Post-Draft Discussion Thread

Not to mention all the kids at Fort Myers anyway. You guys that have been down there for those games know what I mean. rosters might be 25 players, but there are nearly always 10-20 more in workout uniforms sitting up in the left field bleachers shagging for foul balls and talking. Some are XST kids of course, some injured, then some are activated for games also. This has been a ritual for years.

Sterry, Nishioka and Wren all signed for 5K!

m.mlb.com/news/article/237042574/2017-draft-signing-and-bonus-tracker/?topicid=151437456

A few thoughts:
1) VTsox thanks for being so up on things. Love the breaking newsfeed.
2) I know a lot of people are "meh" on Houck, but I like him. He's got a terrific FB with above-avg to plus velocity, and outstanding movement. And, he can control it. I get the delivery concerns, but he has size, tremendous consistency, and no real injury history. He makes it work. I'm optimistic that he can refine the SL and CH, and he'll be forced to as competition improves. But he's got what amounts to a 65-70 pitch in the FB, with solid/good command, and that's where all pitching starts. I think he moves a little more quickly than people expect.
3) If that picture *is* of Brannen, I'm even more excited about his selection. It just means he's got even more physical projection...and he's already got some pop and apparently a solid eye. I don't think anyone should be disappointed by the .270/15/30sb projections. That's outstanding territory for a HSer...first-division CF territory (and essentially what people pegged for Ellsbury, only with more power and a better arm). I also can't get over his 6.18 60y. I can't stress enough how incredibly fast that is. That's true 80 speed, as a HSer. That's Billy Hamilton speed. 30 steals is a floor, if he has any instincts. In today's game, that's 50-70 steal speed if he learns the craft. And it means he's a no-doubt true CF.
4) Wow...Scherff was an incredible get. If the improved conditioning stories are true, he may even have been a bit underrated as a 50-70 range guy due to the late bloom effect. Stuff sounds terrific and they got an outstanding talent on a team-friendly bonus.
5) Nishioka is my sleeper in this draft. He's very bright, and it looks like he's got a real hit tool.
6) Like umass said, I'm really pleased with the breakdown of talent in this draft, and the chance that they get some tough signs done further down. Even with just Houck/Brannen/Scherff, I like the top-end talent, so even just a few lottery ticket late-rounders could really boost the quality of this draft. They went with some safe picks like Thompson, but they took some chances, too.

Young and Sterry official. From the release: "Sterry, who is recovering from a broken right hand, will report to Fort Myers, FL as part of a rehab assignment."

Well, I can only go off of the data I have. If you want to question the PG 60, that's fair. As I've said, I am uncertain of how those times are achieved...the two digits indicate that they are electronically timed. When you quote "6.3" or "6.5" those are hand times, which (as anyone who's sprinted competitively knows) are extremely unreliable. If you want to add 0.24 seconds (reaction time standard for organized T&F) to that 6.18, assuming that it is timed on plane break and not including reaction, that's fine. Also, if Meadows is plus-plus (65-70) and Brannen beats him by 13/100ths, by the same source, then Brannen must be 70-80. Ellsbury was a 6.23, although not by PG, which does raise the question of methodology again.

There are plenty of caveats to speed measurement. Explosive speed is obviously more valuable in stealing bases, but in a 60y there's a substantial (though not like a 100m) contribution of top-end, which is less important in baseball. There's also the in-game observer bias (play-dependent), player effort, and frankly, the ease with which the runner covers ground...fluid runners are chronically underrated (even by track coaches during workouts, when they look like they're not trying).

It's perfectly reasonable to be skeptical. I am, which is why I put a caveat on that time. But when you say 30 players in 14 years, are you really saying that two elite runners per year (out of hundreds of participants) is that unrealistic? Seems like that's pretty consistent with a Z score of 3 (the definition of "80").

Last year they had lots of guys in the system so they took chances on the hard to sign. This year there are lots more room for prospects so they looked more to filling the holes. Looks like they have 3 solid pitchers who can start and a very promising outfielder who could fill a potential hole on the sox in 2020. Time will tell on whether it all works out.

Again, I already explained that. No, there's no way he's faster than the HS 60 champion. But I doubt that they're inflating the numbers (or shrinking them) by actually lying. They're probably timing on plane break, meaning the player is moving (although just barely) at the moment that timing starts. The football 40 times we see are done the same way. FAT times (electronic) in T&F used to be considered 0.24 seconds "slow" versus hand-timing, since they accounted for the reaction time between hearing the gun and initiating movement (which requires hearing, processing the sound, and responding by initiating movement). I ran the (now-defunct) 55m in college. I *know* there's no way that Brannen would run a 6.18 FAT. I'm pretty sure I already pointed that out. It's inconceivable; that's Olympian territory. But run on plane-break? That's more like a 6.50, or about a 7.00 for a 60y. That's still *extremely* fast. You're getting hung up on a methodological issue and missing the point that, electronically timed using the same methodology, Brannen ran the sixth-fastest PG 60 in the showcase history, 0.05 s faster than Justin Upton, who was the 2005 BA "fastest baserunner." Compared across thousands of participants *using identical methodology*, Brannen is in the 99.5th percentile (or higher) for speed, empirically and consistently (presuming it's electronic, which I'm assuming based on the 2-decimal times) measured.

To see how small those differences are, Statcast has Hamilton, Gordon, and Trout topping out at 21.2, 21.0, and 20.8 mph respectively while stealing. Hamilton is considered a "true" 80 (or better). Trout's more like an 80 for some but 70 for others. But the human eye can't differentiate those velocities. Trout *looks* slower to me, but that's not velocity, it's his effort/style. I was surprised by his (empirically measured) speed. It should also highlight how oddly subjectively speed is rated (when empirical measurement is possible), and how important lead, reaction time, reads, etc are in a baseball context. m.mlb.com/news/article/119665974/statcast-top-speed-dee-gordon-vs-billy-hamilton-vs-mike-trout/

That's valid. I looked and couldn't find anything. However, you'll see plenty of stopwatches at a higher-level HS track meet, too, although they use electronic timing. MIAA isn't exactly rich but our State Class and All-State meets were electronically timed 25 years ago. Convention is to report hand times to the tenth, electronic to the 100th or 1000th. Electronic timing isn't prohibitively expensive (nor is a radar gun); it's been around for a long time. And even a hand-timed 6.2 puts Brannen in the bin of top-20 PG performances. Hell, maybe I'll call and ask...I'm kind of curious now.

Houck is official. Keep an eye on Callis' twitter.

Houck signed for slot according to Speier & Callis Twitter

excellent now we need to get the Oregon state pitcher and the outfielder and the sox are in hog heaven.

Thats really hard to predict this early on but I'd say a couple things:

First, in a 'worst case scenario,' its possible that Netzer signs for slot and Thompson goes overslot, in which case all of our savings from senior signs and the 5% wiggle room go to signing Scherff and Thompson.

It Netzer is under by a little, and Thompson is closer to slot, then that gives some money to play with after Round 11. I'd look at draft position to get a clue as to how we might be prioritizing those funds. My guess is that Aaron Perry could be the top dog in that case. The Diaz, Denholm, Anu, and Dearden range of our class looks a lot like the Shepherd, Fitzgerald, Jones, Belge run from the year before. I think these are guys who based on conversations during the draft process, were priced out of our range but we decided to draft anyways in the off-chance that earlier guys don't sign and we run into some unexpected funds. In other words, these are long shots. If Perry were to sign, then I don't think we're likely to sign any of the other guys mentioned here.