John Sickels on the Reds draft

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by Mario-Rijo

Well they sure haven't set the world on fire Doug. Watson is just now having any real consistency besides Low A ball where he could get away with 1 good pitch, Scott Carroll has done what but toil and Cline has barely even pitched yet after close to a year being with the organization. I'd like to see a bit more out of top 5 round selections. You have guys drafted after them who actually have better track records of some success just in this organization alone. 3 years from now if Boxberger is in AA and maybe has a shot at being a good reliever will that be considered a good selection by most here, by anybody? For a 1st round selection? No I doubt it.

If you aren't drafting inside the top 10 or 15, hardly any of your picks are going to set the world on fire. You are talking about a 2nd round reliever, a 3rd round starting pitcher who played more football in college than baseball and a 4th round pick drafted just last year out of high school who hasn't even had his season start this year.

Watson has battled a lot of issues. He couldn't locate his breaking ball in the zone and wound up scrapping it later. Then he couldn't find the strikezone. Lately he is pitching better, but really, you were talking about reaching and at the time of the draft, he went in the range where he was projected to go.

Scott Carroll was a raw type of pitcher because he was also a college football player (QB) and was never able to focus solely on one sport. Last year he got better month by month and well, he had the unfortunate positive test that he and the Reds both fought as a false positive and he has made 1 start this season just last week.

As for Tyler Cline, he made two starts last season. Two. He is likely heading to the GCL or Billings (likely GCL) as a guy in his first full season out of high school as a 4th round pick. You make it sound like he is 22 years old and hasn't made it out of the GCL yet. He is right on target for where just about everyone else his age/draft spot is at.

I think you have the wrong idea of what a draft pick is if you think those guys are 'misses' already, especially Carroll and Cline. Heck, even a guy like Watson is showing MLB qualities at this point in AA. Do I like the idea of a reliever in the 2nd round? Not at all. But if we wind up getting ANY major league production from a 2nd rounder I am going to be happy with that given the fail rates of draft picks.

And lets not really call Boxberger a first rounder. He was a supplemental pick. And as far as him being a reliever in 3 years, well we will see. But I don't think thats in the Reds plans right now.

Do you remember the threads started by M2 a few weeks ago where we redid all of the drafts? Remember how after about 20-25 picks we started getting into role players? If the Reds get a reliever out of Boxberger in the end, then they made a good selection.

[fearofpopvol1]

Originally Posted by Mario-Rijo

Well they sure haven't set the world on fire Doug. Watson is just now having any real consistency besides Low A ball where he could get away with 1 good pitch, Scott Carroll has done what but toil and Cline has barely even pitched yet after close to a year being with the organization. I'd like to see a bit more out of top 5 round selections. You have guys drafted after them who actually have better track records of some success just in this organization alone. 3 years from now if Boxberger is in AA and maybe has a shot at being a good reliever will that be considered a good selection by most here, by anybody? For a 1st round selection? No I doubt it.

I think Doug makes a valid point. Sure...there may be 30 great picks or so each draft...but the first round or any round will contain picks that won't all pan out. And this will happen to EVERY team. But who would've thought Hererra (a 45th rounder) would be a very servicable (at least thus far) major league reliever? Scouting is very important, but luck is too. And development...and the Reds, historically, have been awful at developing.

I think some of the criticisms of those players named...you have to give a little more time to. It's a little early.

[Homer Bailey]

Originally Posted by princeton

In three years, the big pitching adds are Roenicke and Stewart and Sulbaran.

I'd add Fairel in there as well. I want to say Wood was 2005, so I guess we can't use him. Also add in Maloney. He hasn't set the world on fire, but he's been great at AAA and solid so far in his first 2 mlb starts.

[princeton]

Originally Posted by Homer Bailey

I'd add Fairel in there as well. I want to say Wood was 2005, so I guess we can't use him. Also add in Maloney. He hasn't set the world on fire, but he's been great at AAA and solid so far in his first 2 mlb starts.

these guys didn't draft Wood or Maloney, and Fairel probably just hasn't risen to his level of incompetence yet. Even in Latin America, where most attention is paid to middle infielders, catchers and pitchers, these guys have focused on OFers.

so pitching remains to be seen. as previously stated, we've had much worse.

[Blitz Dorsey]

Originally Posted by dougdirt

Tyler Cline was a 4th round pick last year and he has thrown less than 10 innings and he was a reach? Scott Carroll wasn't really a reach and Sean Watson wasn't either at the time of the draft. I just can't see how you can throw those guys all in the 'miss category'.

Yes, Cline was a reach. Just the fact that he was a fourth round pick and he's only thrown 10 innings (more than a year after the draft) kind of proves his point. And yes, I know he was only 17 when he was drafted... was still a reach IMO.

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by Blitz Dorsey

Yes, Cline was a reach. Just the fact that he was a fourth round pick and he's only thrown 10 innings (more than a year after the draft) kind of proves his point. And yes, I know he was only 17 when he was drafted... was still a reach IMO.

I fail to see your point. Most 18 year old kids in their first full season are going to play in rookie ball. He signed late last year and only got about 2 weeks of a season last year and rookie ball hasn't started yet this year. The fact that he didn't go straight to Dayton at age 18 as a 4th rounder means he was a reach?

[Mario-Rijo]

Originally Posted by dougdirt

I fail to see your point. Most 18 year old kids in their first full season are going to play in rookie ball. He signed late last year and only got about 2 weeks of a season last year and rookie ball hasn't started yet this year. The fact that he didn't go straight to Dayton at age 18 as a 4th rounder means he was a reach?

You make a good point on Cline. My whole overall point is Buckley and this group tend to undervalue "stuff guys". We don't have a legitimate #1 starter in this organization drafted by this group. Lotzkar might be a possibility but of course he's been hit with the injury bug 2 years running. You must draft #1 types because you cannot get them any other way, rarely anyway. Buckley has a history of this type of thing with a whole bunch of solid but unspectacular #3-4 types and relief types who aren't necc. high leverage guys in Toronto as well. Very few who can get the ball over 93-94 MPH. It's great he's getting who he is getting but he needs to add a few potential high impact types every year as well. You typically find those guys in the 1st 5 rounds or so, we just don't attempt to find them.

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by Mario-Rijo

You make a good point on Cline. My whole overall point is Buckley and this group tend to undervalue "stuff guys". We don't have a legitimate #1 starter in this organization drafted by this group. Lotzkar might be a possibility but of course he's been hit with the injury bug 2 years running. You must draft #1 types because you cannot get them any other way, rarely anyway. Buckley has a history of this type of thing with a whole bunch of solid but unspectacular #3-4 types and relief types who aren't necc. high leverage guys in Toronto as well. Very few who can get the ball over 93-94 MPH. It's great he's getting who he is getting but he needs to add a few potential high impact types every year as well. You typically find those guys in the 1st 5 rounds or so, we just don't attempt to find them.

Zach Stewart doesn't have #1 type stuff?

[Mario-Rijo]

Originally Posted by dougdirt

Zach Stewart doesn't have #1 type stuff?

No more than Mike Leake does he? I see them both as eventual #2's or 3's, Stewart may yet end up in the pen as well.

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by Mario-Rijo

No more than Mike Leake does he? I see them both as eventual #2's or 3's, Stewart may yet end up in the pen as well.

So a 92-95 MPH fastball (hits 96 multiple times each game) with sink on it, a plus slider and an average change up with good control isn't #1 type of stuff? That's what Stewart is working with. If thats not #1 type stuff I don't know what #1 stuff is.

[Mario-Rijo]

Originally Posted by dougdirt

So a 92-95 MPH fastball (hits 96 multiple times each game) with sink on it, a plus slider and an average change up with good control isn't #1 type of stuff? That's what Stewart is working with. If thats not #1 type stuff I don't know what #1 stuff is.

Well if he's doing that he's pumped up his scouting report pretty well. His scouting report said he could get it up there (96-97) out of the pen but when he starts he is around 89-93 with an average to plus slurvy slider, and an average change. Both the slider and change needed refinement. So your telling me he has refined his slider and added 2-3 MPH on his FB already?

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by Mario-Rijo

Well if he's doing that he's pumped up his scouting report pretty well. His scouting report said he could get it up there (96-97) out of the pen but when he starts he is around 89-93 with an average to plus slurvy slider, and an average change. Both the slider and change needed refinement. So your telling me he has refined his slider and added 2-3 MPH on his FB already?

What scouting report are you referring to?

[Mario-Rijo]

Originally Posted by dougdirt

What scouting report are you referring to?

I assume since he was mostly used as a Reliever at TT most of this is directed at that and I can't imagine he'd be throwing that hard and then be tossing 89-93 as anything but a starter.

PG Cross Checker and MLB.com.

Fastball: Stewart showed plus, plus velocity, throwing his fastball in the 95-97 mph range.

Fastball movement: It had plus life as well.

Slider: He showed a slider that was average-to-plus and threw it with good deception.

Control: He had plus command, particularly of his fastball.

Poise: He has a closer mentality, very aggressive and going right after hitters.

Physical Description: Stewart isn't all that big, but he's strong-bodied and his stuff plays big as does his bulldog mentality.

Medical Update: Healthy.

Strengths: Two plus power pitches and command of both of them. He has the right demeanor to be a closer.

Weaknesses: Having played at three colleges in three years, there's no real track record.

Summary: College closers have become all the rage lately, with some getting drafted early every year. Stewart could be in that group in 2008. The Texas Tech reliever relies on a plus fastball and slider and commands both power offerings well. He's got the kind of makeup you want in a short reliever, a guy who is very aggressive and goes right after hitters. The stuff plus the mentality could push Stewart into early-round consideration.

SCOUTING REPORT (3/1): After a year at Division II Angelo State (Texas) and another at North Central Texas JC, where he went 8-3, 2.29 as a starter in 2007, Stewart has taken over as the closer at Texas Tech this spring. It’s a role he’s cut out to perform as he has an aggressive demeanor and doesn’t give in to hitters. He was Texas Tech’s best arm filling that role in the early going. He displays good sinking action on an 89-93 mph fastball that tails away from lefthanded hitters and bores in or righthanders. The pitch produces a steady stream of ground-ball outs. He also gets slurve-like action on a 75-77 mph slider and gets occasional sink on his changeup, normally a 74-76 mph offering. He has no mechanical faults, but needs work on refining his slider and change.—ALLAN SIMPSON

UPDATE (5/15): Stewart’s unsightly 4.98 ERA (to go with a 3-2 record and three saves) was blown up during his first start of the season (of three total) on April 25 when he allowed a nine-run inning to Oklahoma. He was auditioned as a starter late in the season, in part to give scouts an extended look as he got few opportunities to work in a closer role on a struggling Texas Tech team. Stewart is clearly a reliever and his ability in that role cast him into the first two rounds of the draft. He was steadily 92-95 mph all spring with outstanding sinking life on his fastball.—DAVID RAWNSLEY

[11larkin11]

Quick question. If a team doesn't sign a sandwich pick, do they get compensation the next round. e.g. if we don't sign Boxberger, do we get a pick next year for it?

[Betterread]

Originally Posted by dougdirt

Zach Stewart doesn't have #1 type stuff?

Wow! You think Steward is a potential #1 after roughly two months of starting? You think his offspeed pitch is a 70 or higher. I salivate at the thought. Show me the recent independent scouting report rating his stuff, command and control and I'll believe.