Author Topic: 2008 Draft signing status  (Read 5204 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline DPMOmaha

  • Posts: 17997
Re: 2008 Draft signing status
« Reply #25: June 19, 2008, 12:24:23 PM »
I understand your thoughts here, but IMO, even without the front office having to say it, I believe you have to start with pitching and when you have the opportunity to get the best pitcher in the draft or what's probably the third of four best hitters in the draft you take the pitcher every time.  I think most people are a little too worried about the hitters coming up in the system.  Having a stockpile of good young arms gives a lot of chips to work with in trades to acquire some bats down the line.  It's not like there's no bats in our system, it'd just be good to get a couple more, I get that.  At some point we're going to have to add free-agents to the equation, you'll probably see some bats included in that.  Even if Crow doesn't turn into an ace and and Smoak turns into an All-star 1b with 30 hrs a year, I'll still say you take the best pitcher over the best hitter...every time. 

Online KnorrForYourMoney

  • Posts: 13966
  • Lerners = Bluth family
Re: 2008 Draft signing status
« Reply #26: June 19, 2008, 01:03:45 PM »
we do need a pitcher like that, but looking at last nights game especially, we need someone who can it the ball. and a pitcher can't have one pitch, no matter how good it is.
How many times does the phrase "you don't draft based on need" have to be said?

Online Dave B

  • Posts: 5959
Re: 2008 Draft signing status
« Reply #27: June 19, 2008, 01:45:48 PM »
We better sign Espinosa. Sounds like kind of a big body for a SS, but maybe he's the next Cal Ripken :P

6' 190 is not very big for a SS nowadays

Offline PANatsFan

  • Posts: 37017
  • dogs in uncensored, nudes in gameday
Re: 2008 Draft signing status
« Reply #28: June 19, 2008, 02:10:04 PM »
6' 190 is not very big for a SS nowadays

Guess I'm old school :lol:

Online Dave B

  • Posts: 5959
Re: 2008 Draft signing status
« Reply #29: June 19, 2008, 03:01:17 PM »
Guess I'm old school :lol:

just another reason why the old school sucks: undersized short stops

Offline PANatsFan

  • Posts: 37017
  • dogs in uncensored, nudes in gameday
Re: 2008 Draft signing status
« Reply #30: June 19, 2008, 03:04:05 PM »
just another reason why the old school sucks: undersized short stops

I just don't want a Ronnie Belliard type playing SS.

Offline JMUalumni

  • Posts: 7789
Re: 2008 Draft signing status
« Reply #31: June 20, 2008, 04:31:14 PM »
With all the speculation over if Aaron Crow or Destin Hood will sign today, I poked around a little bit... and didn't find anything on their signing status, except for stuff that we already know.  Nick Saban said that Hood is still deciding as of yesterday, but the tide has definitely turned from where it was a toss if we would sign or not, to now where it seems as though everyone is predicting that he will indeed sign with us.

I also found this little tidbit, unfortunately I do not have access to Baseball America and therefore access to the whole article.  This is courtesy of Federalbaseball.com on Aaron Crow:

Quote
n the most recent newstand edition of Baseball America's magazine, Washington Nationals' correspondent Lacy Lusk quotes Nationals' Vice President of Baseball Operations Mike Rizzo, in an article entitled, "It's Unanimous", in which Mr. Rizzo  states that '08 1st Round Pick Aaron Crow was:

"...the one true unanimous decision in the draft room, which scares me a little bit...But we're very excited to add a top of the rotation guy."

Nationals' scouting director Dana Brown is also quoted in Lacy Lusk's column, telling the Baseball America correspondent about the team's surprise at finding Crow available when their turn came around for the 9th Pick of the 1st Round:

"It's so rare to get a guy like (Crow) drafting this low...I think what happened is that a lot of teams decided to go with bats...When was the last time three catchers went (in the Top 10)?"

Online blue911

  • Posts: 16298
Re: 2008 Draft signing status
« Reply #32: June 20, 2008, 04:45:09 PM »
With all the speculation over if Aaron Crow or Destin Hood will sign today, I poked around a little bit... and didn't find anything on their signing status, except for stuff that we already know.  Nick Saban said that Hood is still deciding as of yesterday, but the tide has definitely turned from where it was a toss if we would sign or not, to now where it seems as though everyone is predicting that he will indeed sign with us.

Yeah, I've been watching the Bama sites also. Seems those SEC freaks keep a pretty good tab on prospects. I would hate to lose a second rounder to Saban.

Offline JMUalumni

  • Posts: 7789
Re: 2008 Draft signing status
« Reply #33: June 20, 2008, 04:54:31 PM »
I would hate to lose a second rounder to Saban.

QFT, Ive never liked that guy.

Online tomterp

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 27815
  • Hell yes!
Re: 2008 Draft signing status
« Reply #34: June 20, 2008, 06:34:02 PM »
Yeah, I've been watching the Bama sites also. Seems those SEC freaks keep a pretty good tab on prospects. I would hate to lose a second rounder to Saban.

We're locked in a bidding war with Bama right now.

Online blue911

  • Posts: 16298
Re: 2008 Draft signing status
« Reply #35: June 20, 2008, 06:38:55 PM »
We're locked in a bidding war with Bama right now.

And I don't know if we have the cash to compete.

Offline PANatsFan

  • Posts: 37017
  • dogs in uncensored, nudes in gameday
Re: 2008 Draft signing status
« Reply #36: June 21, 2008, 02:06:21 PM »
How many times does the phrase "you don't draft based on need" have to be said?

Pirates took SS in the 3rd and 5th rounds. And they are big. One guy is 6'3" 225. I guess that's a big body SS.

Offline Obed_Marsh

  • Posts: 7666
  • ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn
    • Photos
Re: 2008 Draft signing status
« Reply #37: June 21, 2008, 02:18:52 PM »
We're locked in a bidding war with Bama right now.

How much can Bama really bid? Sounds like a gator gar versus a bluegill.

Offline JMUalumni

  • Posts: 7789
Re: 2008 Draft signing status
« Reply #38: June 21, 2008, 05:25:06 PM »
This off of Yahoo! Sports, Three more guys signed.  That makes 10 out of the top 20, now lets start getting some of the top 5 signed.

Quote
The Nationals signed three draft picks on Friday - LHP Robert Hansen (18th round), SS Stephen Lombardozzi (19th round) and OF Derrick Phillips (23rd round). They've signed 21 players

Offline PANatsFan

  • Posts: 37017
  • dogs in uncensored, nudes in gameday
Re: 2008 Draft signing status
« Reply #39: June 21, 2008, 05:47:31 PM »
This off of Yahoo! Sports, Three more guys signed.  That makes 10 out of the top 20, now lets start getting some of the top 5 signed.


Woo infielders.

Offline d_mc_nabb

  • Posts: 778
Re: 2008 Draft signing status
« Reply #40: June 21, 2008, 11:00:54 PM »
How many times does the phrase "you don't draft based on need" have to be said?

funny, because in every ranking i saw, Smoak was higher than Crow. So why did we take Crow? yeah, pitching, pitching, blah blah. it won't win you games, it will only keep them close. and yes, i do know its important. i also know that JB is obsessed w/ pitching.

Offline sportsfan882

  • Posts: 85991
Re: 2008 Draft signing status
« Reply #41: June 21, 2008, 11:14:54 PM »
funny, because in every ranking i saw, Smoak was higher than Crow. So why did we take Crow? yeah, pitching, pitching, blah blah. it won't win you games, it will only keep them close. and yes, i do know its important. i also know that JB is obsessed w/ pitching.
QFT. We need more hitting prospects.

Online houston-nat

  • Posts: 15991
Re: 2008 Draft signing status
« Reply #42: June 22, 2008, 12:39:41 AM »
funny, because in every ranking i saw, Smoak was higher than Crow. So why did we take Crow? yeah, pitching, pitching, blah blah. it won't win you games, it will only keep them close. and yes, i do know its important. i also know that JB is obsessed w/ pitching.
You can never have enough pitching. A good - let alone great - pitcher is a rare commodity in the ML these days. And when you need to trade for a strong young hitter, well ... a mound of quality young pitchers isn't a bad thing to be sitting on.

Online KnorrForYourMoney

  • Posts: 13966
  • Lerners = Bluth family
Re: 2008 Draft signing status
« Reply #43: June 22, 2008, 01:00:24 AM »
funny, because in every ranking i saw, Smoak was higher than Crow. So why did we take Crow? yeah, pitching, pitching, blah blah. it won't win you games, it will only keep them close. and yes, i do know its important. i also know that JB is obsessed w/ pitching.
That wasn't based on need, though.  That was based on value.

I think our scouting dept. honestly felt like they could get more value out of Crow than Smoak.

If your rationale is "this guy's better than the other," then that's fine, but you never look at a draft board and take a guy based on your immediate team needs.  Players you draft usually take somewhere from 2-5 years to reach the majors, anyway.

Offline d_mc_nabb

  • Posts: 778
Re: 2008 Draft signing status
« Reply #44: June 22, 2008, 01:52:06 PM »
That wasn't based on need, though.  That was based on value.

I think our scouting dept. honestly felt like they could get more value out of Crow than Smoak.

If your rationale is "this guy's better than the other," then that's fine, but you never look at a draft board and take a guy based on your immediate team needs.  Players you draft usually take somewhere from 2-5 years to reach the majors, anyway.

Pardon my anger, its the nationals sucking getting me down. I just feel that our farm is too full of pitching already to take another pitcher who, in my opinion, isn't worth as much as a batter we passed on, Smoak.

Offline shoeshineboy

  • Posts: 7349
  • Walks Kill!! Walks Kill! Walks Kill!!!!
Re: 2008 Draft signing status
« Reply #45: June 22, 2008, 08:35:09 PM »
That wasn't based on need, though.  That was based on value.

I think our scouting dept. honestly felt like they could get more value out of Crow than Smoak.

If your rationale is "this guy's better than the other," then that's fine, but you never look at a draft board and take a guy based on your immediate team needs.  Players you draft usually take somewhere from 2-5 years to reach the majors, anyway.

Agreed. You can't have too much pitching in the system. And you don't draft players to fill immediate needs on the big league club.

Offline ronnynat

  • Posts: 23223
Re: 2008 Draft signing status
« Reply #46: June 22, 2008, 08:48:19 PM »
Pardon my anger, its the nationals sucking getting me down. I just feel that our farm is too full of pitching already to take another pitcher who, in my opinion, isn't worth as much as a batter we passed on, Smoak.

I also think Smoak will end up being a good hitter in the Bigs, but Crow is the first prospect that we've had since we moved here that is a projected #1 starter.

Offline d_mc_nabb

  • Posts: 778
Re: 2008 Draft signing status
« Reply #47: June 22, 2008, 10:34:20 PM »
Agreed. You can't have too much pitching in the system. And you don't draft players to fill immediate needs on the big league club.

see, i'm also looking at the future. look at our pitching in the farm system. we have a ton, from Alaniz to Van Allen to Smoker to Zimmerman to Detwiler. but what about hitting? we have Chris Marrero and... maybe Burgess and Maxwell, but there not near the same level as marrero. but i do think that one should get BPA in the first round. Smoak was ranked better than Crow in every ranking i saw. but even if they were ranked the same, i'd take marrero beacause our farm needs it. if theres a choice between two players ranked equally, one at a position you need, the other you don't, you take the one you need more.

Offline sportsfan882

  • Posts: 85991
Re: 2008 Draft signing status
« Reply #48: June 22, 2008, 10:36:44 PM »
see, i'm also looking at the future. look at our pitching in the farm system. we have a ton, from Alaniz to Van Allen to Smoker to Zimmerman to Detwiler. but what about hitting? we have Chris Marrero and... maybe Burgess and Maxwell, but there not near the same level as marrero. but i do think that one should get BPA in the first round. Smoak was ranked better than Crow in every ranking i saw. but even if they were ranked the same, i'd take marrero beacause our farm needs it. if theres a choice between two players ranked equally, one at a position you need, the other you don't, you take the one you need more.
QFT. We are so freaking stacked with pitching. I'm not worried about that aspect of our future. We will be FINE. Matter of fact, I think we'll have the best young starting rotation in baseball as early as next season and it's only going to get better in the following years.

WE NEED HITTERS!!

Offline d_mc_nabb

  • Posts: 778
Re: 2008 Draft signing status
« Reply #49: June 22, 2008, 10:44:17 PM »
QFT. We are so freaking stacked with pitching. I'm not worried about that aspect of our future. We will be FINE. Matter of fact, I think we'll have the best young starting rotation in baseball as early as next season and it's only going to get better in the following years.

WE NEED HITTERS!!

This is a bit of an overstatement. yes, it could possibly be very good. even if it does, at the beginning of next year, if we have first pick, i'd take strasburg no question. he has ace potential, and find me one world series winner that didn't have an ace on its staff.