Rah-Rah
As odd as it may be, JD Martin's invite to spring training got me thinking. For whatever reason, I've been rooting for him since his 2005 breakout season (56IP, 63K, 8BB). Maybe I want to salvage something from that 2001 draft, maybe I have an affinity for short RHPs, maybe I sympathize with a guy who has talent but who has been on the injury fringe for the past few years. Regardless, it made me realize that there are a handful of guys in our minor league system that I adopt as "my guys", and pay attention to more than others.
A few others also on my current list are:
Nick Weglarz - He's a popular pick now, but I think it was the small sample size of his high school experience - in Canada, no less - and the whiskey tango foxtrot of a very young third round pick in 2005 that put him on the list.
Scott Lewis - It was the courage of the pick in 2004 that did it for me. More than the courage, perhaps, was what I thought was the intelligence of the pick - take a guy who struck out 36 guys in consecutive games and trust your medical staff to bring him back into the fold and give you first round-pick value.
I've got more favorites, but that's not the point of this diary. The point is this: who are some of the guys you root for, and why? Make me a fan of somebody I don't currently follow. Go.
51 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Re: Rah-Rah
As far as prospects because of a baseball reason, I've always wanted to see Michael Aubrey finally stay out of the training room.
Re: Rah-Rah
Eddie Mujica, because I like fat pitchers.
Re: Rah-Rah
Re: Rah-Rah
Tony Sipp - because it's easy to forget that he was striking out 12 guys/9 innings before he got injured
Weglarz - not because he's Canadian, but because he's young, takes walks, and hits homers
Goedert - a 2B who mashes...and his name is Go-Dirt
Kelvin De La Cruz & Santo Frias - the nickname (and pitching) potential here is huge
Re: Rah-Rah
Re: Rah-Rah
I initially rooted for the guy, strictly because I was sick of all the BP talk and kvetching during the off-season. I deemed his success as a way to shut those people up. But, I soon realized my folly as those type of fans will never shut up.
There will always be a "BP" on the tips of their tongues and fingertips.
Re: Rah-Rah
And yes, Santo is the new Fausto. Would you like Frias with that?
by ken from alexandria on Feb 14, 2008 11:19 AM EST reply actions
Re: Rah-Rah
Re: Rah-Rah
You gotta root for a guy who can think.
(Although I used to root for Jody Gerut, too, because he went to Stanford and was refreshingly literate. Come to think of it, he probably thought too much and stayed healthy too little. Oh well.)
Re: Rah-Rah
Re: Rah-Rah
In general, I have no particular affection for "brainy" players. I have no problem with them, but I already know plenty of very smart people, and I see no reason to believe that exceptional intelligence makes somebody a better ballplayer, or for that matter a better person.
But you still have to love Garko. Underdog, they said he wasn't athletic enough, had no position, got drafted as a college senior, etc. One year later, Triple-A, three years later, a solid major league starter. You guys can have your "high risk" picks, I'll take Garko. Chuck talked me into it.
Re: Rah-Rah
Re: Rah-Rah
Re: Rah-Rah
In contradistinction to Jay's opinion, I do have a particular affection for "brainy" players. It all began when I was just a lad of seven, and the Most Brainy Player of All Time led our Brownies to NFL glory.
I guess it was imprinting or something.
Re: Rah-Rah
by woodsmeister on Feb 14, 2008 4:29 PM EST up reply actions
Re: Rah-Rah
Re: Rah-Rah
Fausto and Jhonny actually were both favorites of mine, going back 2-3 years before they made it. With Fausto, it was in part because nobody could figure out how he got so many batters out without the K's, but it was just too much to ignore, and in part because he was a year younger as the big bust class of 2001, and he just ran them right over. I just wanted to shake those guys and say, "See? Why can't you boys be more like Fausto? He doesn't have an out pitch, but do you see him complaining?"
Fausto all by himself just makes it hard to take the draft too seriously. I mean, where was all the fuss over his signing? Nowhere. What Big Four was he a part of? Nothing. Where's our three-part series on Shapiro's international signings, year-by-year. Nowhere. We know everything about these drafted kids and nothing about the international signings. Maybe Rosario is the equivalent of a recent first-round pick, but how would we know? We just wouldn't.
I haven't jumped on the Jeff Stevens bandwagon, but I appreciate it. I am still carrying a torch for Shin-Shoo Choo. And I have to admit, I was a big Alex Escboar fan. I just loved watching him throw guys out at third, and he was one of those monster-or-nothing guys as a hitting prospect. Nothing as it turns out.
Mujica is another one. It doesn't seem possible that a guy does what he did in 2006 and doesn't eventually have a pretty good career.
Re: Rah-Rah
Loved Fausto since I saw him pitch for Lake County in '03 (first LC'er to the majors, I believe). Other faves: Raffy Perez, Kouz, Garko, Sipp.
Current prospects I followed closely last year: ACab, Weglarz, Goedert, Espino, Perdomo, among others.
And Adam Miller, listening to the 2004 Kinston playoffs where he was the most dominant pitcher we've had in years - still hoping he reaches his potential for some stretch of time in the majors.
Re: Rah-Rah
Re: Rah-Rah
We had a lot of high picks in 2006 and could have afforded to take just the tiniest of risks in the first round, but no - we take the soft tossing lefty over the fireballing ace named Joba Chamberlain, taken two picks later by you know who.
Micro-rant over, point being I've got some built-in bias regarding Mr. Huff.
Re: Rah-Rah
1) anger/regret over a guy who gets passed over in the MLB draft. there is almost always a guy who we "could have had"...999 times out of a 1000 it's a pointless exercise
Re: Rah-Rah
I hope he becomes the next Glavine, but I'm just saying, through no fault of his own he's not one of my "faves" that I rah for. Yet. A stellar half year at Akron and a promotion to Buffalo would go a long way towards changing that...
Re: Rah-Rah
Re: Rah-Rah
by ken from alexandria on Feb 19, 2008 6:19 PM EST up reply actions
Re: Rah-Rah
I think particularly in 2006, when their overall budget didn't need to be very high because of a lack of high picks, it's very unlikely they would have been concerned about signability over a few bucks. And let's not forget, there's a difference between just not wanting to write the check and not believing that a guy is really worth the check.
They didn't pass Joba up, they selected somebody else. The fact that Joba lasted until the 41st pick speaks for itself.
Re: Rah-Rah
...no, triceps:
http://yankeeprospects.blogspot.com/2006/12/prospect-profile-joba-chamberlain-3.html
Re: Rah-Rah
Pretty much very other team had a better drafting position than we did. We had four picks between 56 and 75, but that is not the same as "a lot of high picks."
Dodgers ... 7, 26, 31.
Red Sox ... 27, 28, 40, 44, 71.
Indians ... 39, 56, 57, 69, 75.
BA ranked Huff as the 22nd best prospect in that draft, and we got him at #38. They now say Huff has both the best changeup and the best control of any of our prospects.
I mean, the guy has already had an elbow injury, doesn't that prove he was risky? What does he have to do to be risky enough for you, catch on fire?
Re: Rah-Rah
That said, I agree with Jay here. Huff was viewed as the starter with the quickest path to the majors. How can that be a bad thing. Getting pitchers to the majors is half the challenge.
Re: Rah-Rah
What can I say? My initial reaction when Huff was picked was anti-excitement, safety over ceiling.
Re: Rah-Rah
I'm sorry, I just think that's bunk. There is no evidence that we pass up guys with higher ceilings in favor of "safer" picks. There is nothing safe about a guy with a Triple-A ceiling.
Re: Rah-Rah
Don't have the time at the moment, but I'll come back with a little analysis.
Re: Rah-Rah
Re: Rah-Rah
"Polish" was the word I was looking for - they weight polish heavily. That quality in a draftee that gives the greatest chance for a smooth transition to pro ball, and maybe the best indicator of aptitude for skill refinement.
But yeah, we're talking SSS, and I'll wait for June to come around to get into cases.
Re: Rah-Rah
Again, Huff was rated #22 and they got him at #38, and I don't see how that can be criticized in isolation. Arguing that they should have taken Joba even though they had injury concerns, that just doesn't make any sense given it was their only pick out of the first 55. The very simple fact is that there aren't a bunch of high-ceiling guys to choose from at #38, or even at #28.
I'd also note that their best two pitching prospects are both high school draft picks.
Re: Rah-Rah
Just doing a quick pass at the first picks from 2003 on, we got:
Aubrey
Sowers
Crowe
Huff
Mills
They all share the "polished" factor more than the "highest ceiling" factor. Aubrey actually had both, being the most polished available as well as a high MLB ceiling. The others were arguably the most ready for pro ball on the board at the time. Mills perhaps still had defensive questions, but his pro baseball exposure and gamer rep fits in the mold nicely.
But in each case except for Aubrey, there were guys on the board who projected higher, either as a pitcher or position player. Now I wouldn't draft on the basis of raw ceiling either, it just comes down to balance. If I can pick between two players who are both highly ranked and successful, I would probably pick the one with the higher ceiling more often than we have.
Re: Rah-Rah
I'm more excited about Mills than I have been about any draft pick -- although to be fair, draft picks are not exciting to me in general. You know my thing, I didn't really care about Adam Miller when we drafted him, I cared when he started tearing up the Carolina League.
I got all excited about Guthrie, and I was intrigued when they drafted his "personal catcher" a year later -- that was Garko, by the way. Weglarz of course. But Mills just seems like this perfect combination, still very young and raw but (it would seem) significantly less risky than a high school pick.
Bottom line, I just like drafting a guy at 20 a whole lot better than drafting a guy at 18 or 22. I'd be pretty pleased if we drafted only 20-year-olds from now on, and my admittedly non-expert instinct is that that would be a damned fine strategy.
Re: Rah-Rah
2003 - Aubrey: Awright!
2004 - Sowers: Fine with it, although I would have been fine with Homer Bailey as well. Sorry to say I wasn't thinking too much about Phil Hughes at the time, although of course he did have FOR projection.
2005 - Crowe: I was fine with it and certain he was being drafted as a 2B. When I found out he was to remain an OF, I couldn't help but wondering what the rationale was - how narrow a projection can you get? He can only play LF in the majors, with little power and will only be successful if he comes thru as the high OBP leadoff sparkplug - a very limited job description. I was more interested in Travis Buck, Colby Rasmus, Bogusevic (as an OF), each of whom I thought had a better future in the OF.
2006 - Huff: Ho-hum. Another soft lefty whose best projection is back of the rotation, even if it's a swift rise. Joba was the obvious comp.
2007 - Mills: I was hoping for Jason Heyward, but wasn't unhappy with Mills. He certainly seems ready to play, and I like his bat. And he's 20!The big question will be if he can cut it in the field.
Needless to say, I'm looking forward to seeing how all of them do this year. I even have Aubrey as my dark horse to finally stay healthy and earn some ML at-bats this year.
Re: Rah-Rah
- 2003 - same as you, and I liked Snyder a lot, too. TOOLZ!
- 2004 - my main thinking, you can't really screw up a #6 pick except by over-drafting, which nobody believed this was.
- 2005 - same as you, and my confusion over this pick, and the ongoing enthusiasm for Crowe, continues to this day. From draft day to the present, the guy has never for one minute looked better than an average third-rounder. So far, the possibility of moving him to 2B was the only thing that has ever been worth a look about this player, and it is INCREDIBLE how badly that went. I still think they should have given it a full season -- they stopped the experiment because they felt it was going to distract him from developing as a hitter. Boy, did that plan totally fail or what?
- 2006 - Yes, ho hum, but what did you expect out of a #38 pick?
Talking about Huff and Joba like they were Top 20 guys, with Huff being "safer" and Joba being "higher ceiling," doesn't make any sense. Huff was "safer," but only because of Joba's injury, not because Joba was developmentally more distant.
It still just amuses me no end that people want more high risk/reward picks from the Indians. I would think that people who know anything about Indians draft picks would still be trying to get the bad taste out of their mouths from the 2001 draft, in which we drafted five guys fitting that exact description -- Foley had just turned 17 -- and have virtually nothing to show for it seven years later.
Re: Rah-Rah
Like I said, its not either or, its balance. If I had to choose one or the other over the long haul, I'd rather have them play safe repeatedly with polished college guys than spend every pick in the top 5 rounds on raw HS pitchers who are just getting used to shaving.
But the reality is that there are more than those two choices, and seasoning a basic formula that decreases the risk of early pro flameouts with equally calculated departures in favor of ML projection when the risk is hedged - I'd like to see a little more of that.
Mirabelli's not running the draft this year, apparently. It'll be interesting to see if there's any change in emphasis.

by 
















