2014 Draft class

[maggsmaggs]

The Angels didn't do anything like you are talking about. At this point you are just making stuff up.

 

Oppenheimer and Bane, who are friendly rivals, spoke after the draft and learned that they had both had rated Trout No. 2 behind Strasburg.

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/how-los...lb-draft-051212

 

Yankees and Angels rated Trout as the No. 2 player in the Draft, FWIW.

[maggsmaggs]

And not a single organization would have been willing to bet their entire draft on Mike Trout on draft day in 2009.

How do we know that? That is just speculation from you. There were no bonus caps. If there were, maybe teams would. You are speculating that no organization would just as much as we are speculating than an organization might have.

[southsider2k5]

The Angels didn't do anything like you are talking about. At this point you are just making stuff up.

 

And just for reference's sake, Trout was the 29th pick, and he got the 32nd biggest bonus that year. The Angels didn't take him and bet a ton of bonus money on him. They drafted him and paid what his slot dictated. There was no stretch to draft him. There was no tons of extra cash to convince him. There was no sacrifice of other signings.

 

http://www.perfectgame.org/Articles/view.aspx?article=2087

[southsider2k5]

How do we know that? That is just speculation from you. There were no bonus caps. If there were, maybe teams would. You are speculating that no organization would just as much as we are speculating than an organization might have.

 

Because he was picked #29, and given a slot level bonus. If an organization was willing to bet their entire draft on him, shouldn't they have probably oh, I don't know, actually drafted the guy? Serious that it makes zero sense to speculate that an organization would be willing to bet a ridiculous amount on the guy when pretty much all of baseball actually passed once on the guy. That is just dumb because the actual reality doesn't support that at all.

[maggsmaggs]

Because he was picked #29, and given a slot level bonus. If an organization was willing to bet their entire draft on him, shouldn't they have probably oh, I don't know, actually drafted the guy? Serious that it makes zero sense to speculate that an organization would be willing to bet a ridiculous amount on the guy when pretty much all of baseball actually passed once on the guy. That is just dumb because the actual reality doesn't support that at all.

Because they didn't have to pay him more than slot? They Angels had him rated No. 2 in the Draft. If his agent wasn't asking for the moon, why would the Angels just give it to him? Clearly, the Angels thought he was worthy of a huge bonus (being No. 2 on their board and in high school), but if the agent was not asking for that bonus, why would the Angels offer it?

 

Again you are saying an opinion and speculation is wrong. Remind me again how you acquired the title of world's smartest person?

[southsider2k5]

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/how-los...lb-draft-051212

 

Yankees and Angels rated Trout as the No. 2 player in the Draft, FWIW.

 

That article is full of s***. The Angels picked Randal Grichuk before they picked Mike Trout.

[southsider2k5]

Because they didn't have to pay him more than slot? They Angels had him rated No. 2 in the Draft. If his agent wasn't asking for the moon, why would the Angels just give it to him? Clearly, the Angels thought he was worthy of a huge bonus (being No. 2 on their board and in high school), but if the agent was not asking for that bonus, why would the Angels offer it?

 

Again you are saying an opinion and speculation is wrong. Remind me again how you acquired the title of world's smartest person?

 

There is zero evidence to support anything being said here.

[maggsmaggs]

That article is full of s***. The Angels picked Randal Grichuk before they picked Mike Trout.

Yes, I believe you know the story better than Ken Rosenthal.

[southsider2k5]

Yes, I believe you know the story better than Ken Rosenthal.

 

So the idea is that the Angels would have been willing to sacrifice their entire draft for Mike Trout, and I am supposed to believe that because an article states that they believed all along that he was the NUMBER 2 player on their draft board? Despite nothing else actually giving evidence to that claim? Not his draft position, not his signing bonus, the fact they drafted someone else ahead of him and waited a couple of years down the road to actually public say oh yeah, we would have drafted Trout, not #1, but #2. That means they would have been willing to give up all of their subsequent draft picks down the road for Mike Trout, despite articles saying how excited they were to get the guys after him as well.

 

Explain to me how that logic makes any sense.

[caulfield12]

 

Even if the Angels "lucked" into the best baseball player of his generation, it hasn't been enough to overcome all their other idiotic decisions.

 

So the point is what? Didn't the Angels actually end up firing the scout who "discovered" Trout in the first place?

 

 

 

Mike Trout is the most exciting thing to happen to baseball since the concession-stand hot dog. He's arguably the very best player in the game, even after he spotted everybody else a month this summer. At 21, he is the youngest to ever -- as in, ever -- produce a 25-homer/40-theft season.

 

He also pilots the Angels charter flights, personally cleans the halo above the Big A in the parking lot and feeds the Rally Monkey before he goes home each night.

 

Well ... some of those last items might not be true, technically. But this is: A total of 23 players were chosen by 21 different clubs in the 2009 draft before the Angels picked outfielder Randal Grichuk 24th and Trout 25th.

 

For this, you would think the genius who drafted Trout for the Angels would have been rewarded with, what? A lifetime contract? A Lamborghini? A personal masseuse?

 

Instead, Eddie Bane got fired.

 

Then-general manager Tony Reagins summoned Bane, Angels' scouting director from 2004-2010, into his office two years ago and told him to get lost.

 

"Real short conversation," says Bane, who now scouts for the Detroit Tigers. "He said, 'We're not going to renew your contract.' I said, 'You've gotta be kidding me.' He said, 'I don't like your last couple of drafts.' "

 

Stuff happens in baseball every day, some things more unexpected than others. Even lifers like Bane know you're hired to be fired. In Houston this week, first-year general manager Jeff Luhnow's reorganization of the Astros included dumping a handful of veteran scouts, including Scipio Spinks and Jack Lind.

 

"Scouts hate this time of year, the end of August, early September," Bane says. "Because after the draft, that's when guys get let go.

 

"It drives a stake through your heart because you see guys on the road all the time, and then all of a sudden you don't see them anymore."

 

But ... you find a Trout and you're still a short-timer?

 

The Angels, with Bane drafting, also acquired All-Stars Jered Weaver and Mark Trumbo (2004). Trumbo smashed his career-high 30th home run the other day, becoming the first Angel to club 30 or more homers in a season since Kendrys Morales in 2009.

 

Morales? Signed by Bane as an international free agent in 2005.

 

Also from the '09 draft came pitchers Tyler Skaggs and Patrick Corbin, whom Reagins wound up trading to Arizona as part of the four-player package for pitcher Dan Haren on July 25, 2010 -- about a month before the GM dismissed Bane.

 

Skaggs (supplemental first-round pick) and Corbin (second round) followed Trout in '09. So did Angels pitcher Garrett Richards (3-3, 4.84 ERA in 14 games, nine starts), who also was another supplemental first-round pick in '09.

 

"Saying he didn't like that draft was like a slap in my face, because those were really good drafts," Bane says. "You look at Dan Haren, who is a really good pitcher, but I never understood that trade because you knew how good Skaggs was going to be, and Corbin had potential.

 

"Skaggs has got a chance to be a No. 1 starter, and Corbin is almost a lock to be a No. 3. That was the one that bothered me the most."

 

http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/story/1998741...t-weaver-trumbo

[caulfield12]

So the idea is that the Angels would have been willing to sacrifice their entire draft for Mike Trout, and I am supposed to believe that because an article states that they believed all along that he was the NUMBER 2 player on their draft board? Despite nothing else actually giving evidence to that claim? Not his draft position, not his signing bonus, the fact they drafted someone else ahead of him and waited a couple of years down the road to actually public say oh yeah, we would have drafted Trout, not #1, but #2. That means they would have been willing to give up all of their subsequent draft picks down the road for Mike Trout, despite articles saying how excited they were to get the guys after him as well.

 

Explain to me how that logic makes any sense.

 

 

 

"None of us thought he'd be as good as he'd be last year, at 20 years old," former Angels scouting director Eddie Bane said. "You could dream about it when he was 27 or 30. Even then, we'd have been told we were crazy."

 

That's because in the spring of 2009, when teams were assembling their lists and preparing for the draft, none of them thought Trout would do what he's done. Good thing, too. Or the Angels wouldn't have been able to get him with the 25th pick, after 21 other teams said, "No, thanks," including the Washington Nationals and Arizona Diamondbacks twice.

 

"He definitely moved a lot quicker and turned out to be a hell of a ballplayer a lot quicker than people were anticipating," said San Francisco Giants scouting director John Barr, who picked sixth. "I think we all look back now and think, 'Geez, we wish he was higher on our boards.'"

 

The Angels had Trout at No. 2 on their board, behind only Stephen Strasburg.

 

"And even that may have been a little low," Bane said.

 

Although Strasburg was baseball's consensus No. 1 pick, a once-in-a-generation talent who has lived up to the billing so far in his major-league career, there was at least one voice in the Angels' draft room who dissented.

 

"I didn't think there was a better player than Mikey," said Morhardt, who now works as a national crosschecker. "I'll put him against anybody. Sometimes you have to jump out there a little bit. I didn't think there was a better amateur player in the country. At some point he's going to have a chance to be a Hall of Fame baseball player."

 

 

Seems to be some contradictory information flying around...

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/trout-3...hardt-bane.html

 

 

Once Bane was sold on Trout, all that was left for the Angels was to hope that Trout would make it past those other 21 teams on draft day. Fortunately for the Angels, a couple factors dropped Trout on other teams' lists.

 

First, he was from New Jersey. Because of the weather in the northeast, the high school baseball season is short, so scouts have less opportunity to see the players.

 

"Guys there have a very short scouting window because of the weather," said Oakland A's scouting director Eric Kubota, who nearly took Trout with the 13th pick. "If you happened to go in and he had a bad day, which all guys do, you might not have had the opportunity to get in and see him again. In Florida and California and Texas, you have plenty of time. It's a lot harder when they are up in the northeast."

 

Morhardt counted on this. In fact, once the Angels had seen all they needed to see, Morhardt joked to Trout's father: "I hope Mike doesn't get a hit the rest of the year."

 

There was also a concern with Trout because of the way he wrapped his top hand around the bat. Some scouts thought he would become a dead-pull hitter. Morhardt said that question was answered when he asked Trout, during a workout the previous summer, to hit some balls the other way. Trout proceeded to hit five or six line drives into right.

 

"They weren't sure if his swing was going to play," Morhardt said. "I think it was looking too much at the negative, which wasn't really a negative. The positive is he's faster than everyone, stronger than everyone, and when he hits it, he hits it harder than everyone."

Edited May 4, 2014 by caulfield12

[oldsox]

Even if the Angels "lucked" into the best baseball player of his generation, it hasn't been enough to overcome all their other idiotic decisions.

 

So the point is what? Didn't the Angels actually end up firing the scout who "discovered" Trout in the first place?

 

 

 

Mike Trout is the most exciting thing to happen to baseball since the concession-stand hot dog. He's arguably the very best player in the game, even after he spotted everybody else a month this summer. At 21, he is the youngest to ever -- as in, ever -- produce a 25-homer/40-theft season.

 

Tulo is better.

"

 

[BigHurt3515]

I would worry about quality of competition with that particular school.

 

We drafted a guy who was at a junior college in the first round last year. There are players drafted out of junior colleges, community colleges, and smaller colleges then Southeast. I know he won't be picked in probably the top 15 rounds, but after I think he will be a great pick up and will be a fun bat to follow.. Not many first basemen our switch hitters who have power from both sides of the plate.

 

Here is what he did in the prospect summer league after his sophomore season:

 

Prospect League Stats

[caulfield12]

We drafted a guy who was at a junior college in the first round last year. There are players drafted out of junior colleges, community colleges, and smaller colleges then Southeast. I know he won't be picked in probably the top 15 rounds, but after I think he will be a great pick up and will be a fun bat to follow.. Not many first basemen our switch hitters who have power from both sides of the plate.

 

Here is what he did in the prospect summer league after his sophomore season:

 

Prospect League Stats

 

 

Yeah, I know, Sale came out of a tiny school still known more for basketball, and Pujols an even more lesser-known JC program in Kansas City (Maple Woods).

 

It can happen. Will just have to trust the scouts on his hitting potential. Sometimes it's very hard to determine without top-flight competition and playing year-round, like what happened with everyone overlooking Trout tucked away in New Jersey.

[Quin]

That article is full of s***. The Angels picked Randal Grichuk before they picked Mike Trout.

 

This kinda sums it up.

[BigHurt3515]

You're obviously biased and only championing the kid because he goes to your school that hinders your argument from being considered across the board. I wouldn't jump at a kid because he's a switch hitter, it's a nice a additive, but it's not a reason to draft someone. But in the 15th round, who gives a s*** bring him on. If he's having that kind of success you might as well mix him in with the several other project picks.

 

Yeah I am a biased but I am not claiming he should be a top 5 or 10 round pick. But after he would be a great pick up and someone to follow.

 

 

Yeah, I know, Sale came out of a tiny school still known more for basketball, and Pujols an even more lesser-known JC program in Kansas City (Maple Woods).

 

It can happen. Will just have to trust the scouts on his hitting potential. Sometimes it's very hard to determine without top-flight competition and playing year-round, like what happened with everyone overlooking Trout tucked away in New Jersey.

 

There are a lot of great players that come out of smaller schools so I have some hope, I know nobody else has seem him play besides myself but I would rather us draft him then some other team

 

He had another 4 hits today and an RBI. Close to batting .400 on the year now. There were about 4 scouts at the game yesterday and around 5 or 6 there today. I know one of them yesterday was for the Padres and I saw a Mariners and Royals scout there today.

[Dick Allen]

Because he was picked #29, and given a slot level bonus. If an organization was willing to bet their entire draft on him, shouldn't they have probably oh, I don't know, actually drafted the guy? Serious that it makes zero sense to speculate that an organization would be willing to bet a ridiculous amount on the guy when pretty much all of baseball actually passed once on the guy. That is just dumb because the actual reality doesn't support that at all.

He was picked 25.

[southsider2k5]

He was picked 25.

 

And missing the forest for the trees, I take it that means you have given up on this one.

[Dick Allen]

And missing the forest for the trees, I take it that means you have given up on this one.

No I haven't. You are advocating knowingly taking a lesser player at #3 so there is more money available for lesser players. It is the same thing as trading Sale for prospects. Quantity over quality. If you are so concerned the Sox will draft a bust at #3 the chances only get greater they choose a bust later in the draft.

 

As of now, the only player to appear in the major leagues for the Sox in the 2009 draft is Josh Phegley.

 

[caulfield12]

No I haven't. You are advocating knowingly taking a lesser player at #3 so there is more money available for lesser players. It is the same thing as trading Sale for prospects. Quantity over quality. If you are so concerned the Sox will draft a bust at #3 the chances only get greater they choose a bust later in the draft.

 

As of now, the only player to appear in the major leagues for the Sox in the 2009 draft is Josh Phegley.

 

 

How can anyone know that before the year 2018 or 2019?

 

Lesser ranked today by a preponderance of scouts means absolutely nothing tomorrow. There are a ton of scouts at the time of that draft who thought Mitchell had all the tools to be a wonderful player, and he'd proven it at the highest level of collegiate baseball, so it's not like he was one of the draft day wonders with a 52" vertical and 4.23 forty time for an NAIA team.

 

Can we say that every team in baseball believes that Rodon is going to have the best pro career, yet quite a few of those teams will deliberately skip over him (including the Marlins and Astros) and take what THEY KNOW TO BE a lesser player in Aiken or Kolek?

 

By definition, aren't the collegiate pitchers and hitters going to rank higher than the high school players, since 98% of the time collegiate players are much more polished and closer to the big league level at the time of the draft?

 

Can you state with 100% certainty that Rodon will be a better player than either Hoffman or Jackson when looking back 5-10 years from now?

 

 

Look no further than the Prior/Mauer situation. Everyone in baseball believed Prior was a once in a generation pitcher with repeatable mechanics. Or Strasburg from that draft. Or Bryce Harper. Doesn't guarantee anything. You're just as likely to end up with a talented enigma like JD Drew or Colby Rasmus as a franchise cornerstone. And even if you draft Harper/Strasburg, you can't guarantee their health.

 

Looking at all the sliders Rodon has thrown already in his career, would you be surprised at all if he goes through TJ surgery?

 

And for a pitcher we'll only control for six years, when you're staring right in the face losing 1 1/2 of those 6 due to surgery and recovery time, is he really the clear choice, and why is that?

Edited May 5, 2014 by caulfield12

[DirtySox]

One month to the draft.

 

Chris Crawford's updated board is up.

 

http://mlbdraftinsider.com/2014/05/the-board-2014-volume-iv/

[caulfield12]

One month to the draft.

 

Chris Crawford's updated board is up.

 

http://mlbdraftinsider.com/2014/05/the-board-2014-volume-iv/

 

 

Rodon and a high school pitcher at 44.

44 Keith Weisenberg RHP Osceola HS (Fla.) NR

 

Erick Fedde at 27. There's just no way he goes as high as the top five. And, if they do actually take Weisenberg, at least we can make some Breaking Bad references, now and again.

 

Still don't think high school arms is how they'll go in Rd 2, but we'll just have to wait and see.

 

 

Cubs would be taking Jackson, with Hoffman going to the Twins. Hmmmm....

Edited May 5, 2014 by caulfield12

[ILMOU]

We could trade into the competitive balance portion of the draft up to pick #35, correct? Not sure if I understand the rules completely.

[Dick Allen]

How can anyone know that before the year 2018 or 2019?

 

Lesser ranked today by a preponderance of scouts means absolutely nothing tomorrow. There are a ton of scouts at the time of that draft who thought Mitchell had all the tools to be a wonderful player, and he'd proven it at the highest level of collegiate baseball, so it's not like he was one of the draft day wonders with a 52" vertical and 4.23 forty time for an NAIA team.

 

Can we say that every team in baseball believes that Rodon is going to have the best pro career, yet quite a few of those teams will deliberately skip over him (including the Marlins and Astros) and take what THEY KNOW TO BE a lesser player in Aiken or Kolek?

 

By definition, aren't the collegiate pitchers and hitters going to rank higher than the high school players, since 98% of the time collegiate players are much more polished and closer to the big league level at the time of the draft?

 

Can you state with 100% certainty that Rodon will be a better player than either Hoffman or Jackson when looking back 5-10 years from now?

 

 

Look no further than the Prior/Mauer situation. Everyone in baseball believed Prior was a once in a generation pitcher with repeatable mechanics. Or Strasburg from that draft. Or Bryce Harper. Doesn't guarantee anything. You're just as likely to end up with a talented enigma like JD Drew or Colby Rasmus as a franchise cornerstone. And even if you draft Harper/Strasburg, you can't guarantee their health.

 

Looking at all the sliders Rodon has thrown already in his career, would you be surprised at all if he goes through TJ surgery?

 

And for a pitcher we'll only control for six years, when you're staring right in the face losing 1 1/2 of those 6 due to surgery and recovery time, is he really the clear choice, and why is that?

OK I will rephrase, you are taking a player you believe to be a lesser player. Is that OK?

 

Every pitcher is an injury risk. Rodon may be an injury risk. Chris Sale is an injury risk. Should the Sox trade him for prospects you don't believe could be as good as him?

 

Hoffman is clearly an injury risk. The HS guys are injury risks, let alone history of HS pitchers taken this high. They might be Doc Gooden (he had his own problems) they might be Zach Greinke (but it really took 6 years for him to establish himself as a top of the line guy, and then he gets expensive and is gone) they may be Todd Van Poppel or they may be Gavin Floyd (some scouts said he could be in a major league rotation as a HS pitcher).

 

If the Sox pass on Rodon because of signability concerns, the advantage they gained losing 99 games last year is lost. I don't think they will pass if he is still there, but it's all probably moot as I doubt he will be there. He has been the prize since last year. He hasn't been hurt. He still should be the prize.

 

Boras can't negotiate, and the player he is advising has very little leverage if the Sox choose to take him. He could go back to college, but that's not going to happen if he is taken 3rd.

Edited May 5, 2014 by Dick Allen

[caulfield12]

OK I will rephrase, you are taking a player you believe to be a lesser player. Is that OK?

 

Every pitcher is an injury risk. Rodon may be an injury risk. Chris Sale is an injury risk. Should the Sox trade him for prospects you don't believe could be as good as him?

 

Hoffman is clearly an injury risk. The HS guys are injury risks, let alone history of HS pitchers taken this high. They might be Doc Gooden (he had his own problems) they might be Zach Greinke (but it really took 6 years for him to establish himself as a top of the line guy, and then he gets expensive and is gone) they may be Todd Van Poppel or they may be Gavin Floyd (some scouts said he could be in a major league rotation as a HS pitcher).

 

If the Sox pass on Rodon because of signability concerns, the advantage they gained losing 99 games last year is lost. I don't think they will pass if he is still there, but it's all probably moot as I doubt he will be there. He has been the prize since last year. He hasn't been hurt. He still should be the prize.

 

Boras can't negotiate, and the player he is advising has very little leverage if the Sox choose to take him. He could go back to college, but that's not going to happen if he is taken 3rd.

 

Unless Hoffman becomes Verlander II and Rodon is simply another version of Francisco Liriano, tantalizingly talented, but, in the end, flawed.

 

Hoffman has at least two more starts before the draft, the first will be this Friday, if ECU reports are accurate.

 

Of course, there's no guarantee that Rodon/Hoffman both won't fall apart and Mr. Jackson becomes Joe Mauer Jr. with the Cubs.