CaliforniaRaisin wrote:Rob wrote:If we could get a starter, I would complain less about picking a college arm in the 1st... but if we actually used our pick to grab a reliever, that might be one of the worst decisions we could possibly make...
We're in agreement here. I get the feel that Lawrie will be gone before the Cubs pick, he seems to be rising quick. Seems like a classic Wilken pick.
I'm no scout, and haven't read enough to have strong feelings about the candidates. Lawrie sounds very good. both of our corner OFers are in their 30's, Aram will turn 30 in a few weeks, and Lee is 32. So if Lawrie projects as a true-blue hitter with some power, it seems like all four of the corner spots might be opening up somewhere around the time when he might be ready, if he turns out great. (I assume almost no baseball for a 1st rounder this summer, so if it's A-, A+, AA, and AAA, a highly successful HS selection would still be comfortably 5-years out.)
So I'm very supportive of getting guys who are true-blue hitting prospects, despite the Cub failure rate with such. I don't think it makes sense to give up trying, maybe the next guy is the smart hitter who will hit and always hit. And who knows, maybe once Vitters hand/wrist gets right (if ever), he'll prove to be a true-blue hitter as well?
I like position players, as I've reasoned in past. If one turns out to be actually good (big if, obviously), they tend to stay healthy and productive longer than pitchers. Some get hurt, obviously (Vitters?), but it's the norm for players to keep going. Whereas for pitchers, it's the norm (despite some exceptions) for them to have much lesser arm and lesser stuff at age 25 than they have at 18. Plus, I see this season as evidence how a strong-hitting team can make some average pitchers win. So, if two best-players-available are equal, I'd break tie in favor of the bat.
Reliever? If we draft a gifted college reliever, I'll be excited. Not my first preference, I grant. But the number of guys at 19 who end up being good contributing big-leaguers is not that high. If they take a good college reliever who can quickly come up and be a good big-league reliever, I'll be glad of that. On the current team, for example, I'd love to have another Marmol reliever; or even a good-Howry. Good relievers are invaluable. I'm not sure I'm too keen on the names I've read; they seem like good arms but seem kind of wild from what little I've read.
Certainly it would be exciting to get a high-ceiling HS pitcher. Our farm is obviously very thin on high-level pitching prospects, guys who have any chance to have both the big arm and the quality control that a good #1-2 starter has. So if we draft a HS pitcher, I'll assume the scouts know the risks and decided that the potential is so good that it justifies the risk, and I'll be enthused until the kid loses his velocity or has his first surgery.
I don't know the personalities. I think when a HS kid gets the big contract, if the guy isn't both pretty grounded and pretty smart, I think there are a lot of risks. I've enjoyed having some Cubs who seem fairly smart. I'm always somewhat leary of guys who seem like jerks or seem dumb. That said, some degree of arrogance can be crucial. Thinking you're really good, and not being afraid to fail, those can be vital qualities.