Baseball America's Draft Report Card - Reds Edition

Jim Callis wrote the Reds draft report card for the 2006 Cincinnati Red's draft. Its subscriber content, and you can view it here:

http://www.baseballamerica.com/onlin...es/262728.html

There are a couple interesting notes about the draft, and overall I think its a very good read.

Chris Valaika was one mentioned as having the best Pro Debut, and he also won out as being the best Pure Hitter of our draft class - Jim Callis thinks his value will soar if he can remain at SS and I agree. Milton Loo also gets mention in both of these categories as well.

Stubbs gets mention in quite a few categories as well, such as Best Pure Athlete, Best Defensive Player, and Fastest Runner.

Sean Watson gets metion as a guy with one of the Best Fastballs, and the best Breaking ball - he throws a knuckle curve. Also gets mention as closest to the majors, and I agree with this assessment.

In regards to the overall assessment of our draft, Callis seems to think that despite the Stubbs pick - which will utilimately be what this draft is graded on and remembered for - he feels that this was one of our deepest drafts in quite some time for our ball club.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I do like this draft class more and more each day. Certainly I am much more happy with it than I was on draft day. I still contend that we should have picked Lincecum, as he would be a great prospect to pair with Bailey, and they're both on the same type of time table. But I've also come to terms with the Stubb's pick - I am certainly more comfortable with it now than I was on draft day - a sentiment I am probably in the minority with.

In any case, what does everyone else think?

One thing that I hadnt read until I saw it was that Josh Ravin's Fastball, which was lower in the spring was 94-96 during the season for the GCL Reds. Thats higher than I had ever seen him throwing, the previous high I had seen was 93 from him. I also like the reports that the Reds had several guys throwing 94 or higher in Watson, Ravin, Jordan Smith, Burchette and Roenicke. All stuff that I loved reading. Great post!

Ravin was listed as one of our pitchers that had a great fastaball, yes. I am really excited about some of the guys we got. They may not have the ceiling of a Homer Bailey, but quite a few of them seem to have more upside than I gave them credit for.

I think Buckley did a pretty good job scouting his picks. I just disagreed with his 1st round selection - although if you consider Stubb's ceiling, and the overall weakness of the draft - taking that kind of a lotto pick with 1 pick perhaps isn't the worst thing in the world.

Great art CincyinCO thanks alot for updating us and Yes Buckley did a decent job I think.

Callis bugs me, sorry. It is abundantly clear that the Reds draft this year had some nice depth, yet Callis proclaims that the success of the draft will be determined by how well Stubbs hits? That's inane. The fact is, Stubbs can get by with the bat and still end up helping the Reds as an above-average defender in CF. Meanwhile, it appears guys like Valaika, Watson, Turner, Loo, just to name 4, have a chance to develop, thus providing plenty of bounty from the 06 class.

Just my pet peeve here, but look at his evaluation of his beloved Cubs. They didn't have a 2nd or 3rd round pick, yet he classifies the draft as a typical effort from the Cubs scouting director, lauded as having the best track record in the game. Now, if the success of ANY draft would hinge solely on the performance of the first round pick, you'd have to think it would be a draft like the Cubs' -- where other high-round picks have been punted. But no -- not with Callis spinning the conclusions.

Great format -- I'd just love to see other writers handle it.

Hereth end rant.

Not sure I agree with what you're saying lollipop, and we're usually on the same page. I think Callis meant more along the lines that "on the surface" that our judge would be graded on the success of stubbs, but that it shouldn't be, because this was a deep effort.

I also believe he meant that the cubs draft was a typical draft for their scouting director, not that their draft was great.

Perhaps I just interpreted it differently, but thats the impression i came away with.

Just to make clear, Loo was part of the 05 d/f group so he shouldn't be included in the 06 draftee's analysis.

Good point Aronchis. For whatever reason, BA includes him in this assessment, probably because he signed/made his debut pretty much in line with the 06 draft class.

W

Aronchis, I think he was just included by Callis becuase he started with the same group that was drafted because of his draft and follow status. Since he signed this season, he couldnt be evaluated in their 2005 draft recap, but he is such an impact on the system that they felt the need to include him.

cincyinco just beat me to it....Im slacking tonight.

though I think they did mention a lot of 05 draft and follows in the draft report cards this year..

was draft and follows done away with?

This is the last season that draft and follows will be allowed. All players from here on out drafted must be signed by August something, or re-enter the draft the next season.

Quote:

---

Josh Ravin's Fastball, which was lower in the spring was 94-96 during the season for the GCL Reds. I also like the reports that the Reds had several guys throwing 94 or higher in Watson, Ravin, Jordan Smith, Burchette and Roenicke.

---

With Ravin's added velocity and his 9.90K/9 last season, I'd say he has quite a bit more potential than I originally gave him credit for. Despite passing on Lincecum, when you throw Arneson and the sinkerballing Lutz into that group, I'd say WayneK did a pretty nice job of grabbing some good arms in the middle rounds. Now that Kainer is in the mix, this draft is starting to growing on me.