SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
2021 MLB Draft
|
Post by vermontsox1 on Mar 6, 2021 16:44:51 GMT -5
Rocker done after 6 innings. He had trouble locating his FB early but settled in and overall looked pretty solid. His slider is vicious. Final line was 6IP 2H 1ER 1BB 11K.
|
|
|
Post by dyoungteach on Mar 6, 2021 18:29:13 GMT -5
After reading more and more on hill and rocker, I do not want Sox to take hill at all. He has a reliever profile from what I was reading. Second, I’ve read rocker is no sure thing either. Don’t take risk on either one of those. Wait till second for pitcher. There are 3 top notch hitters to choose from at top of draft
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 15,684
|
Post by cdj on Mar 6, 2021 18:51:43 GMT -5
My general rule of thumb is no pitchers are sure things
I do love what I’m seeing from Ty Madden though- out of all the pitchers he probably has the most desirable profile. He’s got all the tools you could want. Size, command, durability, 3 good pitches, velocity.......I mean shoot I feel like by years end they could be talking about him at 1. I expect draft boards to be volatile with a lost year of scouting, I think rankings are going to be incredibly different come draft day
|
|
|
Post by unitspin on Mar 6, 2021 20:28:51 GMT -5
Looks like rocker is getting his swag back. He keeps pitching like this he ain't falling to #4.
|
|
|
Post by tyler3 on Mar 6, 2021 21:02:39 GMT -5
I respectfully disagree. He was almost pitching solely off his slider today. He needs to command his fastball, and at some point show a third pitch, in my opinion. Right now he’s looking like he has some serious reliever risk. You can get by in the major leagues with two pitches if they are elite (Chris Sale, occasionally sprinkles in the change). Rocker right now has one elite pitch and a fastball he can’t command. Major leaguers are gonna eat that up. My guess is the next updated board has Rocker at 5 with Jack, Marcelo, Jordan, and Ty ahead of him.
|
|
|
Post by vermontsox1 on Mar 6, 2021 22:43:07 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by blizzards39 on Mar 6, 2021 23:05:04 GMT -5
I’m not taking a pitcher with pick 4 unless you feel he is a sure fire #1. Otherwise the hitter is just more valuable. I don’t care about position. Pick best hitter on your board.
|
|
|
Post by borisman on Mar 7, 2021 11:18:07 GMT -5
I have a feeling that our 2nd round pick would be a first rounder in most drafts.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Mar 7, 2021 11:51:01 GMT -5
I’m not taking a pitcher with pick 4 unless you feel he is a sure fire #1. Otherwise the hitter is just more valuable. I don’t care about position. Pick best hitter on your board. Why is a hitter inherently more valuable than a pitcher? Some pitchers are pretty valuable!
Are you saying teams systemically over-value pitchers in the draft? What's the case for that?
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Mar 7, 2021 12:01:53 GMT -5
I’m not taking a pitcher with pick 4 unless you feel he is a sure fire #1. Otherwise the hitter is just more valuable. I don’t care about position. Pick best hitter on your board. Why is a hitter inherently more valuable than a pitcher? Some pitchers are pretty valuable!
Are you saying teams systemically over-value pitchers in the draft? What's the case for that?
Good question. My unscientific view is that pitchers are more valuable but far higher risk. As I’ve said before, there are very few true #1s at any given time, and they tend to be high draft picks. If you want a Verlander, Strasburg, Cole etc... without paying a fortune for FAs... you have to take a chance. But... I also get the view that it is too high a risk. Pitchers probably have a far higher rate of coming up at absolute zero value.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Mar 7, 2021 12:15:41 GMT -5
If pitchers are higher risk, is that not already priced into the way teams draft?
ADD: Just to get a quick and dirty survey... looking at all the overall #1 picks from 1990-2013, there were 10 pitchers and 14 position players taken. 11 of the position players ended up accumulation 10+ WAR but only 4 of the pitchers did. So maybe that does support blizzard's theory a little bit!
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Mar 7, 2021 12:17:10 GMT -5
If pitchers are higher risk, is that not already priced into the way teams draft? What do you mean? Add: I guess all I’m saying is if there is a hitter and a pitcher who are both clearly highest-level talents, and you are going on best available, I’d rather have the pitcher — if I know he’ll work out! But... if I’m working on likelihood of working out, I take the hitter. So some teams might take a more gambling approach, some a safer approach. I get the Ball and Groome picks in that sense (even if Ball probably didn’t project to be a 1 or 2 even at the time). You accept that if it blows up, people will curse you to the end of time.
|
|
fenwayfaithful
Rookie
A prospect is fun to watch, but trading him for a sure thing in the Majors is never a losing deal.
Posts: 114
|
Post by fenwayfaithful on Mar 7, 2021 12:22:05 GMT -5
I love this kid!!!! If Rocker and Leiter are gone. I’m taking him or Adrian Del Castillo. I can’t wait for this draft it’s going to be a fun one!
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Mar 7, 2021 12:28:34 GMT -5
If pitchers are higher risk, is that not already priced into the way teams draft? What do you mean? Add: I guess all I’m saying is if there is a hitter and a pitcher who are both clearly highest-level talents, and you are going on best available, I’d rather have the pitcher — if I know he’ll work out! But... if I’m working on likelihood of working out, I take the hitter. So some teams might take a more gambling approach, some a safer approach. I get the Ball and Groome picks in that sense (even if Ball probably didn’t project to be a 1 or 2 even at the time). You accept that if it blows up, people will curse you to the end of time. What I meant was that, if a pitcher at a given level of talent is a higher risk than a position player at a given level of talent, then teams would presumably factor that into their draft strategy, so that the equal-talent position players would be getting drafted higher than the pitchers.
But then see the addition to my comment above: it seems that teams haven't been appropriately pricing in pitchers' higher risks (at least they weren't from 1990-2013). Perhaps that is specific to the first overall pick though. Probably there's a study somewhere or other that has looked at this systematically...
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Mar 7, 2021 12:31:20 GMT -5
What do you mean? Add: I guess all I’m saying is if there is a hitter and a pitcher who are both clearly highest-level talents, and you are going on best available, I’d rather have the pitcher — if I know he’ll work out! But... if I’m working on likelihood of working out, I take the hitter. So some teams might take a more gambling approach, some a safer approach. I get the Ball and Groome picks in that sense (even if Ball probably didn’t project to be a 1 or 2 even at the time). You accept that if it blows up, people will curse you to the end of time. What I meant was that, if a pitcher at a given level of talent is a higher risk than a position player at a given level of talent, then teams would presumably factor that into their draft strategy, so that the equal-talent position players would be getting drafted higher than the pitchers.
But then see the addition to my comment above: it seems that teams haven't been appropriately pricing in pitchers' higher risks (at least they weren't from 1990-2013). Perhaps that is specific to the first overall pick though. Probably there's a study somewhere or other that has looked at this systematically...
True, got it. There must be some way to measure appropriate “boldness” — what pick is the time when risk is best? Blowing 1:1 is catastrophic... but by, say, 1:7ish, is it worth the risk on a potentially elite pitcher? (Ahem, back to Trey). Personally, I am a gambler. If a guy has a real 1/2 projection, I take him. I’ll fall on my sword later if he flops.
|
|
|
Post by jdog2020 on Mar 7, 2021 13:06:20 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by unitspin on Mar 7, 2021 13:07:30 GMT -5
I’m not taking a pitcher with pick 4 unless you feel he is a sure fire #1. Otherwise the hitter is just more valuable. I don’t care about position. Pick best hitter on your board. From everything I have found college arms land just as much as HS bats, with college bats falling close behind. The picks that are a huge risk are HS arm's. So I think your off the mark with that.
|
|
|
Post by jdog2020 on Mar 7, 2021 13:53:23 GMT -5
Joshua Baez is an interesting local talent. Committed to Vandy.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 4,139
|
Post by jimoh on Mar 7, 2021 14:09:37 GMT -5
If pitchers are higher risk, is that not already priced into the way teams draft?
ADD: Just to get a quick and dirty survey... looking at all the overall #1 picks from 1990-2013, there were 10 pitchers and 14 position players taken. 11 of the position players ended up accumulation 10+ WAR but only 4 of the pitchers did. So maybe that does support blizzard's theory a little bit!
Well, we don't have the #1 pick. Can you do the #1-5 picks? Or at least the #4 picks? Added: #4 picks 1990-2013: 17 pitchers, 4 over 10 WAR ( incl 28.5, 27.6. 15.7. 11.2 (and still going, Gausman), one at 8.9 at age 28 7 hitters, 2, over 10 WAR, one of them 38.5, the other Dimitri Young's 12.2 If you start at 1985 you get Kevin Brown 67.8 and Barry Larkin 70.5 and one more P at 12.8
|
|
|
Post by rasimon on Mar 7, 2021 14:38:53 GMT -5
If pitchers are higher risk, is that not already priced into the way teams draft?
ADD: Just to get a quick and dirty survey... looking at all the overall #1 picks from 1990-2013, there were 10 pitchers and 14 position players taken. 11 of the position players ended up accumulation 10+ WAR but only 4 of the pitchers did. So maybe that does support blizzard's theory a little bit!
Well, we don't have the #1 pick. Can you do the #1-5 picks? Or at least the #4 picks? Added: #4 picks 1990-2013: 17 pitchers, 4 over 10 WAR ( incl 28.5, 27.6. 15.7. 11.2 (and still going, Gausman), one at 8.9 at age 28 7 hitters, 2, over 10 WAR, one of them 38.5, the other Dimitri Young's 12.2 If you start at 1985 you get Kevin Brown 67.8 and Barry Larkin 70.5 and one more P at 12.8 I looked at 1995-2005 Considered both (1) all picks in round 1 and 1S, and (2) picks 1-10 broke them into college, high school, and other (JC & intl) broke them into pitchers & hitters used bWAR as a metric. Calculated percentage of draftees with career bWAR>=10, and percentage of draftees with career bWAR >=20 1995-2005 Rounds 1 and 1S | Total Draftees | # with bWAR >=10 | % with bWAR >=10 | # with bWAR >=20 | % with bWAR >=20 | College - Hitters | 89 | 29 | 33% | 20 | 22% | College - Pitchers | 132 | 19 | 14% | 7 | 5% | High School - Hitters | 118 | 24 | 20% | 14 | 12% | High School - Pitchers | 110 | 19 | 17% | 12 | 11% | Other - Hitters | 2 | 2 | 100% | 2 | 100% | Other - Pitchers | 11 | 1 | 9% | 0 | 0% | Total | 462 | 94 | 20% | 55 | 12% |
1995-2005 Picks 1-10 | Total Draftees | # with bWAR >=10 | % with bWAR >=10 | # with bWAR >=20 | % with bWAR >=20 | College - Hitters | 21 | 15 | 71% | 8 | 38% | College - Pitchers | 35 | 7 | 20% | 3 | 9% | High School - Hitters | 29 | 12 | 41% | 7 | 24% | High School - Pitchers | 22 | 6 | 27% | 5 | 23% | Other - Hitters | 2 | 2 | 100% | 2 | 100% | Other - Pitchers | 1 | 0 | 0% | 0 | 0% | Total | 110 | 42 | 38% | 25 | 23% |
I had expected college pitchers to do pretty well as it seems they would be the easiest to scout. I had assumed that hitters performance can only be evaluated relative to the pitchers they faced, while you could objectively evaluate pitches (speed, control, break, etc). Clearly that is wrong as college pitchers chosen high in the draft have the worst subsequent performance. if you were wondering, of the 192 college pitchers taken in rounds 1 and 1S 1995-2005 below are all who exceeded career bWAR of 10. Its possible that with the new scouting tools our ability to scout pitchers has improved...or maybe not. J. Verlander 71.8 Jered Weaver 34.6 Barry Zito 31.9 R.A. Dickey 23.7 Ben Sheets 23.2 Matt Morris 20.4 Mark Mulder 20.0 Jeremy Guthrie 18.4 Mark Prior 16.6 Eric Milton 16.5 Jeff Weaver 15.2 Huston Street 14.5 Matt Thornton 13.4 Kris Benson 12.9 Matt Garza 12.5 Joe Blanton 11.9 Paul Maholm 11.9 Jason Jennings 11.2 Noah Lowry 10.0
|
|
|
Post by pedroelgrande on Mar 7, 2021 14:43:28 GMT -5
Jack Leiter shoving it.
|
|
|
Post by tyler3 on Mar 7, 2021 15:45:29 GMT -5
Jack just dealing today.
|
|
|
Post by tyler3 on Mar 7, 2021 15:49:38 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Mar 7, 2021 15:57:15 GMT -5
Well, we don't have the #1 pick. Can you do the #1-5 picks? Or at least the #4 picks? Added: #4 picks 1990-2013: 17 pitchers, 4 over 10 WAR ( incl 28.5, 27.6. 15.7. 11.2 (and still going, Gausman), one at 8.9 at age 28 7 hitters, 2, over 10 WAR, one of them 38.5, the other Dimitri Young's 12.2 If you start at 1985 you get Kevin Brown 67.8 and Barry Larkin 70.5 and one more P at 12.8 I looked at 1995-2005 Considered both (1) all picks in round 1 and 1S, and (2) picks 1-10 broke them into college, high school, and other (JC & intl) broke them into pitchers & hitters used bWAR as a metric. Calculated percentage of draftees with career bWAR>=10, and percentage of draftees with career bWAR >=20 1995-2005 Rounds 1 and 1S | Total Draftees | # with bWAR >=10 | % with bWAR >=10 | # with bWAR >=20 | % with bWAR >=20 | College - Hitters | 89 | 29 | 33% | 20 | 22% | College - Pitchers | 132 | 19 | 14% | 7 | 5% | High School - Hitters | 118 | 24 | 20% | 14 | 12% | High School - Pitchers | 110 | 19 | 17% | 12 | 11% | Other - Hitters | 2 | 2 | 100% | 2 | 100% | Other - Pitchers | 11 | 1 | 9% | 0 | 0% | Total | 462 | 94 | 20% | 55 | 12% |
1995-2005 Picks 1-10 | Total Draftees | # with bWAR >=10 | % with bWAR >=10 | # with bWAR >=20 | % with bWAR >=20 | College - Hitters | 21 | 15 | 71% | 8 | 38% | College - Pitchers | 35 | 7 | 20% | 3 | 9% | High School - Hitters | 29 | 12 | 41% | 7 | 24% | High School - Pitchers | 22 | 6 | 27% | 5 | 23% | Other - Hitters | 2 | 2 | 100% | 2 | 100% | Other - Pitchers | 1 | 0 | 0% | 0 | 0% | Total | 110 | 42 | 38% | 25 | 23% |
I had expected college pitchers to do pretty well as it seems they would be the easiest to scout. I had assumed that hitters performance can only be evaluated relative to the pitchers they faced, while you could objectively evaluate pitches (speed, control, break, etc). Clearly that is wrong as college pitchers chosen high in the draft have the worst subsequent performance. if you were wondering, of the 192 college pitchers taken in rounds 1 and 1S 1995-2005 below are all who exceeded career bWAR of 10. Its possible that with the new scouting tools our ability to scout pitchers has improved...or maybe not. J. Verlander 71.8 Jered Weaver 34.6 Barry Zito 31.9 R.A. Dickey 23.7 Ben Sheets 23.2 Matt Morris 20.4 Mark Mulder 20.0 Jeremy Guthrie 18.4 Mark Prior 16.6 Eric Milton 16.5 Jeff Weaver 15.2 Huston Street 14.5 Matt Thornton 13.4 Kris Benson 12.9 Matt Garza 12.5 Joe Blanton 11.9 Paul Maholm 11.9 Jason Jennings 11.2 Noah Lowry 10.0 This is super interesting. Now I wonder: of the pitchers who didn’t make it, how many just flopped and how many were done in by injury (I know there is often an in-between where it is a bit of both, but...).
|
|
|
Post by vermontsox1 on Mar 7, 2021 15:59:31 GMT -5
Leiter leaves after pitching 5+ IP. Obviously has incredible stuff, but he's going to need to start throwing more strikes (57/94 pitches for strikes).
Having watched both Leiter and Rocker's starts, I'm really not sure who I'd prefer at this point. Once they start facing SEC competition it'll get interesting.
|
|
|