Author Topic: draft grades for NL East  (Read 270 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.


Offline tomterp

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 27836
  • Hell yes!
Re: draft grades for NL East
« Reply #1: August 24, 2011, 03:22:58 PM »

Offline Kevrock

  • Posts: 10968
Re: draft grades for NL East
« Reply #2: August 24, 2011, 03:24:36 PM »
Nice read, thanks for sharing.

Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 14726
Re: draft grades for NL East
« Reply #3: August 24, 2011, 03:27:55 PM »
Nice read, hopefully the grade holds up five years from now

Offline DBPjohn

  • Posts: 10
Re: draft grades for NL East
« Reply #4: August 24, 2011, 04:09:53 PM »
I really didn't give out too many A grades so far, so I would say it would have to be top 5'ish. You have to think 1 or 2 of their top 4 picks works out, and they get some utility from some of the other guys. I'm surprised they gave Goodwin that kind of money, but his talent is worth the risk I guess. Big proponent of spending in the draft. The value is much greater if it works out than free agency. Purke is likely going to be a key. I would let him rest this year and see what he could do in Hagerstown to start next season.

The Diamondbacks, Red Sox, Rays, Pirates, Jays, Royals, and Brewers all had good drafts off the top of my head. The Nats fit in favorably with those.

Offline tomterp

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 27836
  • Hell yes!
Re: draft grades for NL East
« Reply #5: August 24, 2011, 04:23:19 PM »
I really didn't give out too many A grades so far, so I would say it would have to be top 5'ish. You have to think 1 or 2 of their top 4 picks works out, and they get some utility from some of the other guys.

You've discounted it for heightened risk due to injury history of some of the guys - Purke and to a lesser extent Rendon, primarily I presume.  That's probably appropriate.  Do the Nats get a bigger risk discount than other teams, or to view it another way, if everyone were considered only to have developmental risk without injury risk, would the Nats have been #1 based on aggressive pursuit of top talent, or did other teams do just as well in your opinion.

Offline DBPjohn

  • Posts: 10
Re: draft grades for NL East
« Reply #6: August 25, 2011, 05:52:32 PM »
You've discounted it for heightened risk due to injury history of some of the guys - Purke and to a lesser extent Rendon, primarily I presume.  That's probably appropriate.  Do the Nats get a bigger risk discount than other teams, or to view it another way, if everyone were considered only to have developmental risk without injury risk, would the Nats have been #1 based on aggressive pursuit of top talent, or did other teams do just as well in your opinion.

Yes, the injuries were of a concern. Mainly with Purke. The Nats gave him a major league deal, and if his health holds him back, that is a big risk. I have a little concern about Meyer and his delivery, though it reportedly has gotten better. In fact, a scout I know in a NL organization who nailed Hultzen going 1 or 2 way back in March, told me the talk of Meyer going top 10 was kind of nonsense, but said the improvements are real. Guys that are his height scare me though, its much harder to repeat deliveries and he might be a guy that walks 4/9 over his career. But if his change keeps getting better, it may not hurt him much. Goodwin looks the part, but there is something holding me back from falling in love with him for some reason. Maybe its the college suspension and subsequent transfer.

If you take the injury risk out, I think there is some comparable teams, but Nats would probably be #1 in my opinion. Essentially, they ended up with 2 guys who were considered the number 1 prospect at some point in the draft cycle in Rendon and Purke. With Goodwin's ceiling and Meyer's arm, plus the others, I would give them the nod slightly over the Diamondbacks and Red Sox.