The article accompanying that tidbit really makes me think that if Leiter isn't available they shouldn't/won't take Rocker. Davis or one of the top HS short stops will be available, so it feels like taking a hitter is the way to go.
The article accompanying that tidbit really makes me think that if Leiter isn't available they shouldn't/won't take Rocker. Davis or one of the top HS short stops will be available, so it feels like taking a hitter is the way to go.
Did Callis say Kahlil Watson or Jordan Lawlar? I imagine Watson would give the Pirates quite a deal since signing under slot would be his only chance of being drafted in the first five picks.Callis said on his podcast today basically said that Pitt is taking the hitter that gives them the best deal at 1, and that Watson is going 1 or 2, Mayer 1 or 3, and Davis is going 1 or 4.
Honestly that's the order I'd rank them in too.Lawler, Mayer, Leiter, and Rocker are ALL going to be available, and I’m going to be confused and unhappy and complain about whoever the Sox take, cuz they did not take one of the other 3 who shouldn’t have been there!
1. PIT - Marcelo Mayer4. Red Sox: Henry Davis, C, Louisville
The best case for the Red Sox is that they get a chance to choose either Leiter or Davis, and the latter gets to No. 4 if the Pirates pass on him. Boston is the first club that appears to be considering Rocker, though it's unclear if they'd take him over the high school shortstops.
Anyone know if there's ever been a study that looks at the "signability" draft picks and see how the strategy of being able to go overslot later in the draft works out? Seems like it sounds like a good idea but given how the expected value of draft picks crater as one goes farther down the draft order, I would wonder how smart it really ends up being.BC catcher Tony Sanchez was picked 4th overall in the 2009 draft by Pittsburgh, although that was likely driven by signability.
I think it's just the reality that the changes to the game have prioritized hitting, while teams see that they can get by with middle of the rotation starters so long as the bullpen's good.I'm having a hard time understanding why Rocker and Leiter have dropped out of the top 4 in various mock drafts.
Yes- these stats are current.Glad I'm not alone on that.
I'm assuming those lines for Rocker and Leiter include playoffs? I guess Rocker got hit pretty hard in the playoffs. Given how much he improved overall this season, I'm not too worried about it.
I should probably come off my issues with Leiter's walk rate because his season line this year was absurd.
This confuses me. What is your opinion based on? Davis walks more than he whiffs. His batting eye is extraordinary, and his contact skills are excellent. He has good pop. Even if he doesn’t stick behind the plate, why couldn’t he be a good average, great OBP, solid power guy in an OF corner or at 1B - with John Olerud as his best case scenario?…
After that though. . .
Davis's best case scenario is basically Swihart. No guarantees there. And we already have Wong, who has more or less the same potential upside.
…
My gut tells me it is because Leiter and Rocker generally entered the season as the consensus 1-2, or at least as the most well-known prospects and top college players, and have been in the prospect-following consciousness longer, so there is some fatigue there and more time to pick apart potential flaws and such. While the high school players get to coast on projection and "unlimited potential" and whatnot, while Davis has come on as the new hotness that nobody was talking about last fall while we were rooting for losses.I'm having a hard time understanding why Rocker and Leiter have dropped out of the top 4 in various mock drafts. Playing in the SEC:
Rocker: 98 innings, 144 Ks, 2.93 ERA, .91 WHIP, 13.2 K/9.
Leiter: 89 innings, 146 Ks, 2.22 ERA, .87 WHIP, 14.8 K/9.
Rocker's stats have improved across the board since 2019 (except for walk rate at 3 walks/9 innings). Leiter's stats are phenomenal (again with a walk rate at 3.8 walks/9 innings). Is control the concern?
Comparing those two with a college catcher with suspect defensive skills and high school middle infielders, I'd go with Rocker or Leiter every time.
FWIW, these two statements are way off the consensus. People have put Buster Posey comps on Henry Davis, although I think that's in large part due to the fact that there aren't a lot of examples of "80 percent of Buster Posey," which is a more likely comp. But 80 percent of Buster Posey is still a perennial all-star and franchise cornerstone, whereas Wong's potential upside (and the highest upside even a Swihart stan like me put on him) is more like "guy who gives you a bit more athleticism/versatility/offense than a replacement-level catcher."Davis's best case scenario is basically Swihart. No guarantees there. And we already have Wong, who has more or less the same potential upside.
Rocker's velocity has been up and down and there's concern that a lot of his success comes from blowing away hitters with fastballs and getting them to chase off-speed stuff down out of the zone -- which is harder to do at the major league level. Leiter got hit around a bit recently, which fueled concerns about his slight build holding up.I'm having a hard time understanding why Rocker and Leiter have dropped out of the top 4 in various mock drafts.
Yeah. It feels like people have backed off the early Posey comps, but there's a long way to fall before we're looking at a Swihart ceiling.This confuses me. What is your opinion based on? Davis walks more than he whiffs. His batting eye is extraordinary, and his contact skills are excellent. He has good pop. Even if he doesn’t stick behind the plate, why couldn’t he be a good average, great OBP, solid power guy in an OF corner or at 1B - with John Olerud as his best case scenario?
Wong wasn’t as good a college hitter as Davis. And if Swihart were his best case scenario, no one would be talking about him as a first rounder, let alone the first pick, would they?
Would they? This is from the MLB website:This confuses me. What is your opinion based on? Davis walks more than he whiffs. His batting eye is extraordinary, and his contact skills are excellent. He has good pop. Even if he doesn’t stick behind the plate, why couldn’t he be a good average, great OBP, solid power guy in an OF corner or at 1B - with John Olerud as his best case scenario?
Wong wasn’t as good a college hitter as Davis. And if Swihart were his best case scenario, no one would be talking about him as a first rounder, let alone the first pick, would they?
My takeaways:While he doesn't have a pretty right-handed swing, Davis makes it work at the plate and has a higher offensive ceiling than most catchers. He recognizes pitches, manages the strike zone well and makes repeated hard contact, even if his stroke lengthens and he gets a bit pull-happy at times. His strength and controlled aggression could produce 20 homers per season while he hits for a solid average and draws plenty of walks.
Davis' standout tool is his plus-plus arm strength, and he erased 34 percent of would-be basestealers in his first two college seasons while also displaying quick footwork and good throwing accuracy. His receiving lacks consistency and he sometimes struggles to handle quality stuff, but he has looked better in 2021 and should be able to remain behind the plate. He's quicker than most backstops and conceivably could try third base or an outfield corner if a team wants to maximize his offensive value.
Pared down:
Hit: . . .Future plus hit tool (.275-.285 average) with average-to-above-average on-base percentage. . .
Power: . . plus bat speed, raw strength and hand-eye coordination to square balls up consistently will translate to future average power potential (15-20 home runs).
Arm: Plus-to-better arm strength. Accurate thrower. Gets out of his crouch easily. Consistently throws out runners at a high percentage.
Field: Athletic behind the plate with quick feet and lateral movements. Frames well, and athleticism provides mobility for excellent blocking skills on balls in the dirt. Future plus defense with plus athleticism. . .
Run: Average runner, but above-average for catcher. Can go first to third and score from second. Alert on the basepaths with good instincts.
I think this is on target. Mock drafts are only interesting if the names change and it is inevitable that we pick at the flaws.My gut tells me it is because Leiter and Rocker generally entered the season as the consensus 1-2, or at least as the most well-known prospects and top college players, and have been in the prospect-following consciousness longer, so there is some fatigue there and more time to pick apart potential flaws and such. While the high school players get to coast on projection and "unlimited potential" and whatnot, while Davis has come on as the new hotness that nobody was talking about last fall while we were rooting for losses.
I saw that scouting report but think it's far from the consensus view, at least on the hitting side. Could be right, who knows? But Law, for a contrary example, basically said the opposite ("beautiful swing"): The Athletic Ranks Henry Davis as No. 1 2021 MLB Draft Prospect - Sports Illustrated Louisville Cardinals News, Analysis and MoreWould they? This is from the MLB website:
My takeaways:
A) Funky RH swing that works well at the college level, but occasionally pull-happy/long stroke.
B) Upside is slightly-above league-average batting with 20 HR power.
C) Plus arm.
D) Not an overall great catcher but he "should be able to remain behind the plate." (Gee, that's an endorsement.)
E) But athletic, so 3B/OF Swihartian potential, as a fallback.
I just don't get the "top five pick" excitement from the actual skill set as reported. Lower first rounder, maybe.
FWIW, the SoxProspects write-up on Swihart:https://soxprospects.com/players/swihart-blake.htm
Swihart's career was kinda mucked up, I thought, by never really commiting to him as a catcher. I've never quite understood why they said he needed more work as a catcher, then... sent him out to play LF.Also, If you're saying that Swihart's write-up and projection as a prospect was somewhat comparable to Davis's overall value/projection as a prospect, then ok. (There's still the differences between projecting a HS v college prospect.) But I understood you to be saying that Swihart's eventual career (to this point) is Davis's projection ceiling, which I'd just have to disagree with, based on what I've read.
Because he was their third catcher (behind Vazquez and Hanigan), the LHH side of their LF platoon (Holt) was on the IL, and they wanted to get Swihart's bat into the lineup. It wasn't the worst plan in the world to try an athletic guy like Swihart in a more versatile role. He just had the misfortune of getting significantly injured.Swihart's career was kinda mucked up, I thought, by never really commiting to him as a catcher. I've never quite understood why they said he needed more work as a catcher, then... sent him out to play LF.
IIRC, based on historical returns the order of ROI is basically:I think this is on target. Mock drafts are only interesting if the names change and it is inevitable that we pick at the flaws.
Is there a general consensus on which subset of players (high school hitter or pitcher, college hitter or pitcher) most regularly live up to their draft slot?
I took a look at the two names you mentioned (Price and Nola) in comparison to Rocker and Leiter:I would also push back on the idea that Leiter or Rocker are being dinged by virtue of nitpicking. Both have real, substantial concerns (secondary pitches, FB command, stature, etc). They are not David Price. I don't even like either as much as I liked Aaron Nola.
I'm curious if you think hitters are easier to project, pitchers are more likely to get injured, or both?IIRC, based on historical returns the order of ROI is basically:
HS hitter
College hitter
College pitcher
HS pitcher
Hitters produce more and have a higher likelihood of success than pitchers with rare exception (i.e. high school catchers have miserable draft record).
Rocker just painted a 7.2 inning masterpiece (3 hits, 3 walks, 11 K, 0 runs) in Vandy's 2-0 squeaker over 40-15 E. Carolina in the opening game of their Super-regional.
It’s been so long since we’ve drafted a generational young arm, it’s hard to believe they’d pass on both Leiter and Rocker.Rocker just painted a 7.2 inning masterpiece (3 hits, 3 walks, 11 K, 0 runs) in Vandy's 2-0 squeaker over 40-15 E. Carolina in the opening game of their Super-regional.
Well, unless they don't believe either of them to be generational arms.It’s been so long since we’ve drafted a generational young arm, it’s hard to believe they’d pass on both Leiter and Rocker.
Frelick would be the same reason.BC catcher Tony Sanchez was picked 4th overall in the 2009 draft by Pittsburgh, although that was likely driven by signability.
Law has him as his 6th ranked prospect. Most have him between 10-12 that I have seen.Frelick would be the same reason.
If Frelick goes top 5 it’s because he’d take less money than the top 5 guys.Law has him as his 6th ranked prospect. Most have him between 10-12 that I have seen.
He’s been good otherwise. 7IP, 2 H, 1 R, 3 BB, 10Ks. Looks like he is done with 94 pitches.I turned on the Vandy game just in time to see Leiter (I think) give up a long blast
Good question. they redid the stadium 5-6 years ago and changed it from dirt to artificial, so can’t compare with Price or Sonny Gray. Maybe Walker Buehler had a year on turf?Just now noticing that Vandy’s mound isn’t dirt. Is that a concern with Leiter or Rocker when projecting a professional career?
1. PIT - Marcelo Mayer4. Boston Red Sox
Pick: Jack Leiter, RHP, Vanderbilt
KG: Word is Leiter is trying to price himself down to Boston and wants to land there. Word is that Boston would love that as well. Thus, a match made in heaven.
EL: Yup.