So I guess based on the voting system you are on suicide watch?Originally Posted by dougdirt
Suicidal, DanO could do a better job
Enraged, those morons
not sure or neutral
thrilled, this is the best draft ever!
I actually voted "enraged, those moron!". Only because in the order the options were it seemed that they were in worst ever-best ever order, and I didnt think it was the worst ever....yet. I do think Obrien would have done a better job. But hey, its time to let the kids play now (or at leas when they sign) and see how it actually looks. We can all sit around and say "this doesnt make any sense" "what the heck were they thinking" and I know that I was exactly that guy, but the draft is now over and its time to just hope someone turns out to be good. There were quite a few promising things with a lot of the guys...they just have to be able to put it together right.
Cautiosly optimistic .
2006 Redzone mock Draftee's- 1(st) Daniel Bard(redsox), 1(st sup)( Jordan Walden (Angels), 2(nd) rd.- Zach Britton(Orioles), 3(rd) Blair Erickson(Cardinals), 3(rd) Tim Norton( Yankees),(cuz its a Tim Hortons thing
Pain heals. Chicks dig scars. Glory... lasts forever.
I picked not sure, I am just not positive that it was a bad draft but I don't know enough to call myself cautiously optimistic. I do think that if they can tweak the 2nd rounders delivery (his name suddenly escapes me, Sean Burnett I think) he could be very good. When he was picked I watched the video footage and he has a nice 12-6 break on that knuckle-curve. And I was also paying close attention to the gun on his and some of the other "good pitchers" and he seemingly was throwing 92 routinely and some others were at around 86-88 that were suppose to be hard throwers. I found that to be quite odd.
I don't know enough beyond the top 50 or so players to jump in on the conversation except to say that some of those "name guys" that alot of us had been clamoring for were also being consistently passed by other teams as well, which tells me we don't know as much as we think we do or all 32 teams don't. I'll lay my odds on MLB for the most part.
However one thing that has come to my mind during this weeks picks is the question "What is a good draft"? I mean you have 50 picks so how many have to have some degree of success at the Major League level? How many have to be stars at this level? How many have to be dealt for other good or pivotal players down through the years? If your draft stinks to the high heavens except you pluck Mike Piazza, Roy Oswalt or Albert Pujols is it still considered a good draft? And finally how many do you have to get who can foster a winning spirit through your minors so the few big leaguers that come through it know what it takes to be a winner to help the big club.
It could be that the latter is more important than anyone of us wants to give it credit for.
"You can't let praise or criticism get to you. It's a weakness to get caught up in either one."