Sammy Sofa

horsefeathers them, too.

I remember that draft pretty well, and Prior was considered far and away the best prospect available and it was a little bit shocking that the Twins didn't select him (worked out pretty well for them). Obviously, I know a hell of a lot more about baseball now and scouting and the MLB draft, but honestly I still think I would've selected Prior over Tex. That doesn't match my memory exactly, but I was also 14 so I'm not going to claim to have my finger exactly on the pulse. My memory is that there was definitely a sentiment that Prior was an incredible prospect and probably the best in the draft, but also that Teixeira and definitely Mauer were really really good too. Put another way, Prior would have gone #1 in a number of drafts(and possibly his own if it weren't for Mauer's hometown factor), but Mauer and Teixeira would have been Top 5 picks in a number of drafts too. They weren't there for lack of a better of alternatives(unlike say, Hultzen or Ackley) which underlines the point I was trying to make above. IMO you need a prospect of Prior's quality as a prerequisite for taking a pitcher Top 5, but also a lack of prospects of Teixeira/Mauer caliber as alternatives. I'm also thinking along the lines of the Cubs right now; if hypothetically the Cubs miraculously have a pick where they're choosing between Prior and Teixeria, to me Prior seems like the obvious choice. Areas of need should sway this as opposed to just a blanket approach that hitters are almost always the better choice.

No, not enough at least. You need a generational college pitcher(Strasburg, Prior) and a dearth of hitting prospects on par with say, the 2016 or 2014 first round(and even then, Schwarber and Conforto are decent counterpoints) to even consider it. Pitchers fail as a rule, and when you have the chance to impact your organization as much as a Top 5 pick can, you need one to be overwhelmingly above the field for it to be the right call to draft one. Strasburg's draft is close, depending on how much you liked Ackley at draft time. Drafting Prior over Teixeira is not close to that bar(to speak nothing of the fact that Mauer went #1). Fair enough. Personally, I'd be cool with still going with Prior. Vive la difference.

Good call from the comments:

It's not about 100% chance of having the 'right' pick, it's about minimizing downside. Strasburg obviously was a hit(as was Price), but the top of the draft is also littered with Bullingtons and Appels and Hultzens and Bauers and Zimmers, and that's just limiting to the well-regarded college arms. Ackley was a miss(although one who was great in MiLB and carried strong trade value up through his second go round in MLB), but the top of the draft is also full of Teixeiras and Bryants and Poseys and Wieters and Longorias and Gordons. You don't want to ignore your scouting process entirely, but you have to heavily weight the repeated outcomes that have come before you. Right, but do you not think Prior stuck out of the usual pack, even by the standards of top draft picks? Again, it just feels like the circumstances of his downfall are so relatively bizarre that it feels like he's being dismissed in a "well, that's what you get for drafting a pitcher"-sense that doesn't seem entirely accurate.

HARD PASS: http://deadspin.com/jonathan-papelbon-subjected-his-teammates-to-terrible-p-1785311344

Here's a quick and dirty illustration, 2000-2009 Top 5 picks(to give them time to reach MLB and contribute). Hitters: 25 Pitchers: 25 Hitters with 10 career bWAR: 12 Pitchers with 10 bWAR: 5 That will change to 14 to 5 soon because Moustakas and Hosmer are both north of 9.5 bWAR too(no pitchers are close). Again, I'm not disagreeing with this idea. I just don't think that means someone is automatically "wrong" if they would still choose Prior, or choose a pitcher, period.

It's not a matter of being right or wrong unless someone is saying "yes, I would still take Mark Prior knowing what would happen to him." the point is that can't miss college bats really are can't miss and must be taken over can't miss college arms because no arm is can't miss I don't think anyone is disagreeing that bats aren't a better bet to succeed. I just think it's been extrapolated to some goofily extreme levels by some here.

you can make a wonderful argument for drafting Mark Appel over Kris Bryant as well, if you are interesting in being wrong about everything. It's not a matter of being right or wrong unless someone is saying "yes, I would still take Mark Prior knowing what would happen to him."

Well, yeah, arguing it from a standpoint of what actually happened, it's silly to pick Prior. From a standpoint of picking either without knowing what would happen, you can easily make a good argument either way. Personally, I still go with Prior.

It took such a ridiculous series of circumstances to derail Prior; I'd pick him again in a heartbeat.

http://i.giphy.com/IPG22ppWvtAJ2.gif

Has Bryant always had such bad forehead acne and I've just been oblivious to it?

ROAST GOING OUT LIKE A CHAMP.

I'm not going to claim exhaustive knowledge of the process, but my mental model is that they aren't reviewing every audio clip they have each year. If that's the case, then they definitely screwed up more than what I was picturing, but the fact that they've got that in there at all(a 20 year old song with that title) is probably an indicator that whatever list they're pulling from wasn't being reviewed with much scrutiny, if at all. I don't claim to know the actual process they're using either. But I do know that they've got to make sure that all the music they play is licensed, so they have to know what the songs are called. I assume that they have an approval process that would at least include reading the titles of the songs. But I can't imagine a baseball stadium wouldn't also scrutinize the music to, for example, make sure they're not playing F bombs between innings. This is less scrutiny than that. It's hard to believe that someone didn't know what they were doing playing this song. Yeah, I have to think this was intentional; it's not like this is a song typically played at public events that they just stumbled across or accidentally played, and the obvious reason why is right there in the title. I have a feeling this was an awesome bit of... http://i.giphy.com/Cxk8FVWDTWegE.gif

No matter what portion is heard, a song with that title should never intentionally be played during a baseball game (other than the intern protest scenario). Not arguing otherwise, only pointing out how it could happen, especially since 10, even 5 years ago there wouldn't have been the same response to the same clip being played. Nah, that song's been dicey along those lines since it came out. It wouldn't have been as quick a story, say, 10 years ago minus something like Twitter, but it's a song that I would assume most organizations wouldn't even want on on their playlist just since it's been a headache since it was released.

horsefeathers, that would be even worse.

You can have your thumb sliced off by a table saw and be feeling better shortly after "treatment." Go make out with Koyie Hill you weirdo.

= http://i.giphy.com/OXDVrAKkPgt7G.gif

Rondon should have been pulled after the first HR, but anything before that would have really seemed like jumping the gun since, like you said, his stuff and velocity looked good and he was ahead of Wong and got upended by a perfect bunt. I was expecting him to get out of it until that home run.

His home runs allowed are up, but I believe literally everything else except ERA is better than last season.

In hindsight, clearly. Rondon wasn't ready to go today. And it would have be nice to work him in during a lower leverage spot. But, at the same time, we were currently playing the Cardinals. And we were leading and it was late. Really, it would have been better off if he was coming back at a different time. But if you think he's ready and you're in that spot, it's hard to say, "Well, maybe we'll just wait until sometime in the next series." Yeah, it was largely just bad timing; Rondon has to get in sooner rather than later. You skip him tonight, and you end up already two weeks since the last time he pitched. They could have waited to use him in the 9th, but Chapman kinda needs to get in as well since he didn't get much work during the winning streak himself. Ideally it's Rondon shaking of the rust (to me his stuff and velocity looked good, which was encouraging) and he'll be back to kicking ass again.

The two new kids look pretty good and Martinez is a very good pitcher. They played some pretty good games except for the second. Yeah, that's not exactly a recipe for deep playoff success. I'm with the guy who has no fear of playing the Cardinals in the playoffs.

Yeah, his first couple of appearances were unfortunate, but it's odd to be griping about him now.

He arguably destroyed Harper. The Cubs don't need him putting his evil on them.