Any chance to keep us updated? This kind of dynamic fascinates me with the mid round kids.It gets complicated after the 10th round and money. He wasn't happy at Oregon. Coaches are first rate assholes and led him to get injured. His dad flew there yesterday to pack up for the summer regardless. We are all just kind of waiting to see what happens. The shoulder injury is recovering nicely and if the D-Backs take him again it's possible he'll head out to rookie league, Missoula, Montana I believe. I think in all likelihood, he'll go play for Yarmouth-Dennis and go back for his senior year to improve draft status. "The best laid plans..."
Sure. It's been a difficult year but at least he's got choices at 19 years old.Any chance to keep us updated? This kind of dynamic fascinates me with the mid round kids.
I mean, they're both lefty and throw the same type of pitches, but that's about it. Ball was 100% about projection. He wasn't polished at all and because he was from Indiana, scouts didn't have nearly as much to go off of as they do with Groome.Groome has about as much a chance to pan out as Ball did on his draft day. Hell, they're even sort of similar as high school pitchers.
Ball was even considered a bit of a stretch when the Sox grabbed him, which people seem to be forgetting. This is a kid that was a consensus top 10 pick.I mean, they're both lefty and throw the same type of pitches, but that's about it. Ball was 100% about projection. He wasn't polished at all and because he was from Indiana, scouts didn't have nearly as much to go off of as they do with Groome.
Groome is already polished and was a 1-1 candidate in April (was mocked as high as 3 until just a couple weeks ago). To put it in another way, no one considered Ball the top player in the draft like some people think Groome is.
Exactly. And I say this as someone who actually liked the Ball choice, they just aren't all that similar.Ball was even considered a bit of a stretch when the Sox grabbed him, which people seem to be forgetting. This is a kid that was a consensus top 10 pick.
Justify it away any way you want, but high school pitchers are incredibly risky and the gap between Groome now and Ball then isn't terribly big. I'm not saying that Groome is doomed to fail or that Ball was a sure thing that the baseball gods struck down unfairly, but the idea that there is a big difference between the two on their draft days is revisionist history.I mean, they're both lefty and throw the same type of pitches, but that's about it. Ball was 100% about projection. He wasn't polished at all and because he was from Indiana, scouts didn't have nearly as much to go off of as they do with Groome.
Groome is already polished and was a 1-1 candidate in April (was mocked as high as 3 until just a couple weeks ago). To put it in another way, no one considered Ball the top player in the draft like some people think Groome is.
Two picks is a stretch? Come on.Ball was even considered a bit of a stretch when the Sox grabbed him, which people seem to be forgetting. This is a kid that was a consensus top 10 pick.
And Groome was ranked #1 by MLB.com.Justify it away any way you want, but high school pitchers are incredibly risky and the gap between Groome now and Ball then isn't terribly big. I'm not saying that Groome is doomed to fail or that Ball was a sure thing that the baseball gods struck down unfairly, but the idea that there is a big difference between the two on their draft days is revisionist history.
Groome is exciting. So was Ball. Most of us wanted Meadows, and in retrospect, most of us were right. That doesn't mean that Groome is significantly more likely to succeed than Ball was, though. And it's not like Ball was a reach at 7. He was rated 9th in that draft class by BA. Groove came into this draft as number 3. If you think the five picks separating them is a major factor, we probably won't find much common ground here.
Oh, I don't disagree. HS pitchers remain the riskiest draft quantity there is. Teams keep drafting them very highly every year, which may very well be dumb. Groome may very well wind up toiling away with Trey Ball and Casey Kelly and Michael Bowden. I didn't follow the discussion around Ball very closely at the time, but I seem to recall that that draft class wasn't considered particularly strong. I could be wrong. Obviously there's a great chance he could crash and burn, but Groome still seems like a sweet pick to me.Justify it away any way you want, but high school pitchers are incredibly risky and the gap between Groome now and Ball then isn't terribly big. I'm not saying that Groome is doomed to fail or that Ball was a sure thing that the baseball gods struck down unfairly, but the idea that there is a big difference between the two on their draft days is revisionist history.
Groome is exciting. So was Ball. Most of us wanted Meadows, and in retrospect, most of us were right. That doesn't mean that Groome is significantly more likely to succeed than Ball was, though. And it's not like Ball was a reach at 7. He was rated 9th in that draft class by BA. Groove came into this draft as number 3. If you think the five picks separating them is a major factor, we probably won't find much common ground here.
Sorry - other than the fact that they are LHP from HS, your point really breaks down. Let's start with the fact that the 2013 class was believed to be weak at the time, and history has proven it was worse than feared - there wasn't much talent there. Perhaps more importantly, Ball was a 2-way player throughout HS and scouts were undecided as to whether he should be drafted as a pitcher or OF. Finally, outside of alleged make-up issues, Groome was almost universally viewed as the best talent in the draft, and certainly no worse than Top 3. Given the speed of the drop-off in expected WAR as you go through the Top 10, there's actually a huge gap between the guy rated #1 vs. #9 or worse. And that's before you consider differences in talent levels between drafts or risk levels due to lack of pitching history.Justify it away any way you want, but high school pitchers are incredibly risky and the gap between Groome now and Ball then isn't terribly big. I'm not saying that Groome is doomed to fail or that Ball was a sure thing that the baseball gods struck down unfairly, but the idea that there is a big difference between the two on their draft days is revisionist history.
Groome is exciting. So was Ball. Most of us wanted Meadows, and in retrospect, most of us were right. That doesn't mean that Groome is significantly more likely to succeed than Ball was, though. And it's not like Ball was a reach at 7. He was rated 9th in that draft class by BA. Groove came into this draft as number 3. If you think the five picks separating them is a major factor, we probably won't find much common ground here.
Hunter Dozier, Austin Meadows, Braden Shipley, JP Crawford and Hunter Harvey all went in the 15 picks after Ball, so it wasn't really getting all that thin by the time the Sox came up. That class was certainly thinner than this year's overall, but the top 6 in that draft (Appel, Gray, Bryant, Stewart, Frazier, Moran) would probably all slot into the top 10 in this draft somewhere, so commenting on how stacked the top of that draft was while pointing to Groome's number 3 ranking doesn't really tell us all that much. At the very least, the top three would have been the top three this year as well. It would be different if there were a bunch of monster picks in the early mix this year. There weren't. The mock drafts were pretty fluid for a reason.And Groome was ranked #1 by MLB.com.
Look, I don't disagree with your premise that Groome isn't guaranteed anything, but you're REALLY selling Groome short, and also really understating how big of a drop-off there was in that draft after the first 6 picks.
You can just go to baseballamerica.com and click on the top 500 list on their main page.I don't quite understand where BA's "official" draft ratings are (and 1 v 3 probably doesn't make any difference) but I saw Groome's #1 overall rating here. Maybe you saw a more recent one that I missed.
You might want to do some rereading because that isn't my point at all.In short, there are huge risks with taking any HS pitcher, but other than that, your perspective that they are similar has no factual basis. By that logic, all HS pitchers are like Ball and should therefore be avoided - there's no half-way here with the argument you've constructed.
So Groome's number 1 overall ranking doesn't tell us anything but Ball's #9 ranking tells the whole story? As I said, I get your point, I just think you're completely misremembering how that draft, and Ball specifically, was viewed.Hunter Dozier, Austin Meadows, Braden Shipley, JP Crawford and Hunter Harvey all went in the 15 picks after Ball, so it wasn't really getting all that thin by the time the Sox came up. That class was certainly thinner than this year's overall, but the top 6 in that draft (Appel, Gray, Bryant, Stewart, Frazier, Moran) would probably all slot into the top 10 in this draft somewhere, so commenting on how stacked the top of that draft was while pointing to Groome's number 3 ranking doesn't really tell us all that much. At the very least, the top three would have been the top three this year as well. It would be different if there were a bunch of monster picks in the early mix this year. There weren't. The mock drafts were pretty fluid for a reason.
How hard is it to copy a link and post it? I did it, and I'm maybe the laziest man on earth. Help a brother out.You can just go to baseballamerica.com and click on the top 500 list on their main page.
I didn't argue one ranking more valid than the other. I'm pointing out that comparing the two drafts is problematic. Did Ball pan out? No. He's a pretty terrible prospect at this point. On draft day in 2013, however, he was lauded as an exciting pick and the Sox were praised for making it by pretty much every site. I'm honestly having trouble finding anyone who didn't like the pick, aside from some grumbling here because people had their hearts set on Frazier or Meadows.So Groome's number 1 overall ranking doesn't tell us anything but Ball's #9 ranking tells the whole story? As I said, I get your point, I just think you're completely misremembering how that draft, and Ball specifically, was viewed.
On this we can agree.I think Groome is a great pick and I hope he does a great job for the Sox.
Dismissing Ball as a shitty pick requires hindsight which makes the joke shitty. Hindsight might be accurate, but it's also incredibly uninteresting.Or, instead, why not just clarify what you're saying. I am also confused.
A product of Fort Lauderdale's American Heritage High (alma mater of such major leaguers as Eric Hosmer and Deven Marrero), Chatham has been a three-year starter for Florida Atlantic, leading the Owls to the regular-season Conference USA title as a junior as he led the league with a 1.017 OPS. His swing can be long but there's leverage in his swing and solid-average power, if not a tick more. He's got a knack for making contact and some grit, having played through a bone chip in his right wrist this spring that caused him to get off to a slow start. Chatham's defense is the subject of debate, as he's tall and rangy for a shortstop at a listed 6-foot-4, 185 pounds. However, he has a true plus arm, solid instincts and feel for the middle infield. He may have to move off it eventually, bu his first-step quickness, game clock and aptitude may allow him to stick at short, at least in the near-term. He's likely to be drafted in the first three rounds.
Probably not. Mayo said on the telecast that he was beginning to sneak into the first round. He'll probably go slot and they'll be able to use his 5% overage on Groome.ok, so did they target CJ Chatham as an under-slot guy so that they can siphon some of that money off to Groome?
One thing to note is the de-commit to Vandy will make him harder to sign. The story was that he wanted to go the JUCO path so that he'd be eligible again for next years draft if he didn't get the 4 mil rather than have to wait 2 years to be re-drafted if he went to VandyPlus, per Pete Abe, he's committed now to JuCo, not Vandy. Not sure when that changed but suggests he's signable. And Pedroia is his idol. Pedey should have called him by now.
It doesn't require dismissing Ball as a shitty pick to render your perspective on the distance between he and Groome off base. Groome was pretty much the consensus #1 talent in a draft that is almost universally considered to be strong than a historrically bad 2013 draft. And he has been a full-time pitcher throughout HS, so it's not nearly as much of a risk/projection pick as Ball.I didn't argue one ranking more valid than the other. I'm pointing out that comparing the two drafts is problematic. Did Ball pan out? No. He's a pretty terrible prospect at this point. On draft day in 2013, however, he was lauded as an exciting pick and the Sox were praised for making it by pretty much every site. I'm honestly having trouble finding anyone who didn't like the pick, aside from some grumbling here because people had their hearts set on Frazier or Meadows.
On this we can agree.
Dismissing Ball as a shitty pick requires hindsight which makes the joke shitty. Hindsight might be accurate, but it's also incredibly uninteresting.
Using the 5% overage on Groome would get them to what, about 3.5m? Hope that's enough - if he's really stuck on $4m or he's off to JUCO, then they'll have to go underslot somewhere to get that high, or close.Probably not. Mayo said on the telecast that he was beginning to sneak into the first round. He'll probably go slot and they'll be able to use his 5% overage on Groome.
They have a little over 3.4 million for Groome right now if they go 5% over and give CJ slot money. They'll almost surely go underslot in the next couple picks to open up enough cash to sign Groome, but I don't think he'll cost nearly as much as the numbers his agent has been floating.Using the 5% overage on Groome would get them to what, about 3.5m? Hope that's enough - if he's really stuck on $4m or he's off to JUCO, then they'll have to go underslot somewhere to get that high, or close.
Go ahead and see if you can dig up anything from the lead up of the 2013 draft that described it as historically bad. If you are relying on hindsight to claim it was historically bad, you couldn't be missing my point more. Again, the pick was almost universally praised at the time. It didn't work out. It happens with high school arms a lot. It could happen with Groome, too. That doesn't make the Groome pick a bad one. I like it quite a bit, actually. But the only way to claim Ball was a bad pick at the time is to rely on hindsight.It doesn't require dismissing Ball as a shitty pick to render your perspective on the distance between he and Groome off base. Groome was pretty much the consensus #1 talent in a draft that is almost universally considered to be strong than a historrically bad 2013 draft. And he has been a full-time pitcher throughout HS, so it's not nearly as much of a risk/projection pick as Ball.
Pretty sure I understood your point quite well. It was just a bad point.
I'll leave it at that, as I'm driving my point into the ground.Coming into the year, the industry was split on whether Ball had a brighter future as an outfielder or a pitcher. That's no longer a question, as he has excelled on the mound to the extent that he could go in the first five picks overall. He has surpassed Indiana State's Sean Manaea as the top lefthander available by showing better stuff and more athleticism. Ball's fastball dipped to the upper 80s when he wore down toward the end of the showcase circuit last summer, but he has maintained a 91-94 mph heater all spring despite cold and wet weather. He still carries just 180 pounds on his 6-foot-6 frame, so he has plenty of room to add strength and velocity. His athleticism is equally impressive, as he does a fine job of maintaining and repeating his delivery for such a young and tall pitcher. His father restricted his use of a curveball before his junior season, but Ball already shows aptitude for spinning the ball and has an above-average breaker. He learned to rely on his changeup, which he throws with deceptive arm speed and nice fade. He has a fast arm and a clean arm action, and in a rarity for a high school arm, he has no obvious red flags.
I'll just leave this here without comment. Here are a few quotes from ESPN and BP's Chris Crawford in his draft book that was updated very soon before the 2013 draft.And the idea that Ball was 100% projection (posted earlier in the thread) or that there is a significant difference in the odds of Groome succeeding as compared to the odds that Ball would succeed on his draft day is folly.
Ball doesn’t repeat his delivery very well, and will need to make significant mechanical tweaks to his delivery if he wants to throw strikes and hit spots at the next level. There’s very little hip movement in the delivery, and he has an arm action that doesn’t enthrall me or some scouts that I’ve talked to.
Now compare that with what he was/is saying about GroomeIn the first edition, I chose to list Ball as an outfielder, because the general consensus I got from people was that he was being looked at more as a hitter than a pitcher. Now, the consensus seems to be going the other way. I, however, am one of those who believes that his long-term future is brighter in right field behind the plate....On the mound, I see a mid-rotation starter at his peak. I think he could be a future all-star if a team lets him hit, with the mound being a potential fallback if that doesn’t work out.
Groome is the top player on my board. He’s a southpaw who has shown two 70 pitches in his fastball and a disgusting curveball, and he’ll complement them with a pretty solid change as well. He’s had some command issues and that whole suspension thing, but he’s still the guy I’d take 1.1.
Groome was the top player on my board all year, and he's an absolute steal with this pick on paper. Both his fastball and curveball flash double-plus, and when he throws his change, its flashes above-average.
Ah, OK thanks. I guess it is good and bad news. On the plus side, he's not going to college for the sake of college. He's using all of his leverage toward lining up his pro career. I see that the slot is identified as 3.19 mil, so if he wants $4m, it's hard to picture the Sox being willing to let him walk over the $800k.One thing to note is the de-commit to Vandy will make him harder to sign. The story was that he wanted to go the JUCO path so that he'd be eligible again for next years draft if he didn't get the 4 mil rather than have to wait 2 years to be re-drafted if he went to Vandy
It doesn't stop there.I'll just leave this here without comment. Here are a few quotes from ESPN and BP's Chris Crawford in his draft book that was updated very soon before the 2013 draft.
Now compare that with what he was/is saying about Groome
This makes the Benintendi pick look even better.“I’ve been covering the draft since 2009, and this [2015 draft class] is easily the weakest class in terms of quality at the top and quantity overall that I’ve covered,” Christopher Crawford, Baseball Prospectus’s new senior prospect writer, told me via email. “[ESPN analyst Keith Law] and I have both joked that we’d prefer to just skip this year and combine it with next year, which — on paper — is the best I’ve seen.”
I think that's a legit possibility. Another possibility is that they have enough confidence with respect to Groome's number that they aren't worried about signing the rd 2-5 guys around slot. I tend towards the latter explanation, but I'm an optimist.Yeah, I'm mentally preparing for them to miss out on signing at least one or two of these guys. College juniors seem like they'd have all the leverage to hold out for more money since they could just go back to school and maybe improve their draft position next year.
Except they really dont have much leverage, since once you're drafted as a senior you have zero leverage. The decision is "Do I sign this year for $600k or go back next year and risk becoming one of those 10th round picks who signs for $5k"?Yeah, I'm mentally preparing for them to miss out on signing at least one or two of these guys. College juniors seem like they'd have all the leverage to hold out for more money since they could just go back to school and maybe improve their draft position next year.
Leverage is the name of the game, and high schoolers have a lot of it. Their other options may include Junior College or attendance at a 4-year University. If they select Junior College, they have the possibility of being drafted again four more times. If a 4-year University is selected, they may be drafted after their Junior and Senior years. Junior College players have the second most leverage. They may be drafted after their 1st and/or 2nd year of JuCo play. If they so choose, they can pass up signing with a professional team after their 2nd year of JuCo and sign with a 4-year University, starting as a Junior and still being draft eligible the following year. 4-year University Juniors have the leverage of coming back for their Senior season, and 4-year University Seniors have little leverage when negotiating a deal with the teams that select them. That said, a very talented Senior will earn more than a $1,000 bonus, based on the fact that the team wants to show good will towards someone who they hope will be a big contributor for their organization for years to come.
Second Round (No. 51 Overall): SS C.J. Chatham, Florida Atlantic
With many of the top college middle infielders expected to wind up sliding to second or third base, C.J. Chatham quickly emerged as the top option to actually stay at the position.
The Conference USA Player of the Year, Chatham hit .357/.422/.554 with 17 doubles, eight home runs and 50 RBI while continuing to show the defensive chops necessary to stay at the premium position.
Grade: A
Shortstop doesn't figure to be a need for quite some time in Boston thanks to Xander Bogaerts, but shortstop talent has become one of the most valuable currencies in today's game.
Edit: The board won't let me post the link for some reason. Keep getting a 404 page not found error, but it works in my browser just fine. You can find it by googling "Red Sox Draft Day 1" and scrolling through the links.After having Groome fall into their lap at No. 12 overall, the Red Sox managed to pick up the top college shortstop in this year's class at No. 51 overall. This probably isn't how they expected things to play out, but it was a great first day as the rich got richer in an already loaded system.
3B/SS Drew Mendoza from Lake Minneola High School in Minneola, FL is next at 43. At 6'4" 195, he's unlikely to stick at short, but has a plus arm and plus raw power so his ceiling at the hot corner is enticing. There is plenty of debate about how high that ceiling is, though. Florida State commit.Horn has added strength to his athletic 6-foot-2, 190-pound frame and has taken Northern California's prep ranks by storm this spring after pitching in the Area Code Games the last two summers. A California commit, Horn evokes comparisons physically to pitchers from Gerrit Cole to Brad Penny, and while he doesn't have Cole's upper-90s fuel at the same stage of development, he pitches with some of the aggression that marked both big league righthanders. He has energy in his delivery abut has body control and throws quality strikes with a lively mid-90s fastball that regularly reaches 96. Horn's changeup and breaking ball remain inconsistent and well behind his fastball, though his changeup has had its moments and his curveball shows proper spin and power at times.