989 replies to this topic

[SportsGuy]

I saw someone say Haskin is one of the only real potential five tool players in the draft. 20-20 potential. Let’s not act like the upside isn’t there with him. He was also a sophomore so almost a year younger than most college draftees.

Right.

I don’t love the pick either but I know Callis had him mocked to us when the day began. He knew they wanted him and liked him.

The Os obviously see/believe in something about him that made them take him at this point, especially when there was a lot of other talent out there.

[dude]

....because he's George Springer.

[Mackus]

I saw someone say Haskin is one of the only real potential five tool players in the draft. 20-20 potential. Let’s not act like the upside isn’t there with him. He was also a sophomore so almost a year younger than most college draftees.

He's not younger. Draft eligible sophomores are draft eligible because they are over 21. Only two years of college play though so maybe some room for growth because of that.

[Slidemaster]

Per usual, no you don’t have that right. I have already said I wish they had taken Wilcox or Kelley. That would have been my preference.

But we aren’t talking about a preference. We aren’t talking about, which way should they have gone in a given round. You are questioning them having a first round grade on a player you know nothing about. A player you have zero data on, zero scouting, etc...

So, you are essentially saying that someone like Mayo, for example, knows more than Elias and his group because those rankings are the only info you have.

I guarantee you that Elias can articulate an opinion as to why they see him as a first round talent*.

*this is assuming that person is right, which we have no idea if they are, why we should believe them, etc...

Maybe...just maybe...Elias and his team DON'T know something the industry doesn't. Maybe they just took the guy because they think they can fix him.

The Red Sox picked Nick Yorke with their top overall pick. I would bet they have "very intelligent baseball people." The Rangers entire draft looks like garbage. I bet they have "very intelligent baseball people."

Basically what you're saying is that teams know more than anyone else, so we just have to trust them. Maybe if they have a glowing history of draft success, that's a reasonable position. The Orioles do not. It is perfectly reasonable to doubt and question their evaluation and draft selections until they give us a reason to do otherwise.

Still no word yet on why you feel perfectly fine about questioning a franchise with a much better draft history in the Ravens, but the Orioles must not be.

[SportsGuy]

Maybe...just maybe...Elias and his team DON'T know something the industry doesn't. Maybe they just took the guy because they think they can fix him.
The Red Sox picked Nick Yorke with their top overall pick. I would bet they have "very intelligent baseball people." The Rangers entire draft looks like garbage. I bet they have "very intelligent baseball people."
Basically what you're saying is that teams know more than anyone else, so we just have to trust them. Maybe if they have a glowing history of draft success, that's a reasonable position. The Orioles do not. It is perfectly reasonable to doubt and question their evaluation and draft selections until they give us a reason to do otherwise.
Still no word yet on why you feel perfectly fine about questioning a franchise with a much better draft history in the Ravens, but the Orioles must not be.

Elias and his team absolutely have a great history of drafting well.

It is fair to worry about the Angelos family though.

And I have more info about the college players. The players are older(ie no high school guys).

And generally speaking, I do give the Ravens the benefit of the doubt on draft picks. I don’t usually question too much from them outside of not liking the strategy of going after higher picks to get premium talent.

[Slidemaster]

Elias and his team absolutely have a great history of drafting well.

It is fair to worry about the Angelos family though.

And I have more info about the college players. The players are older(ie no high school guys).

And generally speaking, I do give the Ravens the benefit of the doubt on draft picks. I don’t usually question too much from them outside of not liking the strategy of going after higher picks to get premium talent.

Elias and his team have had exactly one draft where he is in charge, not including this one. I don't believe the Angelos family told him who he could and couldn't pick. This is entirely on him. If these players are underwhelming, the blame is his. I'm not going to assume that he's some genius who knows more than the industry without him proving it.

Maybe these reaches will be proven to be good decisions. I hope they are. That doesn't make him or his decisions beyond reproach.

[dude]

Elias and his team absolutely have a great history of drafting well.

 

I'll just assume you don't know his draft history. 

 

People like to say this and here's the reason why.  They said they were "rebuilding" and then they won the WS in 2017.  Therefore, they must have been great at drafting.

 

Nobody wants to do this although we've sort of already done it (I think Mackus bothered to look it up).

 

1) What is the Total WAR from the 2012 to 2016 drafts under Elias in Houston.

2) What is that number without Correa and Bregman.

 

Again, because I point out a fact doesn't mean he can't do well here. 

To say he's already done well or 'great' with the draft is purely non-factual....and if you think what I'm saying is crap, simply point out why I'm wrong.

[You Play to Win the Game]

What on earth is the point of question #2?

[dude]

What on earth is the point of question #2?

 

Well, if you (anyone) is going to suggest that someone is good, excellent, great at drafting (proven), do you agree it should be based on something more than the top 1 or 2 picks in the draft?

----------------

 

fwiw, the selections in 2013 and 2014 (the 2 actual years of 'rebuilding') the Astros selected Mark Appel and Brady Aiken who have combined for 0 WAR and not pitched in the Majors.  Of course they didn't get Aiken signed (he would later sign and fail in Cleveland) which allowed them to draft Bregman in 2015...but they had to offer him a contract which Boras stupidly rejected and cost his client what would turn out to be a lot of money.  That ball wasn't in their court, they had to offer a deal to get the compensation selection for Aiken and if he had taken it, Bregman would never be an Astro.

 

I think their poor experience there is probably playing itself out some here in Baltimore.  It pretty much looks like they have no idea how to draft pitching so they are just avoiding it until maybe a guy has a year of more professional development (competition, data) so that's what we probably see with the guys they've traded for.  It also appears they like college players and that could certainly be because their's more reasonable data input for analytics (whereas HS data can be so confounded by weak competition).

 

All of that is fine and if that's the approach, cool, let's hope it pays off....but no-where have they produced a good (let alone better words) record in the draft from 2012-2016.  Currently the Astros have one of the worst 'talent pipelines' in the majors.  I know what your next response to that is and it's not true either.

[Mackus]

They get full credit for Correa and Bregman. Drafting well in round one is not easy nor is it a given, even if drafting high.

But rest of dude's point is a good one. They haven't had any success outside of the first round. I only looked back through round 10 but since 2011 (when Elias came from St Louis), here are the good picks in the first 10 rounds.

1: Correa, Bregman, Springer, McCullers, Tucker
2: none
3: none
4: none
5: none
6: none
7: none
8: none
9: none
10: none

[dude]

.... but since 2011 (when Elias came from St Louis), here are the good picks in the first 10 rounds.

1: Correa, Bregman, Springer, McCullers, Tucker

 

Elias didn't draft Springer.  Luhnow (who brought Elias in) was hired in December of 2011, after the 2011 season.

[SportsGuy]

I believe Elias brought in several guys from the draft that they were able to move in deals..players that other teams valued enough to go after them.

[TwentyThirtyFive]

I believe Elias brought in several guys from the draft that they were able to move in deals..players that other teams valued enough to go after them.

Seems likely. I don't get trying to discredit Elias. He's been with 2 organizations that were two of the best in MLB at scouting, player development, and acquiring talent over the 10-12 years. Oh btw you had to be encouraged by the strides the Os seemingly made in player development last year in year 1 with a patchwork staff.

[SportsGuy]

Seems likely. I don't get trying to discredit Elias. He's been with 2 organizations that were two of the best in MLB at scouting, player development, and acquiring talent over the 10-12 years. Oh btw you had to be encouraged by the strides the Os seemingly made in player development last year in year 1 with a patchwork staff.

It’s all about dudes broken record crusade against tanking.

[dude]

Seems likely. I don't get trying to discredit Elias. 

 

Why is stating a fact me trying to discredit him.

 

Why would we share information that wasn't true?

[dude]

Oh btw you had to be encouraged by the strides the Os seemingly made in player development last year in year 1 with a patchwork staff.

 

the Orioles improved MiL ranking has almost nothing to do with that.  I'm not saying the things they've done have no value, but there's not an example of a player who's changed the Orioles MiL ranking by performing dramatically different than the path they were on.

 

The Orioles MiL ranking is based on the Talent that was here (which includes the 2019 draft) when he got here.  I know guys act/say things are different and that's great, hopefully players emerge out of this, but you have a couple guys....Baumann has been a little better, Akin a little worse (we could maybe justify that), Sedlock re-emerged some (although they left him unprotected in the Rule5)....and do we have an example of a offensive player doing anything merited?  

 

We have added ZERO unique players to the rankings today as a function of rebuilding (that is a fact).  The next one that will be added is Hjerstad (not included in the rankings yet)

[SportsGuy]

They get full credit for Correa and Bregman. Drafting well in round one is not easy nor is it a given, even if drafting high.
But rest of dude's point is a good one. They haven't had any success outside of the first round. I only looked back through round 10 but since 2011 (when Elias came from St Louis), here are the good picks in the first 10 rounds.
1: Correa, Bregman, Springer, McCullers, Tucker
2: none
3: none
4: none
5: none
6: none
7: none
8: none
9: none
10: none

How are you defining this though?

Daz Cameron, for example, was a comp pick and was used to get Verlander. He was highly rated. He hasn’t panned out so far but he was a good pick and has helped land them a stud pitcher.

Forrest Whitley is a highly rated pitching prospect.

[SportsGuy]

http://www.astrosfut...e-are-they-now/

On this site, you can go back 4 drafts. JD Davis had a good year last year. Several guys were used in trades to acquire key players.

https://www.google.c...ial-media-guide

JB was a top 100 prospect and both him and Martin went to Zona in the Greinke deal.


They drafted Derek Fisher, who was a top 50 guy and could still break out in Toronto..but he got them Sanchez who could end up being really good for them.

[Mackus]

I believe Elias brought in several guys from the draft that they were able to move in deals..players that other teams valued enough to go after them.

That's fair and it does have value. But it doesn't change that they drafted these guys and none of them made it (still some time for the more recent guys). Certainly lots of blame to go around (injuries, development) and frankly, I doubt that getting no good players over half a decade from rounds 2 thru 10 really is that bizarre of a statistical anomaly. But I don't think there is much of strong argument based on his time in Houston as Elias and his staff as being particularly adept at drafting. Maybe there are some double digits round success stories, I didn't look that deep in the draft.

[BSLSteveBirrer]

They get full credit for Correa and Bregman. Drafting well in round one is not easy nor is it a given, even if drafting high.

But rest of dude's point is a good one. They haven't had any success outside of the first round. I only looked back through round 10 but since 2011 (when Elias came from St Louis), here are the good picks in the first 10 rounds.

1: Correa, Bregman, Springer, McCullers, Tucker
2: none
3: none
4: none
5: none
6: none
7: none
8: none
9: none
10: none

While Rob has a fair counterpoint to this the bottom line is that this says that the underslot early approach to have more to spend lately is a big mistake.This clearly says get the very best guy you can in round 1.