Draft Retrospectives

Mike Leake’s Debut

I hate being that guy who always quotes himself, but, well, allow me to quote myself:

Leake possesses a good fastball (sitting 88-92, peak 94), plus slider, above-average changeup, usable curve, plus command, plus control, plus athleticism, and, perhaps my personal favorite positive, intriguing potential with the bat. Can’t wait to see what he does with the Reds this season.

Ignore all that pitching stuff (6.2 IP 4 H 1 ER 7 BB 5 K with 106 pitches — 57 for strikes — and 6 GO to 6 AO) and focus on the bolded part only. There are embarrassingly few things on this mortal earth that I love more than pitchers capable of handling the bat. Reading this quote made me all kinds of happy:

“I was almost more excited to hit today than pitch,” Leake said.

Again, ignore that totally unimportant pitching part (6.2 IP 4 H 1 ER 7 BB 5 K with 106 pitches — 57 for strikes — and 6 GO to 6 AO) and focus on what really matters. At the plate, Mike Leake went 2-2 with a pair of singles. That’s good for a 1.000 batting average, people! I’ve read that Leake’s hat is heading to the Hall of Fame, but if it were up to me you’d better be sure it would be his batting helmet making its way to Cooperstown instead.

On a slightly more serious note, here’s the current plan outlining what is in store this week. All entries are subject to change, and, as always, requests are always encouraged.

Plan of Attack for Week of April 12, 2010

• Who Will Be Drafted? Atlantic 10 Edition
• Positional Rankings (position TBD…college lefties, maybe?)
• Alternate Reality Mock Draft (expect this on Friday, the only day of the week I actually have planned out already)
• Mystery Draft 2.0
• More Data!
• Responses to all comments that I missed this past week

Mike Leake = Big Leaguer

A look back through the archives at what has been written at this very site about the newest member of the Cincinnati Reds starting rotation. The evolution of former Arizona State prospect and current big leaguer Mike Leake as seen through the lens of a nobody amateur draft prognosticator…

February 20, 2009

Leake was ranked 11th on my first ever published list of draft-eligible college players. Not bad, right? Just ignore the fact that he was sandwiched between Indiana’s Josh Phegley (a player I still like, but clearly not a prospect on Leake’s level) and the pitching version of Long Island’s James Jones, a player eventually drafted by Seattle as a toolsy outfielder. My evaluation of him at the time included the following defense of the “controversial” at the time ranking of Leake over Baylor’s Kendal Volz:

Leake over Volz is a little strange, but it came down to present plus command and movement over potential power plus stuff across the board.

February 27, 2009

One week later I noted the way Leake outdueled fellow future first round pick Kyle Gibson. Leake’s numbers that day: 8 IP 1 H 0 ER 1 BB 10 K (11 GO/2 AO). Also noted at the time was Leake’s stellar groundball numbers: 19 of his 23 batted ball outs at that point in the season came on the ground.

March 3, 2009

This is where things starting to get hot and heavy with the Leake lovefest. His ranking (6th on a list of 2009 draft-eligible righthanded college pitchers) may not seem all that impressive, but keep in mind that meant only Aaron Crow, Tanner Scheppers, Kyle Gibson, Alex White, and Stephen Strasburg were ahead of him. Not a bad list of pitchers to fall behind, all things considered. His quick scouting report at the time looked like this:

Leake literally has everything I look for in a pitching prospect. Let’s do it bullet point style:

• Plus athleticism – has played first, second, short, and every outfield position as a Sun Devil
• Ability to handle the bat – hit .340/.500/.574 in 47 at bats last season (12/9 walk to strikeout ratio)
• Groundball inducing stuff – so far this season, 19 of his 23 non-K outs recorded have come on the ground
• Plus secondary pitch – slider works better as another groundball inducing weapon, but it also creates plenty of swings and misses
• Above-average third pitch – his changeup is nearly as good as his slider
• Plus command – his ability to spot any of his three pitches has earned him universal praise from scouts
• Plus control – roughly 1.75 BB/9 in his college career
• Plus makeup/competitiveness – only good things have been said by scouts, coaches, teammates, and parents about Leake’s drive to succeed and strong work ethic

What Leake is missing is an ideal frame (he’s 6-0, 180), an overpowering fastball (sits 89-92), and a whole lot of room for growth. I’d argue the last point a bit because I think any two-way player stands to gain a little something once they begin to focus solely on one aspect of the game, but, on the whole, those negatives are fair criticisms of Leake’s game. Fortunately, a blazing hot fastball and a “prototypical pitcher’s frame” each fall very low on the list of things I care about. A high radar gun reading on a fastball is a good thing, don’t get me wrong, but good fastball movement (something Leake has in spades) trumps good fastball speed every time. There is something to be said about a physical frame that needs filling out eventually producing a better fastball down the road, sure, but many college pitchers are what they are by their junior seasons anyway. The backlash against short righthanders is not grounded in empirical research, so I tend to actually look at short righthanded pitching as being a potentially undervalued asset in the draft every year. Yes, I just spun Leake’s lack of height as a positive. Your mileage might vary with that part of the assessment.

One industry comp and one personal comp for Leake before we wrap this thing up. First, my slightly off the wall comparison – highly-touted Japanese prospect Yu Darvish. Darvish has four inches on Leake and throws a knuckle-curve, but they have similar stuff (sinker, slider, change) otherwise. The better comparison may be the more common one – a lesser Tim Hudson, right down to the two-way talent shown at the college level. You could do worse than a poor man’s Tim Hudson come draft day.

My first prediction of where Leake would wind up drafted came at the end of the piece. Wasn’t quite on the money, but the guess worked pretty well for an early March estimate:

There will be sexier options on draft day for teams picking in the mid- to late first round, but there may not be as sure a bet to be a dependable major leaguer as Leake. I bet he is a target of teams with multiple high picks (Arizona) and mid-market franchises picking in the late teens/early twenties (St. Louis, Toronto, Houston).

March 10, 2009

When I updated the college big board with report card grades (a good idea for 2010 come to think of it), Leake received high praise:

11. Mike Leake – RHSP – Arizona State – One of the easiest grades to assign, Leake’s been phenomenal through three starts so far… A+

March 22, 2009

I can’t believe there is any doubt that Mike Leake has a first round caliber arm. His latest outing was excellent: 9 IP 5 H 1 ER 1 BB 15 K in a win over rival Arizona. His season numbers are pristine (48/7 strikeout to walk numbers in 40 innings of 1.35 ERA pitching) and his scouting reports have been positive all spring long.

April 2, 2009

Leake may be my favorite prospect in all the draft, but I’m not sure how much my opinion matters to teams drafting in the first round…yes, he’s a very good prospect and an almost sure-fire first rounder, but I don’t want my inflated opinion of him getting in the way of properly assessing his relative value.

May 8, 2009

Predicted Leake would go to Colorado with the 11th pick in the first round one month ahead of the draft

June 5, 2009

Stuck with Leake to Colorado with the 11th pick in last mock before the big day

June 9, 2009

Fourth on my last Big Board leading up to the draft! Fourth! My love of Leake as a prospect seemingly grew with every passing week. Nothing has changed from the glowing scouting report posted above. Leake possesses a good fastball (sitting 88-92, peak 94), plus slider, above-average changeup, usable curve, plus command, plus control, plus athleticism, and, perhaps my personal favorite positive, intriguing potential with the bat. Can’t wait to see what he does with the Reds this season.

Shadow Drafting – 2007, 2008, and 2009

A quick look back at some of my own brief forays into shadow drafting for the Philadelphia Phillies. This is almost surely one of those pieces that interests me way more than it could ever interest anybody else, but I think it has some value in that it give some sort of idea of which style of player I’ve liked over the past few years. I’d say grabbing guys like Main, Griffith, Melville, and Seaton all within the first two rounds the past two years would qualify as a bit of a draft trend, as would the selections of Jackson, Hood, and Westmoreland. Who knew I was so in love with prep righthanded pitching and super toolsy high school position players? I wouldn’t have said I feel all that strongly about either type of player, but it’s all right there in black and white. Interesting.

2007

1.19 – RHSP Michael Main (LHSP Joe Savery)
1S.37 – SS Justin Jackson (C Travis D’Arnaud)
2.83 – RHSP Nevin Griffith (3B Travis Mattair)

2008

(Republished from another archived Gmail – yes, this is what I email people about…sad, but true)

I tried my hand at the shadowing the Phillies draft this year in real-time. This was what I would have done and not necessarily what I would have guessed the Phillies would do. You can look at it two ways – where the guys wound up getting picked today (semi-useful, but not really) or what will become of these guys years down the road (the better way, but who’s got the patience?). I freaking love Seaton and thought the Phillies would be all over him – they trust their area scouts in Texas above pretty much any other region. I think I like Hood more than Collier personally, but it’s really close. Putnam dropped because of injury or something, Melville due to signability. Westmoreland has a Rocco Baldelli comp (maybe only since both are from Rhode Island), Martinez was a first rounder two months ago who stunk up the joint his senior year and will now most likely go to Miami for college ball, and St. Clair was a teammate of Savery’s at Rice who I’ve been a gigantic fan of for three years now. Amazingly enough, the Phillies and I were of the same mind when it came to picking Hamilton and Shreve…weird stuff, but I like the picks, especially the selection of Shreve, a first round caliber talent who could be the steal of the entire draft (I don’t say that lightly).

1.24 Tim Melville RHP
S.34 Ross Seaton RHP
2.51 Destin Hood OF
2.71 Zach Putnam RHP
3.102 Ryan Westmoreland OF
3.110 Harold Martinez 3B
4.136 Cole St. Clair LHP
5.166 Jeremy Hamilton 1B
6.196 Colby Shreve RHP

Now, real life:

1.24 Anthony Hewitt 3B
S.34 Zach Collier OF
2.51 Anthony Gose OF
2.71 Jason Knapp RHP
3.102 Vance Worley RHP
3.110 Jonathan Pettibone RHP
4.136 Trevor May RHP
5.166 Jeremy Hamilton 1B
6.196 Colby Shreve RHP

2009

I can’t decide if I want to continue doing the Phillies (their first pick is a loooooong wait from the front of the draft) or if I want to choose a different team this year to mix things up. Ideally, the team would have picks in nearly every round at or around the mid-point of each round. This may be a gametime decision.

From the Vault: Woefully Inaccurate 2008 and 2007 MLB Mock Drafts

And now for something totally different…from deep down in my own personal archives (aka a recovered document from my Gmail account), my final mock draft of the 2008 MLB Draft. Yes, in the span of one year I’ve gone from emailing friends and family about the draft to writing about it on a near-daily basis on this little website. Is that progress? Or a sure sign of my mental deterioration? Time will tell!

If you can forgive the Phillies-centric notes, check out how wonderfully wrong I was once things got tricky after pick six in my projected first round of last year’s mock. I figure it’s only fair to give everybody out there a head’s up on my spotty track record in projecting the first round. Enjoy.

I feel pretty good about the first four, but after that all hell breaks loose. White Beckham to Cincy feels right, but beyond that the rest of my top ten could all be wrong-o. Posey is the guy who really makes the top half of the draft funky – he’s the best player to likely fall out of the top four (and in my mind either the second or third best overall anyway), but his bonus demands really make him a wildcard. I have no feel where Hunt will go, but Jim Callis (the best in the world when it comes to forecasting the first round) has him falling to the Phillies at 24. I’ve seen a lot of him on TV this season and he’d be great value at that spot. Picks 11-15 I feel good about, but they’ll of course depend on who rises and falls in the top ten. I’ll say if the board breaks the way I think it will (more or less), those projections will all be on the money. Cubs taking Melville works for me, as does my semi-surprise pick of Perry to Seattle. I have no clue what the Mets are thinking this year - probably a college reliever, catcher, or high upside high schooler combination of some sort, but getting the names to work was a pain. Cashner and Castro fit the reliever/catcher pattern, so that’s what I came up with. Finally, the 24th pick. I have no idea what names the Phillies are targeting for real – normally I can fake the fact that I’m sort of plugged into the home nine’s thinking, but this year is a mystery. When faced with a challenge like that, we work in generalities – big strapping young RHPs and toolsy athletic types, with a supposed 2008 inclination towards getting a more polished college bat who may drop. Hunt fits the first profile (big, raw RHP - even though he is a college kid, he has considerable upside), but other names to consider include high school righthanders Ethan Martin, Tim Melville, Jake Odorizzi, and Alex Meyer. They’ve also been linked to high school bats Hewitt, Zach Collier, and Casey Kelly and the possibility they go college reliever is always out there (I don’t buy the reliever talk at all, but we’ll see). The surprise pick of a college bat would most likely wind up one of the Arizona State guys (Brett Wallace or Ike Davis) or 3B Conor Gillaspie. Ultimately, my giant surprise pick has them going with one of the draft’s most controversial players: Gerrit Cole. Cole is a mess – mechanics are scary, all kinds of reported makeup problems, and he’s a client of Scott Boras. He also has the best fastball in the entire draft and, from a talent alone perspective, would be a giant steal at 24. The first two negatives (mechanics and makeup) won’t worry the Phillies as much as they will other teams (I think), but the last one (Boras) could be a deal breaker. Cole could also be snapped up by the Mets, Cubs, or Tigers right before the Phillies pick. If that’s the case, any of those other guys mentioned (most likely a high school bat, based on the board) could be the man.

1. TB: SS Tim Beckham
2. PIT: 3B Pedro Alvarez
3. KC: 1B Eric Hosmer
4. BAL: LHSP Brian Matusz
5. SF: C Buster Posey
6. FLA: C Kyle Skipworth
7. CIN: SS Gordon Beckham
8. CWS: 1B Justin Smoak
9. WAS: RHSP Aaron Crow
10. HOU: RHSP Shooter Hunt
11. TEX: RHSP Ethan Martin
12. OAK: 1B Yonder Alonso
13. STL: LHSP Christian Friedrich
14. MIN: SS Brett Lawrie
15. LAD: OF Aaron Hicks
16. MIL: SS Casey Kelly
17. TOR: 1B Brett Wallace
18. NYM: RHRP Andrew Cashner
19. CHC: RHSP Tim Melville
20. SEA: RHRP Ryan Perry
21. DET: RHSP Jake Odorizzi
22. NYM: C Jason Castro
23. SD: OF Ike Davis
24. PHI: RHSP Gerrit Cole
25. COL: SS Anthony Hewitt
26. ARI: RHRP Josh Fields
27. MIN: 2B Jemile Weeks
28. NYY: 1B David Cooper
29. CLE: OF Zach Collier
30. BOS: 1B Allan Dykstra

UPDATE! I found my 2007 mock draft as well! This one was actually published for all to see at my old Phillies blog. The 2007 first round, according to me:

1. Tampa – LHSP David Price
2. Kansas City – 3B Josh Vitters
3. Chicago (NL) – RHSP Jarrod Parker
4. Pittsburgh – C Devin Mesoraco
5. Baltimore – LHSP Ross Detwiler
6. Washington – C Matt Wieters
7. Milwaukee – UT Mike Moustakas
8. Colorado – LHRP Dan Moskos
9. Arizona – RHSP Phillippe Aumont
10. San Francisco – LHSP Madison Bumgarner
11. Seattle – LHSP Nick Schmidt
12. Florida – CF Julio Borbon
13. Cleveland – RHSP Blake Beavan
14. Atlanta – OF Jason Heyward
15. Cincinnati – 3B Kevin Ahrens
16. Toronto – 3B Matt Dominguez
17. Texas – RHSP Rick Porcello
18. St. Louis – OF Kyle Russell
19. Philadelphia – RHSP Michael Main
20. Los Angeles – RHSP Matt Harvey
21. Toronto – C J.P. Arencibia
22. San Francisco – 1B Beau Mills
23. San Diego – 3B/OF Todd Frazier
24. Texas – RHSP Chris Withrow
25. Chicago (AL) – SS Justin Jackson
26. Oakland – 1B Matt LaPorta
27. Detroit – RHSP Andrew Brackman
28. Minnesota – OF Michael Burgess
29. San Francisco – SS Pete Kozma
30. New York (AL) – LHSP Joe Savery

Another awful mock if I do say so myself. To somewhat save face, I did say this the morning of the draft:

I have zero doubt that Wieters can stick behind the plate – he excels in all phases of the game defensively, with his rocket arm standing out as a plus plus tool. At the plate, his bat is good enough to play anywhere on the field.

I think Matt Wieters is the best player in the draft this year.

It wasn’t going out on the biggest limb (or would it be tiniest?) ever, but it was at least mildly controversial to suggest he was a better player than David Price back in June of 2007. Heck, it’s still mildly controversial. Alright, that’s it – no more mocks until the first 2010 one is unveiled, I promise.

Draft 101 – The Basics

What and Why: Formally known as the First-Year Player Draft or Rule 4 Draft; informally known (by me) as the MLB Draft or the Draft. The basic concept behind holding a draft is to restock the worst teams in the league with the best amateur talent available. The Rule 4 Draft is massive in size and scope with a gigantic pool of eligible players and up to 50 rounds of drafted talent. It’s only “up to” 50 because teams have the option to end their draft at any point they choose. Selection order works in reverse order of finish going by the final standings of the previous season. If two teams are tied in the standings then the previous year’s standings are used as a tiebreaker. Easy enough, right? Compensation picks are assigned to teams whose Type A or Type B free agents signed elsewhere, but only when said Type A or Type B players were first offered arbitration. Compensation picks are also assigned when a team fails to sign a player chosen in the first three rounds of the draft prior.

Who: College players at four-year schools who have either completed their junior or senior seasons or are at least 21 years old; junior college players no matter what year they are in; high school players who have graduated but not yet enrolled at college. All players who meet these requirements from the United States, Puerto Rico, and Canada are eligible to be drafted. Cuban defectors living in the United States are also subject to the rules of the draft. Teams have the rights to sign a player from the moment they draft him until August 15th of the draft year.

When: June 9, 10, and 11. Yeah, it’ll really take three days to run through all 1,500 or so selections. This will be the third televised year of the Rule 4 Draft, but the first time that the First-Year Player Draft will ever be held in prime-time. See how I seamlessly dropped both official draft names in there? Anyway, expect the Nationals to go on the clock around 6 PM EST. June 9th will include Round 1, Compensation Round A, Round 2, Round 3, and Compensation Round B.

Where: Studio 42 in Secaucus, New Jersey

How to Watch: Round 1 will be televised on MLB Network. Subsequent rounds will air on a live video stream at MLB.com. Day 1 begins at 6 PM EST, but Days 2 and 3 should both begin at roughly 12 noon EST.

Draft Prospect Retro – North Carolina’s Daniel Bard

This site has only been around a few months, but my own personal obsession with tracking amateur talent goes back years. Indulge me for a moment as I share an old piece I wrote about the newest member of the Boston Red Sox bullpen, Daniel Bard. This was, I think, the very first “published” thing I ever wrote, so please do keep that in mind as you mentally tear it to shreds. Part of the fun of following amateur players from high school to college (or not) to the pros is seeing them eventually make it as big leaguers, so it seems like as appropriate a time as any to revisit my first brush with Bard now that he is on the cusp of making his debut in the bigs. The original date of publication was March 28, 2006, so don’t hold any of the stupid predictions against me…

Photo Credit: duelingcouches.blogspot.com

North Carolina righthanded starter Daniel Bard is one of the most highly touted pitching prospects at the amateur level. His much hyped game really needs no introduction…and yet, in an attempt to be as thorough as possible here, allow me to rattle off a sampling of his accomplishments and accolades. Bard was a twentieth round pick by the New York Yankees after graduating from Charlotte Christian School. He spurned the Yanks to sign with the University of North Carolina – good thing, too, or else this piece would make a heck of a lot less sense. The decision to head to Chapel Hill paid off for Bard as he went on to win the ACC Freshman of the Year award and a spot on the Freshman All-American team as named by Collegiate Baseball. Bard followed up his strong freshman season with an even stronger sophomore campaign. His sophomore year was followed up by his breakthrough performance pitching for the Wareham Gatemen (love that team name) of the Cape Cod League. Baseball America named him to their College Summer All-America second team and rated him the league’s number two professional prospect (the number one prospect that summer was his UNC teammate, lefthanded starter Andrew Miller). Heading into 2006, Bard was named to just about every preseason All-America and All-ACC team possible – Baseball America, Collegiate Baseball, and SEBaseball.com all lauded him as player to watch in 2006. Baseball America finished up the Bard-lovefest by naming him college baseball’s number four junior prospect.

Despite all of the glowing praise, I was skeptical of Bard going into the game I “scouted” for two reasons. First off, Bard has a rather high career BB/IP rate (74 BBs in 184.2 IP) and reports of his shaky control in the scouting community are well documented. The second concern about Bard deals with scouting reports which claim he lacks any kind of solid secondary pitches. Those two concerns led me to mentally prepare for one of those classic dominating pitchers who can get by in the college game by simply blowing away lesser talented competition with a fastball better than any other pitch they’ve seen before. If old baseball clichés are more your thing, try to imagine a player who scouts like to proclaim is more of a thrower than a pitcher – this description is exactly what I was expecting as I settled into my seat behind home plate at Boshamer Stadium. It seems the two concerns over Bard’s game go hand in hand. He doesn’t have the secondary stuff that can be thrown consistently for strikes which hurts his overall performance. Because of this, he tends to get wild at times; check his BB, HBP, and WP numbers as evidence for this. Bard has had trouble controlling his less refined secondary stuff; perhaps, if he sharpened up said secondary stuff and managed to get his slider over for strikes consistently, his control as a whole would improve as well.

Bard’s lack of control and relatively weak secondary stuff will have significant implications on his success in the major leagues unless addressed. If Bard has shown iffy control at the college level (where it is not at all uncommon to see players overanxious and willing to go after that first ball fastball, especially when facing a pitcher capable of throwing a 95 MPH heater), one can only imagine the potential difficulties he’ll face when going against pros. Advanced professional hitters eat up any pitcher who relies solely on his fastball in an attempt to blow people away. Bard has been able to get by with just that four-seam fastball of his thus far, so the pressure to develop better breaking stuff when facing inferior collegiate competition isn’t there. If a guy can simply throw a fastball by a hitter, then he can undoubtedly get himself into the bad habit of simply trying to do so every time. Why mess around with setting up hitters and developing quality breaking stuff when it just hasn’t been necessary for him to do to this point? I’m sure Bard realizes (along with the UNC coaching staff, hopefully) if he wants to reach the bigs some day, these are the flaws in his game he will need to iron out as a pro.

More on Bard’s draft stock, his start against Purdue, and a brief afterword that ties it all together after the jump… Continue reading »

Alternate Reality Mock Draft – The Revenge of the 06′s

We’re promoting a new feature straight from AA to the big leagues today because, well, it’s Friday and that seems like as good a day as any to trot out something totally random and nonsensical. Alternate Reality Drafts – the name evokes a certain feeling that I can’t quite put my finger on, but I like. Something about alternate realities and parallel universes really get the blood flowing. Our question today is a relatively simple one. What if…all of the top high school talent from the 2006 Draft decided to spurn the big leagues and head off to college for three years instead? Let’s find out, shall we? Alternate Reality here we come…

1.1 Washington – RHSP Stephen Strasburg (San Diego State) – Strasburg would still be the man at number one, but there would be a ton of consideration for the next player on the list…

1.2 Seattle – LHSP Clayton Kershaw (Texas A&M) – The Aggies rotation could go five deep with Kershaw joining Raley, Wilson, Loux, and Hales in a rotation that would rival the best in all of minor league baseball. Fans in Seattle wouldn’t be nearly as upset as they are now about losing out on the top spot with a consolation prize like Kershaw.

1.3 San Diego – OF Travis Snider (Arizona State) – Imagine Wallace/Snider/Davis as the heart of the Sun Devils order in 2008. The Padres give consideration to many of the high profile arms in this spot, but eventually decide that a premium hitter ready to step in right away and mash at Petco is more valuable than any particular pitcher on the board.

1.4 Pittsburgh – RHSP Kyle Drabek (Texas? Rice? A&M?) – I just spent twenty minutes I shouldn’t have trying to find Drabek’s college commitment, if he ever even had one at all. If anybody knows it, please let me know. Anyway, wow – we’ve got our first real shocker of the draft. The Pirates never fail to do something out of the ordinary on draft day, so why not add a little nepotism to the usual mix of overdrafting questionable arms and being scared off by high bonus demands that rarely ever actually come into play anyway? The pick will surely be questioned, what with a slew of ridiculously talented pitchers with cleaner health records and more consistent track records of success, but Drabek’s upside is undeniable. The pundits are ready to pan the Pirates for another blown pick, but I applaud them for taking a chance on a truly talented player like Drabek. Would I myself have passed on, say, the player who later went to the Giants in this draft instead of him? Doubtful.(See how I didn’t ruin the surprise there – clever, right?) Though I may not have taken Drabek quite so high, it’s certainly a defensible pick – this isn’t a Moskos over Wieters situation, you know? Incidentally, good for young Kyle for being picked so high – all of the off the field concerns surrounding him coming out of high school are but a distant memory after three years of working hard during his offseasons, rehabbing from injuries diligently, and generally being a good all around teammate.

1.5 Baltimore – SS Adrian Cardenas (Florida) – As tempting as it was to give them Billy Rowell, power hitting shortstop (yeah, right…) from Alabama, I decided that the good fans of Baltimore deserved better. Instead, Baltimore goes with the second surprise pick in a row by taking the Gators star shortstop with pick number five. There are many scouts and talent evaluators that question Cardenas long-term future at short (myself among them), but the O’s will give Cardenas every chance in the world to hold on to the spot. The thought of putting the nearly ML-ready bat in a lineup with Roberts, Markakis, Wieters, and Jones is something special. In a world where batting average is still incredibly overrated by the casual observer, it almost pains me to admit that I think there is still an undeniable cool factor in envisioning  a core group of six youngish (Roberts) to very young (pretty much everybody else) veterans all capable of hitting .300 or above.

1.6 San Francisco – LHSP Brett Anderson (Oklahoma State) – Anderson, Oliver, Lyons…if you’ve got a team loaded up with lefties in your lineup, there’s really no point in showing up at the ballpark for a weekend series against the Cowboys. The Giants may want to grab a hitter like Dustin Ackley, Grant Green, or Lars Anderson here, but eventually decide that Anderson’s mix of polish and projection is too much to pass up. Lincecum, Cain, Anderson, Bumgarner, Alderson…the mind reels at the possibilities.

1.7 Atlanta – RHSP Jordan Walden (Texas) – The Braves stick with what they know best at the seventh spot, going with the big Texan with number one starter upside. Walden’s gigantic junior season with the Longhorns propelled him past a strong group of college righties and there was buzz the Padres considered popping him with the third overall pick. Baseball fans won’t soon forget his Friday night duel against Missouri ace Kyle Gibson that helped determine the Big XII regular season conference champ.

1.8 Cincinnati –  RHSP Trevor Cahill (Dartmouth) – Dartmouth’s (yes, Dartmouth’s) most accomplished pitcher since Mike Remlinger is a perfect stylistic fit for the Reds. Cahill’s groundball tendencies and strikeout stuff should play perfectly in Cincinnati. There is some concern about Cahill’s level of competition, but a closer look reveals a pitcher capable of shutting down any team that takes the field against him. The manner in which he has risen to the occasion time and time again, most notably in his nearly perfect early season starts against Duke, San Jose State, and Santa Clara, as well as a late season mid-week beatdown of Boston College (after the Big Green locked up their spot in the Ivy championship series, of course), show that he is a big game pitcher who is both willing and able to take the ball in important spots.

1.9 Detroit – SS Grant Green (Southern Cal) – In a decision too close to call, the Tigers eventually opt for the college position player over the prep arm (Tyler Matzek). The system is in such sore need of an infusion of talent in any way, shape, or form that it is more than likely that whomever is selected with this pick will be the number one player in the system by the end of the year.

1.10 Washington – 1B Lars Anderson (Cal) – Anderson occupies Rich Poythress’s usual spot as the slugging college first baseman who also happens to be relatively safe to sign with Washington’s second top ten selection. Anderson’s power potential gives him the slight edge over Carolina’s Dustin Ackley. You’d better believe that Washington would be thrilled to land such a potent 1-2 punch of pitching and offense with their top two picks.

College Righthanded Starting Pitching Prospects – Comparing 2008 to 2009

If semi-incoherent ramblings about a very specific and unimportant topic with no readily apparent conclusion or point is what gets you going, be prepared to start your week off with something special. If not, congratulations – you’re normal. I’ve got a hunch that anybody out there willing to read some dummy’s baseball draft website probably isn’t “normal” anyway (and I say that with nothing but love), so why not just give in and see where our aimless thoughts will lead us today…

The top 15 righthanded starting pitching prospects as listed on this site, in descending order:

Jeff Inman, David Hale, Jake Cowan, Sean Black, Sam Dyson
Alex Wilson, Kyle Heckathorn, Mike Nesseth, Kendal Volz, Mike Leake
Aaron Crow, Tanner Scheppers, Kyle Gibson, Alex White
Stephen Strasburg

An updated list might look a little something like this:

Strasburg
Gibson/White/Crow
Leake/Scheppers
Dyson/Wilson/Berry
Volz
Nesseth/Heckathorn/Black/Cowan/Hale
Inman

The tiers align with the first round board tiers from last week, with the exception of Dyson rising up to join Wilson and Berry. Volz and Inman are especially difficult players to place, so they got their own private tiers – it’s the perfect solution for a lazy writer like me, really. Nesseth, Heckathorn, Black, Cowan, and Hale are all players that are personal favorites from my initial top 15, but have such mixed opinions that I’m lost on where to slot them in. I guess what I think is most important to take away from the bottom three tiers is that Volz is a clear step above the Nesseth/Heckathorn/Black/Cowan/Hale group (in the eyes of scouts) and Inman has dropped enough that he is clearly below the group (in my eyes). Further complicating the matter is Nesseth’s switch back to the Nebraska bullpen, but I’ll leave him in with this group for now because I still think his stuff works as a starter professionally.

Players considered for the list, but left off for now include Blake Smith (Cal), Scott Bittle (Mississippi), Jorge Reyes (Oregon State), AJ Griffin (San Diego), and Brad Stillings (Kent State). Smith’s status as a two-way player vexes me, Bittle’s stuff may actually work better as a starter/swingman in the long run, and Griffin is a gigantic personal favorite that will see his stock fly up my own personal rankings when I do my next revisions.

Notable players still missing from the list are the righty college relievers – Ben Tootle (Jacksonville State), Jason Stoffel (Arizona), Brad Boxberger (Southern Cal), and Brian Pearl (Washington) all profile best as relievers. Perhaps I can be convinced otherwise (Boxberger and Pearl might have stuff that would translate; Tootle and Stoffel are much better fits in the pen), but for now all four would strictly be drafted as relievers if I was running the show.

*****

For my money, the 2009 college righthanded pitching class absolutely trounces the 2008 class in terms of both quality and depth. However, the comparison between the two years is a tricky one to make because, and I really believe it’s as simple as this, the 2008 pitching class was an extremely weird one. The proponderence of college relievers made it an unusual draft at the time, but it’s gotten even weirder as we begin to see the long-term plans some of the big league teams have for their drafted relievers. Andrew Cashner, Joshua Fields, Ryan Perry, and Carlos Gutierrez were all college closers drafted in the first round. Of the four, it appears that only Fields and Perry are totally locked into their roles as professional relievers; Cashner and Gutierrez both may have the stuff to work better as pro starters. How do we then judge this class of pitching prospects? Are all four labeled as relievers? Does their eventual professional position carry more weight than their college position? How do we reconcile the fact that we don’t actually know the eventual landing spot of players like Cashner, Gutierrez, or Brad Holt? They may be given every shot imaginable to start, yet may work best as relievers in the long run. To simplify my life, I’m only going to evaluate players that were clearly scouted and drafted as starting pitchers.

The 2008 class was also a weird one because of the huge numbers of very talented players who slid down the board into the mid-rounds. These players were all almost cut from the exact same cloth – gigantic frames, big fastballs, questionable control and collegiate performance, and an inability to stay healthy. For this reason, it is my belief that this comparison would have been more enlightening if done with a pre-draft ranking of the available talent. Players like Chris Carpenter, Scott Green, Brett Hunter, Erik Davis, and Luke Burnett, to name a few, may have ranked higher on such a list. Kyle Heckathorn and Mike Nesseth, be forewarned.

2008 Top 15 College Righthanded Pitchers (7 college relievers, denoted with *)

Aaron Crow, Andrew Cashner*, Joshua Fields*, Ryan Perry*, Carlos Gutierrez*, Shooter Hunt, Brad Holt, Lance Lynn, Bryan Price*, Tanner Scheppers, Tyson Ross, Josh Lindblom*, Cody Adams, Aaron Shafer, Cody Satterwhite*

To this point, Cashner, Lindblom, and Price have all been tried as starters; Gutierrez and Satterwhite have so far only pitched out of the pen. I should also note that I was inconsistent in the way I included unsigned players (by memory, I think I only left out Scott Bittle), but I felt that excluding Crow and Scheppers would only create an unfair representation of the 2008 draft’s true talent level.

2008 Top 15 College Righthanded Starting Pitchers

Aaron Crow, Shooter Hunt, Brad Holt, Lance Lynn, Tanner Scheppers, Tyson Ross, Cody Adams, Aaron Shafer, Stephen Fife, Bobby Lanigan, Drew Liebel, Chris Carpenter, Aaron Pribanic, Scott Green, Vance Worley

Of that group, Holt, Fife, and Green may be future relievers, but all three were drafted as starters. College relievers excluded from this list, in addition to the names in the previous group, were Bryan Shaw, Zach Stewart, and Craig Kimbrel.

After all that, we’re left with comparing the following two pools of players. In one corner, we have the 2008′s:

Aaron Crow
Shooter Hunt
Brad Holt
Lance Lynn
Tanner Scheppers
Tyson Ross
Cody Adams
Aaron Shafer
Stephen Fife
Bobby Lanigan
Drew Liebel
Chris Carpenter
Aaron Pribanic
Scott Green
Vance Worley

Strasburg/Gibson/White/Crow/Leake/Scheppers/Dyson/Hunt/Wilson/Berry/Holt/Volz…and then things get especially murky. From that point on, however, the list would be more about trying to figure out where exactly to squeeze in the 09′s (namely Heckathorn, Hale, and Nesseth) than finding spots for the 08′s (as much as I like guys like Ross and Worley, I’m not sure I could put them over a Black or a Cowan with confidence). There are plenty of slightly later round picks from 2008 (Ethan Hollingsworth, Dan Hudson, Colby Shreve, DJ Mitchell, Michael Stutes) that would also muddle up the picture of what my pre-draft top 15 would look like, but I’ll stubbornly stick with judging the top ranked players from past years based on draft order for now. A comparison between the 2009′s and 2010′s will be better next season because I can compare and contrast my own pre-draft rankings, lists that hopefully give a better idea of talent-level than draft order (which is often skewed by signability and simple team preference).

If you were to include the college relievers from the 2008 class, the overall talent gap would close. Lindblom and Cashner were both players viewed as strong candidates to be switched to the rotation, so if we pretended they were drafted as such, they would compare favorably with Dyson and Wilson as starting pitching prospects. Come to think of it, I wonder if there is a comp to be made between Lindblom and Dyson. That might be worth looking into…but now I’m merely thinking out loud, a sure sign it’s time to wrap this up.

In conclusion…wait, I have no real conclusion. Hmm. In conclusion, 2009 looks like a better year for top end college righthanded starting pitching, but when the 09′s are headed up by Stephen Strasburg and three other potential top ten picks, that’s hardly much of a conclusion at all. I’m willing to concede that the depth between the two classes is pretty close in talent-level, but I’d still give the edge to 2009…though there is still plenty of time left between now and June to sort out who constitutes the “depth” of which we speak of in the 2009 Draft. My real conclusion is actually 100% unrelated to college righthanded pitching prospects. I thought of a pretty good comp for a potential top ten pick the other day, but I’m not all the way there with it just yet, if you know what I mean. It’s not quite a fully developed idea, but I’ll just throw it out there here so I can have it on the record…Grant Green (Southern Cal, SS) and Jason Donald (Arizona, Phillies, SS/3B/2B). Am I crazy in thinking they have similar enough profiles to compare the two?

Why Do College Catchers Always Fail? Part II

Why Do College Catching Prospects Always Fail?

Photo Source: About.com

Alright, always might qualify as a bit of hyperbole (you can’t make it in this world without shock value, you know?), but it’s not as big of a stretch as it sounds. A quick scan of college catching prospects over the past few gradable drafts (gradable meaning we are far enough away to begin accessing what worked and what didn’t, thus eliminating the past four drafts, for now) show college catchers to be an awful investment for big league clubs to make.

The impetus for doing the research, such as it is, was pretty simple. Going through the upcoming draft’s available talent, position by position, revealed what I thought was a simple truth – boy, do these college catchers stink. However, since that initial reaction, I’ve come to a) appreciate some of the potentially undervalued mid-round players, and b) learn to accept the reality that college catchers are largely an underwhelming lot.  With a little historical perspective, this year’s class doesn’t look so bad, all things considered.

The research below follows a fairly simple methodology. I took five draft classes – recent enough to be relevant, but with enough time past to give the players a chance to develop – and simply assessed the success/failure of every college catcher drafted. I began by looking at the first ten catchers taken in each draft class. The number ten was chosen for two reasons – 1) it’s a nice round number and people just love round numbers, and 2) I had originally decided to make my 2009 college catching prospect list a top ten (I’ve since expanded it, but more on that later…). From there, I pulled out the college catchers from the previously selected draft classes and did a very scientific, high tech analysis of each player. My highly sophisticated method of measuring success/failure was based on a complicated, hard to comprehend question; for each catcher, I asked myself the following: is this player a “useful” major leaguer or not?

There are flaws in the research, something I recognize and feel obligated to point out. Five years is hardly a representative sample, the absence of the success/failure rate of other positions is a real drawback (I’d love to compare and contrast these findings with, say, the success rate of college middle infielders or something), and the vague terminology (“useful”) is open to interpretation…all of these are definite flaws that should be taken into consideration going forward. However, sometimes the data paints such a clear picture that it’s difficult to envision being able to draw any other conclusion.

After the jump, the damning evidence that college catching prospects don’t want you to see…

Continue reading »