Tim wrote:....what else have they done in the draft with the Cubs that gives anyone confidence that they can identify which toolsy HS OF they should pick? Is it DJ Wilson or someone else I'm missing? Why should I have any more confidence in Richan than the litany of similar pitchers they've taken?
This is their seventh draft with the Cubs. We've got a pretty long track record for this front office. I think there is room to question their draft strategy without being outrageous when they go so far away from industry consensus.
Obviously, none of us know how this will all pan out. The Cubs have far more resources than we do to evaluate these guys. The industry guys absolutely suffer from some level of groupthink when it comes to the rankings, which leaves room for individual teams to have a much better read on true talent level for certain prospects.
All that said, I still find this draft...puzzling so far. The comments leading up to the draft were that they "had to nail" this time because they probably won't have this many high picks again for a while. These picks (past the first round) look pretty risky from the outside. I'll just hope they've been able to see things that others haven't, I guess.
Puzzling for sure, and risky for sure. I agree, there is nothing in the MacLeod's Cubs drafting that suggests they've got any notable insights outside of top-10 picks. Several thoughts:
1. They have seemed to do pretty well with Eloy, Gleyber, Amaya. Maybe their scouting for teenage bats is good? I hope it will turn out so here.
2. Floor, ceiling, risk. I guess risk is the price of upside. Perhaps by taking a couple of shots in the 2nd, you hope one of them clicks? Pretty much no-such-thing as safe winners in the 60-80 range.
3. Obviously these are all pure, pure scouting picks. Cubs must think they see elements in the pitcher; scouting. The HS OFers, that's really pure scouting picks. Well, just like Wilson was, and Hanneman was, and Hudson was.....
4. Cubs have known they had a bundle of picks in the 60-80 range. So I have to assume they've spent a lot, lot, lot, lot of time reviewing these guys. I assume BA and PG and mlb media guys spend a lot of time on the top-end, first rounders and stuff. Not sure they have resources or focus on 2nd-50 group. But Cubs theoretically invested a whole lot of time in that part of the draft.
5. If some scouts love Davis + Roederer, and seem them as top-80 guys, do they share that with BA, the same way they share views on first-rounders? If you want to steal Davis or Roederer in round 4, do you tell the media you think he's a 1st-day guy? I dunno, and wonder how much of the media ranking is sourced from scouting sources.
Whatever, time will tell. Would be pretty fun if Hoerner emerges as a true-blue hitter who adds some power as well.
And hope the two OFers both magically turn into hitters.