The Draft is Tomorrow
With all due respect to Pat, who I think is dead-on in his writing about 99% of the time, there are a number of assertions I disagree with here (like the notion that the phrase "five-tool" doesn't really mean anything, for example), but I'll just concentrate on this one:
There's a couple reasons why I think the Pirates are looking towards Alvarez as the pick. One is that I assume that Huntington is planning on building around Walker and McCutchen and Alvarez is about the same age as the two of them. Adding a third player to that core would be just another step in the right direction.
If, in fact, the Pirates are leaning toward Alvarez (and most indications suggest that Pat's right about that), I hope it would be for the sole reason that he's the best player available, because the idea that McCutchen and Walker will form the core of a good team is just way off base.
McCutchen might become a star, but the evidence there is far from definitive. He was mediocre in Class AA last year. While he appears to be back on track this year -- so far he's shown a good mix of contact, speed, patience and power at AAA -- that's no assurance of future success. For perspective, McCutchen's list of PECOTA comparables entering this season included Grady Sizemore, Brandon Phillips and Torii Hunter. It also included busts like Choo Freeman, Jason Romano and Corey Smith. I usually roll my eyes when someone brings up Chad Hermansen on a message board, and I don't think McCutchen is nearly as likely to go belly-up as Hermansen was, but a bit of caution is in order. You can compare McCutchen to someone like Jay Bruce or Justin Upton to see why. There are better prospects out there.
As for Walker, even if he works out I don't think he's a core player. He's never shown the sort of power you'd hope to see from a third baseman, and his career minor league OBP is .324. His performance this year has been horrible. In fairness, he's been young for his leagues, but other than the first-round pedigree, where's the evidence that this guy is an elite prospect?
Maybe I'm putting words in Pat's mouth some here, but the question remains: Are these guys core players? I'd say that McCutchen has a pretty good chance of being one, but it's far from certain, and that's it. He's one player. After that the Pirates' minor league system has Steve Pearce and a bunch of suspects.
In other words, there's no core here. It just doesn't exist. The Reds have a great core of young players. So do the Diamondbacks. The Pirates don't. That's why, all other things being equal, I'd prefer a high-upside high school kid. If the Pirates want to take Alvarez, that's fine with me, but it had better be because he's the best, not because they want to add to some existing core (and certainly not because of who is agent is). They can grab the Pedro Alvarezes of the world later, once they actually have that core in place.
* * *
Incidentally, if you'd told me when I started blogging that I would become some sort of advocate for toolsy high school talent, I would have laughed at you.
0 recs |
23 comments
Comments
Let's not forget some sleepers
such as Shelby Ford, Jim Negrych, and Brian Friday. Plus you got McLouth and Doumit for the next few seasons. Imagine this lineup.
LF Cutch
2b Ford
CF McLouth
C Doumit
3b Alvarez
1b Pearce
RF N. Walker (why not?)
SS Friday
U Negrych
by Bad Andy on Jun 4, 2008 7:08 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
See, to me, that doesn’t look like a very good lineup. Doumit will be nearing 30 by the time most of those players enter their primes; Ford, Friday and Negrych are just as you describe them (sleepers—I strongly doubt Negrych in particular will ever make it to the majors); and Walker just doesn’t appear to be that good. That leaves us leaning very heavily on McLouth, plus an injury-prone catcher, Steve Pearce, and two guys who are promising but a long way from proving themselves.
by Charlie on Jun 4, 2008 9:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't forsee that either
I can only hope Neal pulls off some good deals in the near future
by Bad Andy on Jun 4, 2008 9:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Shelby Ford, Jim Negrych, and Brian Friday
might form a decent core of infielders for Indy in the next couple of years.
Ford will probably spend most of his time on the DL, though.
Negrych will “impress” as a third baseman with no power, of course.
Brian Friday will replace the current middle IF Brian at Indy and play a little in Pittsburgh-probably.
Walker doesn`t show the power people projected at one point. The wrist injury?
If he is chosen by the Bucs, I hope that Alvarez and his missing hamate bone show a quick rebound in power and, in general, an awesome ability to “rake.”
I still like Beckham`s upside, and prefer Posey to Alvarez, too.
McClouth, McCutchen, Doumit, Pearce…man, do we ever need some big trades this year and stellar drafts in the years to come!!!
by patthatt on Jun 4, 2008 10:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Walker's power
He’s got an Isolated Power of .189 so far this year. That’s actually not bad, and it’s up from his .174 last year (which in turn was up from his .151 the season before). It’s the singles and the walks that aren’t there for him right now.
I think that Walker will show more power down the road. Guys who hit a lot of doubles/triples usually transfer some of those to HR as they reach baseball middle age.
by Vlad on Jun 5, 2008 9:23 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well
I probably should’ve been clearer. What I think is that Huntington is building with those guys in mind because it’s either them or no one. Whether we like it or not, ending the losing streak is always going to be a priority for this franchise until it happens.
That being said, I think Alvarez is the best prospect in the draft and if he’s there at #2, we were handed a gift in the form of his injury. I was trying to read between the lines into some of Huntington’s motivation because I’m cynical and distrustful of everything the Pirates do, even with different people in charge.
And I don’t know why, but the term “five-tool player” makes me shudder. It’s probably Chad Hermansen’s fault.
http://whereisvanslyke.blogspot.com
http://sports.aol.com/fanhouse/mlb
by whygavs on Jun 4, 2008 7:41 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
When I think of 5-tool
I think of JJ Davis and belive me I shudder just thinking about that.
by Bad Andy on Jun 4, 2008 8:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agree with Pat
3 of the 5 tools are glove, arm, and speed.
Give me a slow fat guy that can hit 40 HR and has a good eye. Not that Pat said that, but, tools shmools. Baseball is a game of skills.
by azibuck on Jun 4, 2008 10:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, but guys who have well-rounded sets of tools age better and are more likely to develop. A fat, slow 20-year-old with good power and patience is a lot more likely to become a fat, slow 27-year-old who can’t play defense or stay off the DL than he is to become a star. See Ben Grieve, Jeremy Brown, etc.
I agree that when you’re talking about guys in or near the majors, then skills are what you should be looking for. I, too, prefer to stay away from the Reggie Abercrombies of the world. But guys with diverse tools often are the ones who develop in the minors and who have long, productive careers.
by Charlie on Jun 4, 2008 11:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
PS, Point taken that too many of the PIrates’ decisions over the past ten years or so have had to do with things like speed that, in and of themselves, don’t do a whole lot. The last thing I want is for the Pirates to be playing someone like Nyjer Morgan because of his “tools.” But when you’re talking about someone like Beckham, it’s different.
See http://ussmariner.com/2008/04/21/sexson-and-old-player-skills/>this, for example.
by Charlie on Jun 4, 2008 11:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I completely get what you’re saying, here, but my point was that every single highly-touted high schooler is going to be considered “5-tool” or he’s not going to be worth a pick at that point. I’d simply prefer a much more tangible description of skill to help set him apart from other players on his level.
http://whereisvanslyke.blogspot.com
http://sports.aol.com/fanhouse/mlb
by whygavs on Jun 5, 2008 12:50 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I guess I just don’t really agree. I don’t really recall some of the top high-school hitters from last year - Mike Moustakas or Josh Vitters, for example - being described that way. It probably is a term that gets bandied about too much by, say, players’ coaches, or the organizations who pick the players, but sources like that are easy enough to see through.
by Charlie on Jun 5, 2008 1:22 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Neil Walker
was an absolute stud in high school—contact, power, glove, arm and speed (at least for his position). So this is, what, almost five years later and we aren’t even sure if he is worth a chance in the starting lineup?
High school players are just too risky when you have so many guys on the board (Alvarez, Posey, Smoak) who you are pretty sure will be at least a useful major-league bat.
by DITO on Jun 5, 2008 9:24 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
People are prematurely freaking out about Walker.
He’s 22. If he’d gone to college, he’d be two months into his first year of full-season pro ball.
by Vlad on Jun 5, 2008 9:26 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not all of them are.
Look at Hosmer, for instance.
by Vlad on Jun 5, 2008 9:25 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Another thought
My impression was that our player development system was below average under Littlefield. We have not replaced that many people from the previous regime. Therefore, it is possible that our player development system is still not very good and may take some time to fix. If that is the case, then it is probably better to draft more polished players rather than high-upside high school players. Drafting high-upside guys only makes sense when you have the ability to DEVELOP their skills. If we lack that ability, then we should draft guys who have already developed their skills. This entire line of thinking is based on the notion that our player development system is ineffective; I have no idea whether that assumption is true or not. What does everyone else think about this?
by houksyndrome on Jun 4, 2008 9:48 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
It’s an interesting idea, but I think we need time to evaluate whether the player development system is actually still bad. Yeah, a lot of the minor league staff is still in place, but a number of sweeping changes were made.
by Charlie on Jun 4, 2008 9:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Our pick...
will not be Alvarez for the simple reason that the Rays will not pass him up. We will be choosing between Beckham and Posey and possibly Matusz (I forget how to spell his name). He’s a pretty good pitcher, albeit not a #2 but he projects safely as a #3 with ace potential. I really wouldn’t be surprised if we drafted Posey or Schumaker as well. However, if Alvarez falls we will draft him and it will be because he’s the best player in the draft. I’m not so sure this regime plans to gut the entire major league roster. I know some players like Nady and Marte will go but don’t be surprised we hang on to Bay with the hopes of competing next year if our pitching mysteriously regains its form. Keep in mind I am not suggesting this is the course of action I’m just saying I have a feeling this may be the case. Charlie, you are dead on in your analysis of McCutchen and Walker. Walker is young but has not shown any real power potential since injuring his wrist and he has zero plate dicsipline. As for McCutchen, he looks better this year but doesn’t look anything like a potential superstar. These two are nowhere near ready to step in and become every day impact players at the major league level.
by Slick1 on Jun 4, 2008 10:10 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
alvarez
Everything I’ve read indicates the Rays will not draft Alvarez.
I’ll be happy with Alvarez or Beckham, though I prefer Alvarez because the system needs power.
by bolton on Jun 4, 2008 11:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I personally...
want Alvarez too because I believe he is the best player in the draft. I truly believe that Smoak has a comparable bat, and power, but the fact Alvarez can play 3b gives him the edge imo. After researching Tim Beckham more, I like the kid but I’m not sure he;s the #2 pick in the draft. It;s an extremely risky pick for the Pirates and one we cannot screw up. I don’t agree with Charlie that we should draft HS players with hgih upside in the 1st round. Not when there is really good talent available. Tim Beckham doesn’t project to have a lot of power from what I’ve read. .300 hitter yes but power, well the evidence is not there yet. We need to infuse power in this system with the 1st pick or we might as well draft Matusz. I’m not sure Gordan Beckham isn’t the better bet. Not quite as much range as Tim Beckham but does have 15-20 HR potential as a SS.
by Slick1 on Jun 5, 2008 12:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I disagree on a bunch of points.
1) You’re underestimating the value of McCutchen’s defense. He is, by all accounts, a plus glove in CF, and runs are runs regardless of where they come from.
2) Who is Schumaker? Do you mean Skipworth? Right now, basically every media outlet in the world is reporting that Alvarez is our top target, and that Tampa is going back and forth between Beckham and Posey. I agree that we’ll probably take a catcher at some point in the early rounds, but it’s much more likely to be someone like Petey Paramore or Jake Jefferies than either of those guys.
3) As I noted above, Walker’s power indicators have actually been steadily improving for several years now. A lot of people seem to be wrongly conflating “power” and “home runs”, when the two aren’t the same thing.
4) Players like Ryan Braun who come up and dominate right off the bat are the exception, not the rule. Even future impact players generally need a year or two of adjustment time. Just look at Barry Bonds: .223/.330/.416 as a 21-year-old rookie. How’d he turn out?
by Vlad on Jun 5, 2008 9:41 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hmm...
“He’s a pretty good pitcher, albeit not a #2 but he projects safely as a #3 with ace potential.”
Ah, yes, another “safe” #3 guy.
by patthatt on Jun 4, 2008 10:50 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Not exactly what I meant...
but I get your point. What I meant was that at #2 he is a bit of an overdraft but he is definitely top #5. He projects as #3 starter with the potential of being an ace. He has the most upside of any pitcher in the draft. He has a plus slider and plus plus change and throws hard for a lefty (low to mid 90’s, think healthy Gorzelany) The safe part is that most scouts thinks it’s a given he at least be a middle of the rotation starter (worst case scenario). None of our recent #1’s, save maybe Lincoln, were projected as an ace. Bullington, Burnett and Maholm all projected as #3’s at best. Big difference. I want Alvarez as our #1, but given our obvious lack of pitching depth in the org, I wouldn’t at all be upset if we picked Matusz even though no one in the world wants to hear that. With that being said I’m nearly 95% sure that won’t happen. From what I’m reading its Alvarez or T. Beckham.
by Slick1 on Jun 5, 2008 12:12 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

by 













