Photo

2013 MLB Draft


  • Please log in to reply
421 replies to this topic

#81 JeremyStrain

JeremyStrain

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 13,372 posts
  • LocationFormerly known as allstar1579

Posted 06 June 2013 - 12:13 PM

My problem with Anderson is that there are a lot of guys like him.  It was similar to my argument against Hobgood when he came out.

 

High floor / low ceiling guys...I mean, with probability the way it is...you need a really high floor for that pick to make sense to me.

 

I would be leaning over to players like Jagielo, Green, Kaminsky, and McKinney.  Maybe Ervin or Dozier if you want high floors.

 

Guys like Anderson will still be plentiful at the comp pick.

 

Maybe they simply see something they really like about him.  I don't know.

 

Yep, I was thinking something really similar this morning when I was looking over the top 75 or so.

 

I'd much rather take a riskier pick in Kent Emmanuel (but he'll be there at supplemental) and take Ziomek in the 2nd, and shoot for some higher tools at #22. Anderson just kinda screams future reliever to me...I don't even know why exactly. Maybe the power combo?

 

You know Wahl was a favorite of mine out of HS, I'd like him better there, MAYBE even Austin Wilson, but he seems a little solid/unspectacular and might be around in the Supp round too.

 

Not a whole lot of plus tools floating out there that late, which is why I said I might reach on McPhearson (but he could be there supp or 2nd) because at least he's got great speed, looks really solid in the OF, but the question is can his bat develop enough to become the leadoff guy he looks like? Maybe a Thomas from Georgia Tech is a better fit, has some pop/speed could be a solid LF.


@JeremyMStrain

#82 Jon Shepherd

Jon Shepherd

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 562 posts

Posted 06 June 2013 - 12:15 PM

Yep, I was thinking something really similar this morning when I was looking over the top 75 or so.

 

I'd much rather take a riskier pick in Kent Emmanuel (but he'll be there at supplemental) and take Ziomek in the 2nd, and shoot for some higher tools at #22. Anderson just kinda screams future reliever to me...I don't even know why exactly. Maybe the power combo?

 

You know Wahl was a favorite of mine out of HS, I'd like him better there, MAYBE even Austin Wilson, but he seems a little solid/unspectacular and might be around in the Supp round too.

 

Not a whole lot of plus tools floating out there that late, which is why I said I might reach on McPhearson (but he could be there supp or 2nd) because at least he's got great speed, looks really solid in the OF, but the question is can his bat develop enough to become the leadoff guy he looks like? Maybe a Thomas from Georgia Tech is a better fit, has some pop/speed could be a solid LF.

 

 

I REALLY like Ervin, but I am a big outlier on him.



#83 SportsGuy

SportsGuy

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 91,979 posts
  • LocationBaltimore

Posted 06 June 2013 - 12:19 PM

Wilson's BB rates concern me some.  Sounds a little too free swinger like for me.



#84 JeremyStrain

JeremyStrain

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 13,372 posts
  • LocationFormerly known as allstar1579

Posted 06 June 2013 - 12:21 PM

I REALLY like Ervin, but I am a big outlier on him.

 

We all have guys like that. Gotta trust your gut. Sometimes it's just a matter of you seeing something that others haven't.


@JeremyMStrain

#85 JeremyStrain

JeremyStrain

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 13,372 posts
  • LocationFormerly known as allstar1579

Posted 06 June 2013 - 12:46 PM

My problem with Anderson is that there are a lot of guys like him.  It was similar to my argument against Hobgood when he came out.

 

High floor / low ceiling guys...I mean, with probability the way it is...you need a really high floor for that pick to make sense to me.

 

I would be leaning over to players like Jagielo, Green, Kaminsky, and McKinney.  Maybe Ervin or Dozier if you want high floors.

 

Guys like Anderson will still be plentiful at the comp pick.

 

Maybe they simply see something they really like about him.  I don't know.

 

Ha, I just took Kaminsky at #25 in the mock draft. Same principle we were just talking about, and his CV ball is amazing. Saw him live a couple weeks ago since I just happened to be up that way. It has SO much potential.


@JeremyMStrain

#86 Jon Shepherd

Jon Shepherd

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 562 posts

Posted 06 June 2013 - 12:49 PM

We all have guys like that. Gotta trust your gut. Sometimes it's just a matter of you seeing something that others haven't.

 

Yeah, I never trust my gut.

 

If I cannot verbalize why I like someone...I discount it.  The way I figure it, I am 33...I should be able to use my words.

 

I can fully explain why I like Ervin and people would disagree with me.  Lots of them.



#87 JeremyStrain

JeremyStrain

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 13,372 posts
  • LocationFormerly known as allstar1579

Posted 06 June 2013 - 01:00 PM

Yeah, I never trust my gut.

 

If I cannot verbalize why I like someone...I discount it.  The way I figure it, I am 33...I should be able to use my words.

 

I can fully explain why I like Ervin and people would disagree with me.  Lots of them.

 

That's the hard part of this. Sometimes you just have to watch someone enough until the words come to you. Sometimes it's instinct that gets you to pay enough attention to get to that point, but it will come.

 

There are always people that are going to argue against your pick, and they might be right, but there's probably about as much chance that you are. It's just scary to have to put it out there on record and really fight for a guy that others are vocal against, but lots of those guys argue until they are blue in the face, and then end up completely wrong later.

 

It's why guys like Trout go where they do. :)


@JeremyMStrain

#88 Jon Shepherd

Jon Shepherd

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 562 posts

Posted 06 June 2013 - 01:14 PM

That's the hard part of this. Sometimes you just have to watch someone enough until the words come to you. Sometimes it's instinct that gets you to pay enough attention to get to that point, but it will come.

 

There are always people that are going to argue against your pick, and they might be right, but there's probably about as much chance that you are. It's just scary to have to put it out there on record and really fight for a guy that others are vocal against, but lots of those guys argue until they are blue in the face, and then end up completely wrong later.

 

It's why guys like Trout go where they do. :)

 

I think the way to better play it is to say that a player may click unconciously based on things you saw before and that can make you develop feelings for a player.  Instinct would imply that such recognition would be recognizable by all.

 

My concern about that unconcious clicking is that it may be clicking on aspects that are similar to past players, but are not the reasons why those past players are good.  From that perspective, I refuse to acknowledge my gut.  I have to have reasons: qualitative or quantitative to support my assessment.  If I don't, I have no idea whether my feelings are based on aspects of a player that translate into success or are aspects that have little to do with success.



#89 JeremyStrain

JeremyStrain

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 13,372 posts
  • LocationFormerly known as allstar1579

Posted 06 June 2013 - 01:28 PM

I think the way to better play it is to say that a player may click unconciously based on things you saw before and that can make you develop feelings for a player.  Instinct would imply that such recognition would be recognizable by all.

 

My concern about that unconcious clicking is that it may be clicking on aspects that are similar to past players, but are not the reasons why those past players are good.  From that perspective, I refuse to acknowledge my gut.  I have to have reasons: qualitative or quantitative to support my assessment.  If I don't, I have no idea whether my feelings are based on aspects of a player that translate into success or are aspects that have little to do with success.

 

I think you might be overthinking a little bit. There's a difference between seeing a guy and seeing some things you like, and seeing a guy and instantly being reminded of other players. In the latter sense, you are totally right, you don't want to fawn over a player just because he reminds you of things you liked in other players.

 

But if you saw a guy and he stood out to you that you liked him and you aren't sure why, take another look and see if you can figure out what it is. Maybe it's just a flash of a plus tool and you really didn't catch it the first time but subconsciously you saw it. Maybe it was just the intangibles, like a guy being a "gamer" as people like to call them, or having good instincts and baseball awareness. Good traits, but without other tools to go with them, they'll end up a good college player but no real pro future. (Guys like Charlie White at MD remind me of this one).

 

It's all a lot more complicated than people realize sometimes, but instead of just dismissing that instinct or whatever you want to call it that is calling you to a player, you should follow it and see what caught your eye. The only thing it's going to cost you is watching more baseball right? A lot of times it's recognizable, but you just see a bad performance from a good player and you need more than one look. That's just me though, I tend to worry that I missed something and err on the side of caution more often than not.


@JeremyMStrain

#90 Jon Shepherd

Jon Shepherd

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 562 posts

Posted 06 June 2013 - 01:53 PM

I think you might be overthinking a little bit. There's a difference between seeing a guy and seeing some things you like, and seeing a guy and instantly being reminded of other players. In the latter sense, you are totally right, you don't want to fawn over a player just because he reminds you of things you liked in other players.

 

But if you saw a guy and he stood out to you that you liked him and you aren't sure why, take another look and see if you can figure out what it is. Maybe it's just a flash of a plus tool and you really didn't catch it the first time but subconsciously you saw it. Maybe it was just the intangibles, like a guy being a "gamer" as people like to call them, or having good instincts and baseball awareness. Good traits, but without other tools to go with them, they'll end up a good college player but no real pro future. (Guys like Charlie White at MD remind me of this one).

 

It's all a lot more complicated than people realize sometimes, but instead of just dismissing that instinct or whatever you want to call it that is calling you to a player, you should follow it and see what caught your eye. The only thing it's going to cost you is watching more baseball right? A lot of times it's recognizable, but you just see a bad performance from a good player and you need more than one look. That's just me though, I tend to worry that I missed something and err on the side of caution more often than not.

 

The thing is though that if you cannot articulate it...you could be drawn to the player for poor reasons.  That is the problem with a gut feeling.  That feeling is not always based on sound parts of an observation.



#91 JeremyStrain

JeremyStrain

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 13,372 posts
  • LocationFormerly known as allstar1579

Posted 06 June 2013 - 02:14 PM

The thing is though that if you cannot articulate it...you could be drawn to the player for poor reasons.  That is the problem with a gut feeling.  That feeling is not always based on sound parts of an observation.

 

Yeah but with another look, you will know for sure. If it's nothing to see or note, you will know it. If there is something really there you should see it. You aren't going to make up things to see because you "like" him, if you don't see anything you can articulate after seeing him again then you move on, no big deal. But it's much better to take a second look and KNOW than to miss on someone that someone else will find.

 

I'm not saying you should start calling him a prospect because you like him, but if you like him you should see him a couple times and see what he really is. Multiple looks are never going to make you see something not there, they will weed out stuff you think is there that isn't. A gut feeling should lead to an observation, not be part of it.


@JeremyMStrain

#92 Jon Shepherd

Jon Shepherd

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 562 posts

Posted 06 June 2013 - 04:12 PM

Yeah but with another look, you will know for sure. If it's nothing to see or note, you will know it. If there is something really there you should see it. You aren't going to make up things to see because you "like" him, if you don't see anything you can articulate after seeing him again then you move on, no big deal. But it's much better to take a second look and KNOW than to miss on someone that someone else will find.

 

I'm not saying you should start calling him a prospect because you like him, but if you like him you should see him a couple times and see what he really is. Multiple looks are never going to make you see something not there, they will weed out stuff you think is there that isn't. A gut feeling should lead to an observation, not be part of it.

 

Actually, it is human nature to make things up.  It is pretty common to see in the literature that when we have positive feelings toward something that we tend to focus on things that are good about something and ignore the bad.  A lot of work has been done on this in the financial world.  So, yeah, if you have a good feeling about someone, you are more likely to ignore negative attributes and magnify positive ones.



#93 JeremyStrain

JeremyStrain

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 13,372 posts
  • LocationFormerly known as allstar1579

Posted 06 June 2013 - 04:56 PM

Just about go time. Going to be interesting, starting at #1. 


@JeremyMStrain

#94 bnickle

bnickle

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 38,177 posts

Posted 06 June 2013 - 04:56 PM

How many rounds today??



#95 Jon Shepherd

Jon Shepherd

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 562 posts

Posted 06 June 2013 - 04:57 PM

How many rounds today??

 

2.

 

Starts at 7pm.



#96 LanceRinker

LanceRinker

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,736 posts
  • LocationPlano, TX

Posted 06 June 2013 - 05:47 PM

http://baltimorespor...und-mock-draft/

 

A bit much to copy and paste in here but Dan Szymborski from ESPN made the O's selection at 22. 


  • BSLChrisStoner likes this

#97 dandrews

dandrews
  • Members
  • 149 posts

Posted 06 June 2013 - 05:49 PM

Wow.

 

Boy does having a team that's in contention completely change how interested I am in the draft.  It's amazing.  Previous years I would read a ton and know who everyone thought were the top 100 or so players.  I know nothing about this draft.  Didn't even realize it was today!

 

I was just thinking the same thing. I've been spending the last 45 min or so trying to catch up lol


@dandrews66

#98 JeremyStrain

JeremyStrain

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 13,372 posts
  • LocationFormerly known as allstar1579

Posted 06 June 2013 - 05:59 PM

I feel better and better about taking Kaminsky at #25, he's getting a lot of buzz right now.


@JeremyMStrain

#99 You Play to Win the Game

You Play to Win the Game

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 60,341 posts
  • LocationMaryland

Posted 06 June 2013 - 06:01 PM

The opening written by Verducci, narrated by Chipper Jones was great. MLBN does a great job with this.



#100 JeremyStrain

JeremyStrain

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 13,372 posts
  • LocationFormerly known as allstar1579

Posted 06 June 2013 - 06:02 PM

The opening written by Verducci, narrated by Chipper Jones was great. MLBN does a great job with this.

 

Almost makes up for the terrible commentary ;)


@JeremyMStrain




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


Our Sponsors


 width=