On Deck: 2016 Draft Discussion Continued

[M2]

From Jim Callis:

"The strength of this draft is high school pitchers," a National League scouting director said. "There are a whole lot of general managers who don't want to take high school pitchers early, but you have to adjust to the talent that's out there. The guys who are better at the Draft are the guys who know that."

That's more of an issue at #35 and #43 than at #2. I'm all for them popping some young flamethrowers with those picks. Matt Manning at #35 is probably a pipe dream, but that would be my perfect scenario.

[lollipopcurve]

That's more of an issue at #35 and #43 than at #2. I'm all for them popping some young flamethrowers with those picks. Matt Manning at #35 is probably a pipe dream, but that would be my perfect scenario.

It's absolutely also an issue at #2, as the article makes clear. The top two talents appear to be Groome and Pint. Unfortunately, no one is saying Perez has helium...

This board reflects what Callis says about some GMs: no high school pitcher shall go at the top of the 1st. I just don't buy that.

For me, Groome's an acceptable pick at 2. Pint needs to be watched closely. He's a very, very rare commodity -- not to be walked away from on principle.

[membengal]

If the current draft guy and development braintrust for the team had showed any real feel for identifying and developing bats I would feel more open to being talked into Pint at #2, figuring they can try a lottery pick who takes time to develop there if they were able to get more bats later. But the dearth of success at identifying and developing legit bats makes me want to get the best bat with the highest upside at 2 rather than hoping they can find and develop some overlooked bats later.

[Rojo Rijo]

http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/201...ake-rutherford

[Rojo Rijo]

Something I didn't know about Riley Pint, his father prevented him from participating in year round youth competition

[lollipopcurve]

If the current draft guy and development braintrust for the team had showed any real feel for identifying and developing bats I would feel more open to being talked into Pint at #2, figuring they can try a lottery pick who takes time to develop there if they were able to get more bats later. But the dearth of success at identifying and developing legit bats makes me want to get the best bat with the highest upside at 2 rather than hoping they can find and develop some overlooked bats later.

How about they get a Cuban bat or two with their big international budget?

If the team has had trouble identifying bats, what makes you think they'll make the right choice among the group of Ray/Senzel/Rutherford/Lewis/ETC?

[M2]

It's absolutely also an issue at #2, as the article makes clear. The top two talents appear to be Groome and Pint. Unfortunately, no one is saying Perez has helium...

This board reflects what Callis says about some GMs: no high school pitcher shall go at the top of the 1st. I just don't buy that.

For me, Groome's an acceptable pick at 2. Pint needs to be watched closely. He's a very, very rare commodity -- not to be walked away from on principle.

I'm not buying on Pint. There's a big pile after Groome and he's in it, but the violence in his delivery makes him a hard no for me. I'm not against Pint because he's a HS pitcher, I'm against him because I think the risk with him is huge. Yet the depth of HS arms doesn't really come into play until you get deeper into the draft. At #2 it doesn't matter if there's lots of HS arms between there and #35. You're still selecting whomever you think is the best non-Groome pick out there.

The larger profile of the draft matters as you get deeper into the draft. So if there's lots of HS arms, then that probably means the Reds need to have that on their radar at #35.

[lollipopcurve]

the violence in his delivery makes him a hard no for me. I'm not against Pint because he's a HS pitcher, I'm against him because I think the risk with him is huge.

I can respect that.

I see a head whack in the delivery. I'm not an expert, so I don't know what to make of that. It does make the delivery look violent, but I don't know if it presents a substantive health risk. I do feel very confident that evaluators have seen this kind of thing many times before -- I know I've seen it being around youth baseball a lot. Is it the kind of thing they try to correct in the minors? It would be interesting to find out.

I need to watch more, but I think I also see a strangely compact arm stroke without him being what they call a short-armer (throwing from the ear). I'm wondering whether this might actually be a good thing, as I've heard a long stroke is generally not considered optimal.

So -- I'm not coming down hard on Pint one way or another for the moment. Need to hear more still. But I do take seriously the initial press reports that he's a really rare bird, possibly even justifying being chosen ahead of Groome.

[membengal]

How about they get a Cuban bat or two with their big international budget?

If the team has had trouble identifying bats, what makes you think they'll make the right choice among the group of Ray/Senzel/Rutherford/Lewis/ETC?

If they would get a potential high impact bat among the international signings, that would be great.

As for the second part, taking the bat with most potential #2 takes at least some of the guesswork out of it. Whether they can develop him or not, that's on them. But if they take the best hitter on their board at #2 overall, that is a better starting spot than trying to find one when they pick again - they have shown they are NOT good at that over the last several years - if they take Pint, we might as well look up all the "try hard" college bats we can for that next pick if they follow previous patterns...

[CRDB40]

I still have no idea exactly who I'd want the Reds to take at 2.

All I know is I hope the Reds go for pitchers with high upside (high velocity and feel for secondary pitches) and clean deliveries.

In terms of position players, I hope they target players with athleticism, good plate approaches, and well-rounded skill sets. I don't want to see them load up on hitters with a mixed bag of high upside tools and big question marks, nor do I want to see guys with high strikeout/low walk totals.

[OnBaseMachine]

The one leading the discussion is Mercer outfielder Kyle Lewis. He's performed (.414/.536/.790, 15 HR, 57 RBIs over 42 games) as well as any hitter in the nation and has considerable upside as well. The flip side of that coin is Lewis is doing it at a small school against what some worry isn't top-notch competition, though the No. 3 prospect performed well in the Cape Cod League -- a proving ground for top prospects -- last summer to offset that concern.

"College position-player wise, he has the most tools in the country," a scouting director said. "It's electric, it's wow. The power, the bat speed. As far as dynamic impact type tools, he has as much, if not more than, anybody in the country."

http://m.mlb.com/news/article/175123...icid=151437456

I'm coming around on Kyle Lewis. All along I've been scared off by the lack of strong competition, and that still concerns me, but he may have the best upside of the college hitters. Sickels says he profiles as a quality defender in either corner outfield spot. He performed well in the Cape Cod League last fall with wooden bats against stronger pitching. Consider me on the Kyle Lewis bandwagon now. I'm down to three favorites for the #2 overall pick - Blake Rutherford, Kyle Lewis, and Nick Senzel.

[Cannon]

Nick Senzel is falling in a lot of draft rankings. I think he might be an iffy pick.

Lewis or Perez for me. Starting to also really hope for Grier at 35.

[Tom Servo]

I still prefer Senzel, but I am coming around on Kyle Lewis. It certainly seems that everybody in the industry is high on him, and his numbers this year do look even nicer than Phillip Ervin's in 2013.

[Rojo Rijo]

http://m.mlb.com/news/article/175123...icid=151437456

I'm coming around on Kyle Lewis. All along I've been scared off by the lack of strong competition, and that still concerns me, but he may have the best upside of the college hitters. Sickels says he profiles as a quality defender in either corner outfield spot. He performed well in the Cape Cod League last fall with wooden bats against stronger pitching. Consider me on the Kyle Lewis bandwagon now. I'm down to three favorites for the #2 overall pick - Blake Rutherford, Kyle Lewis, and Nick Senzel.

I'm Rutherford, Lewis, Groome, and Puk

[nmculbreth]

In my book there are truly only two unforgivable sins for anyone under consideration for the Reds at #2 overall: a hitter with a questionable hit tool and a pitcher with questionable command / control.

I'll concede Pint has an excellent arm but he's a HS pitcher with a somewhat violent delivery and control / command issues, which makes him far too risky at #2 overall for my taste. If you're picking at #8 or #10 overall I could be talked into it but at #2 I need more floor than Riley Pint can provide.