Oops part 2

[imb]

Travis Snider .325/.412/.567/.979 30BB in 197 AB

 

Tyler Colvin .282/.329/.455/.784 15BB in 220 AB

 

Thanks Wilken

[Soriano12]

Travis Snider .325/.412/.567/.979 30BB in 197 AB

 

Tyler Colvin .282/.329/.455/.784 15BB in 220 AB

 

Thanks Wilken

 

:roll:

 

Thats some sample size you got there

[imb]

Travis Snider .325/.412/.567/.979 30BB in 197 AB

 

Tyler Colvin .282/.329/.455/.784 15BB in 220 AB

 

Thanks Wilken

 

:roll:

 

Thats some sample size you got there

 

Colvin is also 3 years older. I forgot to mention that.

[mg420]

Travis Snider .325/.412/.567/.979 30BB in 197 AB

 

Tyler Colvin .282/.329/.455/.784 15BB in 220 AB

 

Thanks Wilken

 

snider should start writing his hall of fame speech soon.

[Milli1306]

Brooks Kieschnieck (sp?) would like to nominate Snider for the Hall, David Kelton, Nic Jackson, and Kevin Orie support the decision as well

[Ding Dong Johnson]

Neifi Perez as a Cub in 2004: 371/400/548/948

 

Give them time.

[sporrer17]

I was a big fan of Snider at the time of the draft, but I have no problem whatsoever with Colvin, and even though it may look like a bad call now, give it time.

 

Remember this, some people preferred Juan Cruz to Carlos Zambrano at one point...give it 5 years or so, then judge it.

[Laura]

Neifi Perez as a Cub in 2004: 371/400/548/948

 

Give them time.

 

I'm not quite sure what to think about this. :arrow:

[imb]

The point is, Snider was much, much more highly regarded come draft time than our own Tyler Colvin was. 200 at bats later, Colvin looks like he may never be a starter, while Snider looks like he has boat loads of potential.

 

I'm not looking at 200 ab's and saying that Snider is god's gift to outfielders, I'm saying that pre-draft, Snider was a better prospect, and post draft he's a better prospect.

 

Be honest, who would you rather have, the young guy with great numbers or the older guy with mediocre numbers. That's retorical by the way.

[NorthsideAvenger]

The point is, Snider was much, much more highly regarded come draft time than our own Tyler Colvin was. 200 at bats later, Colvin looks like he may never be a starter, while Snider looks like he has boat loads of potential.

 

I'm not looking at 200 ab's and saying that Snider is god's gift to outfielders, I'm saying that pre-draft, Snider was a better prospect, and post draft he's a better prospect.

 

Be honest, who would you rather have, the young guy with great numbers or the older guy with mediocre numbers. That's retorical by the way.

 

And Snider has a higher chance of never living up to his potential, while Colvin could reach his ceiling. If Colvin develops into a Mark Kotsay type player, then I have NO problem with the Cubs taking him, over another HSer, WHO MIGHT reach his potential.

 

Besides, you don't compare THAT yr's draft picks, so soon after the draft. You can't really critique the draft, till atleast 1 and 1/2 yrs later. Meaning come back at the end of the 2007 with those criticism.

[Soriano12]

I'll give Wilken the benefit of the doubt for now.

 

His first round track record speaks for itself.

[sporrer17]

I would have loved to get Snider, but I have no problem with the Cubs starting to go for low risk/low ceiling guys rather than the Corey Patterson/Brian Dopirak/Ryan Harvey type guys who will either be great or absolutely worthless.

 

Sometimes it's better just to get a sure major leaguer rather than risk drafting a guy that high that won't even make it.

[harrdb00]

Travis Snider .325/.412/.567/.979 30BB in 197 AB

 

Tyler Colvin .282/.329/.455/.784 15BB in 220 AB

 

Thanks Wilken

 

I'm sorry, but this is one of the dumbest posts I've seen on here in a while (and that says a lot). Are you really going to judge a draft based on 200 ABs at the low-A level?

 

I think it is silly to believe that people know more than the Cubs scouts who watch these players play, because they read something online.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Travis Snider .325/.412/.567/.979 30BB in 197 AB

 

Tyler Colvin .282/.329/.455/.784 15BB in 220 AB

 

Thanks Wilken

 

I'm sorry, but this is one of the dumbest posts I've seen on here in a while (and that says a lot). Are you really going to judge a draft based on 200 ABs at the low-A level?

 

I think it is silly to believe that people know more than the Cubs scouts who watch these players play, because they read something online.

 

But is it silly to believe that publications and other teams who rated Snider higher than Colvin know more than the Cubs scouts? Because I think it was clear that most teams and most scouting publications, and therefore more scouts, etc viewed Snider as the better player.

[harrdb00]

Travis Snider .325/.412/.567/.979 30BB in 197 AB

 

Tyler Colvin .282/.329/.455/.784 15BB in 220 AB

 

Thanks Wilken

 

I'm sorry, but this is one of the dumbest posts I've seen on here in a while (and that says a lot). Are you really going to judge a draft based on 200 ABs at the low-A level?

 

I think it is silly to believe that people know more than the Cubs scouts who watch these players play, because they read something online.

 

But is it silly to believe that publications and other teams who rated Snider higher than Colvin know more than the Cubs scouts? Because I think it was clear that most teams and most scouting publications, and therefore more scouts, etc viewed Snider as the better player.

 

So many of those publications were written months before the draft, ignoring the fact that Colvin came on strong towards the end. I guess the point of my post is that give Wilken time. I wouldn't call it a failure after 200 AB's.

[jkrapfl]

Travis Snider .325/.412/.567/.979 30BB in 197 AB

 

Tyler Colvin .282/.329/.455/.784 15BB in 220 AB

 

Thanks Wilken

 

I'm sorry, but this is one of the dumbest posts I've seen on here in a while (and that says a lot). Are you really going to judge a draft based on 200 ABs at the low-A level?

 

I think it is silly to believe that people know more than the Cubs scouts who watch these players play, because they read something online.

 

But is it silly to believe that publications and other teams who rated Snider higher than Colvin know more than the Cubs scouts? Because I think it was clear that most teams and most scouting publications, and therefore more scouts, etc viewed Snider as the better player.

 

So many of those publications were written months before the draft, ignoring the fact that Colvin came on strong towards the end. I guess the point of my post is that give Wilken time. I wouldn't call it a failure after 200 AB's.

 

So, you're saying its silly for IMB to judge a player based on 200 ABs, but its perfectly fine for Cub scouts to judge a player based on the fact that he came on strong at the end of the season?

[Bruno7481]

Yes, because it is all so clear after 200 minor league AB's.

 

No disrespect to anyone, but this is Wilken's job, I trust that he knows what he is doing.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Yes, because it is all so clear after 200 minor league AB's.

 

No disrespect to anyone, but this is Wilken's job, I trust that he knows what he is doing.

 

But isn't also the other teams' jobs too when they had other players ranked ahead of Colvin.

 

Using the fact that the Cubs drafted him is the lamest cop out ever.

 

The Colvin pick was question by people who's job it is to know about these things the moment they are made. By your argument, we should trust all of Baker's moves because it's his job. We should also trust Jim Hendry because it is his job as well.

 

That's pretty ridiculous to me. I'm not saying that the Colvin pick will or won't be a bust. What I am saying is that there's a whole lot more evidence now, these 200 AB's included but not limited to the 200 AB's, that Colvin was a reach pick and that players taken after him in the first round will be much better players in the major leagues.

 

It appears that most teams felt this way and that the Cubs either saw something others didn't or messed up the pick. Maybe Wilken did make the right pick and maybe it is too early to tell, but I think there are other people who were also "doing their jobs" that think it wasn't the most prudent pick at that draft slot and the early returns are backing up that assessment.

[Bruno7481]

Yes, because it is all so clear after 200 minor league AB's.

 

No disrespect to anyone, but this is Wilken's job, I trust that he knows what he is doing.

 

But isn't also the other teams' jobs too when they had other players ranked ahead of Colvin.

 

Using the fact that the Cubs drafted him is the lamest cop out ever.

 

The Colvin pick was question by people who's job it is to know about these things the moment they are made. By your argument, we should trust all of Baker's moves because it's his job. We should also trust Jim Hendry because it is his job as well.

 

That's pretty ridiculous to me. I'm not saying that the Colvin pick will or won't be a bust. What I am saying is that there's a whole lot more evidence now, these 200 AB's included but not limited to the 200 AB's, that Colvin was a reach pick and that players taken after him in the first round will be much better players in the major leagues.

 

It appears that most teams felt this way and that the Cubs either saw something others didn't or messed up the pick. Maybe Wilken did make the right pick and maybe it is too early to tell, but I think there are other people who were also "doing their jobs" that think it wasn't the most prudent pick at that draft slot and the early returns are backing up that assessment.

 

How do you know where other teams had Colvin ranked?

 

This was an odd draft, with the absence of 2nd, 3rd, and 4th round picks. There have been some that said the Colvin pick was in conjunction with the amount of money Smardzjia got in the 5th.

 

I disagree with your statement here:

 

"What I am saying is that there's a whole lot more evidence now, these 200 AB's included but not limited to the 200 AB's, that Colvin was a reach pick and that players taken after him in the first round will be much better players in the major leagues."

 

Are you saying that you can prove, beyond a doubt how much success these players are going to have in the major leagues based off of 2 months in the minor leagues? You have no way of knowing how much, or how little success a player will have in the future in the Major Leagues, after two months and 200 AB"s.

 

That is ridiculous to me.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

This was an odd draft, with the absence of 2nd, 3rd, and 4th round picks. There have been some that said the Colvin pick was in conjunction with the amount of money Smardzjia got in the 5th.

 

That's been shown as wrong (not saying you're the one saying that the Colvin pick was in conjunction with Samardizja).

 

Colvin got less-than-slot money, but not by much ($1.475 million). Samardzija received $250,000, but won't receive anywhere near the reported $7+ million unless he stays in baseball for a few years. The second and third biggest bonuses the Cubs gave were for Chris Huseby ($1.3 million) in the 11th round and Drew Rundle ($500,000) in the 14th round.

[Bruno7481]

This was an odd draft, with the absence of 2nd, 3rd, and 4th round picks. There have been some that said the Colvin pick was in conjunction with the amount of money Smardzjia got in the 5th.

 

That's been shown as wrong (not saying you're the one saying that the Colvin pick was in conjunction with Samardizja).

 

Colvin got less-than-slot money, but not by much ($1.475 million). Samardzija received $250,000, but won't receive anywhere near the reported $7 million unless he stays in baseball for a few years. The second and third biggest bonuses the Cubs gave were for Chris Huseby ($1.3 million) in the 11th round and Drew Rundle ($500,000) in the 14th round.

 

Thanks...

 

My biggest point still is the fact that at this point in time you can't say who will, or who won't have the better major league career. Some of these kids might not even make it that far. It is impossible to tell at this point.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Yes, because it is all so clear after 200 minor league AB's.

 

No disrespect to anyone, but this is Wilken's job, I trust that he knows what he is doing.

 

But isn't also the other teams' jobs too when they had other players ranked ahead of Colvin.

 

Using the fact that the Cubs drafted him is the lamest cop out ever.

 

The Colvin pick was question by people who's job it is to know about these things the moment they are made. By your argument, we should trust all of Baker's moves because it's his job. We should also trust Jim Hendry because it is his job as well.

 

That's pretty ridiculous to me. I'm not saying that the Colvin pick will or won't be a bust. What I am saying is that there's a whole lot more evidence now, these 200 AB's included but not limited to the 200 AB's, that Colvin was a reach pick and that players taken after him in the first round will be much better players in the major leagues.

 

It appears that most teams felt this way and that the Cubs either saw something others didn't or messed up the pick. Maybe Wilken did make the right pick and maybe it is too early to tell, but I think there are other people who were also "doing their jobs" that think it wasn't the most prudent pick at that draft slot and the early returns are backing up that assessment.

 

How do you know where other teams had Colvin ranked?

 

This was an odd draft, with the absence of 2nd, 3rd, and 4th round picks. There have been some that said the Colvin pick was in conjunction with the amount of money Smardzjia got in the 5th.

 

I disagree with your statement here:

 

"What I am saying is that there's a whole lot more evidence now, these 200 AB's included but not limited to the 200 AB's, that Colvin was a reach pick and that players taken after him in the first round will be much better players in the major leagues."

 

Are you saying that you can prove, beyond a doubt how much success these players are going to have in the major leagues based off of 2 months in the minor leagues? You have no way of knowing how much, or how little success a player will have in the future in the Major Leagues, after two months and 200 AB"s.

 

That is ridiculous to me.

 

I'm not arguing that those 200 AB's are the main predictor. And no, 200 ABs do not predict what a player will do in the majors. But those AB's do back-up, at least for now that the Cubs made a "reach pick" by taking Colvin. At least up to this point, those 200 AB's are a further indicator along with all the other reasons that scouts, publications, and teams had Snider ranked ahead of Colvin. To this point, Colvin has done nothing to warrant his pick over Snider.

 

While it may be ridiculous to base a decision on 200 AB's, that point would be stronger if those 200 AB's didn't support the conclusions that these publications, scouts, and other teams had already made. While I can't offer definitive proof that other teams ranked Snider ahead of Colvin, I have no reason to trust publications who have information from insiders suggesting just that.

 

Even if taking Smarjada was being thought of as making up for the loss of the 2-4 rd picks, it still makes sense to take the better player in the first round and hence get value at two picks. Colvin very well may prove everyone wrong and further validate Wilken as a good drafter. I'll be the first to admit the jury is still out. But, at this point, it appears the Cubs could have had better players than the one they selected. While that may be forgiveable when you take the pick that everyone says should be selected there....it becomes a big error when eveyone says it was a mistake at the time and is still proven to be a mistake later. Right now, it appears to be a mistake. I hope for the Cubs sake it isn't, but the early (key emphasis) on early returns are that is was a mistake to take Colvin with that pick.

 

You may find it ridiculous. I find it an appropriate use of the info that we have available.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

This was an odd draft, with the absence of 2nd, 3rd, and 4th round picks. There have been some that said the Colvin pick was in conjunction with the amount of money Smardzjia got in the 5th.

 

That's been shown as wrong (not saying you're the one saying that the Colvin pick was in conjunction with Samardizja).

 

Colvin got less-than-slot money, but not by much ($1.475 million). Samardzija received $250,000, but won't receive anywhere near the reported $7 million unless he stays in baseball for a few years. The second and third biggest bonuses the Cubs gave were for Chris Huseby ($1.3 million) in the 11th round and Drew Rundle ($500,000) in the 14th round.

 

Thanks...

 

My biggest point still is the fact that at this point in time you can't say who will, or who won't have the better major league career. Some of these kids might not even make it that far. It is impossible to tell at this point.

 

You are correct that it is impossible to tell, but the Colvin pick was criticized by almost everyone as a reach at the time it was made. I think the point the original poster was making is that two months into their careers, it still looks like a reach.

[Bruno7481]

I'm just not ready to proclaim the value of the pick this soon. I don't think it is as simple as looking at the stats this early and drawing the ultimate conclusion. Colvin may turn out to be a dud, who knows. Snider may be the next Pujols. Point is, none of that can be decided right now.

 

Colvin hasn't been that bad, admittley not as good as Snider. But things can change over time.

 

In 2 years maybe you can come to that conclusion without a doubt, but not after two months.

 

If scouts, publications, and insiders spoke the gospel Pujols would have went #1 a few years back. But he didn't, nobody had him ranked hardly at all.

 

That is an extreme example of course, but brought up to prove they aren't always right.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

I would have preferred Drabek or Snyder, but I have faith in Wilken given his track record.