![]() |
|
|
#1 | |||
|
Box of Frogs
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: NJ
Posts: 15,825
|
Keith Law mock draft
Oh boy...
Quote:
A few other tidbits about Cincy's sandwich pick: Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Member
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 4,673
|
Re: Keith Law mock draft
I am not sure if somebody like Dominguez is really "falling" at the 15th spot.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,344
|
Re: Keith Law mock draft
Thanks for posting this, I was hoping someone would.
However, I'm not real crazy about what he has to say. I'll be pretty upset if we pass on Wieters. It would be nice to draft some college players who can contribute soon, for once, especially if the player is at a position of need. I like big LHP Nick Hagadone at 34, and can see him being a guy the Reds would be interested in. Starter-turned-closer who the Reds could turn into a starter again. |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Smells Like Teen Spirit
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 6,486
|
Re: Keith Law mock draft
Aherns as a Red will be nothing to be disappointed about. However, if Wieters is there and the Reds pass, that will be extremely disappointing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 | |
|
Box of Frogs
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: NJ
Posts: 15,825
|
Re: Keith Law mock draft
Quote:
1) This Reds FO, for whatever reason, has zero poker face when it comes to their draft picks. 2) It doesn't matter who is available when they select, they will take Ahrens. I wonder if, say Andrew Miller was available last year, they would still have taken Stubbs? My money is on yes. And that's what scares me about this regime. They have probably spoken to Ahrens and said "What's your number?" He tells them "$1.7 million". The higher ups approve and there's your selection. They want to play it safe and zero in on someone they have a good feeling will be there when they pick. Not a total overdraft, but a slight one. Now, what if Wieters falls and the Reds know it wil take above slot to sign him? Will they be able to gather the testicular fortitude to draft him and worry about money later, or will they still take their guy? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Member
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 6,854
|
Re: Keith Law mock draft
I'm not sure a poker face necessarily helps you here EdAbbs, you can't trade the pick. So what does it matter if everyone above or below you knows who you're going to pick.
It's better to have that pick in mind and know about how much it will cost to sign that pick, that way you don't have to worry about failing to sign them.
__________________
When people say that I don’t know what I’m talking about when it comes to sports or writing, I think: Man, you should see me in the rest of my life. ---Joe Posnanski |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 | |
|
Box of Frogs
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: NJ
Posts: 15,825
|
Re: Keith Law mock draft
Quote:
1) It shows that they are very concerned about signability, which means safety. To be locked in on someone at 15 is tough to do. A lot could happen between 1 and 15. But to be locked in on someone means you are probably overdrafting them since it is tough to gauge who will be there, unless you are 100% sure they will not be drafted by then. 2) Think about this. BA has Ahrens ranked at 28 right now. It's not out of the realm of possibility that he could fall to Cincy at 34. Say a team like Texas (with picks at 24 and 35) likes him as well. If Cincy were to take the BPA at 15 then hope that Ahrens drops to 34, Texas might take him at 24 since they know Cincy will pick him at 34. Trading or no trading of picks, it's not good for everyone to know who you really want in a draft. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 | |
|
Smells Like Teen Spirit
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 6,486
|
Re: Keith Law mock draft
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Member
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 4,673
|
Re: Keith Law mock draft
It was easy to guess the pick last year because the Reds were higher in the draft and the draft wasn't percieved to be deep.
This year it is about who falls and when. |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 | |
|
Box of Frogs
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: NJ
Posts: 15,825
|
Re: Keith Law mock draft
Quote:
It's a deep draft and everyone said Cincy is all over Ahrens. Do you think that, if someone fell, they would switch gears and go with that "better" player? Or do you think the FO has basically everything ready to go except the signature for this guy? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 | |
|
I hate the Cubs
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 5,585
|
Re: Keith Law mock draft
Quote:
__________________
Whenever you get mad over a called strike or ball on a close pitch, it's the equivalent of being mad at the QB pump-faking one time before throwing a pass in your average NFL game. ---Caveat Emperor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Box of Frogs
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: NJ
Posts: 15,825
|
Re: Keith Law mock draft
Wel, then it's time to go against the grain and not call people. Isn't that what the book is all about? Zigging when everyone else is zagging?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
I hate the Cubs
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 5,585
|
Re: Keith Law mock draft
My point was, there wasn't any cloak and dagger stuff going on.
__________________
Whenever you get mad over a called strike or ball on a close pitch, it's the equivalent of being mad at the QB pump-faking one time before throwing a pass in your average NFL game. ---Caveat Emperor |
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Vampire Weekend @Bernie's
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 11,311
|
Re: Keith Law mock draft
The Reds have more high picks than usual, and Way-K has gone on record saying that signability is a factor. Ahrens at 15 wouldn't surprise me, but I would love to see the Reds be able to afford the best player for each pick.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
The Boss
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 30,757
|
Re: Keith Law mock draft
I would love to see the Reds get Griffith at #34. I like what he brings.
__________________
www.redsminorleagues.com |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
|
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. |