally, even before his recent summer dominance. It’s made anything the latter two do a gravy of sorts.
Last edited:
Tapate50
Well-known member
I like this post, but I'd like to point out that Muller and Wentz BOTH have performed well for "first rounders" also. If that group is a trifecta of arms that "make it" then what a coup that is....