PDA

View Full Version : We'll have either the No. 7 or No. 8 pick in the draft next year



Blitz Dorsey
09-30-2007, 10:52 PM
We have the same record as the White Sox (72-90) so depends on what happens with the tiebreaker, we will either have the No. 7 or No. 8 overall pick of the 2008 MLB draft.

dougdirt
09-30-2007, 10:57 PM
We have the 7th pick becuase they had a better record than us in 2006.

RedEye
10-01-2007, 01:56 AM
So... any ideas about who we'd be looking at with the 7th pick?

icehole3
10-01-2007, 07:47 AM
Best available pitcher for at least rounds 1-3, or I'll be pissed

http://www.sternfannetwork.com/forum/images/smilies/Happy/HappyWave.gif

dougdirt
10-01-2007, 07:51 AM
Best available pitcher for at least rounds 1-3, or I'll be pissed

http://www.sternfannetwork.com/forum/images/smilies/Happy/HappyWave.gif

prepare to be upset.

EddieMilner
10-01-2007, 11:16 AM
I am hoping they find a SS with lead-off potential.

Joseph
10-01-2007, 11:46 AM
How about Daniel Webb from Paducah, KY?

M2
10-01-2007, 11:54 AM
prepare to be upset.

The Reds have got to stop being pennywise when it comes to the draft.

15fan
10-01-2007, 12:30 PM
Recent selections @ #7:

2007 - Matt LaPorta

2006 - Clayton Kershaw

2005 - Troy Tulowitzki

2004 - Homer Bailey

2003 - Nick Markakis

2002 - Prince Fielder

2001 - Chris Smith

dougdirt
10-01-2007, 12:41 PM
The Reds have got to stop being pennywise when it comes to the draft.

I just think it would be surprising if they took 3 pitchers in the first three rounds. I could care less who they took. I mean if somehow Pedro Alvarez were to fall to the Reds at #7, then they should take him (barring something unexpected happening) regardless of the pitchers on the board. Not that I would expect them to, just like they didn't take Porcello this year.

George Anderson
10-01-2007, 01:17 PM
What I dont get is why dont the Reds make the first 10 draft picks all pitchers?? Its not difficult to find hitting and defense at the MLB level and It is no secret that good pitching is a hard comodity to find so why not focus on drafting pitching, pitching and more pitching ??

M2
10-01-2007, 01:48 PM
I just think it would be surprising if they took 3 pitchers in the first three rounds. I could care less who they took. I mean if somehow Pedro Alvarez were to fall to the Reds at #7, then they should take him (barring something unexpected happening) regardless of the pitchers on the board. Not that I would expect them to, just like they didn't take Porcello this year.

I didn't say it had to be a pitcher, just be prepared to pounce when a big talent is there on your pick. The Orioles did that with Matt Wieters this year, perhaps preventing him from tumbling into the latter portion of the first round.

It's just that the Reds are putting too much emphasis on the draft not to take the absolute best player remaining on their board each time they pick. Make it work.

HBP
10-01-2007, 02:15 PM
What I dont get is why dont the Reds make the first 10 draft picks all pitchers?? Its not difficult to find hitting and defense at the MLB level and It is no secret that good pitching is a hard comodity to find so why not focus on drafting pitching, pitching and more pitching ??

It may not be difficult to find, but if the player is developed it'll be expensive. Also, you miss out on players like Bruce and Votto. Although they haven't accomplished anything yet, it looks like they'll be franchise staples for years to come.

camisadelgolf
10-01-2007, 02:46 PM
A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. If your first five draft picks are position players who look like they'll be good enough for the Major Leagues, then they should be worth more than ten pitchers who might not be Major Leaguers in the future. With the way Bowden's drafts went (and many other teams' drafts throughout history), they made it look like drafting a quality pitcher is luck. I'm starting to have a lot faith in the staff Krivsky has put together in respect to the pitching that's being drafted, even though it's not being drafted too early.

Sean Watson - overall, he has been solid
Josh Ravin - he has struggled greatly, but it's all attributed to his control
Jordan Smith - his ceiling probably isn't too high, but he's done nothing but produce so far
Travis Webb - he's pitching well and left-handed, and at worst, I think he projects to be a LOOGY
Jeremy Burchett - he was great last year but decided to leave baseball to accept a high-paying position at Google
Josh Roenicke - he might be the Reds' closer of the future
Kyle Lotzkar - he could be a stud; I've heard nothing but great things
Scott Carroll - he looked very good at Billings this year
Drew Bowman - he's had a disastrous start, but it's too soon to give up on him
Evan Hildebrandt - he signed for above-slot money, but he hasn't pitched in the Reds system yet; people are very high on him, though
Harris Honeycutt - he certainly has some things to work on, but his K rate is very nice

I could also pick out several individuals from the lower rounds who have impressed so far, but there's less information about them, so it's more difficult to project. Still, short of Homer Bailey, the recent pitching selections look leaps and bounds better than the players chosen during Bowden's and O'Brien's respective tenures.

George Anderson
10-01-2007, 02:53 PM
It may not be difficult to find, but if the player is developed it'll be expensive. Also, you miss out on players like Bruce and Votto. Although they haven't accomplished anything yet, it looks like they'll be franchise staples for years to come.

The Reds might miss out on players like Bruce and Votto but they also may be missing out on drafting pitchers like Justin Verlander and Brandon Webb by using the picks for yet more outfielders. Finding players who can hit is alot easier than finding quality starting pitching.

dougdirt
10-01-2007, 03:57 PM
What I dont get is why dont the Reds make the first 10 draft picks all pitchers?? Its not difficult to find hitting and defense at the MLB level and It is no secret that good pitching is a hard comodity to find so why not focus on drafting pitching, pitching and more pitching ??

Pitchers, high school or college are about as high risk of a pick that you can make. Lets just say the first 10 rounds worth of draft picks is going to cost you 4 million dollars, wouldn't you rather have taken the guy your scouts feel have the best chance of making the returns on that money, than just hoping the lesser player you took works outs? Only catchers fail more often to make it to the big leagues than pitchers in the draft.

dougdirt
10-01-2007, 04:04 PM
The Reds might miss out on players like Bruce and Votto but they also may be missing out on drafting pitchers like Justin Verlander and Brandon Webb by using the picks for yet more outfielders. Finding players who can hit is alot easier than finding quality starting pitching.

guys taken directly after Justin Verlander:
Jeff Niemann
Mark Rogers
Jeremy Sowers
Homer Bailey
Wade Townsend
Chris Nelson
Thomas Diamond
Neil Walker
Jared Weaver
Bill Bray

Outside of Jared Weaver, the Reds easily made the best pick so far and I would be willing to say he will remain at least the #2 guy behind Weaver (although I think Bailey is going to be better than Weaver).

As for Brandon Webb, he was drafted in the 8th round. The Reds have taken plenty of college pitchers over the last few years in rounds 2-10. Sam Lecure, James Avery, Scott Carroll, Carlos Fisher, Zach Ward, Jeff Stevens, Sean Watson, Jordan Smith, Travis Webb, Jeremy Burchett, Drew Bowman, Harris Honeycutt and Josh Roenicke are the ones that I saw just going over the last 3 years.

George Anderson
10-01-2007, 04:17 PM
guys taken directly after Justin Verlander:
Jeff Niemann
Mark Rogers
Jeremy Sowers
Homer Bailey
Wade Townsend
Chris Nelson
Thomas Diamond
Neil Walker
Jared Weaver
Bill Bray

Outside of Jared Weaver, the Reds easily made the best pick so far and I would be willing to say he will remain at least the #2 guy behind Weaver (although I think Bailey is going to be better than Weaver).

As for Brandon Webb, he was drafted in the 8th round. The Reds have taken plenty of college pitchers over the last few years in rounds 2-10. Sam Lecure, James Avery, Scott Carroll, Carlos Fisher, Zach Ward, Jeff Stevens, Sean Watson, Jordan Smith, Travis Webb, Jeremy Burchett, Drew Bowman, Harris Honeycutt and Josh Roenicke are the ones that I saw just going over the last 3 years.

I just see the obvious problem with this franchise is its inability to produce quality pitching thru its farm system. Your points are good ones but I think even you would agree there is a problem with a franchise that hasn't produced a quality starting pitcher since Tom Browning. (Bailey isnt there yet). So whats the answer?? Is the problem in the minor league instructors not being able to develop the pitchers or is it the drafting of players?

dougdirt
10-01-2007, 04:37 PM
I just see the obvious problem with this franchise is its inability to produce quality pitching thru its farm system. Your points are good ones but I think even you would agree there is a problem with a franchise that hasn't produced a quality starting pitcher since Tom Browning. (Bailey isnt there yet). So whats the answer?? Is the problem in the minor league instructors not being able to develop the pitchers or is it the drafting of players?

Honestly, I think it was a mix of bad scouting (thanks Marge) and just plain old bad luck. How many top guys did we have who had their arms fall apart? Sure, that happens sometimes, but it just seemed that year after year after year it happened to some of the better arms the Reds had in the system. It hasn't happened lately (knock on wood) and I think it had a lot to do with a change in how to handle arms now, as opposed to how young arms were once handled. It takes time to see the fruits of the draft, but once Jim bowden left, our system made a turn for greener pastures. While we obviously aren't the Devil Rays in terms of pitching depth, we have two top end arms that were in our system this year and pitching at the higher levels. Give it time. Not many guys get drafted and are ready to be pitching in the big leagues in a year or two, college or not.

Blitz Dorsey
10-01-2007, 05:12 PM
Thanks on the info regarding the draft tiebreaker, dougdirt. I wasn't aware that's how they did it in MLB. I get so wrapped up in the NFL draft I figured it was a similar system or maybe a coin flip.

As for the people who are clamoring for the Reds to stock up on pitching in the draft, maybe even use their first 3-5 picks on pitching, I have two things to say...

1. It will never happen (like others have said)

2. But it should. When are the Reds going to learn that they need to stock up on pitchers in the draft? Especially as a small market team, it's much easier to go out and find decent hitters for reasonable money on the FA market than it is to find decent pitchers. Is this really that hard to understand? Get your pitchers in the draft (and obviously mix in some hitters as well but focus on pitching) and get your hitters in trades or on the FA market. Because we all know it's near impossible getting good pitchers on the market unless you want to pay out the arse.

Aronchis
10-01-2007, 06:00 PM
When Jim Bowden left in 2003, the Reds didn't have a Bailey or Cueto in the system. Neither did they have sleepers like Lecure,Fisher,Mul"honey" or Wood(who k'd guys at a impressive rate though he battled arm problems) either. Granted most likely none of the sleepers workout but if one does, it is gold. It shows you how bad the Reds system was in 2003. It was incredibly bad. When people were praying their hopes on Bowden's 2003 draft, that is desperation(another bad draft as usual under Jimbo that was injury prone or just failed).

Nor did the rotation have solid vets like Harang or Arroyo.

A bunch of the Reds problems the last 2 seasons was lack of depth in the rotation and bad bullpen(which has been bad since 2004).

We are already paying the vets going foward. The Reds revenue stream has been long dead. The kids have to pan out. If they don't, we are screwed forever and forever and forever.

Considering the last 2 drafts, the Reds have loaded up on bats, it is time for another arms cattle call. The young offensive talent at the major league level, should also indicate this path in 2008.

dougdirt
10-01-2007, 06:01 PM
2. But it should. When are the Reds going to learn that they need to stock up on pitchers in the draft? Especially as a small market team, it's much easier to go out and find decent hitters for reasonable money on the FA market than it is to find decent pitchers. Is this really that hard to understand? Get your pitchers in the draft (and obviously mix in some hitters as well but focus on pitching) and get your hitters in trades or on the FA market. Because we all know it's near impossible getting good pitchers on the market unless you want to pay out the arse.

Becuase it doesn't make any sense to do so. Its like throwing away money. If you don't think the guy has as good of a chance to make it, you are already in the hole. Then on top of that, pitchers as a whole don't make it nearly as often as other positions do, and now you are in an even bigger hole. Its not hard to get good pitchers on the market. Sure, that theory would work if pitchers were, or heck, for that matter, anyone in the draft had a good shot at making the big leagues and being worth a crap, but they aren't. Even first rounders have pretty crappy odds of being good players in the majors.


Aaron Harang and Bronson Arroyo were both acquired for half a season of Jose Guillen and the rights to Wily Mo Pena. You just have to find the right guys to target in your trades.

redsmetz
10-01-2007, 07:22 PM
Aaron Harang and Bronson Arroyo were both acquired for half a season of Jose Guillen and the rights to Wily Mo Pena. You just have to find the right guys to target in your trades.

I think this is critical. Identifying promising young minor league pitchers (yes, I know that Arroyo and Harang weren't minor leaguers), but catching some of these guys that other clubs don't have room for. I think we've made some progress there and have stocked up on quite a number of good arms. I'd just like to see someone help these young guys figure out pitching and not just throwing.

GoReds33
10-01-2007, 08:34 PM
I think this is critical. Identifying promising young minor league pitchers (yes, I know that Arroyo and Harang weren't minor leaguers), but catching some of these guys that other clubs don't have room for. I think we've made some progress there and have stocked up on quite a number of good arms. I'd just like to see someone help these young guys figure out pitching and not just throwing.That's the only obdvious difference in the trades I have seen since the O'Brien era. We take risks on players that teams don't have room for, or just don't want. It's paid off so far.:)

Superdude
10-01-2007, 09:31 PM
But it should. When are the Reds going to learn that they need to stock up on pitchers in the draft? Especially as a small market team, it's much easier to go out and find decent hitters for reasonable money on the FA market than it is to find decent pitchers. Is this really that hard to understand?

I think the exact opposite. Maybe the Yankees can draft for needs and take risks on pitchers, but draft picks are extremely valuable to a small market team. Limiting your options to what is commonly known as a risky group of players in the first place just because of a slightly biased market seems like a bad approach to me. Especially considering how rare it is to draft and develop a major league contirbutor. I still think getting the most bang for your buck is the way to go.

Blitz Dorsey
10-02-2007, 01:03 AM
Becuase it doesn't make any sense to do so. Its like throwing away money. If you don't think the guy has as good of a chance to make it, you are already in the hole. Then on top of that, pitchers as a whole don't make it nearly as often as other positions do, and now you are in an even bigger hole. Its not hard to get good pitchers on the market. Sure, that theory would work if pitchers were, or heck, for that matter, anyone in the draft had a good shot at making the big leagues and being worth a crap, but they aren't. Even first rounders have pretty crappy odds of being good players in the majors.


Aaron Harang and Bronson Arroyo were both acquired for half a season of Jose Guillen and the rights to Wily Mo Pena. You just have to find the right guys to target in your trades.

I disagree. The Reds (and every team) obviously need to fill out their rosters in the minor leagues and can't take 40 pitchers in a 50-round draft. However, they most certainly CAN target pitching in the early part of the draft. Now, if there is a position player that falls to them and is great value in their minds, by all means take him. Take him! But all things being equal, or when there is a question, ALWAYS TAKE PITCHING! That is my only point. Too often it seems the Reds don't take that approach. Quite frankly, some of the position players they have taken early in the draft recently have been head-scratchers save Bruce. Give me a bunch of young pitchers with live arms who were ranked highly and eventually you are going to have your MLB team well-stocked. The Reds do not understand this approach. Well, Krivsky does much better than Bowden, but I would still like to see a higher concentration of pitching in the draft until things are truly turned around.

You can point to 2 lucky examples like Harang and Arroyo, but those deals were just that: luck. If you think that is the norm, you are sorely mistaken. Most teams are not lucky enough to find their Nos. 1 and 2 starters for the likes of Wily Modesto Pena and Jose "Tazmanian Devil" Guillen.

Aronchis
10-02-2007, 01:07 AM
I disagree. The Reds (and every team) obviously need to fill out their rosters in the minor leagues and can't take 40 pitchers in a 50-round draft. However, they most certainly CAN target pitching in the early part of the draft. Now, if there is a position player that falls to them and is great value in their minds, by all means take him. Take him! But all things being equal, or when there is a question, ALWAYS TAKE PITCHING! That is my only point. Too often it seems the Reds don't take that approach. Quite frankly, some of the position players they have taken early in the draft recently have been head-scratchers save Bruce. Give me a bunch of young pitchers with live arms who were ranked highly and eventually you are going to have your MLB team well-stocked. The Reds do not understand this approach. Well, Krivsky does much better than Bowden, but I would still like to see a higher concentration of pitching in the draft until things are truly turned around.

You can point to 2 lucky examples like Harang and Arroyo, but those deals were just that: luck. If you think that is the norm, you are sorely mistaken. Most teams are not lucky enough to find their Nos. 1 and 2 starters for the likes of Wily Modesto Pena and Jose "Tazmanian Devil" Guillen.

I agree. Harang for Guillen was clearly a steal. Arroyo for Pena not so much as Bronson laid a egg this year while WMP is at the age when things tend to come together for his ilk. He will pitch better in the future, but he had a career year in 2006.

What the Reds need is to develope a couple of arms. It would solve the rotation's depth problem.

dougdirt
10-02-2007, 01:12 AM
You are now assuming the Reds have the positional player and the guy you think they should have taken were rated equally by the Reds. Obviously, I imagine the Reds had Porcello as a better talent than Mesoraco this year, but in previous years it hasn't appeared to be that way.

As for Harang and Arroyo... sure, they worked out nicely for us. Look at Oliver Perez though, he was had for peanuts and he worked out pretty well I would say. Johan Santana was a rule 5 pick. Good pitching can be gotten for cheap if you are at the right place ad the right time and can identify it.

dougflynn23
10-02-2007, 01:47 AM
Based on recent historical data, I'd be looking at the state of Texas. It's time for a college pitcher in the 1st round.

lollipopcurve
10-02-2007, 10:04 AM
It's time for a college pitcher in the 1st round.

Maybe, maybe not. It all depends on who's available.

icehole3
10-02-2007, 11:02 AM
I disagree. The Reds (and every team) obviously need to fill out their rosters in the minor leagues and can't take 40 pitchers in a 50-round draft. However, they most certainly CAN target pitching in the early part of the draft. Now, if there is a position player that falls to them and is great value in their minds, by all means take him. Take him! But all things being equal, or when there is a question, ALWAYS TAKE PITCHING! That is my only point. Too often it seems the Reds don't take that approach. Quite frankly, some of the position players they have taken early in the draft recently have been head-scratchers save Bruce. Give me a bunch of young pitchers with live arms who were ranked highly and eventually you are going to have your MLB team well-stocked. The Reds do not understand this approach. Well, Krivsky does much better than Bowden, but I would still like to see a higher concentration of pitching in the draft until things are truly turned around.

You can point to 2 lucky examples like Harang and Arroyo, but those deals were just that: luck. If you think that is the norm, you are sorely mistaken. Most teams are not lucky enough to find their Nos. 1 and 2 starters for the likes of Wily Modesto Pena and Jose "Tazmanian Devil" Guillen.

I agree as well, every year the high rounds must be leaned towards pitching. Pete Rose said he was asked by Castellini what he thought about the team and he said if you feel like youve got enough pitching go out and get a few more starters, you never ever have enough pitching.

bucksfan2
10-02-2007, 11:05 AM
I disagree. The Reds (and every team) obviously need to fill out their rosters in the minor leagues and can't take 40 pitchers in a 50-round draft. However, they most certainly CAN target pitching in the early part of the draft. Now, if there is a position player that falls to them and is great value in their minds, by all means take him. Take him! But all things being equal, or when there is a question, ALWAYS TAKE PITCHING! That is my only point. Too often it seems the Reds don't take that approach. Quite frankly, some of the position players they have taken early in the draft recently have been head-scratchers save Bruce. Give me a bunch of young pitchers with live arms who were ranked highly and eventually you are going to have your MLB team well-stocked. The Reds do not understand this approach. Well, Krivsky does much better than Bowden, but I would still like to see a higher concentration of pitching in the draft until things are truly turned around.

You can point to 2 lucky examples like Harang and Arroyo, but those deals were just that: luck. If you think that is the norm, you are sorely mistaken. Most teams are not lucky enough to find their Nos. 1 and 2 starters for the likes of Wily Modesto Pena and Jose "Tazmanian Devil" Guillen.

I think using all your top on pitching is flawed logic. I think the notion that you win with pitching is one of the most overused saying in baseball. Its true that you need good pitching to win but you need a balanced team. I would be willing to bet that of the teams in the playoffs they all ranked high in offense. The team with probably the best 1-2 punch in the NL as well as the best pen (Padres) is sitting at home watching as the playoffs begin.

I think you need to target the best player available at the point you draft. If you need to overpay for a certain player that you rate the best then you over pay. I don't think throwing around crazy money is good, especially in a draft when most player are years away from making an impact. Pitching is important but so are guys like Jay Bruce.

Doc. Scott
10-03-2007, 12:22 PM
My draft philosophy would be simple.

Best player available, every round.

Simply put, the best way to maximize your overall talent haul from the draft is to select the player who you believe is the best available every turn you take. A good GM then trades his surplus to strengthen his weak spots.

camisadelgolf
10-03-2007, 04:41 PM
My draft philosophy would be simple.

Best player available, every round.

Simply put, the best way to maximize your overall talent haul from the draft is to select the player who you believe is the best available every turn you take. A good GM then trades his surplus to strengthen his weak spots.

If your logic is to trade a surplus of talent, wouldn't it make sense to draft the player who will have the most value, even if it's a starting pitcher who you believe will be average as opposed to an outfielder who you believe will be a little above average?

GoReds33
10-03-2007, 06:31 PM
If your logic is to trade a surplus of talent, wouldn't it make sense to draft the player who will have the most value, even if it's a starting pitcher who you believe will be average as opposed to an outfielder who you believe will be a little above average?Absolutly. You have to put weight on the positions. If pitching is valued high, as it is right now, then you draft pitching.:)

dougdirt
10-03-2007, 07:01 PM
If your logic is to trade a surplus of talent, wouldn't it make sense to draft the player who will have the most value, even if it's a starting pitcher who you believe will be average as opposed to an outfielder who you believe will be a little above average?

Sure, but the starting pitcher has to be good to be worth more than a slightly above average outfielder.

I am with Doc Scott, always draft the best player available.

Doc. Scott
10-03-2007, 07:39 PM
If your logic is to trade a surplus of talent, wouldn't it make sense to draft the player who will have the most value, even if it's a starting pitcher who you believe will be average as opposed to an outfielder who you believe will be a little above average?

In theory, those things are one and the same. Best player= highest value.

Of course, other GMs value certain qualities and players more than others in real life. You can't evaluate talent on a completely objective basis.

I'm mainly just trying to refute those who are saying, "The Reds need to focus on pitching in the upcoming draft." No, they don't. They need to be focused on getting the best-quality scouting and player evaluation tools they can to maximize the talent flowing into the organization. Certainly an imperfect science, which is why I'm speaking generally.

If the best overall player available at the Reds' spot in the first round this coming June is a five-tool centerfielder with Gold Glove potential but a questionable bat, they should take him. Period. Any deviation from this ("oh, we don't need an OF, we'll take the second-best player because he's a pitcher") is rationalizing.

Doc. Scott
10-03-2007, 07:42 PM
(double post)

mth123
10-03-2007, 10:49 PM
In theory, those things are one and the same. Best player= highest value.

Of course, other GMs value certain qualities and players more than others in real life. You can't evaluate talent on a completely objective basis.

I'm mainly just trying to refute those who are saying, "The Reds need to focus on pitching in the upcoming draft." No, they don't. They need to be focused on getting the best-quality scouting and player evaluation tools they can to maximize the talent flowing into the organization. Certainly an imperfect science, which is why I'm speaking generally.

If the best overall player available at the Reds' spot in the first round this coming June is a five-tool centerfielder with Gold Glove potential but a questionable bat, they should take him. Period. Any deviation from this ("oh, we don't need an OF, we'll take the second-best player because he's a pitcher") is rationalizing.

:thumbup:

PuffyPig
10-12-2007, 10:07 AM
What I dont get is why dont the Reds make the first 10 draft picks all pitchers?? Its not difficult to find hitting and defense at the MLB level and It is no secret that good pitching is a hard comodity to find so why not focus on drafting pitching, pitching and more pitching ??

Becasue pitching is so valued by every team in the draft, if your drafting policy is "pitching or bust", you will find yourself constantly reaching for piching while bypassing better hitters.

When a pitcher is picked early, his realistic chances of making the majors as a productive regular is less than a similarly drafted hitter. That's because every team is "reaching" for pitching for the reasons you state.

RedlegJake
11-08-2007, 12:16 PM
My draft philosophy would be simple.

Best player available, every round.

Simply put, the best way to maximize your overall talent haul from the draft is to select the player who you believe is the best available every turn you take. A good GM then trades his surplus to strengthen his weak spots.

Bingo. Identify the best player no matter the position and draft him. Lets say three years running you get a Jay Bruce/Adam Dunn type of hitting talent - you run with it. In the first couple rounds my opinion is it doesn't matter pitching or hitting - but be right! Drafting for a positional need alone leads to Mesarasco type picks. Next be committed to paying the market price for top talent - Gruler over Kazmir for instance (some say Gruler was justified at the time because he looked as good as Kazmir -I disagree - I believe Kazmir was rated higher by most scouts but the Reds were afraid of demands) or the Sowers fiasco. Hopefully at least that nonsense is mostly behind us.

The real key to a good system I think is getting good value in the lower rounds. Mostly not glamour players but a team that can developseveral major league capable players from the pool after round 5 is most likely to have the best system. The first couple picks need to be right for financial reasons but its the deep draft that builds a farm system. Krivsky appears to be getting that part right so far even though I'm not enamored of his top picks so far.

dougdirt
11-08-2007, 12:23 PM
There was no Sowers fiasco.... The Reds made the pick with no intentions of signing him.

camisadelgolf
11-08-2007, 12:27 PM
There was no Sowers fiasco.... The Reds made the pick with no intentions of signing him.

'fiasco' might be the word people use when describing Sowers' career. Unless the Reds traded him before this year, he would've been a bad pick, apparently.

5DOLLAR-BLEACHERBUM
11-08-2007, 12:28 PM
I just see the obvious problem with this franchise is its inability to produce quality pitching thru its farm system. Your points are good ones but I think even you would agree there is a problem with a franchise that hasn't produced a quality starting pitcher since Tom Browning. (Bailey isnt there yet). So whats the answer?? Is the problem in the minor league instructors not being able to develop the pitchers or is it the drafting of players?I see no way that we would know the answers to these questions being that with the new FO im sure all of these instructors who had problems developing pitchers in the past are gone. We cannot keep living in the past concerning the Reds. In the past we may have had bad managers, we have a new manager now. In the past we have had sub par GM's, we have a new one now. In the past we have had sub par ownership, we have a new owner now. It's impossible to know how this franchise does things or how well it will do at righting this ship, but one thing is for sure, it's too small of a sample size to say that it's anything like it was in the past.

camisadelgolf
11-08-2007, 12:44 PM
Actually, 'fiasco' is the term I'd use for the Reds' 2001 draft. The Reds didn't sign anyone from that draft who played MLB. Only five of the players reached AAA. Jeff Bannon, Jesse Gutierrez, and Steve Kelly just became minor league free agents. David Shafer self-destructed in AAA after being traded for Kirk Saarloos. Daylan Childress was claimed off waivers by the Twins and stopped playing after 2005. The only other player still in a MLB team's organization is Bobby Basham, who was traded for Dave Ross and has pitched only 13.2 innings since (with a WHIP of almost 3.00). I think Bowden got his draft board and dart board mixed up.

M2
11-08-2007, 01:31 PM
Actually, 'fiasco' is the term I'd use for the Reds' 2001 draft. The Reds didn't sign anyone from that draft who played MLB. Only five of the players reached AAA. Jeff Bannon, Jesse Gutierrez, and Steve Kelly just became minor league free agents. David Shafer self-destructed in AAA after being traded for Kirk Saarloos. Daylan Childress was claimed off waivers by the Twins and stopped playing after 2005. The only other player still in a MLB team's organization is Bobby Basham, who was traded for Dave Ross and has pitched only 13.2 innings since (with a WHIP of almost 3.00). I think Bowden got his draft board and dart board mixed up.

Dead on.

15fan
11-13-2007, 05:02 PM
Actually, 'fiasco' is the term I'd use for the Reds' 2001 draft. The Reds didn't sign anyone from that draft who played MLB. Only five of the players reached AAA. Jeff Bannon, Jesse Gutierrez, and Steve Kelly just became minor league free agents. David Shafer self-destructed in AAA after being traded for Kirk Saarloos. Daylan Childress was claimed off waivers by the Twins and stopped playing after 2005. The only other player still in a MLB team's organization is Bobby Basham, who was traded for Dave Ross and has pitched only 13.2 innings since (with a WHIP of almost 3.00). I think Bowden got his draft board and dart board mixed up.

And then they really set the organization back by following it up with the 2002 draft. Look at the guys who went after Gruler (@ #3) in round 1 that year.

2002 MLB Draft - Round 1 (http://www.thebaseballcube.com/draft/2002/Round-1-1.shtml)

Pretty much anyone else who went in round 1 and was not named Chris Gruler would have given the Reds a second impact prospect/player to team with Joey Votto from the class of 2002. Cole Hamels, Jeff Francouer, Khalil Greene, Nick Swisher, Prince Fielder, James Loney, Jeff Francis, and the list goes on. It's like Morton's steak house was giving away filet mignon one night, but the Reds instead decided to reheat some leftover White Castles from the night before.

Here's the 2002 Reds draft (http://www.thebaseballcube.com/teams/draft/cincinnati-reds-2002.shtml). 2 years, one legitimate prospect, and a whole lot of nothing else.

2003 (http://www.thebaseballcube.com/teams/draft/cincinnati-reds-2003.shtml) was another year that was pretty much a whiff, though there wasn't a whole lot left on the board in round 1. It might net Richie Gardner and Carlos Guevara.

3 years of drafting, and literally all the Reds have to show for it is Votto, Gardner and Guevara. You could set out each year to have the worst draft in history, and I don't think that you could do worse than the Reds did in 2001-2003.

dougdirt
11-13-2007, 05:09 PM
And then they really set the organization back by following it up with the 2002 draft. Look at the guys who went after Gruler (@ #3) in round 1 that year.

2002 MLB Draft - Round 1 (http://www.thebaseballcube.com/draft/2002/Round-1-1.shtml)

Pretty much anyone else who went in round 1 and was not named Chris Gruler would have given the Reds a second impact prospect/player to team with Joey Votto from the class of 2002. Cole Hamels, Jeff Francouer, Khalil Greene, Nick Swisher, Prince Fielder, James Loney, Jeff Francis, and the list goes on. It's like Morton's steak house was giving away filet mignon one night, but the Reds instead decided to reheat some leftover White Castles from the night before.

Here's the 2002 Reds draft (http://www.thebaseballcube.com/teams/draft/cincinnati-reds-2002.shtml). 2 years, one legitimate prospect, and a whole lot of nothing else.

2003 (http://www.thebaseballcube.com/teams/draft/cincinnati-reds-2003.shtml) was another year that was pretty much a whiff, though there wasn't a whole lot left on the board in round 1. It might net Richie Gardner and Carlos Guevara.

3 years of drafting, and literally all the Reds have to show for it is Votto, Gardner and Guevara. You could set out each year to have the worst draft in history, and I don't think that you could do worse than the Reds did in 2001-2003.

2003 could also include Chris Dickerson and a HeismanTrophy winner in Dennis Dixon.

Benihana
11-13-2007, 05:10 PM
And then they really set the organization back by following it up with the 2002 draft. Look at the guys who went after Gruler (@ #3) in round 1 that year.

2002 MLB Draft - Round 1 (http://www.thebaseballcube.com/draft/2002/Round-1-1.shtml)

Pretty much anyone else who went in round 1 and was not named Chris Gruler would have given the Reds a second impact prospect/player to team with Joey Votto from the class of 2002. Cole Hamels, Jeff Francouer, Khalil Greene, Nick Swisher, Prince Fielder, James Loney, Jeff Francis, and the list goes on. It's like Morton's steak house was giving away filet mignon one night, but the Reds instead decided to reheat some leftover White Castles from the night before.

Here's the 2002 Reds draft (http://www.thebaseballcube.com/teams/draft/cincinnati-reds-2002.shtml). 2 years, one legitimate prospect, and a whole lot of nothing else.

2003 (http://www.thebaseballcube.com/teams/draft/cincinnati-reds-2003.shtml) was another year that was pretty much a whiff, though there wasn't a whole lot left on the board in round 1. It might net Richie Gardner and Carlos Guevara.

3 years of drafting, and literally all the Reds have to show for it is Votto, Gardner and Guevara. You could set out each year to have the worst draft in history, and I don't think that you could do worse than the Reds did in 2001-2003.

And thus endeth the Jim Bowden era.

15fan
11-13-2007, 05:23 PM
2003 could also include Chris Dickerson and a HeismanTrophy winner in Dennis Dixon.

True. Dickerson in round 16 of 2003, as well as Denorfia in round 19 of 2002 should get some mention.

But the fact that those 2 guys round out the top 5 of a 3 year draft window is pretty damning evidence against everyone who was associated with scouting, drafting and developing during that time frame.

Triples
11-13-2007, 07:30 PM
Becuase it doesn't make any sense to do so. Its like throwing away money. If you don't think the guy has as good of a chance to make it, you are already in the hole. Then on top of that, pitchers as a whole don't make it nearly as often as other positions do, and now you are in an even bigger hole. Its not hard to get good pitchers on the market. Sure, that theory would work if pitchers were, or heck, for that matter, anyone in the draft had a good shot at making the big leagues and being worth a crap, but they aren't. Even first rounders have pretty crappy odds of being good players in the majors.


Aaron Harang and Bronson Arroyo were both acquired for half a season of Jose Guillen and the rights to Wily Mo Pena. You just have to find the right guys to target in your trades.

I have to go along with Doug and the others that suggest its not wise to only go after pitching with your top picks. The odds are greater that a pitcher will not make it so why not load with top position talent and then use that talent to trade for pitching that is more proven and less risky. Although, let me be clear, I'm not suggesting that the Reds should load up exclusively on position talent and ignore the next Cueto or Bailey. If a top flight pitcher is available they should take him and work to get him to the majors; IMO....I'm still waiting for Mr. Krivsky to call for my thoughts on the matter.

Benihana
11-14-2007, 12:35 PM
Depending on how they perform this season, I wouldn't mind seeing

LHP Brian Matusz
SS Tim Beckham
or SS Harold Martinez (in that order) at #7.

Is there any way to figure out if the Reds will have any sandwich picks or extra picks after the first round, or is that not determined until after the offseason?

M2
11-14-2007, 12:41 PM
Matusz is my early frontrunner, but let's keep in mind that the list of top prospects for the draft will go through a major upheaval between now and next June.

Benihana
11-14-2007, 12:44 PM
Matusz is my early frontrunner, but let's keep in mind that the list of top prospects for the draft will go through a major upheaval between now and next June.

Of course it will. I just like speculating now since there's not much else to do these days.

Mario-Rijo
11-14-2007, 06:55 PM
Depending on how they perform this season, I wouldn't mind seeing

LHP Brian Matusz
SS Tim Beckham
or SS Harold Martinez (in that order) at #7.

Is there any way to figure out if the Reds will have any sandwich picks or extra picks after the first round, or is that not determined until after the offseason?

Those are my exact choices as well at this point. I still don't feel that there is 1 true potential above avg off/def SS in our system.

Janish Good Def/below avg stick

Chris valaika in my mind his defense is probably going to be better suited at 2nd. I like his stick and makeup but he needs to be more disciplined at the plate.

Zach Cozart is a potential above avg defender and perhaps he turns it around with the stick but it doesn't look good either.

Todd Frazier is maybe a 3B but I think a 1B/LF waiting to happen.

Neftali Soto may be a good 3B perhaps but I dunno if he is even an IF either.

M2
11-17-2007, 11:04 PM
Not that the Reds will draft him, but they've no doubt seen a ton of Sarasota HS SS Casey Kelly.

OnBaseMachine
11-17-2007, 11:17 PM
Casey Kelly is also a pretty highly recruited QB. I know that Oregon and Arizona State are recruiting him currently.

*BaseClogger*
11-21-2007, 12:14 PM
Only catchers fail more often to make it to the big leagues than pitchers in the draft.

Then I guess we should have taken a pitcher last year...

dougdirt
11-21-2007, 12:16 PM
Then I guess we should have taken a pitcher last year...

Nah, we should have taken whoever we had as the best prospect available that was being reasonable with their demands (Porcello). I think the Reds did that.

jmcclain19
11-21-2007, 10:54 PM
I think it's a pretty good bet the Reds will take lots of up the middle college bats & arms with relatively low wear on them. Other than that - at this point there is no way on earth to predict who the Reds would pick.

Mesoraco was a 4th-5th round pick at this point last year. Drew Stubbs was a No. 1 overall candidate at this point 2 years ago. Jay Bruce was a 3rd-4th rounder at this point.