MakMan44 said:I like Manny, I really do and I was thinking about picking him with my first round pick. I was fucking shocked how much of his value was tied to defense though, at least according to Fangraphs.
The Best Catch in 100 Years said:Good pick. Would have definitely taken him over Hanley, for one.
keninten said:The knee is what scares me the most. It`s his 51 doubles at 21 years old. If he grows a little more he could be a monster bat.
Fishercat said:I don't really mind Machado there, but I am thinking there are a couple guys still on the board I'd rather take my chances on with a first round pick (well, at least one for sure).
MakMan44 said:I think it's pretty insane that's it's only the first round and we've only had one pick in nearly 48 hours.
MakMan44 said:Well I edited my comment out because I knew what I was signing up for. If I didn't like the 24 clock I shouldn't have agreed to it.
As for terri, I have no clue man. My gut says the clock reset to 11:57 last night but I'll defer to whatever scoops says.
The decision to go with very young, high risk/reward players over more established veterans is interesting because it gives insight into how each person views being a gm. I know with the number 2 pick it came down to McCutchen or Harper. I decided to go with McCutchen and one of the main reasons was I was looking at having a winning team for 5 years. I decided that I am not the gm of an expansion team and wanted to win in that window. The alternative is taking the view as you are starting an organization from scratch and want to build for the next 15 years. If I took that stance I would have drafted Harper. This pick does not guarantee that McCutchen will be better than Harper for the next 5 years but I thought there was more variability in Harper, risk/reward, vs consistency with McCutchen.Fishercat said:The thing that is most interesting about this first round, at least compared to last year, is how different the risk tolerance is.
I cannot go too deep with consideration to the rule about not talking about unpicked players, but looking back at last year's draft, you didn't see a ton of high-risk players in the first round. Certainly, there were some a year or so off of traumatic injury and definitely some who had/have injury questions or consistency issues, but even one of the rawest players chosen in that Top 30 still had a year of MLB time or so on Manny Machado, Jose Fernandez, or Yasiel Puig, who had great rookie/post-rookie campaigns but do have some real game-based questions to them.
It seems like owners, at least early on, are aiming for the (justifiably) high ceilings of some guys who would have dropped a bit more last year. Even Tulo went seven slots higher than he did last year, after 3/4 of a great season, and we've discussed CarGo's jump. Last year, you had to wait until the second half of the first round to really see players go who had notable possibilities of dropping off a cliff, not living up to a huge year, or who had notable risk attached to them.
None of this is a judgment really, I just think it's kind of interesting to see the type of a shift a single year can have, especially when there are players falling who actually did have really good years in 2013.
Why Not Grebeck? said:Taking pitching early is interesting. Useful position players dry up WAY faster, and there's a much bigger chance your early round pitcher is going to end up being useless in three years than any hitter.
At the same time, we all saw in the playoffs this year just how crucial it is to have someone you can trust at the top of your rotation. Even the best offenses are going to be held down by a great 1-2 punch. With wild card play-in games now, I think having an ace is even more important than ever before - especially someone you can count on to go deep into games year in, year out.
PrometheusWakefield said:The lesson I learned from my team last year is don't bet on pitchers with high potential but injury concerns. The team that rolls the dice with Brett Anderson this year will not be me.
It would be interesting to see an effort to quantify the difference in range of outcomes between pitchers and hitters and between players with an established level of performance versus younger players who have less depth to their MLB statistics but are at a better point on the aging curve. I think people underestimate the fact that all players are risks of some degree. Josh Hamilton and Albert Pujols would once have been on lists of sure things.
Snodgrass'Muff said:
The question, as it was last year, is where is the line between that kind of pitcher and the guys in the next tier (very good but not elite) who are not likely to be more valuable than the best position players around. Of course approach is once again an important factor and if a team is focusing on drafting a young roster that can grow in the coming years, that risk tolerance will have to be greater than in a team that is looking to compete right now.
It's definitely been interesting to see this first round develop so far, especially when compared to last year. I know how I would be building my team if I was doing this again. Of course, my team from last year did far worse than I was expecting, so what do I know?
I agree and its not that it's a bad pick, its just that there is still a couple elite bats available and I wonder what the difference in pitching between the 20th and their 2nd/3rd round pick would be after 2/3 seasons. I did not pick a starting pitcher until the 3rd round last year and I am very happy with how that worked out for me, especially taking Matt Harvey in the 4th. I think Verlander even coming off an off year last year is still a good pick, but I would always take the elite bat in this situation as pitching is a lot deeper.Why Not Grebeck? said:Verlander, eh? His best days are almost certainly behind him, and he wasn't great for long stretches in 2013. His 2012 was otherworldly, though, and he looked great in the playoffs to finish the year. I suppose he could be seen as something of a 'buy low,' but it's the 20th overall pick so what is low, exactly?
At first I thought his fastball decline was the problem, but it looks like movement issues with his secondary stuff was more of an issue. Here's an interesting article about it: http://www.baseballprof.com/2013/08/justin-verlanders-declining-skills/
I'm pretty sure there are at least 5 or 6 other pitchers I'd have taken over him, though they all have risks.
Fishercat said:That took long enough, cripes. Was Top 10 last year, was 7th ranked in Fangraphs WAR for hitters last year, had a full healthy season, is still reasonably young, and plays in a position that was hell to find talent in in the draft last year. Even with the emergence of a couple guys, that depth chart gets UGLY as you go lower.
If Longoria went 6th I wouldn't have blinked, he's a complete steal there at 20.
FarvinMoosey said:
PM your thoughts to me when it rolls back around towards me Snod. That way I have plausible deniability when I suck again.
Fishercat said:I mean, that's technically true for 2013 too. I wouldn't take his 2013 over Longo's though.
BoredViewer said:Freddie Freeman.
He's really, really good and only 24.
Note for the future: Please post positions with your picks--Freddie's a 1B, but as we get into later rounds I don't want to be looking things up or guessing whether player X is going in your LF or RF.BoredViewer said:Freddie Freeman.
He's really, really good and only 24.
FarvinMoosey said:
PM your thoughts to me when it rolls back around towards me Snod. That way I have plausible deniability when I suck again.
Actually, my team last year ended up better than I thought considering Hart never played, but it surprised me in that bullpen ended up being a strength while my lineup was anemic.
Interestingly when making my picks last year I looked at easily 4 times the information on my position players. Now I have a thoughtful exercise in that I am going to go with the same bullpen logic this year and see how it pans out.
Also, and less politely now that I have been drinking, all you people taking pitchers are crazy. =)
The Best Catch in 100 Years said:What is knucklecup's deal? He has been on since the skip. Should soxfan121 take over?
soxfan121 said:
Oh favorite avatared poster of mine, when will you learn? You can get an excellent bullpen if you don't draft an RP until round 15 and don't draft the majority of them until Round 20 and after. There is nothing, NOTHING more overvalued or overrated as relief pitching.
soxfan121 said:I have no interest in knucklecup's sloppy seconds, as they are often thirds or fourths. And I'm not a long-term take-over option - I can come in, make a few picks, help out someone with some unbiased advice but I don't want to participate in 24 more rounds of terrisus whining about how long it takes someone to pick.
Y'all need to chill the fuck out. This is SUPPOSED to take four more months. Cristiano Ronaldo, anything to add?