373 replies to this topic

[RichardZ]

I don't understand what's so hard to grasp here.

You aren't saying that you disliked the selection of Akin. You aren't claiming that Akin wasn't the highest pick on their board.

You aren't saying that lists like BA or MLB Pipeline or 2080 are gospel.

You aren't saying you know anything about these players but what you read.

You certainly aren't saying you know more than the O's Scouting Department.

You've acknowledged that even if Akin wasn't the highest pick on the board, and that he was an underslot they liked, that they know they can sign at X, and have more funds to play with later... that you get that's part of the strategy teams employ.


You are simply asking the question... did the O's take best the talent available, or did they come into the draft with a philosophy which might have prevented that? 

Asking the question does not equate to having an opinion that the opposing action is what happened.  It's a question, and a legitimate one. Especially when the O's stated  before the draft what their philosophy was, and their actions have matched those comments.

 

 

2). I just personally don't believe they did value him higher.

 

, I think that's a flawed strategy and it makes you reach for a player instead of taking the BPA.

 

 

Try again, Chris.   I don't think you are SportsGuy's personal apologist but it does come across that way this time.   He is definitely saying that he believes that the Orioles did not take the BPA on their board and that their strategy is all wrong.   He has no idea if Akin was or was not the best player on their board but he wishes to assume that he wasn't and the simply skipped a much higher rated player (Nolan Jones).

[RichardZ]

Good he have should have hits. No problem giving him Gausman, but making a selection that 98% of arm-chair analysts would have made does little for me.

Sisco, great job.  Heim check.

 

I like to give Rajisch credit for Harvey. I think that was excellent. Harvey went 22nd that year, and he grabbed a kid with obvious high ceiling that others were shy to. Whatever happens with Harvey going forward, I think that is a win.

Mountcastle's bat looks promising. Nice to see him having success in the Sally. Based on what I've heard from our guys on his defensive profile, I'm not overly excited there... but it's fine and accurate to count the selection as a win so far.

 

 

I'm not overly down on Rajisch. I think he (like many in the organization) are often forced to operate with a hand tied. And I totally agree with the point that everyone is going to have misses....   but Hart's abject failure, and Stewart having immediate trouble transitioning to pro ball both at Aberdeen last year, Delmarva this year, and having the Player Development types thinking he has to be rebuilt as a hitter (his calling card) are black eyes on Rajisch's resume imo. 

 

 

Did 98% of armchair analysts think Mike Zunino was good pick?   

 

How about Albert Almora?

 

Would you trade Gausman for Byron Buxton?

 

The first round picks (just look at them) were not slam dunks.   We got ours right.

 

 

I agree, Hart and Stewart are currently black eyes for Rajsich.   Name me a scouting director in baseball that doesn't have the same over the last 4 years.

[RichardZ]

 

"We focused on the arms, that would probably break a tie [in selecting each round]. 

 

 

You can believe or not believe but those are Gary Rajsich's words.

 

"We got most of our guys which is a real good feeling," Rajsich said. "You hope the Draft works in your favor-, you hope certain guys are there. For example to get [Sedlock] at 27 was a nice surprise. To get Keegan Akin [in the second round] we thought for sure he'd be gone. Matthias we thought he'd be gone in the second round. All those things surprise you, but happily so."

[BSLChrisStoner]

Did 98% of armchair analysts think Mike Zunino was good pick?   

 

How about Albert Almora?

 

Would you trade Gausman for Byron Buxton?

 

The first round picks (just look at them) were not slam dunks.   We got ours right.

 

 

I agree, Hart and Stewart are currently black eyes for Rajsich.   Name me a scouting director in baseball that doesn't have the same over the last 4 years.

 

Selecting 4th, the O's were in position to take the best college pitcher, a guy that many had neck and neck with Correa.
Yes, he / the O's get credit for making the selection. Personally, I just can only give them so much for doing so. If you give more, that's fine.

 

Everyone is going to have misses. Even with high selections. That's not the issue with Hart, and Stewart. With Hart it's the degree of miss (unless you want to pin that on Player Development), and with Stewart... it's that when you select the advanced college bat, you are partly doing so because you want the safe play. When he doesn't even immediately dominate the NY / Penn, and Sally League (and actually struggles at both), and when he has clear obvious issues (before the selection) that limit his projection going forward.... that's on Scouting.

 

To expand slightly, if Stewart had come into the system and immediately preformed at these lower levels, but then struggled later as he progressed... that would suck, but I'd hold that less against them. For Stewart to have immediate problems, is a bigger issue imo. For Hart to be a complete loss, who has shown nothing, is a bigger issue. It's not just that the two players immediately selected after Hart have both reached the Majors... it's that the player you selected has shown nothing. 

 

I'm reading my comments here, and I see how it can be read as railing against these two players (one I haven't even completely written off), and using that as the total basis to evaluate Rajisch. To be clear, I'm not...  I realize Rajisch has had his hands tied some, particularly by 2014.  He's had some positive showings. I realize that every organization will have selections that totally fail.

 

 

Hopefully we will look back in a couple of years, and it will be clear he had some additional wins to his column in this 2016 draft.

[BSLChrisStoner]

 

You can believe or not believe but those are Gary Rajsich's words.

 

I do believe it.  I see no reason not to.  The O's drafted who they wanted.   Good, that's what I want them to do.
Now they get judged on the results.

[BSLChrisStoner]

2). I just personally don't believe they did value him higher.

 

, I think that's a flawed strategy and it makes you reach for a player instead of taking the BPA.

 

 

Try again, Chris.   I don't think you are SportsGuy's personal apologist but it does come across that way this time.   He is definitely saying that he believes that the Orioles did not take the BPA on their board and that their strategy is all wrong.   He has no idea if Akin was or was not the best player on their board but he wishes to assume that he wasn't and the simply skipped a much higher rated player (Nolan Jones).

 

You are bolding Rob's comment that he said he personally didn't believe they (the O's) did value Akin higher.... but you aren't bolding the comments from Rob where he acknowledges 1) Maybe they did, and 2) It's completely fine if they did.

 

I think it's reading into his comments a bit much to assume that Rob believes they definitively skipped on a player they rated much higher. To me, he's simply asking the question, and being skeptical.

Like I said though, and I guess unlike Rob here,  I'm going to take the O's at their words. No reason not to imo. They had Akin higher, they took him. Great. That's what I would want them to do.

[RichardZ]

Selecting 4th, the O's were in position to take the best college pitcher, a guy that many had neck and neck with Correa.
Yes, he / the O's get credit for making the selection. Personally, I just can only give them so much for doing so. If you give more, that's fine.

 

Everyone is going to have misses. Even with high selections. That's not the issue with Hart, and Stewart. With Hart it's the degree of miss (unless you want to pin that on Player Development), and with Stewart... it's that when you select the advanced college bat, you are partly doing so because you want the safe play. When he doesn't even immediately dominate the NY / Penn, and Sally League (and actually struggles at both), and when he has clear obvious issues (before the selection) that limit his projection going forward.... that's on Scouting.

 

To expand slightly, if Stewart had come into the system and immediately preformed at these lower levels, but then struggled later as he progressed... that would suck, but I'd hold that less against them. For Stewart to have immediate problems, is a bigger issue imo. For Hart to be a complete loss, who has shown nothing, is a bigger issue. It's not just that the two players immediately selected after Hart have both reached the Majors... it's that the player you selected has shown nothing. 

 

I'm reading my comments here, and I see how it can be read as railing against these two players (one I haven't even completely written off), and using that as the total basis to evaluate Rajisch. To be clear, I'm not...  I realize Rajisch has had his hands tied some, particularly by 2014.  He's had some positive showings. I realize that every organization will have selections that totally fail.

 

 

Hopefully we will look back in a couple of years, and it will be clear he had some additional wins to his column in this 2016 draft.

 

 

That's just not true, Chris.    The top players in that draft were Buxton and Appel.   Baseball America's top ten rated guys were

 

1. Buxton

2. Zunino

3. Zimmer

4. Appel

5. Gausman

6. Correa

7. Almora

8. Wacha

9. Giolito

10. Stroman

 

 

BTW, I think you are wrong to completely write the 21 year old Josh Hart off at this point but I realize I'm in a very small minority.

[BSLChrisStoner]

That's just not true, Chris.    The top players in that draft were Buxton and Appel.   Baseball America's top ten rated guys were

 

1. Buxton

2. Zunino

3. Zimmer

4. Appel

5. Gausman

6. Correa

7. Almora

8. Wacha

9. Giolito

10. Stroman

 

Stotle had Gausman #1 overall in that Draft. I recall he wasn't alone.

[RichardZ]

Stotle had Gausman #1 overall in that Draft. I recall he wasn't alone.

 

 

I didn't say that some people didn't have Gausman rated highly.   I said he wasn't a slam dunk selection at #4 and that there appear to be other misses at the top of the first round, most notably Zunino and possibly Buxton.

[BSLChrisStoner]

I didn't say that some people didn't have Gausman rated highly.   I said he wasn't a slam dunk selection at #4 and that there appear to be other misses at the top of the first round, most notably Zunino and possibly Buxton.

 

Fair enough. And agreed, that's why you do credit teams for the high selections they do make. There are flameouts even at the top of drafts, so when a player hits, the FO deserves credit.

I've always given them credit for Gausman ... maybe I haven't given them enough.

[SportsGuy]

I think I laid out Rajsich's draft's pretty well.   Our farm system is not in good shape.     That can't all be laid at the feet of Rajisch.   Just because the system is not a great shape and we can't go out and get whatever we want at the deadline does not mean that Rajisch has done a poor job drafting.   As I said, Stewart is his big miss so far.    I know keeping a balanced view might be a little tough for you but Rajisch has drafted at these positions since 2012.

 

4 (Gausman)

22 Harvey

90 Brian Gonzalez

25 D.J. Stewart

 

You'd expect some return on a high first round pick.   He's had one to work with.    He hit on Harvey but Harvey got hurt.   Does that make Harvey a good pick at #22 overall or a bad one?    You tell me.    Even if Harvey was healthy, at age 21, he's probably in AA or AAA right now.    The 2013 HS draft was HS heavy.      The 2014 draft was almost not a draft.    

 

I pointed to Rasjich's drafts and pointed out how he's done a decent job.   Aren't you knowledgeable enough to counter that post?

He's done a decent enough job that our system blows?  I mean, I said your initial post was well said and you made/make good points.

 

But at the end of the day, none of these guys are looked at as legit prospects.  So, even if YOU want to say he has done a good job, no one wants our players. 

 

He has had enough drafts here where he could have things turned around.  So, if he has done so well, why isn't the system in better shape? 

[SportsGuy]

The top 10 of the draft sucks a lot in terms of guys that perform or don't.

 

I think every pick that hits should get credit.  But the ones that fail should also be against them.

 

Its so funny...people want to say, oh look at how good this guy turned out!  But if you say these 10 guys sucked, the answer is, well its a crapshoot!

 

I mean which is it?

[BSLChrisStoner]

He's done a decent enough job that our system blows?  I mean, I said your initial post was well said and you made/make good points.

 

But at the end of the day, none of these guys are looked at as legit prospects.  So, even if YOU want to say he has done a good job, no one wants our players. 

 

He has had enough drafts here where he could have things turned around.  So, if he has done so well, why isn't the system in better shape? 

 

Does have to be remembered that some things (particularly '14) were outside of his control.

[SportsGuy]

Does have to be remembered that some things (particularly '14) were outside of his control.

Sure...and it's not his fault Harvey got hurt either.

Still, we should be in better shape if he is doing such a good job.

And btw, I think RZ has made a case for him doing better than he has been given credit for by me and others.

However, RZ is taking it to another level IMO and with the way he talks about him and his drafts, he has to think the organization is in much better shape than basically everyone says.

[RichardZ]

Sure...and it's not his fault Harvey got hurt either.

Still, we should be in better shape if he is doing such a good job.

And btw, I think RZ has made a case for him doing better than he has been given credit for by me and others.

However, RZ is taking it to another level IMO and with the way he talks about him and his drafts, he has to think the organization is in much better shape than basically everyone says.

 

 

Here you go making up shit again.   All I did, was go through his drafts and give my opinion on them.   Is it too much for you to point out something specific you disagree with?  

 

All you keep hinting out is that he's done a bad job because the system is bad.   Unfortunately, you are unable to speak about anything specifically and just keep touting this line.  

 

How can our farm system be poor if our scouting director has done a decent job?

 

The Red Sox spent 63M to get their #1 prospect.    Their #2 guy was also an international FA.   Their #4 guy is also an international FA.    Their #9 guy is also an international FA.

 

The Rangers currently have Roughned Odor, Nomar Mazara, Jurickson Profar, and Martin Profar on their roster.   Do you know how they were acquired?   The scouting director has nothing to do with it.

 

We have a GM who has traded Hader (GR draft pick), Eduardo Rodriguez,  Tarpley, Brault, and Cosme (all GR draft picks)

 

He has traded away two compensation picks, and forfeited three others  (2 1st round picks and a 2nd).   

 

Our international program has never spent more than 350K on any one prospect.    We have never signed a Cuban FA to more than a 750K type of contract.

 

There is a lot that goes into making a strong farm system   Rajsich, from where I'm sitting, has done his job.   Again, way too early too judge him on this draft and even last year's draft.   He was handicapped in 2014, did a good job in the 2013 draft, and got Gausman and Hader in the 2012 draft.

 

Again, I'd be happy to debate specific drafts and draft picks.   You seem incapable of that.   You just want to say that he must not be good because the system is not strong.   Are you that much of a simpleton?

[SportsGuy]

When we can avoid a personal back and forth, I will have a conversation with you and address your points.

[RichardZ]

When we can avoid a personal back and forth, I will have a conversation with you and address your points.

 

 

You've had plenty of chances to address my points and haven't done so.   I don't think having a personal back and forth has anything to do with it.   I think you are in over your head.   

[SportsGuy]

You've had plenty of chances to address my points and haven't done so. I don't think having a personal back and forth has anything to do with it. I think you are in over your head.

Lol. There will never be a conversation with you that anyone is in over there head.

Maybe you can tell us more about how Kim isn't a MLer and is in over his head? Lol.

I'm more than happy to have a conversation with you...when you stop being a f'ing 'jerk'. If you choose not to(which I'm sure you won't since that's the type of person you are and always have been), I won't go back and forth with you and you can sit there and pat yourself on the back because you think I'm running from your mediocre opinions.

I apologized to you earlier for misrepresenting what you said and I have said you have made some good points. In return, you act like this. So f it, I'm done until you aren't a 'jerk'.

[McNulty]

I wonder if this kid has any idea the amount of animosity that he has inadvertently set off?

[SportsGuy]

I wonder if this kid has any idea the amount of animosity that he has inadvertently set off?

Funny part is, no one has any issue with him and we all like the player, based off of what we know.