PDA

View Full Version : Knee Jerk Reactions to 1st Round Picks from around the league



jmcclain19
06-11-2008, 01:20 AM
MLB Trade Rumors did an amusing poll - a quick knee jerk reaction of their readership of what each group of fans thought about their teams respective 1st round pick.

Quite the amusing disparity between the fan bases

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2008/06/the-08-draft-kn.html


1. Tim Beckham, Rays - 80% said yes.
2. Pedro Alvarez, Pirates - 89%.
3. Eric Hosmer, Royals - 63%.
4. Brian Matusz, Orioles - 80%.
5. Buster Posey, Giants - 68%.
6. Kyle Skipworth, Marlins - 54%.
7. Yonder Alonso, Reds - 33%.
8. Gordon Beckham, White Sox - 79%.
9. Aaron Crow, Nationals - 82%.
10. Jason Castro, Astros - 14%.
11. Justin Smoak, Rangers - 90%.
12. Jemile Weeks, A's - 41%.
13. Brett Wallace, Cardinals - 65%.
14. Aaron Hicks, Twins - 79%.
15. Ethan Martin, Dodgers - 62%.
16. Brett Lawrie, Brewers - 62%.
17. David Cooper, Blue Jays - 26%.
18. Ike Davis, Mets - 55%.
19. Andrew Cashner, Cubs - 57%.
20. Josh Fields, Mariners - 65%.
21. Ryan Perry, Tigers - 53%.
22. Reese Havens, Mets - 33%.
23. Allan Dykstra, Padres - 28%.
24. Anthony Hewitt, Phillies - 32%.
25. Christian Friedrich, Rockies - 89%.
26. Daniel Schlereth, D'Backs - 65%.
27. Carlos Gutierrez, Twins - 21%.
28. Gerrit Cole, Yankees - 82%.
29. Lonnie Chisenhall, Indians - 17%.
30. Casey Kelly, Red Sox - 74%.

Blue
06-11-2008, 01:25 AM
Whoah. Almost 1/3 of Giants fans don't approve of the Buster Posey pick? Now that's ridiculous.

The Alonso pick is still growing on me. I do think he's the top Reds prospect the moment he signs.

fearofpopvol1
06-11-2008, 02:10 AM
The Jason Castro response made me LOL.

Mario-Rijo
06-11-2008, 03:07 AM
Aside from the A's fans not being enamored with Weeks (not real sure why), I can see why the fans voted the way they did on almost every other pick. It's not usually about who you got, but who you passed on. The Astros fans though probably was a little of both, or in this case a lot of both. :eek:

kfm
06-11-2008, 07:19 AM
Is this poll proof that Reds fans are just knowledgeable or that Red's fans are among the most negative fans in baseball? I know what I think, but I am curious as to what everyone else thinks.

Caveat Emperor
06-11-2008, 07:49 AM
Is this poll proof that Reds fans are just knowledgeable or that Red's fans are among the most negative fans in baseball? I know what I think, but I am curious as to what everyone else thinks.

The Reds can't pitch.

The Reds keep drafting hitters.

It isn't surprising to me that 67% of their fanbase is saying "Buckley, we have a problem."

lollipopcurve
06-11-2008, 08:36 AM
Is this poll proof that Reds fans are just knowledgeable or that Red's fans are among the most negative fans in baseball? I know what I think, but I am curious as to what everyone else thinks.

Among the most negative -- easily.

REDblooded
06-11-2008, 10:20 AM
prob because some people still think it would be a good idea to take an arm that will blow up within the next 3 years.

gonelong
06-11-2008, 12:09 PM
Is this poll proof that Reds fans are just knowledgeable or that Red's fans are among the most negative fans in baseball? I know what I think, but I am curious as to what everyone else thinks.

Since its not a poll of Reds fans specifically, but rather 4000 readers of this guys blog ... I don't think its proof of jack squat.

GL

flyer85
06-11-2008, 12:15 PM
Among the most negative -- easily.amazing what 7 consecutive losing seasons will do.

dougdirt
06-11-2008, 01:02 PM
The Reds can't pitch.

The Reds keep drafting hitters.

It isn't surprising to me that 67% of their fanbase is saying "Buckley, we have a problem."

Doesn't mean the fan base has it right though. The only guy even close to being around where the Reds were picking that was a pitcher was Aaron Crow and the Reds didn't like his mechanics at all. I would love to see these types of polls that gave explanations of why teams took A instead of B and see how that changed how the fans felt.

Caveat Emperor
06-11-2008, 01:07 PM
Doesn't mean the fan base has it right though. The only guy even close to being around where the Reds were picking that was a pitcher was Aaron Crow and the Reds didn't like his mechanics at all. I would love to see these types of polls that gave explanations of why teams took A instead of B and see how that changed how the fans felt.

To misquote Chris Rock -- "I'm not saying they're right...but I understand."

lollipopcurve
06-11-2008, 01:10 PM
amazing what 7 consecutive losing seasons will do.

How was Griffey treated in his first years here? Reds had won in 95 and 99, Griffey chose to come play here.......and once he started getting hurt, lots of fans turned on him.

Cincinnati's a town with a great baseball history, but its days of being a great baseball town are a thing of the past, in my opinion.

BuckeyeRedleg
06-11-2008, 01:15 PM
amazing what 7 consecutive losing seasons will do.


And three post-season appearances in 32 years.

lollipopcurve
06-11-2008, 01:28 PM
And three post-season appearances in 32 years.

Cutting history off at 76? How about 7 postseason appearances in 38 years, going back to 1970....

Poor babies.

HokieRed
06-11-2008, 02:12 PM
Doesn't suggest negativity at all. By the time you got to the 7th pick, there wasn't the clarity of choices there had been earlier. You could make a good case for Alonso, Gordon Beckham, Crow, or Smoak. I imagine Reds fans were probably about equally split among Alonso, Beckham, and some other pick (one of several). So 33% is just about what I'd expect. Doesn't suggest negativity; I'd call it rather a high level of knowledge and informed opinion. I like the choice but would have been equally happy with G. Beckham and maybe with Smoak, though not with Crow because of the injury risk. If Alvarez or even Matusz had fallen to us, by some quirk, I bet you'd see those "negative" Reds fans poll at something like 90% happy.

BuckeyeRedleg
06-11-2008, 05:23 PM
Cutting history off at 76? How about 7 postseason appearances in 38 years, going back to 1970....

Poor babies.

That's right. I'm cutting history off at 1976 because 1977 was the first year I can remember caring about the Reds or baseball. I was six.

It was also the first year without Tony Perez. The end of the Big Red Machine.

At 37, I have zero memory of the BRM. I was still pooping my pants when the Reds were on top of the baseball world. So, yeah, poor me (and anyone else under 40) that I see three stinking post-season appearances in 32 years.

I would bet the Reds are in the bottom third in all of baseball during that time period, so, the point is that there is a large percentage of the current fan base that wasn't lucky enough to be spoiled during the 70's and they haven't had a whole lot to cheer about.

macro
06-11-2008, 06:26 PM
To follow up on Buckeye's point, only the Nationals/Expos have fewer post season appearances than the Reds dating back to 1980.

Topcat
06-12-2008, 04:16 AM
The problem exists that the current regime takes the heat for past failures. It's wrong but sadly you can't go back and aggressive stupidity is just that stupidity.

Stewie
06-12-2008, 07:39 AM
I'd like to know the rationale behind the 32% who liked the Anthony Hewitt selection for the Phillies.

Dan
06-12-2008, 08:19 AM
Guys, one other thing to think about...

More than once in the past 15 years the Reds didn't select the best player available because of need or lack thereof. This time they went with Alonso even though we've got strong LH hitters and a good young 1st baseman, because he WAS the best player available. Let things shake out and see where the chips fall in 2-3 years before passing any kind of judgement.

Highlifeman21
06-12-2008, 09:28 AM
I wonder what would have been the Reds % if we had taken Gordon Beckham instead.

11larkin11
06-12-2008, 12:02 PM
That's right. I'm cutting history off at 1976 because 1977 was the first year I can remember caring about the Reds or baseball. I was six.

It was also the first year without Tony Perez. The end of the Big Red Machine.

At 37, I have zero memory of the BRM. I was still pooping my pants when the Reds were on top of the baseball world. So, yeah, poor me (and anyone else under 40) that I see three stinking post-season appearances in 32 years.

I would bet the Reds are in the bottom third in all of baseball during that time period, so, the point is that there is a large percentage of the current fan base that wasn't lucky enough to be spoiled during the 70's and they haven't had a whole lot to cheer about.


Lucky you. I was born in '91, so I have 0 memory of the Reds ever winning something. My first baseball memory is the '97 WS. Best Reds team I ever saw was the '99 one game playoff team.

Mario-Rijo
06-13-2008, 10:52 AM
Lucky you. I was born in '91, so I have 0 memory of the Reds ever winning something. My first baseball memory is the '97 WS. Best Reds team I ever saw was the '99 one game playoff team.

Ouch, I feel for ya bub! I am just a hair younger than BRL (36 in Oct) and '90 still plays in my head from time to time. I really didn't watch/listen to too many Red's games until the Milner/Redus years and didn't watch/listen consistently until the Davis/Larkin years. Watched or listened to every single wire-wire game of that '90 championship season. And watching that season is what spoiled me rotten and also showed me what it takes for a ball team to play winning baseball. And '99 barely scratches the surface.

It's too bad we had the strike or we might be talking about the last great Red's team of '94 who were 18 games over when the strike happened. Probably didn't have enough pitching but we certainly were headed for the playoffs assuming we could hold those pesky Astros off.

marcshoe
06-13-2008, 12:48 PM
amazing what 7 consecutive losing seasons will do.

And yet 89% of Pirates' fans approved of Alvarez. It would seem to me that by now Pirate fans would just assume that whatever the club did was wrong--particularly with the recent failed first round picks.

11larkin11
06-13-2008, 01:44 PM
Ouch, I feel for ya bub! I am just a hair younger than BRL (36 in Oct) and '90 still plays in my head from time to time. I really didn't watch/listen to too many Red's games until the Milner/Redus years and didn't watch/listen consistently until the Davis/Larkin years. Watched or listened to every single wire-wire game of that '90 championship season. And watching that season is what spoiled me rotten and also showed me what it takes for a ball team to play winning baseball. And '99 barely scratches the surface.

It's too bad we had the strike or we might be talking about the last great Red's team of '94 who were 18 games over when the strike happened. Probably didn't have enough pitching but we certainly were headed for the playoffs assuming we could hold those pesky Astros off.



As you can probably assume from my name though, I grew up idolizing Larkin, but I didn't even really get to see him until the end of his prime. I have a framed picture of Griffey's first game in 2000 in my room with a gold coin with Griffey's face on it, and my favorite part of it is Larkin standing right beside him.

Mario-Rijo
06-13-2008, 07:48 PM
As you can probably assume from my name though, I grew up idolizing Larkin, but I didn't even really get to see him until the end of his prime. I have a framed picture of Griffey's first game in 2000 in my room with a gold coin with Griffey's face on it, and my favorite part of it is Larkin standing right beside him.

I hate to make you feel worse but you really missed out on alot of "amazing". Anybody that's watched him in any aspect of the game on a consistent basis and were not awed by not only his play but with the grace and majesty he did it with are not human.

The man was simply blessed and he did it all w/o so much as a speck of smugness.

ChatterRed
06-15-2008, 07:44 PM
The Reds may have picked the one guy closest to being major league ready, also.

marcshoe
06-15-2008, 10:06 PM
I hate to make you feel worse but you really missed out on alot of "amazing". Anybody that's watched him in any aspect of the game on a consistent basis and were not awed by not only his play but with the grace and majesty he did it with are not human.

The man was simply blessed and he did it all w/o so much as a speck of smugness.


I'm not sure of the clearest way to say this--of all the players I've seen, the "in person" aspects of seeing Larkin and appreciating him were greater than any other. I mean when I was actually at the game instead of watching him on television the things he did became much more clear. Nearly every time I ended up keeping a close eye on him, seeing how much he knew about the game, appreciating the grace and ability that stood out so much more than it did on tv.

Mario-Rijo
06-16-2008, 01:30 AM
I'm not sure of the clearest way to say this--of all the players I've seen, the "in person" aspects of seeing Larkin and appreciating him were greater than any other. I mean when I was actually at the game instead of watching him on television the things he did became much more clear. Nearly every time I ended up keeping a close eye on him, seeing how much he knew about the game, appreciating the grace and ability that stood out so much more than it did on tv.

Absolutely brilliant! :thumbup:

Sea Ray
06-16-2008, 10:00 PM
The Jason Castro response made me LOL.

He is really being talked up on ESPN tonight and he has had a good game both defensively and offensively. I don't recall much talk on these boards about him being a possible Reds' selection. Seems to me he'd be a better fit for our organization than Alonzo from Mia. Any of you think the Reds should have selected Castro?

OnBaseMachine
06-16-2008, 10:06 PM
He is really being talked up on ESPN tonight and he has had a good game both defensively and offensively. I don't recall much talk on these boards about him being a possible Reds' selection. Seems to me he'd be a better fit for our organization than Alonzo from Mia. Any of you think the Reds should have selected Castro?

No. Castro was more like a 17-25 type talent as opposed to top ten.

Sea Ray
06-16-2008, 10:08 PM
No. Castro was more like a 17-25 type talent as opposed to top ten.

OK, why? What kept him from the top ten? Obviously the Astros didn't consider him a 17-25 type

OnBaseMachine
06-16-2008, 10:11 PM
OK, why? What kept him from the top ten? Obviously the Astros didn't consider him a 17-25 type

Pretty much everyone considered Castro at #10 as a reach. He doesn't have any huge tools and this year was the first year he's hit well while at Stanford. He's a nice player but not top ten caliber.

REDblooded
06-17-2008, 10:45 AM
OK, why? What kept him from the top ten? Obviously the Astros didn't consider him a 17-25 type

Go take a quick peek at the Astros farm system. Is that a team you really want to use as a model for draft slotting?

camisadelgolf
06-19-2008, 09:13 AM
I think a lot of the disapproval of the pick came from the Reds picking Alonso over Smoak.