If going from a late round draft-and-follow to #7 overall isn't exploding then I don't know what would be.Originally Posted by lollipopcurve
The O's were smart to try him as a position player first because if it doesn't work out he can go back to pitching later.
OK, I'll give you the explosion. But I think the issue here is that there's reason to believe the Reds never would have developed the player the Orioles got, because the Reds wanted to make him a pitcher. So, perhaps their not signing him was less a tragedy than a comedy of errors, on both the budgeting and evaluation fronts.If going from a late round draft-and-follow to #7 overall isn't exploding then I don't know what would be.
The O's were smart to try him as a position player first because if it doesn't work out he can go back to pitching later.
The one that hurt was the Sowers selection...but that was probably done b/c Bowden knew he wouldn't sign and the Reds would save some $$$.
Hard to say what they would have done with him. Markakis was leading the JC ranks in HRs when the O's snagged him and I do recall at least one poster on this board who made the case that if he can hit and pitch, you spend the money on him and pick the one that gets him to the majors fastest (namely hitting).
I'm not a system player. I am a system.
Nope, no quibble, Markakis didn't want to come to Cincy and his play in JC up to that point, allowed him to not come here. Simple as that.
IIRC, the Reds only offered $1.5M and he wanted another 250K and the Reds said no. It was all about the money. I think he already had an assurance from the O's about what kind of bonus money he would be looking at.
Last edited by flyer85; 04-07-2006 at 02:09 PM.
Right. And as I recall the Reds liked him as a pitcher. I could be wrong, but both times they selected him the draft list showed it was as a pitcher -- and I believe the stories at the time of the signing negotiations indicated they saw him as a pitcher. Which is not to say he wouldn't have failed quickly and they wouldn't have converted him to an outfielder. But it's unlikely that a) he would have failed quickly, and b) the organization would have admitted the failure quickly (for one, they tend not to recognize high-draft failures for years, and for another, the pitcher to position player conversion is highly unusual in pro ball).Hard to say what they would have done with him.
Yeah -- definitely wish they'd have signed him, but I doubt he'd be the same guy you're seeing with the O's.
That's how I remember it too. It turned out to be a fairly nominal difference.
lollipop, I know they liked him as pitcher when they drafted him, but I don't know if they were still thinking that way after he tore the cover off the ball during his "follow" season. Proably the safest guess is that the organization still considered him a pitcher because they weren't the most mentally agile bunch on the planet at that time, but his bat had turned heads and it managed to make him a #7 overall pick. It is possible after his .455, 17, 74 season in 2003, the Reds would have agreed with the Orioles that his bat was too good to keep him on the mound.
Last edited by M2; 04-07-2006 at 02:19 PM.
I'm not a system player. I am a system.
Markakis didn't want to come here. Add that 250k and it still doesn't matter, he goes back into the draft. Simple as that. Heck, sign the guy to 2.5 mill, considering the poor job the usual Bowden associates did in the draft, take the bat and run, but instead they decided to try it again.
I agree. That was truly pathetic. It was those late Bowden years that completely deprived the organization of minor league talent. The Latin American operation was a sham too.The one that hurt was the Sowers selection...but that was probably done b/c Bowden knew he wouldn't sign and the Reds would save some $$$.
Bull.
I'm not a system player. I am a system.
I certainly saw zero evidence of he didn't want to come to Cincinnati. I believe it was Callis(BA) that followed the story and his take it was all about the $$ and Bowden having a limited budget. In actuality I am guessing that if they had signed Markakis they would have went extra cheap with their 2003 draft picks.
True.It is possible after his .455, 17, 74 season in 2003, the Reds would have agreed with the Orioles that his bat was too good to keep him on the mound.
A quick search turns this up...from "The Baseball Savant":
"Cincinnati was going to use him as a pitcher and DH him on his off days"
So -- sounds like the Reds wanted him to keep his options open -- at their price. Oh well, how bout that Milton Loo?
BTW, The Reds drafted Markakis twice(like the current Loo situation).
Posting Permissions
|
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. |
