So far

[donobr]

Crighton Ridge

[Mephistopheles]

Wow, I drive past there every morning during the summer when I go to work. I have a summer job at the Conroe YMCA.

[donobr]

Dunn ,he is still loyal to high school buddy who lives 3 miles away.is building home by Lake Conroe

[NorthsideAvenger]

So one team thought about taking him with the 29th pick in the draft? 29th. We had the 13th. In the first round - value wise - the difference is considerable. Not to mention the White Sox had a 2nd round, 3rd round and 4th round pick. The Cubs don't and liked the guy. That's understandable. So we decide to trade a top 15 pick for a third rounder and a first rounder whose odds of making the major leagues are lower than any one drafted in the first two rounds? It's a quick way to set your system back a year, when our system is manageable at best.

 

I disagree. This was NOT a good year for the draft. There was only ONE SURE-FIRE stud in the draft in Andrew Miller. Guys like Linecum, Bard, Rowell, and say Marrero and the like are pretty much boom or bust caliber players....including Tyler Colvin. Talent wise, part of me wish the Cubs would had taken Daniel Bard (dude, was throwing 98 mph in the 8th, with a very good breakin ball in the Nat'l Champ game) but oh well. To me there wasn't much value difference between 13 and 30. Players between 13-30 could had gone in any order. So it wasn't a "stretch" per se, it wasn't unexpected. And unexpected doesn't mean the pick of Tyler Colvin was a bad one, either.

 

As of right now, the Colvin pick looks horrible. He's going to have to prove me wrong. I'd love for Colvin to develop into a quality outfielder. It looks like he's going to end up being a guy with 15 HR power, .340 OBP skills and 10 SB with okay defense. He won't have enough power to play LF, that's a given. He probably won't be fast enough to play CF on a daily basis. So his projection is a 4th outfielder. I'm not going to give Wilken the benefit of the doubt just because his track record. I did that to Jim Hendry once. Look how he and Dusty has run the Cubs and their system into the ground.

 

Only to those, who like the "sexy" names like a Billy Rowell, or a Hank Conger, or a Travis Snider, or a Chris Marrero. Looks to me like the Colvin pick reaks of Hendry trying to get players who can contribute to the big club in no time. So he went with an OFer with limited potential, but IMO, Colvin has a better chance at reaching the "lower expectations" then say Snider or a Conger, who has "higher ceilings. In his first draft, I didn't mind drafting players whose potential was closer to the floor, then to the ceilings. It has worked for Oakland. Again, before we write off this draft as a "bust" (this draft will need Colvin, Sammy, and Rundle to produce, immediately, I admit) let's see what the kids can do. Don't write off the kids, because of the bitterness towards the franchsie. I could live with the .340 OBP with 15 hrs and prolly closer to 20 sbs, with solid defense in CF, anyday of the week. Speed isn't the only thing that matters in CF, and if Wilken believes this kid can play CF, Colvin will have to prove he can't, before I am concern.

 

 

Why take a gamble in the first round when you don't pick again until the fifth round when your system needs depth? It's like gambling away rent money.

 

Let me answer that question with this question....why not take the gamble? Alot of people were going to question the draft, and call it "failed draft" anyways. Why not roll the dice, on players who they feel can play and hope for the best. If Colvin can't prove to be anything more then a "4th OFer), or if Sammy elects to play NFL, or Rundle is a "bust", oh well nothing really lost. This wasn't a great draft. To me...taking a kid with characters issues like Drabek would have been "BAD" (remember Sisco, the kid still won't grow up, and I fill Drabek will be in the same mold) over a good character, good kid, solid baseball talents would have been disasterous.

 

Look, all I ever ask from my fellow Cubs fans, is stop being so short-sighted about the draft. This isn't the NBA/NFL when young players are expected to make an imediate impact. MLB draft is designed for the long-term, the big pictrue, so to speak. And Tim Wilken, and the Cubs have followed their draft picks longer then the Cubs fans, and I believe they did their homework. And call me naive, I trust Wilken. If they fail, fine....but don't say they fail because they are players you didn't want the Cubs to pick. Not fair to the kids.

[mg420]

So one team thought about taking him with the 29th pick in the draft? 29th. We had the 13th. In the first round - value wise - the difference is considerable. Not to mention the White Sox had a 2nd round, 3rd round and 4th round pick. The Cubs don't and liked the guy. That's understandable. So we decide to trade a top 15 pick for a third rounder and a first rounder whose odds of making the major leagues are lower than any one drafted in the first two rounds? It's a quick way to set your system back a year, when our system is manageable at best.

 

I disagree. This was NOT a good year for the draft. There was only ONE SURE-FIRE stud in the draft in Andrew Miller. Guys like Linecum, Bard, Rowell, and say Marrero and the like are pretty much boom or bust caliber players....including Tyler Colvin. Talent wise, part of me wish the Cubs would had taken Daniel Bard (dude, was throwing 98 mph in the 8th, with a very good breakin ball in the Nat'l Champ game) but oh well. To me there wasn't much value difference between 13 and 30. Players between 13-30 could had gone in any order. So it wasn't a "stretch" per se, it wasn't unexpected. And unexpected doesn't mean the pick of Tyler Colvin was a bad one, either.

 

As of right now, the Colvin pick looks horrible. He's going to have to prove me wrong. I'd love for Colvin to develop into a quality outfielder. It looks like he's going to end up being a guy with 15 HR power, .340 OBP skills and 10 SB with okay defense. He won't have enough power to play LF, that's a given. He probably won't be fast enough to play CF on a daily basis. So his projection is a 4th outfielder. I'm not going to give Wilken the benefit of the doubt just because his track record. I did that to Jim Hendry once. Look how he and Dusty has run the Cubs and their system into the ground.

 

Only to those, who like the "sexy" names like a Billy Rowell, or a Hank Conger, or a Travis Snider, or a Chris Marrero. Looks to me like the Colvin pick reaks of Hendry trying to get players who can contribute to the big club in no time. So he went with an OFer with limited potential, but IMO, Colvin has a better chance at reaching the "lower expectations" then say Snider or a Conger, who has "higher ceilings. In his first draft, I didn't mind drafting players whose potential was closer to the floor, then to the ceilings. It has worked for Oakland. Again, before we write off this draft as a "bust" (this draft will need Colvin, Sammy, and Rundle to produce, immediately, I admit) let's see what the kids can do. Don't write off the kids, because of the bitterness towards the franchsie. I could live with the .340 OBP with 15 hrs and prolly closer to 20 sbs, with solid defense in CF, anyday of the week. Speed isn't the only thing that matters in CF, and if Wilken believes this kid can play CF, Colvin will have to prove he can't, before I am concern.

 

 

Why take a gamble in the first round when you don't pick again until the fifth round when your system needs depth? It's like gambling away rent money.

 

Let me answer that question with this question....why not take the gamble? Alot of people were going to question the draft, and call it "failed draft" anyways. Why not roll the dice, on players who they feel can play and hope for the best. If Colvin can't prove to be anything more then a "4th OFer), or if Sammy elects to play NFL, or Rundle is a "bust", oh well nothing really lost. This wasn't a great draft. To me...taking a kid with characters issues like Drabek would have been "BAD" (remember Sisco, the kid still won't grow up, and I fill Drabek will be in the same mold) over a good character, good kid, solid baseball talents would have been disasterous.

 

Look, all I ever ask from my fellow Cubs fans, is stop being so short-sighted about the draft. This isn't the NBA/NFL when young players are expected to make an imediate impact. MLB draft is designed for the long-term, the big pictrue, so to speak. And Tim Wilken, and the Cubs have followed their draft picks longer then the Cubs fans, and I believe they did their homework. And call me naive, I trust Wilken. If they fail, fine....but don't say they fail because they are players you didn't want the Cubs to pick. Not fair to the kids.

 

nicley stated imo.

[larhur]

I believe that the Cubs were trying to survive in a draft that they only had two picks in the first 5 rounds in a bad draft class. Now several players drafted in the lower rounds will make it to the majors in 3-4 years. lets give it time, maybe one of ours

[Soul]

[http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/askba/261494.html

 

Try this on for size, Soul

 

The pick wasn't as big of a reach as the difference between where Colvin went and where we ranked him on our Top 200 Prospects list might have made it seem.

 

I know of at least one other club that would have considered taking him late in the first round, and my first phone call this morning was from a scout from a third team that thought Colvin was an astute pick at No. 13.

 

But Chicago's Tim Wilken may have the best track record of any scouting director out there--that's a project I need to tackle some day--and I'll give him the benefit of the doubt for now.

 

Colvin's situation is similar to that of Bowling Green State outfielder Nolan Reimold a year ago. He didn't make our Top 200 because he went into a slump trying to impress crosscheckers as we were putting it together, yet he went in the second round to the Orioles. And he has looked like a bargain ever since.

 

Look, Jim Callis mentioned he prolly wouldn't take Colvin at 13, but then that is still based on opinion. Yes...Colvin was a stretch at 13, but NOT, I repeat NOT an outreagous reach as some are overblowing.

 

So, I trust Tim Wilken ability to judge talent, and if he believe Tyler Colvin is worth the gamble at 13, then WHO is anybody to argue with him.

 

That's pretty funny. The guy admits they had Colvin picked 170th, then goes on to basically say BA's rankings mean nothing. Perhaps Callis ought to recommend a change in the way they do their rankings then?

 

And he still says it's a reach, but not an extreme one. I disagree. And there was no reason for the Cubs to make this kind of a high-gamble pick with literally a ton of other, less risky picks waiting on the boards. 143 of them, to be exact. By BA's own count, that is.

 

As for trusting Wilkin---not sure why a guy who hasn't had a single position player come out of his minor league system to make the All-Star team for his club becomes sacrosanct, but I'm not buying it. Certainly not because Callis thinks so, you can bet on that.

 

Show me an All-Star position player who was drafted and came up through our system to play for the CUBS, and I'll start taking Mr. Wilken's reaches on "faith." Not before.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

As for trusting Wilkin---not sure why a guy who hasn't had a single position player come out of his minor league system to make the All-Star team for his club becomes sacrosanct, but I'm not buying it. Certainly not because Callis thinks so, you can bet on that.

 

I think it has to do with his track record for producing major league talent. He had 12 straight 1st round picks make it to the bigs. That's pretty darn impressive.

[goonys evil twin]

As for trusting Wilkin---not sure why a guy who hasn't had a single position player come out of his minor league system to make the All-Star team for his club becomes sacrosanct, but I'm not buying it. Certainly not because Callis thinks so, you can bet on that.

 

I think it has to do with his track record for producing major league talent. He had 12 straight 1st round picks make it to the bigs. That's pretty darn impressive.

 

Guys reaching the bigs is nice and all, but that doesn't win championships. You need to draft impact players.

[Soul]

As for trusting Wilkin---not sure why a guy who hasn't had a single position player come out of his minor league system to make the All-Star team for his club becomes sacrosanct, but I'm not buying it. Certainly not because Callis thinks so, you can bet on that.

 

I think it has to do with his track record for producing major league talent. He had 12 straight 1st round picks make it to the bigs. That's pretty darn impressive.

 

Guys reaching the bigs is nice and all, but that doesn't win championships. You need to draft impact players.

 

That does seem like a pretty low standard to me as well. So I guess if Neifi had been picked in the 1st round we could chalk up another big success to Mr. Wilkin.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

Wilken provided the Blue Jays system with sufficient talent. What they did with it should not fall on him. He gave them Shannon Stewart, Chris Carpenter, Billy Koch, Roy Halladay, Vernon Wells, Alex Rios, etc.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

That's pretty funny. The guy admits they had Colvin picked 170th, then goes on to basically say BA's rankings mean nothing. Perhaps Callis ought to recommend a change in the way they do their rankings then?

 

And he still says it's a reach, but not an extreme one. I disagree. And there was no reason for the Cubs to make this kind of a high-gamble pick with literally a ton of other, less risky picks waiting on the boards. 143 of them, to be exact. By BA's own count, that is.

 

What Callis is trying to say is Colvin was still rising after BA finished its last rankings, 2 days prior to the draft. He wasn't the 170th rated player anymore, closer to the 30th rated player. Obviously still a reach (and a pick I didn't like), but not as colossal a reach as the 170th best player in the draft.

 

As for trusting Wilkin---not sure why a guy who hasn't had a single position player come out of his minor league system to make the All-Star team for his club becomes sacrosanct, but I'm not buying it. Certainly not because Callis thinks so, you can bet on that.

 

Uhh, I believe Wilken's biggest first round reach - Vernon Wells - has made the all-star game before.

[goonys evil twin]

What Callis is trying to say is Colvin was still rising after BA finished its last rankings, 2 days prior to the draft. He wasn't the 170th rated player anymore, closer to the 30th rated player. Obviously still a reach (and a pick I didn't like), but not as colossal a reach as the 170th best player in the draft.

 

I wonder where he would have been after the CWS, where he looked absolutely pitiful.

[Soul]

Vernon Wells? That was 9 years ago!!

 

 

Plus, all this talk of Colvin "shooting up" the draft boards. Not sure I buy into the validity of that. I know it happens, don't get me wrong. But it has been my observation over the years----not just in baseball but in any draft----that these late-cycle jumps in draft position are something that should be taken with a grain of salt.

 

Here's a good example: Michael Haynes. Nobody thought he would be much more than a very late 1st rounder, more likely 2nd rounder in the NFL draft. But---he has a dominant senior bowl, and suddenly he's shooting up the draft boards. So the Bears take him at 14. But you know what? Ultimately the original value that was placed on him was probably the right one, because we found out in fairly short order that his talent level just wasn't upper-half 1st round.

 

I would tend to go with the original ranking of 170, rather than buy into a late surge up to as high as perhaps 30 on Colvin.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Vernon Wells? That was 9 years ago!!

 

He's a part of Wilken's great track record. And you said Wilken hadn't ever draft an all-star position player. Now you want a time limit on when he can draft his all star position players?

 

Plus, all this talk of Colvin "shooting up" the draft boards. Not sure I buy into the validity of that. I know it happens, don't get me wrong. But it has been my observation over the years----not just in baseball but in any draft----that these late-cycle jumps in draft position are something that should be taken with a grain of salt.

 

Here's a good example: Michael Haynes. Nobody thought he would be much more than a very late 1st rounder, more likely 2nd rounder in the NFL draft. But---he has a dominant senior bowl, and suddenly he's shooting up the draft boards. So the Bears take him at 14. But you know what? Ultimately the original value that was placed on him was probably the right one, because we found out in fairly short order that his talent level just wasn't upper-half 1st round.

 

I don't disagree that Colvin is a reach and that he really doesn't seem like a top-13 pitck. I'm just pointing out there's merit to the talk that he was rated too low by BA. This same thing happened with Lance Broadway last year, and the White Sox ended up taking him in the first round. Right now, he's doing pretty well at AA. There is merit to the late, quick-rising college player.

 

I would tend to go with the original ranking of 170, rather than buy into a late surge up to as high as perhaps 30 on Colvin.

 

Given the body of writing that has come out since draft day, I think you're wrong. At least two other clubs would have taken him in the first round (one being the White Sox) and scouts rated him the second best college OF behind Stubbs and heck. It's still a reach and a disappointing pick, but not the monumental reach you want to make it out to be.

 

As for you saying Callis should change the way BA ranks their players (which you said earlier but I just noticed now), I don't know why they should have to do that when they screw up ranking a couple of players a year: they do this because they don't release another ranking of prospects the day before, mainly because they are tending to the phones to do a last minute mock draft (which tends to have an 80%+ success rate).

[TruffleShuffle]

Vernon Wells? That was 9 years ago!!

 

If it makes you feel better, Alexis Rios will probably make it this year too.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

Vernon Wells? That was 9 years ago!!

 

If it makes you feel better, Alexis Rios will probably make it this year too.

 

Vern deserves to go again too.

[TruffleShuffle]

Vernon Wells? That was 9 years ago!!

 

If it makes you feel better, Alexis Rios will probably make it this year too.

 

Vern deserves to go again too.

 

He has to go. If there are 6 outfielders better than him in the AL, I'd like to meet them. One could argue he's been the best AL outfielder so far, although Manny Ramirez and Jermaine Dye (wtf??) would have to factor into the discussion.

[Soul]

Given the body of writing that has come out since draft day, I think you're wrong. At least two other clubs would have taken him in the first round (one being the White Sox) and scouts rated him the second best college OF behind Stubbs and heck. It's still a reach and a disappointing pick, but not the monumental reach you want to make it out to be.

 

As for you saying Callis should change the way BA ranks their players (which you said earlier but I just noticed now), I don't know why they should have to do that when they screw up ranking a couple of players a year: they do this because they don't release another ranking of prospects the day before, mainly because they are tending to the phones to do a last minute mock draft (which tends to have an 80%+ success rate).

 

Well---I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on it then. I turn a very skeptical eye to what I consider to be the hysteria of an approaching draft and what it does to players and their value. I'd go with the original ranking, which is based off a much larger body of work---pretty much his entire young career as a player, rather than the spurt, which is based on supposed "enlightenment" which occurs right before a draft. I've seen these things happen quite a bit, and because of my perception on it, I believe Colvin is a huge reach. The articles I quoted earlier are from some folks who I believe are doing the same thing: disregarding the momentary hysteria of the draft in favor of what they consider to be the true, earlier assessment of the player.

 

It's like when you get into a court room with a witness who suddenly changes his/her testimony. Do you just believe the brand new stuff in the heat of the moment? Not me---I tend to go with what was solidified during much, much cooler times.

 

That said, it's about opinions and I really do hope Colvin works out. I don't want anyone to think I'll be rooting against him or something. Far from it.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Given the body of writing that has come out since draft day, I think you're wrong. At least two other clubs would have taken him in the first round (one being the White Sox) and scouts rated him the second best college OF behind Stubbs and heck. It's still a reach and a disappointing pick, but not the monumental reach you want to make it out to be.

 

As for you saying Callis should change the way BA ranks their players (which you said earlier but I just noticed now), I don't know why they should have to do that when they screw up ranking a couple of players a year: they do this because they don't release another ranking of prospects the day before, mainly because they are tending to the phones to do a last minute mock draft (which tends to have an 80%+ success rate).

 

Well---I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on it then. I turn a very skeptical eye to what I consider to be the hysteria of an approaching draft and what it does to players and their value. I'd go with the original ranking, which is based off a much larger body of work---pretty much his entire young career as a player, rather than the spurt, which is based on supposed "enlightenment" which occurs right before a draft. I've seen these things happen quite a bit, and because of my perception on it, I believe Colvin is a huge reach. The articles I quoted earlier are from some folks who I believe are doing the same thing: disregarding the momentary hysteria of the draft in favor of what they consider to be the true, earlier assessment of the player.

 

It's like when you get into a court room with a witness who suddenly changes his/her testimony. Do you just believe the brand new stuff in the heat of the moment? Not me---I tend to go with what was solidified during much, much cooler times.

 

That said, it's about opinions and I really do hope Colvin works out. I don't want anyone to think I'll be rooting against him or something. Far from it.

 

Unlike the NBA and NFL drafts, in MLB these guys are still playing come draft time, so it's far more believable when they go up the draft boards. They aren't rising up because of strong performances in individual workouts or combines here. An improved performance during the season would more likely be able to carry over than the rising stock of a combine warrior.

 

On the whole, quick risers are more likely in the MLB draft than in NBA/NFL since players fade or become top prospects so much more quickly (it's really easily to suddenly gain or lose 5 mph on the fastball or gain or lose HR power).

 

I never doubted you would be rooting against him, nor will I even though I don't think the Cubs should have picked him.

[NorthsideAvenger]

Look, if people don't like the pick, fine, but don't get down on Colvin, because of the bitterness towards the franchise.

 

This WAS NOT A GREAT DRAFT, people, and Hendry wanted players who would reach the "floor" instead of "ceilings." Again, it's work for the A's. So, instead of looking at the short-term, look at the long-term of this draft. IMO, there will be atleast 5-10 players from this draft to play in the majors.

[Outshined_One]

IMO, there will be atleast 5-10 players from this draft to play in the majors.

 

All of them for the Marlins and Orioles.

[goonys evil twin]

IMO, there will be atleast 5-10 players from this draft to play in the majors.

 

What? Where do you come up with a random stat like that? First of all, just playing in the majors doesn't mean a darn thing. It doesn't mean a guy was a good draft pick or that he "made it". A cup of coffee is worthless, while a couple years of suckitude doesn't mean anything either. Secondly, when was the last time the Cubs had 10 guys from a draft make the majors? This sounds like blind optimism to me with no basis of support.

 

You don't want people to diss Colvin just because he was drafted by an inept franchise. Well why don't you stop pretending these guys are all great just because they were drafted by the Cubs?

[Guest]

When was the last time ANY team had a draft where 10 guys reached the bigs?

[Derwood]

Following the Spikes here, I can say there were at least 4 or 5 guys that the Cardinals picked WAY after Colvin who I would love in the Cubs organization.

 

1B Mark Hamilton (Tulane) leads the NYPL with 6 HR in 19 games.

RHP Adam Ottavino (1st round pick) has yet to give up an earned run in 4 starts.

 

and the list goes on.