What Do Those 5 Draft Picks Mean?
by mattwelch on Dec 26, 2008 10:23 PM PST
Email
PrintWhat does it mean to have 5 extra draft picks this year in the first two rounds, and how should that affect our decision on whether we sign Type A free agent Brian Fuentes (and therefore lose our own first-round pick)? There are a lot of ways to answer that question. One is simply to look at recent drafts, and see what kind of talent was selected at the spots the Angels will have. Assuming Jon Garland signs elsewhere, our compensation will look like this:
25th (Mets' first round pick)
26th (Yanks')
46th (supplemental pick for Frankie, estimated)
47th (supplemental pick for Teixeira, est.)
54th (supplemental for Garland, est.)
Our own first-round pick is at 33 (which, when you think about it, is actually kind of the second round).
So, let's start at 1998 -- the first year when there were 30 teams in the draft -- and take it to 2002, since a high schooler in June '02 is still only around 24 years old today, and many (if not most) players don't reveal themselves at the big-league level by then. In order, here are picks 25, 26, 33, 46, 47, and 54 in the 1998-2002 drafts. Only those who have made the big leagues get a hyperlink:
1998: Nate Bump, Rick Elder, Brad Wilkerson, David Kelton, Robbie Morrison, Eric Good
1999: Mike MacDougal, Ben Christensen, Jeff Heaverlo, Chris Duncan, Mike Mead, Brian Sanches
2000: Scott Heard, Corey Smith, Dustin McGowan, Dane Sardinha, Jason Young, J.D. Durbin
2001: Bobby Crosby, Jeremy Bonderman, Jeff Mathis, Andrew Sisco, Jon Switzer, Mike Rodriguez
2002: Matt Cain, John McCurdy, Matt Whitney, Darrell Rasner, Adam Donachie, William Johnson
Conclusions? Well, it's a small sample size, but I think we'll probably get at least one player who can help us, and three or four major leaguers overall. Should that prevent us from signing Brian Fuentes, if he comes at a nice price? I'd say no. I'll come up with some other ways of looking at this question in a bit.
This Fan-Post is authored by an independent fan. Tell us what you think and how you feel.
38 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Great point
And it definitely should not try preventing us from re-signing Vlad and Lackey because we get these great draft picks (recent post reply).
Fuentes had a 1.84 era away from Coors. And he wants to play for the Angels. And he may only cost 10 mil. That is pretty hard to pass up if it doesn’t mean losing Vlad and Lackey.
Angel Pitching, Angel Defense - get past that.
by vladtheimpaler on Dec 26, 2008 10:44 PM PST reply actions
Very Interesting
Of course it just makes me want to sign more free agents. It could take a lifetime to get lucky enough to get a “big bat” through the draft.
I'm still not over losing Tex.
I don’t think it’s about getting lucky. That would be nice, but I believe it would be more important to stock the little teams with more impact like players. This is something we have missed for a few years now, but could benefit the big team in a number of ways (trades, organizational perception, awards). However, with more picks in those rounds comes the responsibility of actually signing those players, and getting them indoctrinated into the Angel/Scioscia way of Baseball as soon as possible.
To Matt’s OP, these picks suggest we will find talented players who can, under the right environment, make an impact on the big team. I’d be happy with an Angel-raised McDougal/McGowan, but I think we can all agree a Cain and a healthy Bonderman would be ideal. Matt’s research suggests the type of players that are available at these draft positions could help, but as an Angel fan, we have to hope that our scouting department, talent evaluators, and organizational philosophy from the lowest club to the MLB level will effectively raise these kids into productive, impacting players at the MLB level. To that respect, I like our chances.
www.13stoploss.com
Impact players
can also come in the form of throwing the ball and not hitting it.
Pitchers count too, and lucky for us, those impact players from our farm system saved our season last year.
I brought sexy back, but they only gave me store credit....
One good point, one scary point...
However, with more picks in those rounds comes the responsibility of actually signing those players, and getting them indoctrinated into the Angel/Scioscia way of Baseball as soon as possible.
I agree with the first part – about signing the guys they draft. That is important, and the FO needs to be wary of going for guys who just won’t sign while at the same time, not drafting a Matt Bush just because he is signable.
The second part of the quote above might be the reason that Mike Napoli is the only Angel offensive prospect that has become a good/great MLB offensive player (I know, sample size…but he’s on the right track). Maybe they ARE being indoctrinated into the organizational approach swimmingly. Who’s to say that they aren’t learning to hack away and swing at anything and everything?
Until this team begins to value OBP with more than lip-service from a non-believer like Hatcher they will have trouble developing good MLB hitters. If they are lucky enough to draft a kid that already understands that part of the offensive game, they’ll luck into a big bat through the draft. But, I don’t hold out hope that Hatcher, Scioscia, etc. will actually DEVELOP good offensive players that value OBP.
Jim Scully
Lets all remember and love the fond memory
of Hatcher turning Kotchman into a free swinging below average offensive player from the wonder high OBP/SLG player he was a year or two earlier.
God I love our hitting coach.
I brought sexy back, but they only gave me store credit....
Its all HAtchers fault.
I hate the guy and will always hate the guy. The only thing I like him for is his passion he shows like the 2002 World series. He showed some fire, but still the guy is just a bag of balls now. They need to bring back Salmon as their hitting coach. He will teach them all what a strike zone is. And until he is gone they will keep being the same Win the Division, first round exit champs.
"Throw some CHED!"
by angelskid2210 on Dec 27, 2008 12:20 PM PST up reply actions
Salmon would be awesome
i remember hearing about the game in September where Salmon was on the field talking to the kids during batting practice… that was the game Wood hit 2 homers and SRod hit one.
Kotch would've had that.
by howiestheman on Dec 27, 2008 1:07 PM PST up reply actions
Salmon as hitting coach would especially be awesome this offseason
Many fans are let down again by this whole Tex thing. Assuming Reagins doesn’t pull some ninja act that wows us all, hiring Salmon would be a great morale booster, and much cheaper than a big bat FA. Although, after reading Suboptimal’s point below, maybe Salmon would actually do more good at a lower level like AA where the kids are still being molded rather than just fine tuned. But who knows if he’d even want to do that job. Not much glory in it.
Don't mess with Teix-ass or Bor-ass!
by Rally Manatee on Dec 27, 2008 3:30 PM PST up reply actions
It's not just Hatcher
Mickey Hatcher was not a good hitter: .280 / .313 / .377 career, and he walked just 4.55% of the time. But I think his direct influence is overestimated. By the time a hitter makes it to the bigs, he’s already “made”: he already has a stance, a swing, and a preference for certain pitches. Hatcher’s job is really to point out things the hitter doesn’t notice. Maybe he steps too soon, or the other team keeps feeding him curveballs. But Mickey Hatcher isn’t going to turn a slap-hitter into a slugger, or a hacker into a patient hitter. That development happens much sooner.
This has to be bigger than Hatcher. It must be happening at every level of the organization, because the Angels keep producing the same type of offensive players: aggressive contact hitters. They might specifically select for it in the draft. Maybe Hatcher oversees all of it, or maybe it’s Scioscia. He was also a contact hitter, though not as extreme as Hatcher. It could be something that was part of the organization even before Scioscia. I don’t know.
I agree.
But remember Woods batting stance got changed after going back down to the minors. His hands were lifted higher giving him a better chance at the high fastball and also keeping him higher for the off speed. To me that looked like the lower levels pointed it out and not Hatcher, so who knows. But something needs to change with their guys. But i still would love Salmon too. But remember when Carew was the hitting coach all he was was a slap hitter and they got rid of him. The problem is Hatcher and Soth are best of friends so if one goes maybe they both go.
Give the young guns a chance...if they suck wellll...
by angelskid2210 on Dec 27, 2008 2:08 PM PST up reply actions
I believe that was Jim Eppard
The hitting coach at Salt Lake. Wood is young enough to make those adjustments, but someone like, say, Maicer Izturis, with 1425 major league plate appearances, is not going to completely change his approach at the plate because of Hatcher.
For all I know, Hatcher is a great hitting instructor. There isn’t a direct link between good hitters and good hitting coaches: the Rangers’ hitting coach never even played in the majors. But someone, somewhere in the Angels organization is telling the kids to be aggressive, make contact, and above all, fear the strikeout. It’s probably a lot of different people.
Good hitters
don’t always make good hitting coaches and similarly, bad hitters don’t always make bad hitting coaches. A lot of times (but not ALL the time, please don’t mix up my words) the crappy hitters make better hitting coaches because since they sucked, they knew what it felt like to struggle and have to make adjustments. To the contrary, people like A-Rod, Pujols, or Manny could very well make bad hitting coaches if they decide to become a hitting coach one day. Hitting comes so naturally to them that they might have a hard time helping out those who don’t have natural hitting ability. It’s like having a college professor who is a genius but cannot explain things for shit because they all make so much sense to him that it is inconceivable to him that the students don’t understand the material.
by Chzburger Jones on Dec 31, 2008 2:08 AM PST up reply actions
I'm having a hard time remembering a great hitter who was a good coach
I think Rod Carew was as bad as it gets as a hitting coach — worse than Hatcher. It’s always stood to reason to me that the biggest geniuses would be the worst teachers, because how do you teach genius? (And as a player, how do you ever question someone who had such mad success?)
I'm confused.
From what I’ve read, Carew was a good hitting coach, because he studied what it was to be a hitter while he was playing.
Angels fan since '67
I've studied this question at length, though I haven't published
And what I found surprised even a Carew-disliker like me. Just take what hitters did before, during and after Carew’s coaching, and it’s pretty gruesome.
What about.......
Don Baylor, Terry Pendleton
Willie Mays Aikens is FREeeeeeeee
by Angel Aviator on Jan 1, 2009 9:18 AM PST up reply actions
There is a guy right now
that is getting a lot of complements on his ability as a hitting coach that wasn’t to bad as a player…
Donny “Baseball” Mattingly
Willie Mays Aikens is FREeeeeeeee
by Angel Aviator on Jan 1, 2009 9:25 AM PST up reply actions
Wow
i know that we can all have our opinions in here about whatever we want. it can mean something or not. but how many of guys are actual coaches? paid coaches? run your own baseball clubs? baseball business? you guys act like you know more then these professionals. i’m not the biggest Hatcher fan but he does get paid at the highest level so i’m going to assume he knows more then us.
Being paid for something...
doesn’t necessarily mean they are good at what they do. I am a professional musician and college professor. I get paid good coin to play a handful of high-profile gigs a year to supplement my teaching gig. I know that I get paid what I am worth, and I provide a service and am rewarded for it when I choose to take those gigs. I know what the market is for professional musicians with regard to pay for gigs, lessons, etc. I also know that a ton of my college students that get paid to teach lessons to younger students, and I’d be wary of hiring those students to wash my car, let alone teach my kids music.
I think a hitting coach has minimal impact on major league players – but who the team hires as hitting coach could say a lot about what the organization values in its offensive players. I don’t think that Hatcher does too much damage with the veterans, but if the same philosophies that are failing at the big league level are being taught throughout the system, then that is problematic. If the organization thought that OBP was important, chances are they would hire hitting coaches throughout the system that would preach patience, pitch recognition, waiting for the most “hittable” pitch, working the count, etc. I don’t see anything in their major league performance that tells me that those skills are valued at the minor league level, and if those skills ARE valued at the minor league level then those coaches need to be fired because that shit ain’t translating at all as they move up the ladder.
Jim Scully
i understand
that just because your paid doesn’t mean your good. what i’m trying to say is that this is the organizational philosophy. contact over OBP. you guys are getting mad at someone who was hired to preach that philosophy.
by HALO_86 on Dec 27, 2008 4:45 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Big League Hitting Coach
A good hitting coach knows his hitters well. He knows what makes them successful and can recognize what they need to do once they get away from that path that has made them a successful hitter
Willie Mays Aikens is FREeeeeeeee
by Angel Aviator on Jan 1, 2009 9:22 AM PST up reply actions
You are correct, sir
And I’m sure there are plenty of others. (Though Pendleton was a weird hitter — terrible some years, then .320 others.)
But when you think of hitting coaches, who do you think of? Hrniak, Lau, that Rangers guy…. And how many times in your non-baseball life have you observed the most talented practitioners sputter with frustration when they try to teach mere mortals?
I think your talking about ,,,,,,,,
Ted Williams yeah?
Rangers hitting coach Rudy Jaramillo is the Lau and Hrniak of this generation.
Your right though a lot of good hitters can’t tell you why they hit or explain it they just “HIT”
Willie Mays Aikens is FREeeeeeeee
by Angel Aviator on Jan 4, 2009 10:49 AM PST up reply actions
then
how do bad hitters teach players how to hit better?
Not that they were bad
they just were not GREAT
Average hitters worked at it in order to be average and therefore have a good understanding of what it takes to hit. A lot of times it’s mental and how they approach the game/situations
Willie Mays Aikens is FREeeeeeeee
by Angel Aviator on Jan 5, 2009 9:44 PM PST up reply actions
And our winner is...
Jim Scully!
Nailed it.
"There's nothing that cleanses your soul like getting the hell kicked out of you." - Woody Hayes
by johnnyangel101 on Dec 27, 2008 9:51 AM PST up reply actions
For a change, I'll offer the shorter version:
It’s this simple. It truly is.
Unfortunately, I’m not sure Mickey Hatcher can read.
"…he has a 2 seam ‘heavy’ fastball that has sink but he does not throw a ‘sinker’." Angel Aviator on Jake Peavy.
by GarretSaysSuckIt on Dec 27, 2008 5:07 PM PST up reply actions
Yep
When the Angels won the WS due to their offense….
Salmon and Glaus just always understood the strikezone.
Speizio came from the A’s who preach onbase %
Eck came from the Red Sox who do the same.
And even Fullmer understood the strikezone ok.
And the players that didnt’ understand the strikezone…. ie GA and Molina, they just happened to be in their peak years.
You know I keep thinking
I don’t really think pitching wins Championships.
I think its more who has the more clutch, effective offense who can coup with intense scouting and pressure.
I think even the most mediocre pitchers can thrive when they know exactly what to throw every batter, every inning. I personally think that pitching in big games is easier than hitting in big games especially with runners on.
Every batter is scouted, and broken down so much for the playoffs that it really takes a good hitter to shine through it. I think that is why Vlad is nearly rendered ineffective each year, he has too many holes in his swing and teams break down a pitch by pitch sequence to completely neutralize him.
Very good hitters who know the strike zone and have few holes (Bonds, Texieria, Man Ram, Ortiz, Pujols, Howard, Glaus, Jeter) can turn the pressure back on the pitchers and thrive.
Teams that keep winning these Series are teams with solid offenses and usually one one very good pitcher.
Im starting to think the old saying that pitching wins everything is completely wrong. I think it takes scouting and good clutch pressure offenses.
Take for example the Angels in 08. Once they got to the ALDS against the Red Sox they had pitching. But they looked like they were being sodomized consistently in the dugout. So serious. They were 0-900 RISP.
They beat themselves, even with better pitching than the Red Sox.
I brought sexy back, but they only gave me store credit....
Maybe we could
have a draft like the Blow Sox did. They got Ellsbury and Bucholz and there shortstop. so i think they are pretty important. The problem is that they love to go after high school kids when i think they should go after 3 or 4 year college kids who are more prepared like an ellsbury or a longoria.
"Throw some CHED!"
im sure if you look at the players just taken BETWEEN those picks
you’ll see waaaay more guys we recognize as well. It will be interesting to see where the scouts go with this draft. Some college players with a quicker path to the Angels might not be a terrible idea…
Prediction...
We’ll sign someone like Fuentes for ‘only’ 10 million a year when our very own home grown, World Series winning difference maker Frankie could have been had for $3 to $4 more million per year.
That’s when I’ll barf. All because we held out hope for a guy that has always been about the money and has never won anything while calling our own a greedy bastard for wanting to ‘test free agency.’
Ugh.
Well the dollar amount hasn't been reported...
There is a post that the Angels did sign Fuentes.
Which means we give up a draft pick to Colorado? And with Lowe expected to sign for the Mets, what does that do with our outstanding draft picks.
I hope Garland goes to some middle of the pack team so we can pick up a few more good draft picks.
We lose pick #33 in the draft
Still maintain #s 25 (Mets’), 26 (Yanks’), and then somewhere around 46 & 47 (supplementals for Teix and Frankie). From what I understand, the quality of Garland’s taker has no bearing on the order of the supplemental we’ll get as a result (just as the #s 46 & 47 don’t). Those just go to the teams in order of their own records, which means we’ll get the last of the Grade B supplemental picks, which will be around 54.
Well get ready to barf
Although Fuentes’ deal is much more affordable.
This is the worst offseason in years. But hey we got Colorado's closer!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Ku Klux Klan, umpires and bowling: Why the minor leagues tossed out Jim Evans academy
- The Cardinals Hall of Fame can now be found at Bill Clinton’s library in Arkansas (Huh?)
- Will Bryce Harper start the season with the Nationals?
- Mitch Mustain puts football behind him, signs reported rookie deal with White Sox
- Robinson Cano and Denzel Washington face off in Jay Leno’s Yankees trivia contest
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
