toonsterwu

Dunno why this thought didn't cross my mind about Hoerner last night, and perhaps someone posted it last night, but I wouldn't be surprised if a positive case for him is Ben Zobrist. Sure, Zobrist is bigger, but people forget that Zobrist was actually a solid shortstop prospect, not elite defensively, but in another situation, could've perhaps made it up as a shortstop.

I love the pick. He's got a good bat, should be cheap, and well, we really could use some 3rd basemen in the system. Heck, we could use anything more than the million OF's we've taken.

I assume a UVA degree has some value. Yeah. And he could have done that after he tried pro baseball. With 900k in his pocket. And the Cubs paying for his college. It's a completely different dynamic, though. You only get one chance to go to college in your formative years ... after that, it's just education. Similarly important, but a far different dynamic. This isn't any UVA bias ... I would say that if a kid felt it was a good decision to go to school, then I'm of the opinion that it was a good decision.

Was about to post this afternoon that I wouldn't be surprised if the Cubs took Casey, since they scouted Virginia. Casey's gonna turn pro. He's had TJ ... and finally got in a solid year. He was a very good prep arm back in the day, but the fastball, IIRC, used to hit mid-90's more consistently. I believe he worked around 91-94 this year, with a slider that flashes well, but is probably just above average. The profile is there to be an end of the rotation starter, but the more realistic guess may be a middle relief profile that could be better if his stuff plays up out of the pen. I'll be honest ... Daniel Lynch has a higher ceiling ... I think Derek Casey is the more likely bet to reach the majors. _____ Weber put together a fantastic season. Hit tool is very good, puts good wood on it, showed burgeoning power. He very much fits the "mold". It's more gap power, and I think the biggest question is how the discipline holds as he deals with tougher pitching. It's a tough one to call ... I could see him surprising and being a very good, offensive minded 2nd baseman ... but I could also see him flounder a la Bruno. Off the top, he has some positional versatility (could probably handle 3rd, although off the top, don't think he's played it since his freshman year? He's played 2nd the last two years). _____ My personal bias aside ... if you strip away the early picks, I like how the rest of the draft has moved along. I figured they would try to target college guys to fill in gaps in the system, and there's some good pieces. I'll be honest, my bias aside, I like the Casey pick moreso than Richan. I think their ceilings are about the same.

I don't think they're looking for the "next" anything. They have a certain type of player-strong contact skills/ hard worker/up the middle potential/ previous wood bat success if applicable-and that profile has landed them Ellsbury, Pedroia, Betts, Schwarber, Almora, etc. Sure, that's fair. I was over-stating it with the comparisons, but my point is that they look for a mold, particularly as you go later on in the draft. That mold is a solid one, but it limits the diversity of talent in an organization. You'll occasionally run into a Mookie Betts, but you'll also get (and I liked him a lot) the Stephen Bruno's of the world.

Ugh, as a UVA fan, I hate that Siani got picked. UVA badly needed his bat next year. Feels like, for them to pick him here, they know his number and will meet it. I figure they might've saved some on the early picks, so a big package for Siani isn't out of the question.

I really viewed can't miss or as getting guys who can move up the ladder and perhaps generate some value. There were talent gaps in the system this year.

I don't disagree. Actually, more I think about it, I lean a bit negative on the Herron pick because of timeline, even though I sorta like Herron (reminds me a bit of the Dewees pick, although Dewees had more pop, I think). Again, I'd note that they draft a lot of guys that have a loose profile, and thus, increase the risk of limiting the type of assets the organization fosters. It's not that the profile is bad ... it's that you want more diversity. He'll be gone this year, so his earliest chance at hitting AA is, barring an exceptional showing, perhaps 2020? My bigger issue is the dramatic swings in how the club focuses on their drafts - they spent 2 years focusing hard on pitching, and it's easy to imagine with the paucity of talent in the full-season ranks, that they'll spend quite a few assets on collegians who could perhaps move faster. Of course, down the line, that will lead to gaps elsewhere. I'd rather they just take a step back, take the lumps from the gaps in the system, and build more balanced drafts. Obviously, yes, some of it is out of their control, as it depends on how a draft falls, but ugh.

In a vacuum, I like Herron. He'll be down for awhile, but he's got a good hit tool. He might be more of a 4th OF profile if the hit tool doesn't carry that well. BUT .... you just drafted 3 positional guys, 2 OF's. Granted, the two OF's were prep OF's, so the timeline is different. Still, it feels like they are going to a) Go heavy on positional guys. b) Go heavy on college guys that could slide up a bit faster. Overall, eh, as it's easy to envision Herron, when healthy, perhaps moving up faster.

I would add that Theo and Co., along with his branches, often look for a certain type/mold. For lack of better way of saying it, they look for the next Ellsbury (certainly, one can say the next Betts) and Pedroia, and while there is value in that, there's also a risk of getting too locked in on a type. I had, in the back of my mind, wondered if Jake McCarthy would be the pick because of all the comparisons to Ellsbury/AJ Pollock. I don't think any of the critiques are necessarily off or wrong. The system has floundered in recent years, and while some of that was initially blamed on trades, the reality is that there were massive gaps in the system that were apparent and their drafting hasn't filled said gaps. Part of the problem was the immense focus on finding arms, which led to holes (and they still don't have that many quality arms). They've had a long history with the Cubs now, and it's been pretty scattershot after the top picks. They really haven't done a great job identifying arms, and the top two arms they've drafted are all with other organizations (I think) ... Paul Blackburn and Zack Godley. To be honest, I like how this draft looks so far in comparison to the last couple of years. Part of it was that they had two drafts where they went hard after pitching (and still might not have much). What I like is the combination of ceiling/floor that they seemingly have taken. I think every system needs to occasionally gamble on a Davis type, a guy who looks so tantalizing ... if he can put it together. I like the fact that Hoerner, whose ceiling is still debatable, might be able to move fast. I don't really love Richan, particularly with somewhat of a glut of arms in the levels he's likely to come in at. It's not a draft I really love so far, but the balance is a bit better. I viewed the nailing it comments as more a need to get guys in that can move up the ladder, moreso than finding stars.

I don't particularly love or hate this draft. All scouting staffs have good and bad drafts. I doubt we've gotten significant savings so far ... Hoerner's the only one that sounds like it could be a decent chunk, and Davis/Roederer might both cost more than slot to get signed. I wouldn't be surprised if Davis/Roederer costs ended up balancing out, or being more than, any Hoerner savings. I like that they wanted to address their positional depth charts, and I like that they went for some upside in those two picks, but both seem fairly risky. Davis reminds me of a prep version of Daniel Johnson. Richan seems like a steady, high floor guy who should move up the ladder. Going to be curious what happens in the next few rounds. At this juncture, it seems a bit unlikely that the Cubs will be in the mix for any huge name slipping, as signability makes that seem unlikely. Wouldn't be surprised if they started loading up on some college guys that could potentially move fast.

I don't recall Mookie Betts the pick being criticized. It was a 5th round pick. I do recall Mookie Betts the prospect getting critiqued somewhat, but I really don't recall much criticism over a 5th round pick.

I wonder if this is the dagger in the Mejia behind the plate option in Cleveland. The doubts have continued to grow despite the 80 grade arm. Doubt Naylor would impact Mejia. Naylor's at least ... what, best case 4-5 years away?

Really love the Noah Naylor pick for the Indians. They'll give him all the time he needs behind the dish.

Lemahieu College bat who squares everything up and settles as an above average defensive 2B I think he's going to have a bit more pop than LeMahieu, but who knows. _____ In some respects, the pick really makes a lot of sense. They kept on noting how they couldn't miss with this draft, and they needed to restock the upper levels with positional assets. Hoerner is relatively safe, compared to the other options out there, and he was safer than Eierman. I preferred more upside, but I get it, with how the system stacks up, what the needs were, and how the draft looked.

Surprised McClanahan keeps on falling. Seemed like a tailor made Nationals gamble. Still, love Denaburg. Too lazy to ponder which teams might have underslot early but seems like McClanahan will slip and be a nice pickup for someone early in round 2, unless there's something we are unaware of, outside of the already known risks

I don't mind Hoerner. I think I preferred Eierman, but I don't mind Hoerner. Still, would've liked a bit more upside with this first pick. That said, I also didn't think McClanahan was the type of guy they'd pick. I don't think McClanahan gets past 27, though.

I'm stunned at Murray going that high. Beane and Forst's guys have to be right on this (that is, cross-checkers checking what it would take) ... still for Oakland, makes me wonder if spending so much on Murray is worth it. There's immense talent, but it seems like it's going to take a lot of time and work.

Yeah, this stuff on Virginia is one of the main reasons so many people are critical of the draft prospects of so many Virginia players. The pitching thing is fair. There's a reason why Lynch is a guy who I think might be a better pro than a collegian. He doesn't really crouch all that much. When Lynch is on ... he looks DAMN good. He looks like a borderline TOR arm type talent. When Lynch is on, it's at least a plus fastball and 2 above average (slider/change), and there have been times where the secondary looks like two plus pitches. There's been a few other pitchers that have come through the line that didn't really do the crouch, and it's not like Kuhn has held them back from reaching their potential. They've actually been aggressively pushing Lynch since Day 1 since they saw the top end talent that many didn't really identify. All that said, he's been so inconsistent throughout his career. There is very little chance I would want him in the first round. I'm not sure I even love him in the 2nd either ... I think there's a huge boom/bust risk factor that comes with him. There's really only one UVA guy this year that I think deserves to go in the top 2 rounds, and that's Jake McCarthy, assuming he passes his physicals. ____ I think, and I didn't hear the podcast, that the critique on UVA hitters is a bit of an oversimplification to say they teach the Stanford swing. There's been a wide variance of hitters and styles since O'Connor and Co. has gotten to UVA. Pavin Smith was always this disciplined hitter who didn't go for the bomb. The Cubs hitting staff sorta made Adam Haseley - he was a nice two-way player, but he really took off over his 3 years. That said, a few years back, they had guys like Brandon Downes and Jarrett Parker come through the line, completely different hitter profiles. Now, the one thing to be said about UVA coaches is that they actively look for athletic guy that try to play to the dimensions of their field. Davenport is a pitcher's park, and they don't make any bones about looking for guys that will understand what to do in that park.

If Cease is at High A in a couple months, that's pretty bad, but for now, I've got no issues with where the White Sox placed him. This is his first touch of HIgh A. They are in no rush at all, so the slow burn is okay, IMO. I do expect he'll be in AA sooner than later. Hudson's 6'8" and only 21. Tbh, I'm not super huge on him, but I always thought it was a rush to judgment last year, when there were specific things he was working on. Gotta like his work this year somewhat ... bad start to the season, but instead of buckling under, he settled down and 4 out of his last 5 starts have been solid (did have a stinker on the 22nd ... still, the positive spin is that he bounced back). That was a nice pitching matchup in AAA today ... shame Alzolay got hurt.

Was Connor that high out of the prep ranks? I really don't recall, tbh. I knew he was good, but with Nathan Kirby having turned down the draft, Connor sort of always got stacked behind him. I will say this, if UVA, and their coaches have done a fantastic job since they've gotten there, screw with Vasil's delivery, that's just stupid. It looks ... from what I've seen, clean enough that it shouldn't be an issue.

That stinks. I guess the kid didn't want a chance at a big league career. Going to UVA effectively ends that. It's a fair critique of recent UVA pitchers, but I would point out that a) Off the top, and I don't exactly memorize pre-draft prep rankings, Vasil might be the most talented arm to go to UVA in awhile. Hultzen might be a close 2nd, but I feel like Vasil was the better thought of kid. b) The biggest critique of UVA pitching first goes to the crouch. That said, Daniel Lynch, the enigma that he is, didn't really utilize the crouch. Off the top, c) Hultzen's failure hangs over the group, but Hultzen admitted that a lot of it was his own fault, as he lacked the structure at UVA to get him back on track when he got side-railed (or words to those extent). d) I mean ... besides Hultzen, talent wise, from a SP perspective, really ... it's Nathan Kirby, and maybe, maybe Branden Kline. Kirby got injured. I should know what happened to Branden Kline ... I can't think of it right now, but it was an injury. Otherwise, even a guy like Josh Sborz was more a middle relief profile who was a tough as nails pitcher, and same goes for Brandon Waddell. Tyler Wilson was a fringe arm who did long-tossing to improve. Connor Jones stuff backed up senior year, and IIRC, had to do with him getting too muscular and losing touch? I think. Short of it is, in the end, talent matters, and Vasil would be another notch. And yeah, it's fair to critique UVA pitchers in the pros until they come through, but really, it's a limited sample size that were really top level talent. Oh, thinking about it, the most talented uVA arm might've been J ... crap what's his first name, Thompson. Still, he was a ground ball guy whose stuff backed up by the time his junior year was done.

That's a huge get for UVA if it holds true. Will wait and see, although the top guys that didn't reach UVA in recent years (Wentz/Jones) largely gave indications that they were going to go pro (well, Jones was sorta in b/w, but iirc, had given indication that the right money was needed). Vasil has a good chance to be the Friday night starter from the get-go next year, as UVA's rotation will likely lose 2/3rd of it's weekend guys (hard not to see a team draft Lynch at some point early enough ... there's potential that may be better suited for professional coaches to unlock, what with the UVA pitching approach).

Wasn't Moreno's main pitch a power sinker? Wouldn't surprise me if a) He's ramping it up out of the pen. b) He's going more to a 4-seamer out of the pen. It'd be somewhat of a shame if he was in the pen for good, but he could move fast in the pen if the stuff is still strong.

We're gonna end up doing something like Russell, Heyward and some combo of Monty, Caritini, Alzolay, Bote, etc to SD for Hand and them paying some chunk of Heyward's contract and then we are going sign Machado and Harper this offseason. I'd be somewhat surprised if San Diego dealt Brad Hand this year, and I'd be somewhat stunned if they dealt him and it wasn't a king's ransom type of deal. He's affordable for next year, he's signed down for 2 more years, and they view themselves as a club on the upswing, with an improving farm. The addition of Heyward's contract, unless we are paying a huge majority of it, would seem like a deterrent, particularly since so many teams are likely to be searching for pen additions. Who knows, though.