PDA

View Full Version : Draft Impression



redsof72
06-09-2010, 12:20 AM
Impossible to know which players will live up to or exceed expectations and which players will not, and really a waste of time to try to say that certain specific players should or should not have been taken, but two philosophical imprints on this draft that hit you like a pair of 10 foot poles:

1) The Reds drafted a ton of guys from quality college programs, in contrast to recent seasons that have featured numerous picks from Division II and III or NAIA programs. I really like this. We have seen far too many minor leaguers over the last couple of years that struggled mightily with basic elements of the game (catching fly balls, throwing to the cut-off man, understanding how to run the bases, defending double steals, etc.). They seem to have decided to start drafting players who have played in some pressure games against good competition. If nothing else, regardless of how many of these players make it, they improve the quality of baseball in your farm system and help your prospects develop in a more professional game environment.

2) This year, the Reds drafted players based more on baseball ability than tools, as evidenced by the long list of players with highly impressive statistics at the Division I college level. Many of the same points can be made from this as stated in the paragraph above. I think they got a little tired of bringing in guys who were supposed to have some "tool" but turned out to be guys who simply couldn't play or who might have had one tool but were so terribly weak in another area that they were useless as prospects.

I am really happy about this change. Again, you are surrounding your prospects with a higher quality of baseball. The records of the farm clubs will be better. That is critical. The number of 9th inning blunders (and blown games) because guys had no baseball instincts or ability to perform in hostile situations should drop dramatically.

I can say with some confidence that the managers and coaches of the farm clubs will be very pleased with this approach.

icehole3
06-09-2010, 04:46 AM
I agree 1000%, Ive always wanted them to concentrate on pitching in the draft and if not pitching focus on speedy CFs or SSs or power hitters and it looks like they went the speedy route

redsfandan
06-09-2010, 06:33 AM
Taking a catcher in the 1st round is risky, taking a catcher in the 1st round twice in 4 years?

It just seems like they made a risky pick with Grandal and then proceeded to make their next few picks safe picks. That just seems a little backwards to me.

And I'm not saying that I think making a "safe pick" is bad, affordable picks aren't necessarily bad either, and athletic players are good too, but where's the power? They used their first 4 picks on position players but, right now, it seems like those 4 could have a ceiling of average, or below average, power for their position.

Am I wrong?

PuffyPig
06-09-2010, 06:52 AM
Grandal was rumoured to go as high as 4th and was nothing of a reach.

I'm not sure why this would be characterized as a "risky" move.

redsfandan
06-09-2010, 07:10 AM
Grandal was rumoured to go as high as 4th and was nothing of a reach.

I'm not sure why this would be characterized as a "risky" move.
Simply, because he's a catcher.

A lot more has to go right with the development of a catcher than, for example, an outfielder.

icehole3
06-09-2010, 07:48 AM
theyre all risks, it does seem the Reds have shown patience recently to allow these guys to develop

redsmetz
06-09-2010, 07:55 AM
Simply, because he's a catcher.

A lot more has to go right with the development of a catcher than, for example, an outfielder.

The fact is that there are a minimum of 60 catchers in the major leagues year in and year out. They have to come from somewhere. The Miami Herald quoted Buckley about the pick. "It's such a hard position to find," Buckley said. "There's so few everyday catchers across the minor leagues, or even in the major leagues, that we just didn't think we could pass on him."

http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/06/07/1668544/reds-take-c-grandal-with-top-draft.html

lollipopcurve
06-09-2010, 08:38 AM
Interesting points, 72. Ultimately, though, I'm not sure there's a real correlation between baseball instincts and what college program you come out of. However, I can see the rationale in starting to favor guys with excellent stats over guys with a few tools, to a certain extent.

I have a good feeling about this draft class, provided they get the talent signed.

PuffyPig
06-09-2010, 09:22 AM
Simply, because he's a catcher.

A lot more has to go right with the development of a catcher than, for example, an outfielder.

Which is why not picking catchers is also risky.

There are so few catchers that if you have to get one on the open market it is very expensive.

Developing your own is the safest way to go.

Mario-Rijo
06-09-2010, 09:39 AM
1st impression is another low ceiling high floor class, Buckley's forte' really. Of his drafts this one impresses me the least (even less overall upside than usual). Sure it makes our minor league teams nice and rounded, solid fundamentally, competitive etc. Well hypothetically anyway, this class is pretty much the same as the several before it (with Buckley) and they have made some impact but not quite as much as we have hoped for. Of course I guess you have to consider how poor this entire draft was to recent ones to begin with.

kaldaniels
06-09-2010, 10:14 AM
I wouldn't say picking Joe Mauer was risky.

mace
06-09-2010, 10:17 AM
A couple other things to consider in this strategy. In mining the Latin American countries as heavily as they currently are, the Reds are investing there in youth, tools and upside. In that respect, they're allowing the draft to complement that element with experience, production and polish (to the extent that those commodities are actually available). Also, the system has shown itself to be woefully weak in the A-AA region. Perhaps they're counting on the draftees to fortify those areas in fairly short order.

Benihana
06-09-2010, 10:56 AM
I like this draft crop.

I came into this draft wanting six things:

1. A high-upside catcher. Experience shows that HS catchers in particular have an incredibly risky track record, so I preferred our catcher to come from the college ranks. Grandal is the best catcher in the draft, and one of three players (along with the Sales) that I wanted at 12 given who was available. (Check)

2. A college SS that can stay at SS. I'm not sure that Zach Cozart is the answer (he might be), and we have a lot of high-upside toolsy SS in the lower minors (Hamilton, Gregorious, Valor, etc.) so I wanted a college SS that could move quickly but stay at SS. While I didn't have my sights set on Lohman, I'll take him. (Check)

3. A power-hitting OF who can play defense. Not sure if we got this, but Waldrop looks to have serious upside. I hope we can sign him and convince him not to play football. (Incomplete)

4. A high-upside HS arm. Would have loved AJ Cole in the second round, although given his salary expectations and the Grandal pick, this was probably unrealistic. Drew Cisco is admittedly not one of the highest upside arms in the draft, but he is very polished. Given the Reds track record of developing HS arms, this is probably a good thing. Like Waldrop, I hope we can sign him, especially given that he fell farther than anyone was expecting. (Check)

5. A second round draft pick that didn't disappoint. I have to admit, I was very disappointed when we selected Boxberger over Tanner Scheppers last year. While Boxberger has been solid in high A, Scheppers has been lights out in AA, although he still carries the injury risk that scared many teams off. Although there were a couple other players available (Paxton, Cole) that I liked more than LaMarre (despite the fact that he played at my alma mater), I won't complain about this selection. While I am a bit confused as to where LaMarre fits in the system given the presence of Stubbs, Heisey, Dickerson, Sappelt, Perez, Fellhauer, and Yorman, he appears to have clearly been the BPA on the Reds' board and I can't complain about that. He strikes me as a Twins' kind of pick- similar to a Denard Span or Ben Revere, and you can't argue with their track record. (Check)

6. A quick moving reliever. Would have loved Workman or Ruffin in the second round, although they didn't fall that far. Am very glad they didn't draft either in the first round, as some had reported. Arico appears to be a guy that could fit the bill, although it is a risky proposition to rely on picks beyond the second round to do anything, let alone help the big club this year or next. (Incomplete)

All in all, Buckley and co. accomplished many of the goals that I had in mind, and especially given the Reds activity in the international game, I really don't have much to complain about with this draft. As always, only time will tell, but for now I give this draft a :thumbup:

PuffyPig
06-09-2010, 11:13 AM
I like this draft crop.

I came into this draft wanting six things:

1. A high-upside catcher. Experience shows that HS catchers in particular have an incredibly risky track record, so I preferred our catcher to come from the college ranks. Grandal is the best catcher in the draft, and one of three players (along with the Sales) that I wanted at 12 given who was available. (Check)

2. A college SS that can stay at SS. I'm not sure that Zach Cozart is the answer (he might be), and we have a lot of high-upside toolsy SS in the lower minors (Hamilton, Gregorious, Valor, etc.) so I wanted a college SS that could move quickly but stay at SS. While I didn't have my sights set on Lohman, I'll take him. (Check)

3. A power-hitting OF who can play defense. Not sure if we got this, but Waldrop looks to have serious upside. I hope we can sign him and convince him not to play football. (Incomplete)

4. A high-upside HS arm. Would have loved AJ Cole in the second round, although given his salary expectations and the Grandal pick, this was probably unrealistic. Drew Cisco is admittedly not one of the highest upside arms in the draft, but he is very polished. Given the Reds track record of developing HS arms, this is probably a good thing. Like Waldrop, I hope we can sign him, especially given that he fell farther than anyone was expecting. (Check)

5. A second round draft pick that didn't disappoint. I have to admit, I was very disappointed when we selected Boxberger over Tanner Scheppers last year. While Boxberger has been solid in high A, Scheppers has been lights out in AA, although he still carries the injury risk that scared many teams off. Although there were a couple other players available (Paxton, Cole) that I liked more than LaMarre (despite the fact that he played at my alma mater), I won't complain about this selection. While I am a bit confused as to where LaMarre fits in the system given the presence of Stubbs, Heisey, Dickerson, Sappelt, Perez, Fellhauer, and Yorman, he appears to have clearly been the BPA on the Reds' board and I can't complain about that. He strikes me as a Twins' kind of pick- similar to a Denard Span or Ben Revere, and you can't argue with their track record. (Check)

6. A quick moving reliever. Would have loved Workman or Ruffin in the second round, although they didn't fall that far. Am very glad they didn't draft either in the first round, as some had reported. Arico appears to be a guy that could fit the bill, although it is a risky proposition to rely on picks beyond the second round to do anything, let alone help the big club this year or next. (Incomplete)

All in all, Buckley and co. accomplished many of the goals that I had in mind, and especially given the Reds activity in the international game, I really don't have much to complain about with this draft. As always, only time will tell, but for now I give this draft a :thumbup:

As a side note, it was likely impossible to c omplately meet your wish list, as each one basically would need to be satisfied with a early pick, and we had no supplemental picks.

Benihana
06-09-2010, 11:33 AM
As a side note, it was likely impossible to c omplately meet your wish list, as each one basically would need to be satisfied with a early pick, and we had no supplemental picks.

Of course, that's why it's called a wish list. Rarely if ever do you get to meet every item on your wish list.

You could make the argument that you could fill every need even with the Reds picks, but you would need an almost unlimited draft budget. For instance:

Round 1: Yasmani Grandal (top tier college catcher)
Round 2: AJ Cole (high upside HS arm & good value for 2nd round pick)
Round 3: Devin Lohman/Josh Rutledge (college SS that can stay at SS)
Round 4: James Paxton/Bryan Morgado (reliever/polished arm that could move fast)
Round 5: Austin Wilson (high-upside power hitting OF that can play D)

Obviously, that is unrealistic given budget constraints and the fact that you can't always have everyone you want- but it is an illustration that it is theoretically possible given the Reds' picks.

Like I said though, I am not complaining about this draft at all.

dougdirt
06-09-2010, 02:23 PM
I wouldn't say picking Joe Mauer was risky.

Catchers taken in the first 5 rounds fail to make the major leagues 95% of the time. Its the ultimate high risk pick. For every Joe Mauer, there are THOUSANDS of catchers drafted who don't make it to the majors.

kaldaniels
06-09-2010, 02:30 PM
Catchers taken in the first 5 rounds fail to make the major leagues 95% of the time. Its the ultimate high risk pick. For every Joe Mauer, there are THOUSANDS of catchers drafted who don't make it to the majors.

See, you threw in the "first 5 rounds" to make your stat look pretty. We are dealing with a first rounder, and in my example the #1 overall pick.

dougdirt
06-09-2010, 02:31 PM
See, you threw in the "first 5 rounds" to make your stat look pretty. We are dealing with a first rounder, and in my example the #1 overall pick.

The track record isn't all that much better for the first round. Just go back and look. Joe Mauer was an outlier. Outliers don't make the rule.

kaldaniels
06-09-2010, 02:33 PM
The track record isn't all that much better for the first round. Just go back and look. Joe Mauer was an outlier. Outliers don't make the rule.

Actually it is much better. Starting with say 2006, go back through the first round and look how many players who we drafted as a catcher made the show.

dougdirt
06-09-2010, 02:40 PM
Here is the 2000-2005 catchers list from the first round
Scott Heard
Dave Parrish
Joe Mauer
Jeff Mathis
Jeremy Brown
Daric Barton - Not a catcher
Mitch Maier - Not a catcher
Jarrod Saltalamacchia
Neil Walker - Not a catcher
Landon Powell - MLB Debut at age 27. Barely playing at 28.
Jon Poterson
Robert Stiehl
Jeff Clement - Not a catcher
Brandon Snyder

How many of those guys are still catchers? How many of them are even average catchers?

It is basically Joe Mauer and guys who either didn't make it or didn't stick at catcher.

redsmetz
06-09-2010, 02:53 PM
Catchers taken in the first 5 rounds fail to make the major leagues 95% of the time. Its the ultimate high risk pick. For every Joe Mauer, there are THOUSANDS of catchers drafted who don't make it to the majors.

Doug, I don't have time to look up the stats, but in the first ten years of the draft, 30% of those drafted as catchers had some time in the major leagues. Actually there were four Hall of Famers during that time (Bench, Carter, Fisk & Eddie Murray - he's listed as being drafted as a catcher). Likewise during that same period, Ted Simmons, Thurman Munson and Dale Murphy were all drafted in the 1st five rounds.

No big deal and maybe later drafts don't follow this pattern, but 90% may be a bit of hyperbole. The reality is, there's a lot of failure in any draft regardless of the position.

dougdirt
06-09-2010, 02:56 PM
Doug, I don't have time to look up the stats, but in the first ten years of the draft, 30% of those drafted as catchers had some time in the major leagues. Actually there were four Hall of Famers during that time (Bench, Carter, Fisk & Eddie Murray - he's listed as being drafted as a catcher). Likewise during that same period, Ted Simmons, Thurman Munson and Dale Murphy were all drafted in the 1st five rounds.

No big deal and maybe later drafts don't follow this pattern, but 90% may be a bit of hyperbole. The reality is, there's a lot of failure in any draft regardless of the position.

It isn't really. Account for the guys who don't stick at catcher and the numbers are terrible.

PuffyPig
06-09-2010, 02:57 PM
Here is the 2000-2005 catchers list from the first round
Scott Heard
Dave Parrish
Joe Mauer
Jeff Mathis
Jeremy Brown
Daric Barton - Not a catcher
Mitch Maier - Not a catcher
Jarrod Saltalamacchia
Neil Walker - Not a catcher
Landon Powell - MLB Debut at age 27. Barely playing at 28.
Jon Poterson
Robert Stiehl
Jeff Clement - Not a catcher
Brandon Snyder

How many of those guys are still catchers? How many of them are even average catchers?

It is basically Joe Mauer and guys who either didn't make it or didn't stick at catcher.


I think the statement was 95% of those drafted as catchers don't make the majors.

Over 50% of that group has.

TheNext44
06-09-2010, 02:59 PM
Mauer
Mathis
Jeremy brown
Daric Barton
Mitch maier
Salty
Neil walker
Landon Powell
Jonathon poterson
Jeff Clement
Brandon snyder
Maxwell sapp
Hyun Conger
Matt wieters
Mesoraco
Arencobia
Darnaud
Jackson Williams
Canham
Easly
Posey
Skipworth
Juan Castro

Here's a list of 2001-2008


I really don't care if I draft a guy at catcher and he becomes a major league contributor at another position. Players end up at different postitions than the ones they were drafted all the time.

If Grandai ends up at 3B and is solid everyday player, will you say that the pick was a failure? I look at my list and think that the drafting team was happy with the results of their pick about half the time, maybe a little less, although time will tell on many of them. I think most first round picks, regardless of the position, fair about as well.

kaldaniels
06-09-2010, 03:03 PM
Simply, because he's a catcher.

A lot more has to go right with the development of a catcher than, for example, an outfielder.

FYI Doug, this is the mindset I don't agree with...slamming the pick SIMPLY for being a catcher. One should come to table with a little more than that.

dougdirt
06-09-2010, 03:07 PM
I think the statement was 95% of those drafted as catchers don't make the majors.

Over 50% of that group has.

As catchers, they pretty much don't. Of course I was talking 5 rounds deep too. Still, the point stands. Its the riskiest pick in the draft, to take a catcher and get him to the majors as a catcher who can stay there. It just doesn't happen often.

dougdirt
06-09-2010, 03:08 PM
FYI Doug, this is the mindset I don't agree with...slamming the pick SIMPLY for being a catcher. One should come to table with a little more than that.

I am not slamming the pick at all. I am in favor of the pick. Just saying its incredibly risky.

kaldaniels
06-09-2010, 03:10 PM
As catchers, they pretty much don't. Of course I was talking 5 rounds deep too. Still, the point stands. Its the riskiest pick in the draft, to take a catcher and get him to the majors as a catcher who can stay there. It just doesn't happen often.

You've gotta compare the relative risk though. We all know that over half over 1st round picks don't amount to much (a solid MLB career) anyway.

dougdirt
06-09-2010, 03:16 PM
You've gotta compare the relative risk though. We all know that over half over 1st round picks don't amount to much (a solid MLB career) anyway.

I have compared the risk. Catchers are the riskiest and its not close.

TheNext44
06-09-2010, 03:26 PM
As catchers, they pretty much don't. Of course I was talking 5 rounds deep too. Still, the point stands. Its the riskiest pick in the draft, to take a catcher and get him to the majors as a catcher who can stay there. It just doesn't happen often.

I agree with this, the facts are clear on this.

But drafting a catcher is not that much riskier than drafting another postition when you factor in that many, if not most move on to an easier position, and a good number of those succeed.

kaldaniels
06-09-2010, 03:27 PM
I agree with this, the facts are clear on this.

But drafting a catcher is not that much riskier than drafting another postition when you factor in that many, if not most move on to an easier position, and a good number of those succeed.

Didn't the Reds draft a catcher in the early rounds of 2002...what's he doing now?

dougdirt
06-09-2010, 03:36 PM
I agree with this, the facts are clear on this.

But drafting a catcher is not that much riskier than drafting another postition when you factor in that many, if not most move on to an easier position, and a good number of those succeed.
The safest pick in the first round is a college 3B. In the research I did, over 40% of them made the majors and were 'quality' players (non back ups with regular playing time).

kaldaniels
06-09-2010, 04:05 PM
The safest pick in the first round is a college 3B. In the research I did, over 40% of them made the majors and were 'quality' players (non back ups with regular playing time).

Going back 20 years or so from 2006-7, catchers drafted out of college aren't chopped liver. Granted there haven't been many. See for yourself.

Aside - Do we consider supplemental picks "true" first rounders for argument sake...I really don't myself...just wondering.

krm1580
06-09-2010, 04:05 PM
1st impression is another low ceiling high floor class, Buckley's forte' really. Of his drafts this one impresses me the least (even less overall upside than usual). Sure it makes our minor league teams nice and rounded, solid fundamentally, competitive etc. Well hypothetically anyway, this class is pretty much the same as the several before it (with Buckley) and they have made some impact but not quite as much as we have hoped for. Of course I guess you have to consider how poor this entire draft was to recent ones to begin with.

I will preface my entire post with the statement, that I am not a scout, do not have a crystal ball, am not privy to what the Reds philosophy is and have no idea who will make it and who will not.

That being said my initial impression of this draft is the same as Mario's. Solid but not spectacular

TheNext44
06-09-2010, 04:27 PM
Didn't the Reds draft a catcher in the early rounds of 2002...what's he doing now?

Lol

I guess that pick turned out okay, even if he turned out not to be a catcher. ;)

BuckeyeRedleg
06-09-2010, 04:28 PM
I like this draft crop.

I came into this draft wanting six things:

1. A high-upside catcher. Experience shows that HS catchers in particular have an incredibly risky track record, so I preferred our catcher to come from the college ranks. Grandal is the best catcher in the draft, and one of three players (along with the Sales) that I wanted at 12 given who was available. (Check)

2. A college SS that can stay at SS. I'm not sure that Zach Cozart is the answer (he might be), and we have a lot of high-upside toolsy SS in the lower minors (Hamilton, Gregorious, Valor, etc.) so I wanted a college SS that could move quickly but stay at SS. While I didn't have my sights set on Lohman, I'll take him. (Check)

3. A power-hitting OF who can play defense. Not sure if we got this, but Waldrop looks to have serious upside. I hope we can sign him and convince him not to play football. (Incomplete)

4. A high-upside HS arm. Would have loved AJ Cole in the second round, although given his salary expectations and the Grandal pick, this was probably unrealistic. Drew Cisco is admittedly not one of the highest upside arms in the draft, but he is very polished. Given the Reds track record of developing HS arms, this is probably a good thing. Like Waldrop, I hope we can sign him, especially given that he fell farther than anyone was expecting. (Check)

5. A second round draft pick that didn't disappoint. I have to admit, I was very disappointed when we selected Boxberger over Tanner Scheppers last year. While Boxberger has been solid in high A, Scheppers has been lights out in AA, although he still carries the injury risk that scared many teams off. Although there were a couple other players available (Paxton, Cole) that I liked more than LaMarre (despite the fact that he played at my alma mater), I won't complain about this selection. While I am a bit confused as to where LaMarre fits in the system given the presence of Stubbs, Heisey, Dickerson, Sappelt, Perez, Fellhauer, and Yorman, he appears to have clearly been the BPA on the Reds' board and I can't complain about that. He strikes me as a Twins' kind of pick- similar to a Denard Span or Ben Revere, and you can't argue with their track record. (Check)

6. A quick moving reliever. Would have loved Workman or Ruffin in the second round, although they didn't fall that far. Am very glad they didn't draft either in the first round, as some had reported. Arico appears to be a guy that could fit the bill, although it is a risky proposition to rely on picks beyond the second round to do anything, let alone help the big club this year or next. (Incomplete)

All in all, Buckley and co. accomplished many of the goals that I had in mind, and especially given the Reds activity in the international game, I really don't have much to complain about with this draft. As always, only time will tell, but for now I give this draft a :thumbup:

While we are on opposite ends of the college football spectrum (OSU/U-M), it is downright freaky how much we are in agreement with this and many other minor league topics.

Well done. :beerme:

redsfandan
06-09-2010, 06:00 PM
Which is why not picking catchers is also risky.

There are so few catchers that if you have to get one on the open market it is very expensive.

Developing your own is the safest way to go.
And I agree 100%.


FYI Doug, this is the mindset I don't agree with...slamming the pick SIMPLY for being a catcher. One should come to table with a little more than that.
What I said was that it's risky. That's all.

Taking a catcher in the 1st round is risky, taking a catcher in the 1st round twice in 4 years?

It just seems like they made a risky pick with Grandal and then proceeded to make their next few picks safe picks. That just seems a little backwards to me.
Doug already elaborated on this but it's my understanding that catchers taken early in the draft are less likely to "pan out" than other positions. Also, the amount of offense the player provides that is acceptable depends on the position. MOST catchers can't provide an acceptable amount of offense if they're moved to 1st base or a corner outfield spot. Taking the view of "well Joey Votto did it" won't work most of the time. Ramon Hernandez is one example. He has a .784 ops this year which I'll take from a catcher. He also has a career ops of .684 when he's played at 1st which isn't quite as good. Not his fault but what's acceptable at one position isn't always as acceptable at another position. And even a .784 ops will hurt you if that's what you're getting from your 1st baseman.

Risk also includes cost. 1st rounders obviously cost more financially than later picks. So, making the biggest single financial investment on a pick that plays a position that sees a higher rate of attrition just seems odd to me considering that this team is getting a reputation for preferring safe picks.

Put another way, would you invest the biggest chunk of your money saved for retirement on a single individual stock that is a long shot to do anything? Or would you put the biggest chunk into something that doesn't carry quite as much risk, and is a safer bet to make you money, while still allowing some money to go into many different riskier investments?

Alot of money is spent on 1st round picks which is why I didn't have a problem with Leake last year cuz he was a safe pick with a high floor so it was a pretty good bet that the big investment in him would pay off. From the 2nd round on I wouldn't care as much since, with those picks, you're not out as much money if the pick doesn't work out. But I just think that the 1st round is when the safe pick makes the most sense imo cuz there's so much more money at stake with the 1st rounders. When there's so much more money at stake, compared to later picks, I'd think that a pick that is a relatively safe pick to pay off would make sense.

That Grandal played at such a good college program helps and I hope it works out. But, I'm just saying that alot more rides on the 1st round pick(s). Those are the picks that have to pan out. Hopefully this one will.

kaldaniels
06-09-2010, 07:20 PM
You said a lot there Dan without putting your opinion out there, and I'll just ask. Do you like the pick, why or why not?

camisadelgolf
06-09-2010, 07:37 PM
2000 (two catchers that never played MLB)
Luis Montanez - not a SS
David Espinosa - not a SS
Corey Smith - not a SS
Kelly Johnson - not a SS
Aaron Herr - not a SS

2001 (the game's best catcher + a Major League backup)
Bobby Crosby - mediocre MLB numbers
Josh Burrus - not a SS
Bryan Bass - not a SS
Bronson Sardinha - not a SS
Michael Garciaparra - not a SS
Jayson Nix - not a SS

2002 (a catcher who only got a cup of coffee at the big league level)
B.J. Upton - not a SS
Scott Moore - not a SS
Drew Meyer - not a SS
Khalil Greene - mediocre MLB numbers
Russ Adams - poor MLB numbers
John McCurdy - never played MLB
Sergio Santos - not a SS

2003 (two non-catchers and a player toiling in AAA)
Aaron Hill - not a SS
Brandon Wood - not a SS
Omar Quintanilla - poor MLB numbers
Adam Jones - not a SS

2004 (a non-catcher and a Major League backup)
Matt Bush - not a SS
Chris Nelson - hasn't yet played MLB
Stephen Drew - good MLB numbers
Trevor Plouffe - future utility player at best

2005 (two non-catchers)
Justin Upton - not a SS
Troy Tulowitzki - great MLB numbers
Carl Henry - never played in MLB
Cliff Pennington - poor MLB numbers
Tyler Greene - poor MLB numbers

People are pointing out that drafting a catcher is risky, but what draft pick isn't risky? To make it fair, shouldn't we look at other positions? I'll start with shortstop.

13 catchers were drafted in the first round from 2000-5. 7 of them stuck at catcher, and only one of them (Joe Mauer) became an average or better major leaguer.

31 shortstops were drafted in the first round from 2000-5. 12 of them stuck at SS, and only two of them (Stephen Drew and Troy Tulowitzki) are average or better major leaguers.

By that math, in the first round, drafting a catcher is a safer bet than drafting a shortstop.

RED VAN HOT
06-09-2010, 09:03 PM
As others have commented, the high number of college players stood out. I saw this as an attempt to re-build the low to mid-level minor league teams quickly. The Reds certainly owe something to Billings after the team they fielded last year. Also, this strategy seems to complement the high number of Latin players at the low levels that may take several more years to develop.

It also seemed to me that there were a higher than usual number of college committed HS players chosen. The ultimate success of the draft may well rest with how many the Reds are able to sign.

dougdirt
06-09-2010, 09:06 PM
It also seemed to me that there were a higher than usual number of college committed HS players chosen. The ultimate success of the draft may well rest with how many the Reds are able to sign.

Even the top of the line high school players have college commitments. They just aren't as likely to honor them.

kaldaniels
06-09-2010, 09:18 PM
Put me down as not caring was position Yas ends up at...as long as he finds success.

dougdirt
06-09-2010, 09:27 PM
Put me down as not caring was position Yas ends up at...as long as he finds success.

I think everyone is with you there, but the big question I had with him coming into the draft was 'can he hit well enough to have value if he has to move off of catcher?' and I don't think he can (assuming he moves to a corner position). With that said, if his arm is better than earlier reports had it as, then I think he can stick behind the dish.

powersackers
06-09-2010, 10:21 PM
2000 (two catchers that never played MLB)
Luis Montanez - not a SS
David Espinosa - not a SS
Corey Smith - not a SS
Kelly Johnson - not a SS
Aaron Herr - not a SS

2001 (the game's best catcher + a Major League backup)
Bobby Crosby - mediocre MLB numbers
Josh Burrus - not a SS
Bryan Bass - not a SS
Bronson Sardinha - not a SS
Michael Garciaparra - not a SS
Jayson Nix - not a SS

2002 (a catcher who only got a cup of coffee at the big league level)
B.J. Upton - not a SS
Scott Moore - not a SS
Drew Meyer - not a SS
Khalil Greene - mediocre MLB numbers
Russ Adams - poor MLB numbers
John McCurdy - never played MLB
Sergio Santos - not a SS

2003 (two non-catchers and a player toiling in AAA)
Aaron Hill - not a SS
Brandon Wood - not a SS
Omar Quintanilla - poor MLB numbers
Adam Jones - not a SS

2004 (a non-catcher and a Major League backup)
Matt Bush - not a SS
Chris Nelson - hasn't yet played MLB
Stephen Drew - good MLB numbers
Trevor Plouffe - future utility player at best

2005 (two non-catchers)
Justin Upton - not a SS
Troy Tulowitzki - great MLB numbers
Carl Henry - never played in MLB
Cliff Pennington - poor MLB numbers
Tyler Greene - poor MLB numbers

People are pointing out that drafting a catcher is risky, but what draft pick isn't risky? To make it fair, shouldn't we look at other positions? I'll start with shortstop.

13 catchers were drafted in the first round from 2000-5. 7 of them stuck at catcher, and only one of them (Joe Mauer) became an average or better major leaguer.

31 shortstops were drafted in the first round from 2000-5. 12 of them stuck at SS, and only two of them (Stephen Drew and Troy Tulowitzki) are average or better major leaguers.

By that math, in the first round, drafting a catcher is a safer bet than drafting a shortstop.

With these kind of odds I think the draft is a big waste of money for MLB teams. They'd be better off taking the signing bonus money and buying lottery tickets and signing some Free agents with what money is left. First round picks only pan around 3 in 44 as average or better MLBers? Yikes.

dougdirt
06-09-2010, 11:31 PM
With these kind of odds I think the draft is a big waste of money for MLB teams. They'd be better off taking the signing bonus money and buying lottery tickets and signing some Free agents with what money is left. First round picks only pan around 3 in 44 as average or better MLBers? Yikes.

At the same time, if you get a guy in the majors from the draft that you paid 1.5M for to sign, and then only pay him 1.5M over his first three seasons, you make a HUGE profit versus what you would have paid him as a free agent. If he is just an average player, likely to the tune of saving 15-20 million over just the first three years that player spends in the major leagues.

redsfandan
06-10-2010, 08:24 AM
You said a lot there Dan without putting your opinion out there, and I'll just ask. Do you like the pick, why or why not?
I thought I did but I'll bite.

Personally, it's a meh pick to me. As you could probably tell I'm not big on taking catchers in the 1st round. Due to the track record of catchers drafted in the 1st round, how long they take to get to the majors since they have to learn more than other position players, and their offense doesn't translate well (most of the time) to other positions if a move off of catcher is required.

On the other hand, he's not only a college hitter but comes from a college with a "pretty good" baseball program so that makes me feel better about the pick. The big question to me will be his arm/defense. If the concerns that I read about his defense turn out to be overblown than great. Offensively, his ceiling seems to be kinda like a Mike Napoli and, if his defense is ok, than I'll take that anyday. But, since he plays a position where defense is more important (than say a 1st baseman/corner outfielder), I'll be looking forward to the reports about his defense in the minors.

I was hoping to hear that the Reds picked Brentz and I was surprised that he fell so far. I might be missing someone but the only outfield prospects that the Reds have that should/could have plus power in the majors are Francisco, Yorman, and Duran. Francisco still has that wonderful plate discipline and the other two won't be up anytime soon. So, grabbing an outfielder that at least has a shot of 30+ homers (with decent plate discipline) and be up late 2011/early 2012 appeals to me.

edit: I REALLY like the Hernanigan tandem we have behind the plate now and I wouldn't have a problem with a 3rd year. After that, if things go well, Mesoraco could replace Hernandez and we'd still be set for at least a few more years. So, where would Grandal fit in? A hedge in case Mes has problems?

The possibility of the Reds not signing Grandal and getting the extra pick next year has already been floated by others. I'm betting the Reds won't do that but I wouldn't have a problem if they did.

redsfandan
06-10-2010, 08:54 AM
With these kind of odds I think the draft is a big waste of money for MLB teams. They'd be better off taking the signing bonus money and buying lottery tickets and signing some Free agents with what money is left. First round picks only pan around 3 in 44 as average or better MLBers? Yikes.
That '3 of 44' came from only two positions and includes high school players. Even if you stayed with just those 2 positions but only include college players the odds will improve. And I doubt you'd find a duo of Votto/Bruce for under $1M combined from the free agent ranks.

The draft will always be the cheapest way to go and, unless you're the yankees, the best way to go.

redsfandan
06-10-2010, 09:35 AM
2000 (two catchers that never played MLB)
Luis Montanez - not a SS
David Espinosa - not a SS
Corey Smith - not a SS
Kelly Johnson - not a SS
Aaron Herr - not a SS

2001 (the game's best catcher + a Major League backup)
Bobby Crosby - mediocre MLB numbers
Josh Burrus - not a SS
Bryan Bass - not a SS
Bronson Sardinha - not a SS
Michael Garciaparra - not a SS
Jayson Nix - not a SS

2002 (a catcher who only got a cup of coffee at the big league level)
B.J. Upton - not a SS
Scott Moore - not a SS
Drew Meyer - not a SS
Khalil Greene - mediocre MLB numbers
Russ Adams - poor MLB numbers
John McCurdy - never played MLB
Sergio Santos - not a SS

2003 (two non-catchers and a player toiling in AAA)
Aaron Hill - not a SS
Brandon Wood - not a SS
Omar Quintanilla - poor MLB numbers
Adam Jones - not a SS

2004 (a non-catcher and a Major League backup)
Matt Bush - not a SS
Chris Nelson - hasn't yet played MLB
Stephen Drew - good MLB numbers
Trevor Plouffe - future utility player at best

2005 (two non-catchers)
Justin Upton - not a SS
Troy Tulowitzki - great MLB numbers
Carl Henry - never played in MLB
Cliff Pennington - poor MLB numbers
Tyler Greene - poor MLB numbers

People are pointing out that drafting a catcher is risky, but what draft pick isn't risky? To make it fair, shouldn't we look at other positions? I'll start with shortstop.

13 catchers were drafted in the first round from 2000-5. 7 of them stuck at catcher, and only one of them (Joe Mauer) became an average or better major leaguer.

31 shortstops were drafted in the first round from 2000-5. 12 of them stuck at SS, and only two of them (Stephen Drew and Troy Tulowitzki) are average or better major leaguers.

By that math, in the first round, drafting a catcher is a safer bet than drafting a shortstop.
Nifty. You started with shortstops that were drafted in the early part of this decade. Some of those players have moved to other positions and some are still too young to know, for sure, if they'll be "average" in the majors or not.

You said you'll "start with shortstop". So, what's next?

How about if you DON'T restrict it to position. I mean whether they become 'average or better' at their original position is one thing. But, and I know some may not be crazy about this stat, but maybe you could use WARP instead. Even though they didn't stick at short I'd say that Justin Upton, BJ Upton, Aaron Hill, Kelly Johnson, and Adam Jones have turned out to be average or better at their new position in the majors. Can that be said about the catchers that moved to another position?

And how about looking at players drafted in the 90's. I'd think we'd have a much better idea how someone drafted in '99 turned out in the majors compared to someone drafted in '05.

My bet is that you'll find that players drafted out of college and that played either at a corner infield position or corner outfield position will be the safest and that high school players that either pitched or were middle infielders (C, 2nd, SS, 3rd) were the least safe.

camisadelgolf
06-10-2010, 07:04 PM
Nifty. You started with shortstops that were drafted in the early part of this decade. Some of those players have moved to other positions and some are still too young to know, for sure, if they'll be "average" in the majors or not.

You said you'll "start with shortstop". So, what's next?

How about if you DON'T restrict it to position. I mean whether they become 'average or better' at their original position is one thing. But, and I know some may not be crazy about this stat, but maybe you could use WARP instead. Even though they didn't stick at short I'd say that Justin Upton, BJ Upton, Aaron Hill, Kelly Johnson, and Adam Jones have turned out to be average or better at their new position in the majors. Can that be said about the catchers that moved to another position?

And how about looking at players drafted in the 90's. I'd think we'd have a much better idea how someone drafted in '99 turned out in the majors compared to someone drafted in '05.

My bet is that you'll find that players drafted out of college and that played either at a corner infield position or corner outfield position will be the safest and that high school players that either pitched or were middle infielders (C, 2nd, SS, 3rd) were the least safe.
I think you missed what I was getting at, Dan. I wasn't pointing out that the arguments for not liking the pick were valid--just the opposite, actually.

It wasn't my idea to start by position--that idea was floated earlier in the thread. My point was that it was it might not be a fair way to go about criticizing the pick, and your post only furthers the cause.

It was dougdirt who implied he doesn't like taking catchers in the first round, and one of the reasons for that is that they often don't stick at catcher. Is that a good reason not to like the pick? I don't think so personally because, as you pointed out, a player can move off a position and still have a very successful career.

Would analyzing the '99 draft class be a more accurate judgement than the '05 class? I think so, too, but I'm not the one who started with the '00 class.

To sum that up, I was just playing devil's advocate. I was hoping someone would make a post like yours.

redsfandan
06-16-2010, 08:35 AM
I was afraid I'd find something like this...

I think you missed what I was getting at, Dan. I wasn't pointing out that the arguments for not liking the pick were valid--just the opposite, actually.
No, I understood completely what you meant. BUT, ...

It wasn't my idea to start by position--that idea was floated earlier in the thread. My point was that it was it might not be a fair way to go about criticizing the pick, and your post only furthers the cause.

It was dougdirt who implied he doesn't like taking catchers in the first round, and one of the reasons for that is that they often don't stick at catcher. Is that a good reason not to like the pick? I don't think so personally because, as you pointed out, a player can move off a position and still have a very successful career.
I think you missed MY point. Players CAN move to another position and still be successful. As YOU pointed out, from 2000-05, there were 5 players that were drafted in the 1st round as shortstops that became successful at other positions. But how many catchers that were drafted in the 1st round in those years have moved to other positions and have been successful? Daric Barton? Neil Walker? Jeff Clement?

On most teams a 1st baseman, like Barton, that only has 20 homers in over 1,000 mlb plate appearances wouldn't get many abs. Walker has a shot but he's only had 120+ pa's so far. And Clement was just sent back down to the minors after putting up a sizzling ops of .560 in 136 pa's while playing 1st base for the Pirates.

And, as a reminder, these are the shortstops that have been successful in other positions: Justin Upton, BJ Upton, Aaron Hill, Kelly Johnson, and Adam Jones.

I know it's a little early but I think the former shortstops have done a little better.


Would analyzing the '99 draft class be a more accurate judgement than the '05 class? I think so, too, but I'm not the one who started with the '00 class.

But you did decide to STAY with that class. If you really wanted to try to prove your point you wouldn't have. Granted, I don't think you could've made your point even if you did use the drafts from the 90's. But you could've at least tried.

To sum that up, I was just playing devil's advocate. I was hoping someone would make a post like yours.
And your post is why I hesitated in checking back. I don't think it was a 'bad' pick. I think it was a risky pick. Because I do think that taking a catcher in the 1st round is one of the biggest gambles to make in the 1st round. Hope you don't mind if I bring your 'math' back up:

13 catchers were drafted in the first round from 2000-5. 7 of them stuck at catcher, and only one of them (Joe Mauer) became an average or better major leaguer.

31 shortstops were drafted in the first round from 2000-5. 12 of them stuck at SS, and only two of them (Stephen Drew and Troy Tulowitzki) are average or better major leaguers.

By that math, in the first round, drafting a catcher is a safer bet than drafting a shortstop.
1 catcher out of 13 = 7.7% (pretty impressive).

2 shortstops out of 31 = 6.5% (even better).

NOW let's add in those 5 shortstops that became successful at other positions.

7 out of 31 = 22.6% (hmm that kinda changes things).

Now, I don't know how you feel about Barton, Walker, and Clement but, right now, I don't think they'd help the stats for catchers drafted in the 1st round. So, so far, the players drafted as shortstops from '00-'05 have done a little more than the catchers.

You said "in the first round, drafting a catcher is a safer bet than drafting a shortstop" to be an average or better major leaguer. You've yet to convince me.

My point in my initial post wasn't that the Reds should've taken a shortstop or that shortstops pan out at a great rate either. But at least shortstops are athletic enough that they can move to other positions and still be average or better players as long as they can hit. But if you have to move a catcher then it's a problem cuz, usually, their bat just doesn't transfer as well.

The Reds decided to gamble with a position that doesn't have a good track record in the 1st round and then, imo, they seemed to go with the safer picks AFTER the 1st round. To me that's just odd.

Kingspoint
06-16-2010, 05:18 PM
Catchers taken in the first 5 rounds fail to make the major leagues 95% of the time. Its the ultimate high risk pick. For every Joe Mauer, there are THOUSANDS of catchers drafted who don't make it to the majors.

Does that mean they don't make it as Catchers or they don't make it at all?

traderumor
06-17-2010, 06:20 PM
I have compared the risk. Catchers are the riskiest and its not close.Of course they are. Law of numbers. Add to that low turnover due to the specialized position, and you have very few jobs available. You have to weigh the high reward if you find a major league catcher or two. I don't think you can just relegate it to a lower round pick because of risk alone, esp. if there is a decent bat to go with the position. I also see the risk mitigated by having quality catching in the minors for the pitching prospects. Is the risk/reward worth a little bit of bonus money to take them early?

Benihana
06-17-2010, 07:01 PM
Of course they are. Law of numbers. Add to that low turnover due to the specialized position, and you have very few jobs available. You have to weigh the high reward if you find a major league catcher or two. I don't think you can just relegate it to a lower round pick because of risk alone, esp. if there is a decent bat to go with the position. I also see the risk mitigated by having quality catching in the minors for the pitching prospects. Is the risk/reward worth a little bit of bonus money to take them early?

Exactly. Risk is only half of the equation. Reward should be considered as well, and the potential reward is huge with guys like Grandal. A lot of this year's picks have had a louder bark than bite so far when it comes to bonus demands. Offer him somewhere between $2 and $2.5 MM and hold firm. Worst case you get two first rounders next year (maybe three if they can swing a trade for Lee.)

camisadelgolf
06-17-2010, 07:49 PM
And, as a reminder, these are the shortstops that have been successful in other positions: Justin Upton, BJ Upton, Aaron Hill, Kelly Johnson, and Adam Jones.

I know it's a little early but I think the former shortstops have done a little better.
And that trend will always continue. Many shortstops that are drafted never play a single day of shortstop in the minor leagues. The same could be said for catchers (i.e. Joey Votto), but it's especially true of shortstops.


But you did decide to STAY with that class. If you really wanted to try to prove your point you wouldn't have. Granted, I don't think you could've made your point even if you did use the drafts from the 90's. But you could've at least tried.
I stayed with that class for the purpose of being objective. I was never arguing with you--it was an argument against dougdirt's posts.


You said "in the first round, drafting a catcher is a safer bet than drafting a shortstop" to be an average or better major leaguer. You've yet to convince me.
You took my quote out of context. I would never say that drafting a catcher is the safer bet because it simply isn't. If you want to say that drafting a shortstop is generally a safer bet, I'll agree with you, but if you argue in the way dougdirt did (using the first few drafts of the decade, implying a catcher that is moved to a different position is a failed pick, etc.), I find it very faulty.


The Reds decided to gamble with a position that doesn't have a good track record in the 1st round and then, imo, they seemed to go with the safer picks AFTER the 1st round. To me that's just odd.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but you're calling the Grandal pick a gamble because he is a catcher. Would the Joe Mauer pick have been less risky if he was drafted as a shortstop? Joey Votto was drafted as a catcher--does that mean it was a riskier pick? Of course not. Grandal was taken where he was because it's a pretty safe bet that he can stick at catcher (while hopefully putting up decent offensive numbers). If there was a lot of doubt about him staying at catcher, then he would've been drafted much later.

traderumor
06-17-2010, 08:45 PM
AZ-Chris Snyder-rd. 2 2002 John Hester rd. 13 2006
ATL-Brian McCann-rd. 2 2002 David Ross rd. 7 1998
BAL-Matt Weiters-rd. 1 2007 Craig Tatum rd. 3 2004
BOS-Victor Martinez-IL FA 1996 Jason Varitek rd. 1 1994
CHC-Giovanni Soto-rd. 11 2001 Koyie Hill rd. 4 2000
CHW-A.J. Pierzynski-rd. 3 1994 Ramon Castro rd. 1 1994
CIN-Hernandez-IL FA 1994 Hanigan-Amateur FA 2002
CLE-Lou Marson-rd. 4 2004 Mike Redmon-Amateur 1992
COL-Miguel Olivo-IL FA 1996 Chris Ianetta-rd. 4 2004

Took about 15 minutes to get this far, but what I'm starting to see is that major league catchers tend to be drafted early, unless you find your gem in Latin America. So, I assume the Reds decided that Mezaroco and Grandal are future major league catchers to spend a 1st round pick and money on them.

I hope someone has a more efficient way than back and forth on baseball-reference.com to compile the list of draft position for major league catchers if anyone is interested in taking this the rest of the way.

redsfandan
06-18-2010, 06:57 AM
And that trend will always continue. Many shortstops that are drafted never play a single day of shortstop in the minor leagues. The same could be said for catchers (i.e. Joey Votto), but it's especially true of shortstops.

(Maybe, but I think that's why it's so important that it's easier to move a shortstop to another position.)


I stayed with that class for the purpose of being objective. I was never arguing with you--it was an argument against dougdirt's posts.


You took my quote out of context. I would never say that drafting a catcher is the safer bet because it simply isn't. If you want to say that drafting a shortstop is generally a safer bet, I'll agree with you, but if you argue in the way dougdirt did (using the first few drafts of the decade, implying a catcher that is moved to a different position is a failed pick, etc.), I find it very faulty.

(I did? It sounded to me like you were implying that catchers were safer. And I agree with Doug that, for the most part, they do turn out to be failed picks if they're moved. You're more likely to get another Clement than another Votto.)


Correct me if I'm wrong, but you're calling the Grandal pick a gamble because he is a catcher. Would the Joe Mauer pick have been less risky if he was drafted as a shortstop? Joey Votto was drafted as a catcher--does that mean it was a riskier pick? Of course not. Grandal was taken where he was because it's a pretty safe bet that he can stick at catcher (while hopefully putting up decent offensive numbers). If there was a lot of doubt about him staying at catcher, then he would've been drafted much later.

(Yes and no, remember I never said it was a bad pick. But I do think that defense is much more important with a catcher prospect than with a prospect at any other position. So, I'm really hoping that the questions about his defense are overblown.

I also think it's kinda funny how Mauer and Votto keep getting thrown out as examples of players that made it. It's like people want to think that because ONE drafted catcher turned out to be Mauer that using a 1st round pick on a catcher isn't risky. Or because ONE drafted catcher turned out to be Votto proves that it's not a problem if a catcher has to be moved to another position. Those players were exceptions.)


This what I said in my initial post back on the 1st page:

Taking a catcher in the 1st round is risky, taking a catcher in the 1st round twice in 4 years?

It just seems like they made a risky pick with Grandal and then proceeded to make their next few picks safe picks. That just seems a little backwards to me.
The post by traderumor kinda shows what I'm talking about. You don't have to use a 1st round pick to get a major league 'average or better' catcher. And I'm not saying that the Reds shouldn't draft catchers. OR that Grandal was a bad pick. OR that I would never draft a catcher in the 1st round.

I just think it's odd that an organization that's known for mostly 'safe' picks would make the biggest single financial investment in the draft on a catcher in the 1st round twice in the last 4 drafts when 1st rounders that play THAT specific position see a higher rate of attrition.

That's all.