10th overall pick

[zoom]

Anyone have a couple of names that they are targeting for this pick? 

[NFA Brian]

My guess is they'll target a college arm.

The college bats for that level will almost certainly be gone. Dustin Ackley and Grant Green both should go before #9.

I'd guess the top HS bat, Donovan Tate, will also be off the board.

There should be guys like Vanderbilt's Mike Minor, Baylor's Kendal Volz, Arizona's Jason Stoffel, and Arizona State's Mike Leake. I'm not sure I'd gamble on a HS arm there

[Obed_Marsh]

Aaron Crow.

[cmdterps44]

Aaron Crow.

'

I hope we steer clear of that queer. (sorry had to make some cool rhyming scheme for some reason)


I have no idea who we'd get but id like to get Grant Green

[NFA Brian]

id like to get Grant Green

I would be shocked if he didn't go top 5

[cmdterps44]

I would be shocked if he didn't go top 5

Yea, just wishful thinking on my part

[zoom]

Thanks Brian.  I actually found some great stuff from your site. 

[wisefan11]

Thanks Brian.  I actually found some great stuff from your site. 

Yeah, I also noticed Rich Poythress from Brian's draftwatch. Last week, the first baseman from Georgia had 6 hits and 10 RBI in 10 at-bats, with 2 doubles, 4 home runs, 2 BB and 0 K. You can never have too many power prospects.

[MrMadison]

#1...there should be absolutely no discussion/debate about it at all(and the fact that people are actually debating this is infuriating). unless his arm breaks - we take Strasburg, we sign Strasburg. period.

#10 is a far more interesting pick to talk about, imo. i don't think there is really a clear target @ 10.

[JMUalumni]

#10 is a far more interesting pick to talk about, imo. i don't think there is really a clear target @ 10.

I agree, but it will be difficult to do so until the pool of talent settles and the top 15-20 prospects for the June draft become more clear.  I think this discussion will really begin to pick up in May when the more serious mock drafts start popping up.

[MrMadison]

I agree, but it will be difficult to do so until the pool of talent settles and the top 15-20 prospects for the June draft become more clear.  I think this discussion will really begin to pick up in May when the more serious mock drafts start popping up.

it's a damn shame that everyone is debating the clear and obvious no-brainer choice at #1, and nobody is really talking about #10. I'm talking about in the Media of course.

[sportsfan882]

Did you guys see this post from the nationals.com board?

After I saw him on MLB TONIGHT last week, I wrote Dr. Mike Marshall, the onetime Dodger pitcher and Cy Young Award winner who is now a doctor of kinesiology, and asked him what he thought of Stephen Strasburg's mechanics and potential for injury. Below is his response, which you can verify by writing him at drmikemarshall@earthlink.net, an e-mail address you will find at his site: <http://www.drmikemarshall.com>.

In case you didn't read my earlier post on Dr. Marshall, you can watch his two-part interview on the MLB Network at this link: <http://mlb.mlb.com/media/video.jsp?mid=200903263990519>. The parts are titled "Dr. Mike Marshall discusses pitching and baseball" and "Dr. Marshall demonstrates new pitching techniques".

Here is Dr. Marshall's response to me:

Dear Sir,

This is the first time that I have seen video of Mr. Strasburg. Unfortunately, what I see is not good. He uses the worst of the 'traditional' baseball pitching motion.

That is, he takes the baseball out of his glove with the palm of his pitching hand on top of the baseball, which causes him to have 'Late Pitching Forearm Turnover,' which causes him to have 'Reverse Pitching Forearm Bounce.'

While it is not as bad as Mr. Lincecum's bounce, he will, in time, also rupture his Ulnar Collateral Ligament.

Mr. Strasburg also strides closed and too far. These injurious flaws will eventually destroy his pitching knee, lower back and the front of his pitching shoulder.

Without high-speed film, I cannot comment on whether he will lose any degrees of his extension and flexion range of motion in his pitching elbow.

Sincerely,

Dr. Mike Marshall

  

[tomterp]

Yeah, I also noticed Rich Poythress from Brian's draftwatch. Last week, the first baseman from Georgia had 6 hits and 10 RBI in 10 at-bats, with 2 doubles, 4 home runs, 2 BB and 0 K. You can never have too many power prospects.

Frank Howard once had 10 home runs in 20 plate appearances.     

Oops, wrong thread.     

[JMUalumni]

Did you guys see this post from the nationals.com board?

  

Right, I think this has been covered before.  But in reference to Dr. Marshall, he was a great pitcher and at one point a great teacher of pitching mechanics.  Recently, though, Marshall has begun to lose it.  Many pitching "experts" I frequently refer to have acknowledged the influence of Marshall on their work, but have also pointed out that his newer techniques have deviated from his original school of thought.  He has frequently been cited as turning down research from respected surgeons/physicians and is known to only refer to his own "research."  There is a reason why all 30 MLB teams have turned down his services and why many baseball minds think he is crazy.  For what is worth, over the last few years, Marshall has lost credibility within the scouting community BUT has gained credibility in the media.

[blue911]

Right, I think this has been covered before.  But in reference to Dr. Marshall, he was a great pitcher and at one point a great teacher of pitching mechanics.  Recently, though, Marshall has begun to lose it.  Many pitching "experts" I frequently refer to have acknowledged the influence of Marshall on their work, but have also pointed out that his newer techniques have deviated from his original school of thought.  He has frequently been cited as turning down research from respected surgeons/physicians and is known to only refer to his own "research."  There is a reason why all 30 MLB teams have turned down his services and why many baseball minds think he is crazy.  For what is worth, over the last few years, Marshall has lost credibility within the scouting community BUT has gained credibility in the media.

Actually, Mike Marshall is just a plain pain in the ass. Always has been. I don't know how he is working with players, but he was one of the least liked players in baseball.

[JMUalumni]

Actually, Mike Marshall is just a plain pain in the ass. Always has been. I don't know how he is working with players, but he was one of the least liked players in baseball.

He mostly just works with failed major leagues and independent players nowadays.  He likes to preach the "theory" of pitching rather than apply research data (in addition to the theory); this method was all fine and dandy until the ability to measure the amount of force placed on each muscle appeared.  I don't pay him much attention either way.

[sportsfan882]

good info. so what you are saying is that he is a complete moron that is just making stuff up?

[JMUalumni]

good info. so what you are saying is that he is a complete moron that is just making stuff up?

More or less.  It is hard to tell what is true and what is not from his opinion.  The "late pitching forearm turnover" that he refers to is probably the only credible concern.  And likely, that will not even be a problem unless overuse becomes an issue or if for some reason he starts throwing over 70% fastballs.

To put it another way, and this is from a criticism of Marshall I saw months ago.  If Marshall's methods really did work like he say they do, then he would be employed by a major league team.  Not because he might be able to add a few MPH to a pitcher's fastball or because he was a cy young winner, but rather because of the amount of money he could potentially save teams in terms of injuries to pitchers.

[KnorrForYourMoney]

Yeah, I thought his opinion was dubious when he started knocking Lincecum's mechanics.  I've read articles about how Lincecum's mechanics, while rather violent and defying conventional wisdom, are clearly tailored to his build.

[tomterp]

To put it another way, and this is from a criticism of Marshall I saw months ago.  If Marshall's methods really did work like he say they do, then he would be employed by a major league team. 

I think that's fairly weak logic.  Now, it may be true, but it also is true that MLB teams rarely take risks or do things outside the normal parameters of behavior, lest they burn bridges they might need for their next career move. 

The point I'm making is that you cannot assume that everything MLB teams do is well thought out, rational, and ensures the greatest likelihood of success, or else Josh Gibson would have been a Senator.

[JMUalumni]

I think that's fairly weak logic.  Now, it may be true, but it also is true that MLB teams rarely take risks or do things outside the normal parameters of behavior, lest they burn bridges they might need for their next career move. 

The point I'm making is that you cannot assume that everything MLB teams do is well thought out, rational, and ensures the greatest likelihood of success, or else Josh Gibson would have been a Senator.

I agree it isn't good logic (based on that rationale), what I meant to do was supplement the original point that he is a kook.  With that said, Mitchell preaches that he can reduce injury risk to almost nothing while increasing velocity.  If he were ACTUALLY able to do this (and provide evidence), then he would be a uber valuable commodity.  Preventing the injury in pitchers completely (an absurd idea at this point in time) would be worth in excess of 50 millions dollars for many teams (and even more for others).  My assumption was not that what MLB teams do is rational, but rather cost-effective and/or centered around money.

[KnorrForYourMoney]

Actually, that isn't unfounded.  Perhaps he could just slightly increase velocity (add maybe 1-2 mph), while greatly sacficing movement.

In that case, he would be telling the truth, yet teams would have a reason not to employ him.

[JMUalumni]

Actually, that isn't unfounded.  Perhaps he could just slightly increase velocity (add maybe 1-2 mph), while greatly sacficing movement.

In that case, he would be telling the truth, yet teams would have a reason not to employ him.

that is certainly possible, yes.  But he claims he can increase velocity by up to 10 MPH and cited one example of a player going from 93 to 103 MPH.  On one level, in terms of injury risk, that doesn't make sense.  Increasing velocity by that much over a year or even two years can be way too much for the body to handle, especially at those levels. 

On the other hand, in terms of an increase in velocity... that doesn't make sense.  If someone was throwing a 75 MPH fastball and he increased it to 85, maybe that would be feasible.  Maybe even 80 to 90.  But 93-103?  To my knowledge, he hasn't presented any credible evidence that he has done this.

[KnorrForYourMoney]

Oh yeah, that's completely outlandish.

[JMUalumni]

Oh yeah, that's completely outlandish.

I will try to find a quote, I don't like to cite stuff with out evidence.  So until then, take it as hearsay.