Turn Off Ads?
Page 43 of 44 FirstFirst ... 33394041424344 LastLast
Results 631 to 645 of 651

Thread: 2004 Draft thread

  1. #631
    Pre-tty, pre-tty good!! MWM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    12,324

    Re: 2004 Draft thread

    Quote Originally Posted by traderumor
    MWM,

    No one is trying to suck your fun out of being a fan. But it is funny to watch someone go on and on about how bad a pick this was but then say "I'm not an expert" in the same breath. It isn't about no armchair QBing allowed here, but at some point it is healthy to admit that perhaps, perhaps, the folks that have done a little (ok a lot) more legwork than reading publications and done went and made a draft pick that didn't fit inside some neat little "moneyball pick" box (which just like in high school, when all the non-conformists dressed alike ) might find an exception to a rule. Or they may be the same devil we just got rid of.
    I think we're at that point of both of us saying virtually the same thing every post using different words. You keep talking about how the guys making the decision have done a lot more legwork and have experience doing this. I come back saying they had the same experience and did the same amount of legwork when they drafted Gruler and Howington, etc... You come back with perhaps they see something different. I respond by agreeing that it's possibility, but not one I'd be willing to give $2 - $3MM to. You find it funny that a non-expert feels so strongly about this. I find it funny that folks can give their loyal nod of approval simply because "experts" must know what they're doing. And so on a so forth.

    But just so we can agree on something, I will gladly cede the point that "perhaps, perhaps" Bailey will develop into everything these scouts thought he could be. It might sound like I'm arguing against that point, but I never meant to. I sure hope he turns into a perennial 20 game winner, and it's possible he will. But we're both aware of the odds. Can we agree on that?

    One last thing, my opinion on this matter was formed long before the release of Moneyball. Moneyball has nothing to do with my opinions on drafting high school pitchers. Henceforth, anyone saying the belief against drafting high school pitchers in the first round with large signing bonuses attached is based on Moneyball will be slapped with a large trout.
    Grape works as a soda. Sort of as a gum. I wonder why it doesn't work as a pie. Grape pie? There's no grape pie. - Larry David

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #632
    Posting in Dynarama M2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    28,164

    Re: 2004 Draft thread

    Quote Originally Posted by lollipopcurve
    So, M2, you'd have taken a HS catcher over Bailey?
    I believe the success rate of HS catchers taken in the first round is the lowest of any position, including HS pitchers. But correct me if I'm wrong.
    Walker rated high because of his bat as much as his position. My litmus test on him, or any catcher, would be whether I'd be drafting him there if he played RF or 3B.

    Had I been the Reds, and Nelson, Townshend and Diamond were off the board and I didn't want to haggle with Weaver and Drew, then I'd have certainly considered Bailey over Walker. Dexter Fowler, Greg Golson and David Purcey also would have factored into my thinking in that case. Of course, that wasn't the case, because the Reds had the #8 pick and not something in the low teens, thus my extreme disappointment.
    Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong

    I'm witchcrafting everybody.

  4. #633
    Unsolicited Opinions traderumor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Right Down Broadway
    Posts
    18,667

    Re: 2004 Draft thread

    They also completely ignored the strength of this draft.
    Quote Originally Posted by Red Leader
    That is exactly the way I feel and the main reason that I'm upset with the draft so far.
    This seems to be confusing categories. Ok, so there is more of one thing available than another overall, but we are drafting individual players for an individual team. When you're using a BPA approach, which the Reds claim was going to be their primary philosophy, why does it matter what area has the deepest quality (assuming that was indeed the case) to a particular team's draft? That is akin to saying the Bengals should have drafted a QB with their first round pick simply because folks claimed that the overall draft had a glut of good QBs. I'm not following that logic.

  5. #634
    Posting in Dynarama M2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    28,164

    Re: 2004 Draft thread

    Quote Originally Posted by traderumor
    This seems to be confusing categories. Ok, so there is more of one thing available than another overall, but we are drafting individual players for an individual team. When you're using a BPA approach, which the Reds claim was going to be their primary philosophy, why does it matter what area has the deepest quality (assuming that was indeed the case) to a particular team's draft? That is akin to saying the Bengals should have drafted a QB with their first round pick simply because folks claimed that the overall draft had a glut of good QBs. I'm not following that logic.
    First off, BPA is a subjective measure. Every ratings authority I've seen ranked Nelson in front of Bailey. So it's not like the Reds picked the consensus BPA with their pick. Clearly they used a different, I'd argue flawed, metric.

    Beyond that there's an illusion of relativity to deal with, one I whole-heartedly admit to pursuing myself. So Bailey's the best HS pitcher in the nation. What does that mean? How far down the list of college pitchers do you have to go before Bailey's really the better selection? I know that's kind of like asking how many of those scrumptious apples do you have to eat before this orange tastes really great, but that's the dynamic at work here.

    Anyway, everyone else is drafting college arms and it's attractive to run toward a high school arm because why get the sixth-best of something when you can get the best of something else? Thing is, there was probably a reason why everyone was drafting those college arms -- they were really good pitchers at a far more advanced level of competition and more physically mature. IMO, the Reds zagged early, while there were still high level college arms on the board. Had Bailey been hanging around on pick #16, his selection would have made a lot more sense and you'd have been spending less for his attractive, if distant upside. And this doesn't even touch upon the BPA, Chris Nelson.

    So, if the Reds consciously tried to buck the trend, my argument is they took what might have been a good concept and misapplied it, overdrafting Bailey rather than taking him as an undervalued commodity.
    Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong

    I'm witchcrafting everybody.

  6. #635
    Member CougarQuest's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Bright, Indiana USA
    Posts
    5,573

    Re: 2004 Draft thread

    In the first 30 rounds, here is what the Reds took:

    14 pitchers in the first 30 rounds, 7 of them left handers.
    3 - RHP out of high school
    4 - RHP out of college
    2 - LHP out of high school
    5 - LHP out of college

    C - 2 college, 1 baseball academy
    1 - none
    2 - 2 college
    SS - 1 college, 2 high school
    3 - 2 college
    OF - 5 college, 1 high school
    Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity.

  7. #636
    Puffy's Daddy Red Leader's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Centerville, OH
    Posts
    20,422

    Re: 2004 Draft thread

    Quote Originally Posted by CougarQuest
    In the first 30 rounds, here is what the Reds took:

    14 pitchers in the first 30 rounds, 7 of them left handers.
    3 - RHP out of high school
    4 - RHP out of college
    2 - LHP out of high school
    5 - LHP out of college

    C - 2 college, 1 baseball academy
    1 - none
    2 - 2 college
    SS - 1 college, 2 high school
    3 - 2 college
    OF - 5 college, 1 high school

    When you look at it like that, it looks like they have been more weighted toward college players, but if you look at the first 10 picks:
    1.RHP-Homer Bailey(LaGrange HS Texas)(6'4 185, R-R)
    2.OF-BJ Szymanski(Princeton)(6'5 210, S-R)
    3.C-Craig Tatum(Mississippi St)((6'1 215, R-R)
    4.RHP-Rafael Gonzalez(George Washington HS NY)(6'3 225, R-R)
    5.SS-Paul Janish(Rice University)(6'2 180, R-R)
    6.C-Lonny Roa(Puerto Rico Baseball Academy)(6'3 215, R-R)
    7.LHP-Phillippe Alexan Valliquette(Canada HS)(6'0 175, L-L)
    8.LHP-Gregory Goetz(Bellevue CC)(6'4 195, L-L)
    9.2B-Trevor Lawhorn(East Carolina)(6'2 182, R-R)
    10.RHP-Terrell Young(Grenada HS)(6'3 175, R-R)


    5 pitchers: 4 High School, 1 community college
    2 C: 1 college, 1 academy
    1 SS: 1 college
    1 2B: 1 college
    1 OF: 1 college

    The arms heavily favor high school in the top of the draft where all of your "major" talent is available.
    'When I'm not longer rapping, I want to open up an ice cream parlor and call myself Scoop Dogg.'
    -Snoop on his retirement

    Your Mom is happy.

  8. #637
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    58

    Re: 2004 Draft thread

    i have to agree with M2 on this one.

    no way in hell can you pass up the chance at the next barry larkin(maybe better) to take another in a long line of arm surgery victems.

    look, bailey is a very talented player, and everything looks great from teh outside. he's tall, has a good throwing motion and he throws hard, but chris gruler threw hard too.... i mean, when will this organization (and others) learn that high school pitchers rarely work out. for every kerry wood or josh beckett, there are 3-4 other guys who blow out there arms and never reach their potential. guys like wood and beckett are the exception, not the rule.

    now on to nelson. this guy IS bj upton, only about 4 inches shorter. he is a true 5-tool middle infeilder: he hits for average, he hits for power, he runs as well as anyone in the draft, he can pick it at short and despite t.j. surgery, he has an absolute cannon for an arm. imo, he is as close to a shore thing as it gets as far as the baseball draft is concerned.

    imo, shortstop is just as big a need as pitching. look at what we have in the minor leagues as far as middle infielders:

    felipe lopez: dont make me laugh. "no socks" is NOT a major league player. he's a punk with a weak bat, laughable defense and a general lack of common sense.

    rey olmedo: he's a decent little player, but he'll never be more than a juan castro type.

    edwin encarnacion: he's gonna be a third baseman.

    it's obvious we needed a shortstop, yet the new braintrust decided to waste another high pick on a guy who will probably blow his arm out within the next two years.

    for baileys sake, i hope i'm wrong and he can buck the trend of, not only h.s. pitchers, but reds pitchers in general. but i just get the feeling, while chris nelson is playing in all-star games for the colorado rockies, homer will be sitting at home in his cowboy boots, watching the games from his couch.

  9. #638
    breath westofyou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    PDX
    Posts
    42,823

    Re: 2004 Draft thread

    Forgive me if this was already posted

    Szymanski was overrated when he was being talked up as a top-10 pick, but he's not too much of a stretch in the second round. He's a converted football player whose numbers don't stand up too well when you adjust for the level of competition. His temper still reflects a football mentality--the word "raw" comes up way too often in discussions of him. That said, he has a high upside, so he was worth a flyer, although the third or fourth round might have fit him better.


    http://www.baseballprospectus.com/ar...articleid=2948

    Boyd Nation is the sole author and Webmaster of Boyd's World, a Web site devoted to college baseball rankings, analysis, and opinions.

  10. #639
    Ripsnort wheels's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Columbus, Ohio
    Posts
    7,594

    Re: 2004 Draft thread

    Sorry I didn't chime in yesterday....But it just sickens me that they didn't draft Nelson.

    While I do believe that Homer Bailey is the next in line at dr K's office, it's not that they drafted him that upsets me the most. Chris Nelson's gonna make all of us shake our heads in disbelief a few years from now. He's a guy that Colorado will build it's franchise around.

    Will Homer Bailey be able to match that? My gut feeling tells me no.

    Of course we shouldn't be surprised by any of this....Not when you look at the braintrust involved. This front office has displayed an apalling amount of hubris by thumbing thier collective noses at years and years of evidence that drafts like this are poison to the long term health of a small market franchise.

    I hope I'm wrong.
    "We know we're better than this, but we can't prove it." - Tony Gwynn

  11. #640
    Pre-tty, pre-tty good!! MWM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    12,324

    Re: 2004 Draft thread

    Hey mods, can we archive this one, so when Bailey ends up winning the Cy Young in 4 or 5 years, I can gladly eat the crow I will deserve. :mhcky21:
    Grape works as a soda. Sort of as a gum. I wonder why it doesn't work as a pie. Grape pie? There's no grape pie. - Larry David

  12. #641
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Shelburne Falls, MA
    Posts
    10,133

    Re: 2004 Draft thread

    Nelson lovers,
    I was hoping for Nelson (or Sowers), but I have to say I think the touting of Nelson around here is premature. Let's remember -- 7 other teams passed on the guy. San Diego liked Bush better. Detroit has no SS to speak of in the majors or minors. Cleveland isn't exactly set at SS either.

    If Chris Nelson is a franchise player, a BJ Upton, you guys called it. If he's an average player, then your whole take on this draft will have been wrong, in my opinion. Because as much as the argument has sounded like a "philosophical debate" about drafting HS pitchers, I really think the subtext has been huge disappointment that we didn't pick Nelson. Just my take...

    Sometimes the energy that surrounds a super prospect like Upton ebbs into how people perceive the next wave -- "who's the next BJ?" The assumption is that the next BJ must be there somewhere. Now I think the touting of Nelson has some merit, and has been reasonably argued, but the fact is that the buzz around him nationally is not really close to what you had for Upton.

    Anyway, Bailey's our guy now. I love the tape I've seen of him, and I like what I've read. Hey, maybe he'll become the ace we've been waiting for.
    "Baseball is a very, very complex business. It's more of a people business than most businesses." - Bob Castellini

  13. #642
    C-A-T-S CATS! CATS! CATS! WVRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Almost Heaven
    Posts
    8,445

    Re: 2004 Draft thread

    Quote Originally Posted by RedsDude
    i have to agree with M2 on this one.

    no way in hell can you pass up the chance at the next barry larkin(maybe better) to take another in a long line of arm surgery victems.

    look, bailey is a very talented player, and everything looks great from teh outside. he's tall, has a good throwing motion and he throws hard, but chris gruler threw hard too.... i mean, when will this organization (and others) learn that high school pitchers rarely work out. for every kerry wood or josh beckett, there are 3-4 other guys who blow out there arms and never reach their potential. guys like wood and beckett are the exception, not the rule.

    now on to nelson. this guy IS bj upton, only about 4 inches shorter. he is a true 5-tool middle infeilder: he hits for average, he hits for power, he runs as well as anyone in the draft, he can pick it at short and despite t.j. surgery, he has an absolute cannon for an arm. imo, he is as close to a shore thing as it gets as far as the baseball draft is concerned.

    imo, shortstop is just as big a need as pitching. look at what we have in the minor leagues as far as middle infielders:

    felipe lopez: dont make me laugh. "no socks" is NOT a major league player. he's a punk with a weak bat, laughable defense and a general lack of common sense.

    rey olmedo: he's a decent little player, but he'll never be more than a juan castro type.

    edwin encarnacion: he's gonna be a third baseman.

    it's obvious we needed a shortstop, yet the new braintrust decided to waste another high pick on a guy who will probably blow his arm out within the next two years.

    for baileys sake, i hope i'm wrong and he can buck the trend of, not only h.s. pitchers, but reds pitchers in general. but i just get the feeling, while chris nelson is playing in all-star games for the colorado rockies, homer will be sitting at home in his cowboy boots, watching the games from his couch.
    Man alive, you people are writing him off before you even see him pitch. Give him a chance for Petes sake.

    As far as the Gruler comparison goes, I blame that on one thing, Jim Bowden. Bowden would have let Ryan Wagner pitch last year until his arm fell off. There is already a pitch limit in place now for our younger pitchers, unlike past regimes.

    What makes you so sure that Chris Nelson is going to be BJ Upton? What makes me think Homer Bailey will be a Cy Young candidate? Will BJ Upton even succeed(Since he is still in the minors)? To be honest, I dont think we will ever get a fair reading on Chris Nelson, because he will likely be wearing purple and black and playing in thin air Coors Field(unless his value drops and he is traded).

    The fact is, folks, college and high school pitchers are different, yet similar. High schoolers rely more on velocity and power, instead of learning to pitch. Its when the team who falls in love with that power that they flame out. College pitchers learn to pitch in college, and are more polished, and usually make it to the major leagues because of that. But most of them are overvalued because they are a "college" and therefore a "safe" pick(see Bryan Bullington).

    I wonder how many people here would have cried if we had been in the Marlins place and had taken Josh Beckett over Kyle Snyder(top collegiate pitcher taken).

    If you want to see a good list of college pitchers being picked because they were safe picks, look at the 98 draft. Of the pitchers who have reached the majors(Mark Mulder, Jeff Austin, Jeff Weaver, Seth Etherton, Brad Lidge, and Kip Wells) only one strikes me as dominating(maybe two if Wells would switch teams). My point is that out of the 10 "sure thing" pitchers, only one has made a mark. Even though there were four HS arms taken, one(CC Sabathia) is still establishing himself in Cleveland.

    Or if you want to judge whether or not a first round pitcher will make it(HS or College), you can use the 97 draft, where Matt Anderson and Jon Garland might be the closest things.

    Now heres an interesting SS debate, the Reds drafted a SS from LSU in the first round of that same 97 draft, yet a slugging 1B from Rice went two picks later, can you guess his name?

    Im sure I will never convince M2 or MWM that Bailey was a good pick, nor can they convince me that we made the wrong choice in not taking Nelson. But it also seems that while people mention us taking Chad Mottola over Derek Jeter, we seem to forget that we took a SS in 97 from LSU only to have a slugging 1B taken by the Astros two picks later.

    I wish both Bailey and Nelson the best of luck on their journey to the majors, and I think we made a difficult choice in who we took, but one I think could pay dividends if handled the right way.

    But until these kids play the game, you cant really make a fair distinction.
    Quote Originally Posted by savafan View Post
    I've read books about sparkling vampires who walk around in the daylight that were written better than a John Fay article.

  14. #643
    Member CougarQuest's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Bright, Indiana USA
    Posts
    5,573

    Re: 2004 Draft thread

    Final tally of the 50 rounds:
    23 pitchers, 8 of them left handers.
    8 - RHP out of high school
    7 - RHP out of college
    2 - LHP out of high school
    6 - LHP out of college

    C - 3 from college, 1 from baseball academy, 1 from high school
    1 - 3 out of high school
    2 - 2 out of college
    SS - 2 out of college, 3 out of high school
    3 - 3 out of college
    OF - 6 out of college, 3 out of high school
    Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity.

  15. #644
    Pre-tty, pre-tty good!! MWM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    12,324

    Re: 2004 Draft thread

    WVRED, why are so willing to name Bailey a future Cy Young award winner?
    Grape works as a soda. Sort of as a gum. I wonder why it doesn't work as a pie. Grape pie? There's no grape pie. - Larry David

  16. #645
    C-A-T-S CATS! CATS! CATS! WVRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Almost Heaven
    Posts
    8,445

    Re: 2004 Draft thread

    Quote Originally Posted by MWM
    WVRED, why are so willing to name Bailey a future Cy Young award winner?
    I didnt know I was. All I am saying is give the kid a chance.

    Im saying that Bailey could be in the same category as other Texas pitchers, such as Kerry Wood and Josh Beckett, but its going to take some teaching and coaching to get him to that level(same as it did the Cubs and Marlins). And I think this is going to be a telling point as to how good Dan O'Brien is. Bailey can be one of the above, or he could be a Todd Van Poppell or Colt Griffin, its up to him and the Reds.

    Who knows, he could be a Cy Young winner, or he could be next in line at Dr Ks office. Chris Nelson could be in the ARod mold, or he could be the next in a line of Colorado SSs shown the door(Neifi Perez, Juan Uribe).

    The pick has already been made, lets get behind Dan O'Brien and hope that he knows what he is doing.
    Quote Originally Posted by savafan View Post
    I've read books about sparkling vampires who walk around in the daylight that were written better than a John Fay article.


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25