2018 Actual MLB Draft Day(s) Thread

[craig]

...I think the biggest issue I had with Richan is simply that, at the moment, it felt like a high floor guy. .... .... I still don't love Richan ... but the system is the system, and [highlight=yellow]there is a need for underslot guys.[/highlight]

 

I don't really follow the "system is the system, and there is a need for underslot" logic, with regards to Richan and the Cubs draft.

Unless there are some surprises ahead.

 

With Davis signing for $1.1 slot, why would there be any "need" to underslot in the Richan pick? I may be wrong, but I don't imagine Roederer or Franklin are getting $0.5M over..... With Davis and Hoerner signing for slot, they could certainly have covered Roederer with overage, and taken a full-slot guy at Richan's pick. I don't think they had to go cheap, or had to significantly compromise quality (as perceived by Cub scouts).

 

If they didn't need to, then why did they? I hypothesize that they just liked the guy, and viewed the subslot not as a need but as an opportunity. If they like the guy just as well as slot guys, why not take the equally good Richan AND free up the cash? Win-win.

 

I may be wrong. Maybe they love both Roederer and Franklin, and need to hit $1M for each of them or close. *IF* they like Franlin to the tune of >$800K, then they needed to create some cash somewhere. (If so, I'm actually more excited about Franklin, that would be pretty intriguing)

 

But I'm kinda thinking they just scouted Richan as being worth the pick, with the sub-slot cash freed as being value added. Kind of how they talk about Schwarber.

[craig]

It will be interesting to see how the Cubs spending does play out. How much will Roederer and franklin get?

 

I've kind of gotten used to Cubs going senior-sign cheap in rounds 8-10, sometimes 7 too. But some things may be different this year? Paying Artis a little OVER in round 7? Reynolds almost full in 10? I wonder if, with other teams often dropping out in rounds 7-10, if they've felt that by going slot in those rounds, they can actually get some good value on guys who want to sign and want the status of being 2nd-day picks?

 

There was reference to "decent" offer to 28th round pick Parker. Maybe they do think there are also some guys who'd sign for $150+ on 3rd day, and with two rookie-league teams they want to add more volume? Will we see a couple of 3rd-days who get modest overslot? Not huge, but $100K here or there?

 

Hard to figure the value of sub-slotting richan without knowing what the cash gets spent on; and then it will take years to figure if any of that is worthwhile.

[craig]

He has [highlight=yellow]less fastball[/highlight] than all of them, and [highlight=yellow]doesn't even flash a plus secondary[/highlight] like each of those 3 you listed. Those are the big reasons why he was knocked around all year at the college level. It's not always a great thing to throw strikes when your [highlight=yellow]stuff is as mediocre as Richan's[/highlight].

 

From what I see when I read - his peak fastball velocity isn’t as high as the others mostly never showed that in the pros anyway. Otherwise those guys don’t really have anything over him that really really matters. Johnson had his breaking ball but a significant injury history and mediocre mound skills. Skulina was tall or something but didn't have any standout skills, tools, or performance. Stinnet's big skill was missing bats that one year but otherwise didn't have much going for him. Richan just seems more well rounded. He gave up hits in college but wasn’t really knocked around - not many XBHs or HRs (6 HRs his last two seasons over 166+ IP, including just 1 in 2017), and the quantity of hits could be a product of being a groundball guy in front of a college defense. I don't really see scattering some hits as a more damning flaw than lots of injuries, no discernible skills, or being a one trick pony. I believe there's more to work with here than is being credited..

 

Tom, I think your point is well taken.

Why are we sure Richan's a bad pick? Logic Premises: 1. Slow bad fastball 2. No good secondary 3. Overall mediocre stuff. Evidence to support premises: Proven bad ERA, lots of hits, several very lukewarm media scouting reports. Given the premises, the conclusion of bad pick and limited upside seem fair.

 

Tom, I think your comparison to failed picks is somewhat non-helpful. Saying he's no worse than a bunch of busts doesn't really help; we want somebody better! Still, those guys each had stuff to hope on. Johnson throws plenty hard, and has a plenty good secondary pitch, at times. Excellent stuff. Vandy coach-Cubs coordinator-Brewers coach loved him, and projected him as a high-end control guy with a plus/fast fastball and a plus slider, and a promising change. Skulina's reports had a big fastball and a very promising slider. So, based on what media reports told us, each of those looked to have promising big-league stuff, reason to hope. In each case, the control/command never came, and in Skulina's case the pro velocity declined. But, there were reasons to hope. Any prospect, the hope assumes they will develop and improve, and control/command is always part of the hope for pitchers; not that many draft-picks have big-league control already during draft spring.

 

Richan seems to have less velocity than any of them, and no single pitch that's been ID'd as excellent.... by us on this board or by the limited media scouting reports.

 

But I'm inclined to kinda trust the Cubs scouts.

1. They've got 20+ of them, and tools to be measuring spin rates and stuff. Maybe they see healthy spin rates and DO see already good secondaries with potential for plus secondaries?

2. Media reports were mediocre/slow fastball; McLeod talked about 94 regularly.

3. Seems like most of the good pitchers in the league are mostly working in the 90-93 range most of the time anyway, so while Richan's doesn't seem fast, it may be in the same standard range where most guys work, and probably as fast as Lange or any of the picks last year. Perhaps they feel his velocity is just fine, and not much different from Darvish or Chatwood, or the Brewers guys who have been shutting us out?

4. This will sound cheesy, but yeah, I do tend to figure that when the Cubs pick a guy, they do it with a lot of info and in a thoughtful, logical, well-reasoned way. I don't know what their scouting input was, but I just kinda assume they had thorough scouting that justifies the pick where it was made.

5. Think a lot of their recent college pitchers have been doing reasonably well. Lange, Abbott, Thompson, Uelman, all are doing pretty well, and Little was getting better too. Thomas and Lacy also. Hatch, Miller, Robinson, Rucker, those guys have been doing pretty decent also. So, maybe the Cubs scouting deserves a little benefit-of-the-doubt? I understand the converse too, though; not sure any of those guys have stuff to go beyond decent A+/AA pitchers. Not sure yet whether any of them will have enough stuff to win in the majors. So, I understand the logic that maybe the Cubs scouts do NOT desrve any benefit-of-the-doubt, at leat not yet....

 

I looked at Richan's numbers, and I may not be recalling right or maybe didn't calculate right but I think his BABIP-against was like >.350 this season. Crazy high. Perhaps that reflects really blah stuff; or that his low walk-rate is just because he'll groove a meatball fastball rather than allow a walk. Totally possible. But maybe he really did just have a lot of bad luck, and bad defense.

 

Hoping he works out well and the cubs scouts are vindicated.

[javy knows my name]

I will give you $10 if you can prove you read that whole post

[CaliforniaRaisin]

https://cubscentral.wordpress.com/2018/06/12/inside-the-draft-process-good-stuff-from-sam-hughes-via-mick-gillispie-and-eric-cain/

 

This year, those highest scores went to second round pick Brennen Davis. Hughes described Davis as super athletic with an amazing presence and an engaging personality.

 

It was strange to hear a national crosschecker give a lot of thanks to the R&D part of the Cubs’ scouting service, but it is the 21st century.

 

Hughes also brought up compensation pick Cole Roederer as a pick he really liked. What I found most interesting about this point in the conversation was the Cubs’ scout spent ten days straight watching him play in the Area Code Games. It was a good thing the Cubs scouted him early has Roederer had hamstring and non-throwing shoulder issues most of his senior year of high school. Roederer’s a classic top of the order guy with some pop.

 

...

 

Hughes thinks Roberts’ stuff will play up like Dakota Mekkes’ stuff has done as a pro. That’s a pretty cool comp. And again, Hughes praised the Cubs R&D staff for all the pitch data on Roberts, who could be an elite arm.

[craig]

Thanks, Cal, that was a **really** interesting interview to listen to. A lot of insights into how they think about prospects, and what they saw in guys rounds 1-5.

 

Multiple references to analytics and stuff, including for not only Roberts but also Richan.

 

Thought it interesting that he didn't really mention anybody after Franklin, other than 13th rounder Ezequiel Pagan, who's 17. Doubt he'd mention him if they don't assume he's signable?

 

I believe the Robert/Mekkes analogy was that their fastballs will play out better than their velocities might suggest. (For whatever reason; Mekkes has the remarkable extension, not sure what it is they see with Roberts....)

[CaliforniaRaisin]

[Hrubes20]

He has less fastball than all of them, and doesn't even flash a plus secondary like each of those 3 you listed. Those are the big reasons why he was knocked around all year at the college level. It's not always a great thing to throw strikes when your stuff is as mediocre as Richan's.

 

From what I see when I read - his peak fastball velocity isn’t as high as the others mostly never showed that in the pros anyway. Otherwise those guys don’t really have anything over him that really really matters.

 

Anecdotally after the 2016 draft I singled out Rucker as an interesting looking guy (on this site!) based off a Youtube clip of him closing a game for BYU. He wasn't pumping out 95+ pitch after pitch in that inning either or show a wipeout offspeed, but did repeat his delivery well while throwing strikes, getting some misses anyway, and not blowing his arm out. I got similar vibes watching Richan.

 

A potential plus secondary is most certainly something "over him that really matters" but it's whatever at this point.

 

But with the bolded, the big thing for everyone is whether or not you got the same vibe when you watched Ryan Kellogg, Kyle Twomey, or any of the other failed pitching prospects you fell in love with?

[Hrubes20]

 

I wonder what Roederer is angling for there. Have to imagine the Cubs knew the number necessary and were going to meet it, along with 4 years future tuition at UCLA. With the lack of overslots in this draft class, it's actually really surprising that they all weren't signed right away.

[davell]

 

I wonder what Roederer is angling for there. Have to imagine the Cubs knew the number necessary and were going to meet it, along with 4 years future tuition at UCLA. With the lack of overslots in this draft class, it's actually really surprising that they all weren't signed right away.

 

I still think he is signed. He's already said they met his number and his social media stuff has Cubs all over it. I'm guessing is it just means that since he hasn't shown up and taken his physical, it means they're still negotiating.

 

Total guess, but I'm figuring he gets a million. That'd put the first day as close to break even, which I could see them trying to do.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

https://twitter.com/carriemuskat/status/1008434410151141377?s=21

[Hrubes20]

 

I wonder what Roederer is angling for there. Have to imagine the Cubs knew the number necessary and were going to meet it, along with 4 years future tuition at UCLA. With the lack of overslots in this draft class, it's actually really surprising that they all weren't signed right away.

 

Total guess, but I'm figuring he gets a million. That'd put the first day as close to break even, which I could see them trying to do.

 

I was assuming a million as well.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

[Tim]

But with the bolded, the big thing for everyone is whether or not you got the same vibe when you watched Ryan Kellogg, Kyle Twomey, or any of the other failed pitching prospects you fell in love with?

 

Well no, Kellogg and Twomey were really well known HS recruits that never got better but I thought they would in the pros. That's different. This is more the Cubs have drafted seemingly random college arms before with big holes in their profile somewhere or another and were given the benefit of the doubt on upside potential development ceiling. I don't see why Richan doesn't get the same when his flaws mostly seem aesthetic.

By aesthetic, do you mean "couldn't even get college hitters out"?

[Regular Show]

But with the bolded, the big thing for everyone is whether or not you got the same vibe when you watched Ryan Kellogg, Kyle Twomey, or any of the other failed pitching prospects you fell in love with?

 

Well no, Kellogg and Twomey were really well known HS recruits that never got better but I thought they would in the pros. That's different. This is more the Cubs have drafted seemingly random college arms before with big holes in their profile somewhere or another and were given the benefit of the doubt on upside potential development ceiling. I don't see why Richan doesn't get the same when his flaws mostly seem aesthetic.

 

Listen, we all appreciate your enthusiasm for all things Cubs related, but you do tend to weigh in on a favorite player or draft prospect or recent IFA signing and talk about why they are your current favorite...

 

 

 

 

 

Then you change your mind or in many instances you're just wrong and you just move on. I've only been on this forum for like 2 years now and I've seen you make many weird predictions and proclamations. I mean you were all in on Kumar Rocker, and every team passed on him and he's going to college. He might develop into a top prospect in a few years, but he might also regress or get hurt. I doubt you'll mention your love and conviction on Rocker if he ends up not living up to the hype.

 

I'm OWNING what I said whether I'm wrong or right... I said drafting Brennen Davis was a mistake and that I really dislike this draft class (outside of Nico) overall. I will either be right or wrong in a few years, and I'll fully admit if I'm wrong on Davis or Roederer or if some later selections end up being successful draft picks. You don't build credibility and trust when you just make a bunch of claims and quickly move on or never mention them again when you're wrong. If you really like Richan... well, that's fine but when/if he ends up not amounting to much I hope you admit you were wrong and that the Cubs made a mistake in drafting him.

[davell]

Just so I'm super clear for the future - what's the process for owning up? Do I have to mention the big Ryan Kellogg miss more often? What should I be sayng about Rucker post-draft outside of shucks and good luck? Is there a credit/debit system and what earns credit talking about prospects? It seems as arbitrary as Richan being greeted with pessimism when the benefit of doubt on upside was given to other flawed non-first college RHs in the past.

 

Dead serious, as someone who's gotten into it as much as anyone with you..... And no, I'm not trying to start something here, just trying to be helpful.

 

Everyone has guys they like. We all miss a bunch. None of us are any better or worse at this than anyone else. I try my best to be receptive to what others say, because we're all in the same boat. We're prospect nerds. There ain't many of us on here either, probably 10?

 

I'm happy to hear who you like. You do research EARLY. You post things on guys that, early in the process, some people are getting familiar with them, because of you. That's awesome. You help keep things lively, no doubt.

 

On the other end, you're the most dismissive guy we've got. It's just a message board, but still..... And you've actually addressed you're not great at this. Maybe try a bit more? (Saying this, I'm expecting a Meh, or worse in return, just to give an idea)

 

And honestly? The misses don't matter as much, if you're not bringing them up as much lol. Example, heading every time a dude basically gets on base? Too much man. (Ademan) Rocker. We all knew you liked him. Didn't need to hear it 4-5 times a week.

 

Again, not trying to start anything. You asked a question, just trying to help things.

[Savermetrics]

Y'all are for real? Come on now. These are high school and college athletes who we're all horsefeathering rooting for to succeed and make it playing an awesome game. There's nothing wrong with gravitating toward some ballplayer in any sport who you want to see live up to their potential and be in the Hall of Fame. It's totally cool to like a prospect and be wrong about it. There's so many players who are never going to be drafted, let alone make it to the Majors. It's not a bad thing to be one of their few crazy supporters while they're working on a dream.

[Regular Show]

Y'all are for real? Come on now. These are high school and college athletes who we're all horsefeathering rooting for to succeed and make it playing an awesome game. There's nothing wrong with gravitating toward some ballplayer in any sport who you want to see live up to their potential and be in the Hall of Fame. It's totally cool to like a prospect and be wrong about it. There's so many players who are never going to be drafted, let alone make it to the Majors. It's not a bad thing to be one of their few crazy supporters while they're working on a dream.

 

Welcome to the Board! Big fan of your twitter account!

 

Thanks for making a post and I agree that there is nothing wrong with liking a prospect and being wrong about it. I was just talking about accountability and being self-aware lol.

 

We've all liked some prospect at some point that ended up being a huge disappointment.

[Savermetrics]

Also, what the horsefeathers has that coaching staff done to Josh Sawyer?

 

Edit: Horsefeathers? That's the filter?

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Also, what the horsefeathers has that coaching staff done to Josh Sawyer?

 

Edit: Horsefeathers? That's the filter?

 

It’s in honor of a poster who used to say that who has since passed.

 

Welcome to the board!

[davell]

Wwwwwwweeeeeeeeeesssssssss!!!!!!! About damn time! Welcome!

[davell]

No, not prospecting lol. I'm not here screaming "You suck!!!!!!!!!" We're all going to hit and miss on guys, just part of it. Your opinion is valuable. What I was talking about, is that you've mentioned that, on occasion, your internet demeanor needs a bit of work.

 

I'm not implying Ademan is a miss, nor am I saying anything negative about Rocker. Just using examples of you bringing up guys that we already are super aware that you like. When there's nothing new to talk about with them. May not even be the case with Ademan at this point, he's getting to that point where he's got to kick it in gear a bit more.......

 

Repentance on Kellogg? A month of not talking about Carrera lol. Just kidding, no repentance needed, just joke around a bit more when we ALL miss on guys.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Confirmed we drafted the next Kinsler

 

[tweet]

[/tweet]

[CaliforniaRaisin]

https://twitter.com/savermetrics/status/1009229110445367296?s=21

[davell]