Turn Off Ads?
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 38 of 38

Thread: Reds approach to this years draft

  1. #31
    ZCTRMTP!!!!! texasdave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    10,824

    Re: Reds approach to this years draft

    Maybe I am missing something but if a pitcher and a position player are rated equally, and the position player is more likely to reach the majors, then the smart pick would seem to be to take the position player. This is along the same lines as picking a college pitcher over a high school pitcher if they are rated the same.

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #32
    Box of Frogs edabbs44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    16,314

    Re: Reds approach to this years draft

    Quote Originally Posted by IslandRed View Post
    The other thing to remember -- going back to the approach to the 2007 draft specifically -- is that we're picking #15. The no-brainers will be off the board, so we'll be able to poke holes in the selection of whoever it is, if we're so inclined.

    Otherwise, I agree with jmcclain -- this isn't the NFL, baseball teams shouldn't draft based on current-day needs. As for the other question, I would take a pitcher over a position player if I had them rated equally but would not pass up a position player if he was clearly tops on my board.
    No brainers could still be there, due to contract demands.

    Look at 2004: Jered Weaver went 12, Stephen Drew went 15. Btw, Bill Bray went 13 in that draft.

    2005: Craig Hansen went 26, Luke Hochevar went 40.

    You never know who could fall...especially if you have deep pockets.
    Last edited by edabbs44; 04-10-2007 at 12:50 PM.

  4. #33
    Box of Frogs edabbs44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    16,314

    Re: Reds approach to this years draft

    Quote Originally Posted by texasdave View Post
    Maybe I am missing something but if a pitcher and a position player are rated equally, and the position player is more likely to reach the majors, then the smart pick would seem to be to take the position player. This is along the same lines as picking a college pitcher over a high school pitcher if they are rated the same.
    But then the Reds could end up in the same boat as they've been in for the past few years.

    All hit and no pitch makes managers have a lot of free time during the summer.

  5. #34
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    1,866

    Re: Reds approach to this years draft

    In the first three rounds the Reds need to pick the best player available and if they are even lean towards the pitcher. Since they don't have studs at every position and every level they need to continue to fill the pipe line.

  6. #35
    The Boss dougdirt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    35,940

    Re: Reds approach to this years draft

    Quote Originally Posted by dougdirt View Post
    Saltalamaccia fell on his face last year hitting .230 with a .380 slugging percentage....
    Guess Salty decided to make me look real stupid real fast. He just hit his 3rd HR of the season today... Sure its early, but maybe he is ready to break out again.

  7. #36
    Charlie Brown All-Star IslandRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Melbourne, FL
    Posts
    4,866

    Re: Reds approach to this years draft

    Quote Originally Posted by texasdave View Post
    Maybe I am missing something but if a pitcher and a position player are rated equally, and the position player is more likely to reach the majors, then the smart pick would seem to be to take the position player. This is along the same lines as picking a college pitcher over a high school pitcher if they are rated the same.
    Well, I was referring just to the first-round pick, and the odds are very good that if I'm looking at a first-round pitcher it's a college pitcher. That evens up the odds quite a bit. I'm also of the mind that it's easier to trade a minor-league pitcher for something I need down the road than an equivalently good position player, so that factors into it as well.
    For those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don't believe, no proof is possible

  8. #37
    One Man Army
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    440

    Re: Reds approach to this years draft

    Huh. Some of the stuff in this thread has a similar subject to a post I made on my home board not too long ago.

    Quote Originally Posted by Outshined_One
    I've repeated this time and again whenever people try to do limited analyses of drafted players in terms of success rates based on a certain classification (pitchers, position players, college, HS, etc).

    They do not work.

    There are numerous factors which make things so incredibly muddled in terms of determining whether a team made the right decision in drafting a player. I've seen a number of studies done on overall success rates in the draft and whatnot, but you absolutely cannot make universal judgments on players based on something like whether that player was drafted in the Top 10 or if that guy was drafted as a shortstop.

    Here are a few factors worth noting...

    -Signability. In 2006, the consensus best player in the draft (Andrew Miller) fell to #6 due to signability concerns, since the top teams were worried about his contract demands. In 2004, Jered Weaver and Stephen Drew suffered the same fate. Because of contract demands, college commitments, and a variety of other factors, guys who would otherwise be taken in the Top 10, first round, first five rounds, or whatever, based on talent instead fall well out of those spots.

    It's not necessarily that the Cubs have been able to unearth guys like Sean Gallagher, Jeff Samardzija, and Chris Huseby because they were diamonds in the rough. Instead, the Cubs had enough scouting and money to pry those guys away from their commitments.

    -Injuries. Yes, they are an unfortunate fact of life when it comes to sports, but I maintain that the majority of injuries which occur are not foreseeable. Sometimes, bad things happen to guys which no one could see coming and it could at the least set back their development and at worst end their careers. How fair is it to judge a team based on drafting a certain player in hindsight when, at the time, he had a clean bill of health with no red flags?

    Cripes, just imagine what the Mets' rotation would look like if Isringhausen, Wilson, and Pulsipher didn't all have arm injuries. I'll refrain from addressing the Cubs' history in this area, but you get the idea.

    -Arbitrariness/Sample Size. This is part nitpick, part major point. The nitpick is, why limit yourself to the Top 10? What makes 10 so special? How much would it affect the numbers, success rates, and correlations if you increased the sample size to something like Top 15, Top 20, and so on? Based on the signability issues I mentioned above, wouldn't it make some sense to expand the pool to include these potential top picks who fell because of money concerns?

    Secondly, this is an incredibly difficult thing to accurately measure in terms of sample size. I've seen people pull out the last 15 #6 overall picks in the NFL draft based on the Bears' tradeup rumors and people have been making predictions based on the success numbers at that pick. The problem is, the pick itself does not dictate how good or bad a player will be; it's the scouting department, talent available, and to a certain extent the luck that will determine that matter.

    To me, that's the bottom line in all of this. I don't particularly care who the Cubs draft, where the guy played ball, how old he is, and so on. What I really care about is whether the Cubs did their homework on the guy and know that he's got the chops to make an impact on the big league club some day.

    Poor scouting and bad luck lead to more busted draft picks than anything else, you know?

  9. #38
    Member 11larkin11's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Bellefontaine,OH
    Posts
    2,333

    Re: Reds approach to this years draft

    Whats the draft projection of Trent Kline? Is he a guy we could be looking at? I watched him on ESPN the other day and looks like he has a good bat and average defensive skills. Hes a catcher from South Carolina. Also, his teammate Justin Smoak was bragged about all game.
    Domo Arigato, Here Comes Joey Votto

    ---TRF

    "I do what I want to do and say what I want to say."

    --Bronson Arroyo


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