Here is one early take on the 2009 draft.
As expected, RHP Stephen Strasburg is the choice at #1 overall. I was more interested to see who the choice was going to be at #9A. This mock draft has the Nats grabbing a HS LHP Tyler Matzek. Here is a quick scouting report of Matzek from Saberscouting:
Matzek works at 89-92, touching 94 with a heavy fastball and mixing in a knockout mid-70s curveball. His curveball is a two-plane bender that is regularly above-average now with a chance to be a plus pitch. He also mixes in solid slider and shows feel for a changeup that flashes above-average.
He’s projectable and athletic with a clean arm and simple delivery, throwing from a classic high 3/4 arm angle. That allows Matzek to work both sides of the plate effectively, pounding the zone with advanced feel. He’s got four pitches and command that project for average or better; there’s just a lot to like. One insider said Matzek reminded him of another lefty: the 4th overall pick of the 2008 draft, former U. San Diego hurler and Orioles draftee, Brian Matusz.
One scout that saw Matzek at the Perfect Game National showcase in Minneapolis said, “if his breaking ball develops like you hope, he could be Clayton Kershaw.” That might sound a bit optimistic, and that I’m using too many comparisons, but considering how under-the-radar Kershaw was entering his senior year, it doesn’t seem so far-fetched
Nothing against Matzek, but if the Nats grab an arm at #1, I’d hope they target a bat at #9A (assuming he’s close to the best player available). Of the players still on the board, I’d be intrigued by the selection of OF Kentrail Davis from Tennessee. Here is the Future Focus I had on Davis prior to the 2007 draft. The only question I’d have regarding Davis is his price tag. As a draft eligible sophomre, Davis has the flexibility to return for his junior season and not necessarily impact his draft position (assuming no injuries).
Given the fact the Nats have no safety net with this selection, that would be a gamble I’m not sure they’d take.
UPDATE: Jim Callis at Baseball America has his early top 10 for 2009 with the Nats taking Strasburg and RHP Kyle Gibson at #9A. Gibson is from Missouri and was a member of the same 2008 rotation as the player who led to this compensation.
Todd Boss | 09-Oct-08 at 11:58 am | Permalink
You would have to think that taking Strasburg AND the Missouri guy would guarantee us draft bonuses upwards of $20M for the whole draft. I have a sneaking suspicion that Strasburg’s pedigree, assumption as #1 overall pick already and Agent in Boras will push his bonus demands to $10M. And preliminary reports about the Missouri guy lend me to believe he’ll expect what we offered Crow in the $3.5-$4M range.
Channeling my inner moneyball, I really hope we do NOT take more HS arms and focus on a proven college bat at the 9A position. Everyone like the arms we have in the high-A and AA level, but all our bat prospects are in rookie and low-A.
mjames | 09-Oct-08 at 12:31 pm | Permalink
At the risk of being hoisted on my own petard, is it possible to draft Strasburg ,sign him, and trade him to San Diego. We in turn would get SD’s 09 pick and one of their top prospects. This assume SD really wants Strasburg. Maybe we could get SD to draft a good bat. With 9A we take the best available although I would shy away from a HS pitcher.
I do not know whether the above is permitted although I do not see why not. We sign Strasburg and we trade him.
Brian Oliver | 09-Oct-08 at 12:38 pm | Permalink
Drafted players cannot be traded until one year from their signing date. So, Strasburg could not be dealt to SD until 2010 at the earliest.
Marc | 09-Oct-08 at 1:39 pm | Permalink
And you can’t trade for SD’s ‘09 draft pick - no trading picks.
Brian, I really liked “the player who led to this compensation.” He Who Shall Not Be Named!!
Let’s airbrush him out of all the photos, too, Stalin-style. =)
Realistically, is there anything (except major injury) that would derail Strasburg from being #1, or should we just hope they start talking to Boras about it now?
estuartj | 09-Oct-08 at 2:11 pm | Permalink
I think going for a second pitcher is dangerous, but reasonable with the 9a pick. Going for a HS player who isn’t set on playing pro ball vs college is risky to the point of being foolhardy.
I hope Oliver is available, but just looking at who’s still “on the board” in this scenario at 9a is not encouraging.
You’ll know for sure they’ve lost their nerve if it’s Tanner Scheppers.
VladiHondo | 09-Oct-08 at 2:11 pm | Permalink
Hey Brian!
BA has an article on the NL East International signees today. Any chance for a synopsis?!!
Sue Dinem | 09-Oct-08 at 2:18 pm | Permalink
Brian - Can you clarify the fine print on Joshua Fields? From what I’ve been able to piece together, it appears that the 8/15 deadline doesn’t apply to him because his college eligibility is used up. Is that correct?
Also, in the interest of getting the the HWMNTB click-and-spewers to STFU, wouldn’t this clause (in bold) basically prevent the Nats from redrafting him?
From MLB.com:
A Club generally retains the rights to sign a selected player until 11:59 PM (EDT) August 15, or until the player enters, or returns to, a four-year college on a full-time basis. A player who is drafted and does not sign with the Club that selected him may be drafted again at a future year’s Draft, so long as the player is eligible for that year’s Draft. A Club may not select a player again in a subsequent year, unless the player has consented to the re-selection.
Brian Oliver | 09-Oct-08 at 2:27 pm | Permalink
Vladi - You really don’t want to know what it says. ;) Nats signed no one to a bonus of six figures and only references three players (Elvin Cuello, Victor Baez and Alexander Romero). Apparently Cuello misrepresented himself so his original six figure bonus ended up less.
SueD- Fields had no eligibility left when he was drafted so the 8/15 does not apply to him. He who shall not be named DID have the eligibility left when drafted so the deadline applies. And you are spot on with the permission aspect.
MO Nats Fan | 09-Oct-08 at 2:28 pm | Permalink
Coming in #30 on the high school hot 30 and likely available at the top of the second round;
School & Hometown: American Heritage HS; Davie, FL
Specs: 6′0, 160, Bats R, Throws R
Skinny: Marrero is the younger brother of Nationals top prospect and former 1st rounder Chris Marrero. He also plays for 2008 High School National Champions American Heritage High. With that kind of pedigree and background, along with a gamer style and solid makeup, you can see what there is to like about Marrero. That being said, he lacks bulk and doesn’t have a standout bat, along with no more than average speed. He looks to most scouts right now like a good college player with rock solid intangibles. That type of player’s draft fortunes depends on his bonus demands, but he looks a lot like a guy that will go in the top three rounds after a solid three years in college.
Brian Oliver | 09-Oct-08 at 2:35 pm | Permalink
Deven is actually Chris’ cousin.
estuartj | 09-Oct-08 at 2:53 pm | Permalink
I’m surprised to see Devon Marrero discounted so much, my first though is what they consider to be the #30 HS talent in the whole country is no better than a 3rd round guy AFTER 3 years in college?
Does anyone have access to the averages, say over the last 10 years, of College vs HS players taken in the first round?
Sue Dinem | 09-Oct-08 at 3:29 pm | Permalink
estuartj - When you say averages, do you mean making an MLB roster? For example, there were X guys taken in H.S. from Years A to B and Y guys made it? If so, I think it could be researched, if we can also get a consensus as to what’s a reasonable age for a given player to “make it” — within 3 years for college, six for h.s.?
estuartj | 09-Oct-08 at 3:30 pm | Permalink
I was only thinking how many college vs hs players have been taken, on average, in the first round. How they turn out is beyond this discussion, I’m just curious how many of the HS top 30 would go in an average first round.
Brian Oliver | 09-Oct-08 at 3:38 pm | Permalink
Here is the 1st rd from 1999. The next 9 drafts can be followed through the drop down box.
MO Nats Fan | 09-Oct-08 at 4:44 pm | Permalink
Does anyone know how the affiliates are assigned to team in the AFL? Just curious…
estuartj | 09-Oct-08 at 4:53 pm | Permalink
Detwiler pitches two scoreless inning today in AFL, 1 hit, 1BB, 1k.
Rhinehart is DH and Desmond is SS.
Pilchard | 09-Oct-08 at 5:32 pm | Permalink
The Nats have taken a college pitcher at the top of the last 2 drafts, and with Strasburg as the very likely choice, that would be 3 in a row. While I generally agree with the “take the best available draft pick” adage, would like to see the Nats take an offensive player with Pick 9a if it’s a close call at all. The Nats system really lacks much offensive punch, and much easier to project offensive success than defensive success. FWIW, would love it if Lars Tate fell to the Nats. The Devil Rays largely built their success on drafting athletic offensive players with their high picks (Crawford, Upton, Baldelli, Longoria, even Josh Hamilton).
estuartj | 09-Oct-08 at 6:22 pm | Permalink
I think you mean Donovan Tate, Lars was his dad, right?
I’d love it if a guy like Tate, Ackley or Green fell to 10. With so long to go any projections at this point are useless, but with such a high number of top pitchers available the chances of a top hitter being available at 9A decent.
Andrew S. | 09-Oct-08 at 7:14 pm | Permalink
Obviously I’m hoping for Strasburg 1. Loyola Marymount has a slugger, plays 1b/3b…maybe a corner OF slot. I’m in favor of taking a college bat 10th. Remember the last time the Nats took a college hitter in the 1st round?
Hoagie | 10-Oct-08 at 1:56 am | Permalink
Andrew, I do agree that we need to take a bat with the 10th pick, but keep in mind Ryan Zimmermans do not grow on trees. While he may not be the best player out of the 2005 draft, his signability and MLB readiness are both incredibly rare. Let’s not get our hopes up too high, I just hope we can sign Strasburg, the 10th pick and at least 7 of the 9 other top 10 round picks (we all know Uncle Teddy will use the 2 first rounders as an excuse to cut the budget at that).
William | 10-Oct-08 at 4:23 am | Permalink
I have seen Kentrail Davis play along with Destin Hood at the same time. The Rockies are going to wish they would have treated him like a 2nd round round pick after drafting him 14th-round. The Rockies offer was fair but we are talking about Oakland failing to sign Justin Smoak has a 16th-round selection in 2005 failure.
Marc | 10-Oct-08 at 10:05 am | Permalink
I agree on the bat stuff - I mean if there’s some clear-cut arm that’s fallen or something, I still think best available is the way to go at 9a, but presuming Steven “El Savior” Strasburg at 1, if it’s close, I think we have to get a bat, preferably a college IF bat with some pop.
But as much as I’m done talking about HWMNBN, I do see this draft as a referendum on Uncle Teddy’s willingness to spend on the future of the franchise - signing two top-ten picks is going to be expensive. Signing the “once in a decade” talent is going to be expensive. Rebuilding through the draft is comparatively cheap and if it means shelling out $20-25m over the whole draft class, Uncle Teddy needs to shut up and do it. If we’re going to run the same glorified developmental squad out there that we had at the end of the year (and you know we are), then there can be no doubt that we’re taking development seriously. I’m willing to give a pass on HWMNBN, but that’s it. One mulligan - they play this shot where it lies.
Chris | 10-Oct-08 at 11:14 am | Permalink
I think we’re going to have to go a little lower on the talent scale at 9a because of Strasburgs price tag and the face that we have to sign the pick. Id love Davis but I dont think he would fit. I think it will be a college position player, maybe a bit of an overdraft
Chris | 10-Oct-08 at 11:23 am | Permalink
this is embarassing
Washington Nationals
Six-figure signings: None
Summary: Since signing Dominican shortstop Esmailyn Gonzalez in 2006 for $1.4 million (the period’s third-highest signing bonus), the Nationals have been relatively quiet in Latin America. The Nationals had agreed to terms with Dominican shortstop Elvin Cuello for $150,000 in May, but the deal was never made official after it was revealed that Cuello was using a false identity. The Nationals did sign righthander Victor Baez for $95,000 in November, though the 17-year-old didn’t play much this year in the DSL due to injury. The Nationals picked up 18-year-old Dominican third baseman Alexander Romero for $20,000 in May, and he hit .247/.410/.407 to help lead the DSL Nationals to their second straight league championship
estuartj | 10-Oct-08 at 11:59 am | Permalink
I’m curious how many names in a simair mock draft 9 months out last year were picked in the top 20?
I bet there are going to be a dozen or more new names in the mix by June.
William | 11-Oct-08 at 5:08 am | Permalink
The only players to fall from last year early mocks where Andrew Cashner ,Brandon Crawford, Tanner Scheppers, Zach Collier, Christian Friedrich, Shooter Hunt, Jake Odorizzi , Cole St. Clair, Jordan Danks, Brett Hunter, Colby Shreve, Jacob Thompson, and Adrian Nieto.
Thompson and Crawford were in many Top 10 list along with Collier. Colby Shreve was a potential 2nd rounder before his injury.
Isaac Galloway and Daniel Webb the only 2 potential 1st rounders to drop past the 8th round.
The biggest leapers was Allan Dykstra, Ryan Flaherty, Cody Satterwhite ,Tyler Stovall, Jaff Decker, Tyler Ladendorf and Lonnie Chisenhall. They were all late 2nd to 4th Rounders.
If Destin Hood would have been more upfront about not going to Alabama, he would have been drafted much earlier.
SlowPitch63 | 11-Oct-08 at 8:33 am | Permalink
I think we have to go best player available for each pick. Not only were we bad at the top but we had bad depth through Syracuse and Harrisburg. I am very hopefull that we will have competitive seasons from the P-Nats on down and after the glorious P-Nats season last year may be competitive at the AA level at Harrisburg. We still can not afford the luxury of picking by position since we need help everywhere, at least at the top three levels.
Having mouthed all the generalities above I’d take Strasburg and Matzek if no one else bursts onto the scene. Remember the report on Matzek was on a high school jr. He ought to improve even those high measurables.
We’ve spent money on the scouts and ought to believe them and continue to draft the BPA every round. If the plan is real then extra effort, read dollars, should be evident at every level to sign the players we’ve drafted. This year that effort was inconsistent. We didn’t sign, #1, 14, 20, 26, 29, 31 32 and 33 out of the top 36 and only one of the bottom 10. In 09 a real effort must be made to sign them all. Brian brought up a good point that 40-50 should be college players who have fewer options so in that narrow case maybe we depart from BPA. They did do a good job of signing undrafted free agents and I’d like to see that continue.
All of this would mean as high as a $20M price tag for next year’s draft but it would still be the cheapest way to acquire the talent that we desparately need.
If we do much less than that I will really doubt the plan is real.
Let’s play two!
SlowPitch63 | 11-Oct-08 at 8:54 am | Permalink
On international signings:
Do Stan and JB really think we’re not watching? I missed that part of the plan that covered bungling the 08 draft and ignoring international talent. Maybe I’m missing something. Do we have rights to the players on the two DSL teams or are they available for anyone to sign. Since Baez and Romero are mentioned as having played on the DSL teams and are listed as signees does that mean that all the other players on the two DSL teams are not under contract?
WHERE ARE WE MAKING EXTRAORDINARY EFFORTS TO SIGN PLAYERS?
where are we making extraordinary efforts to sign players?
All I hear is an echo down here in the basement.
Let’s play two!
Berndaddy | 11-Oct-08 at 11:25 am | Permalink
WHERE ARE WE MAKING EXTRAORDINARY EFFORTS TO SIGN PLAYERS ?
Crap now the echos in my basement, SP63, I’ll play two!!!
I love it, keep it coming…
EdDC | 11-Oct-08 at 1:28 pm | Permalink
Chris,
At post #23, you suggest going a little lower on the talent scale for the 9A pick, and overdrafting a player there, because of the Strasburg pricetag.
But why stop there? If the Nats go for signability over talent at the top spot too, they could continue to wring some serious bucks out of this region. The financial benefit to the Nats could be especially huge if you add these savings to the minuscule free agent budgets, the unwillingnes to trade for a player if he has a decent major league level contract, and the lack of funds spent in the international arena for young players. On top of it all, if you can continue to escape paying rent for your stadium, then you will see a heckuva year for the Nats, financially.
SlowPitch63 | 13-Oct-08 at 6:42 am | Permalink
EdDC,
I desparately want the Nats to do well, but I must see an exceptional effort to acquire players/prospects before I can believe that they will.
Watch out, you may begin hearing echoes in your basement also.
Let’s play two!
EdDC | 13-Oct-08 at 9:41 am | Permalink
SlowPitch63,
Yes, it does hurt the bottom line if you invest in the young players, and this can be financially painful (even for billionaires). But it is only painful in the short run. And if you don’t go after the expensive free agents, you can still turn a profit–even if you spend millions elsewhere on young talent. If the Lerners want baseball to catch on in this town, they have to make those investments, as distasteful as that strategy is.
I have absolutely loved the idea of not wasting tons of money on old, fat, slow, fading superstars, and instead investing in draft picks who are picked for talent over signability.
I love the idea of finding and paying for the best of the international kids, and investing in a global scouting system that could identify those kids.
I have looked forward to trading for younger players even if they already have decent major-league-level contracts.
I love the idea of identifying our franchise players who are already playing for the Nats, and locking them up long term, like the other building clubs do.
I also like the idea of collecting some good free agents who can bring sandwich picks in July or some winter. The dregs the Nats can “afford” are not appealing to other clubs; hence, no sandwich picks under the Lerners.
I thought all of that was the Plan. And basically it is a frugal Plan. OK, it doesn’t seem to be the Plan. So what is the Plan?
estuartj | 13-Oct-08 at 10:11 am | Permalink
The problem with “collecting some good free agents who can bring sandwich picks in July” is that if they are Type A FA we’d have to give up our 2nd round pick in hopes that we could then get better picks in return when they leave via FA. This is not a very efficient way to build a team. I’d like to see Bowden or Kasten explain that a type A FA (or at least one not named Texiera or Sabathia) isn’t worth losing our second round pick.
Also the draft is in June not July, but I’m not splitting hairs…
Cole | 13-Oct-08 at 10:18 am | Permalink
If the top ten prospects continue to be very pitching heavy, and if shortstop Grant Green continues to draw comparisons to Tulowitski and Longoria, do the Nats consider taking Green #1 overall and then take a pitcher at 10?
EdDC | 13-Oct-08 at 10:55 am | Permalink
estuartj:
Thanks for the correction. Same thought but better said:
I also like the idea of collecting, in July or some winter, good players who can bring sandwich picks when signed by other clubs when they reach free agency. The dregs the Nats can “afford” are not appealing to other clubs; hence, no sandwich picks under the Lerners.
My reasoning is that sandwich picks are higher than second rounders. Plus decent players help the club win and get interesting, building the fan base and revenues, in an upward spiral. But I would be willing to forgo some of that and only focus on Type B guys. A good young player, however, could be appealing whether Type A or B. Depends on the player.
SlowPitch63 | 13-Oct-08 at 11:31 am | Permalink
Guys,
I’ve thought about this and I think you are saying:
Trade for a type A FA near the deadline. If we can do that for current members of the roster whose future productivity we doubt or MiLB prospects who we are not high on then for some dollars and the aforementioned players we get the use of the Type A for a few months. We then surrender him via Free Agency to get the sandwich pick(s).
It only costs money and players we are willing to disgard BUT of course we must find a willing trading partner.
That was, in effect, what we did with Soriano.
Let’s play two!
Nats fan in NJ | 13-Oct-08 at 12:02 pm | Permalink
Responding to Cole at #34 posting above: I think going after Green at #1 may make a ton of sense. I think how the pitchers are doing the first 2.5 months of the ‘09 season would play into this. If the pitchers are improving and there is depth to get a potential #2 pitcher with the 9a pick, then I don’t think I’d complain if they pick Green. Some may say it’s a fiscal pick, but considering Boras’ as an agent and the higher liklihood of a position player succeeding vs. a pitcher (though college is better than HS), I’m not sure that I’d have a problem with it.
estuartj | 13-Oct-08 at 12:05 pm | Permalink
How appealing our “dregs” are is irrelivant, compesation is determine independantly.
If we trade for Type A or Type B level soon to be FA we have to give up MLB players or prospects in exchange.
The Soriano deal worked out great for us, we got Zim and Burgess for a handful of garbage (except Gallaraga, but that was just dumb luck). Overall this is a big risk to take in trying to build a team, in the long run I think you lose trading MLB talent for picks.
If we sign FA and then try to flip them that is also a tough gamble, since you can’t be sure what compensation you’ll get in return, if any, depending on their performance going into their contract year.
This type of dealing can be very productive, but you have to be very careful and selective and it shouldn’t be the backbone of your development.
EdDC | 13-Oct-08 at 12:31 pm | Permalink
Right, totally agree–the backbone is drafting for talent and not just for the slot guys, and then taking the all-important step of signing them. And sign some good international talent.
But you can also make good trades to bring in some talent that will either net you some good kids in trades in the future, or net you compensatory picks when they sign elsewhere. Or who knows, they could be added to your core group of young talent. Bowden calls this “acquiring assets.”
Tampa Bay and the Marlins did not just rely on the draft. They made some other moves. And the Nats, in a more affluent, larger market than the FL teams, can do some of that too. But as you say, you should not trade away your youth in this process.
If the Nats only sign the dregs, I think it does become relevant to the Nats’ team building because you can’t turn those players into any value later.
Jeff | 13-Oct-08 at 1:35 pm | Permalink
Give me Strasburg & Gibson. I know we need a college bat but at #9b I don’t believe there will be a guy available worth taking that high.
JD | 14-Oct-08 at 8:18 am | Permalink
This team has too many holes in the organization to worry about positions. Take the best value/player, period. To all accounts it seems like Strasburg is a front line #1 starter which you rarely have access to select.
estuartj | 14-Oct-08 at 11:44 am | Permalink
At the top of the draft you have to emphasize best player available, unless you see someone who can contribute right away at a position of need, but this can be very dangerous.
Later in the draft I think more emphasis can be put on team needs since the likelyhood of individual players “making it” goes down exponential each round. If your short on middle infielders or starting pitchers or outfielders in your farm system I can see using that to help choose between a group of available players that are graded roughly equal.
so I think Strasburg has to be #1 if nothing changes by June. I think you take the best player at 9a, but I can see giving a nudge toward a position player, especially an “impact” bat as Bowden likes to call them. Unfortunately the ugly SiGNABILITY monster may rear it’s head for that spot too, gos help us…
Tofu Dog | 14-Oct-08 at 9:50 pm | Permalink
Get the screaming and kicking out of your system now, because I don’t think the Nationals will risk–for a pitcher–the kind of money Strasburg will want. If they were too cheesy to spend a few extra $100,000 for Crow, why would they spend $10,000,000 for Strasburg and have to bargain with Boras at 11:59 on the 15th over a million here, a million there. I say they take Grant Green with the 1st pick and then go for the best college arm at 9a–Volz or Gibson.
Dale | 15-Oct-08 at 7:23 am | Permalink
The Nats will draft Strasburg, for reasons of vanity, pride and because of fan expectation. Giving the extra money for Strasburg is a no brainer compared to Crow. The Nats are in no position to take the PR hit if they do not draft Strasburg, so relax about that worry. Indeed, if they fail to sign a big time free agent this winter they can claim that they are going to spend it on Strasburg instead so he is in a sense their safety valve.
Tofu Dog | 15-Oct-08 at 9:23 am | Permalink
I’m not worried. I don’t care whether they take him or not. He is not going to fix what is wrong with the Nationals all by himself. I would just as soon see them draft players they can sign and leave you guys sweating the bs about best available.
estuartj | 15-Oct-08 at 10:27 am | Permalink
I would rather negotiate with Boras than those idiots who represented Crow. The whole think smelled of rank amateurism.
Boras is a bastard, but by God he gets the deal done.
I’m betting they’ll go for a bonus in the $9-10mil range and a 5 year MLB conract (thus getting him to FA a year early where he can REALLY make some dough. If they sign that deal the day after the draft he’ll be in the bigs by September and anchoring the top of the rotation in ‘10.
Unless he sucks.
Nats fan in NJ | 15-Oct-08 at 10:45 am | Permalink
estuartj - ok, THAT was funny!!
estuartj | 15-Oct-08 at 10:48 am | Permalink
I hate to say it, but Might NFA be going the same way as Capital Punishment? Brian, I know your swamped with school, but please tell us your not losing faith!
To fill in;
The Sags lost 8-6 to the SURPRISE! yesterday. 1B Bill Rhinehart went 2-4, with a run scored and a k. SS Ian Desmond went 1-4 with an rbi and a run scored. RP Zincola pitched 2 perfect innings with 2 Ks lowering his ERA in AFL to 1.93.
To catch everyone up a bit Rhinehart is batting .214, Desmond is batting .250, Leonard Davis is batting .300 (20abs). Zincola has appeared in 3 games (4.2 IP) with a 1.29 whip and 4 Ks to 2 BB and one HR (his only ER). Ross Detwiler has played 2 games (4IP) giving up 2 hits, no ERs and 1 K and 1BB. Cory VanAllen has started 2 games (4.0IP) giving up 5 ERs (6 total) on 8 hits (1HR) and 3 Ks to 1 BB. His ERA is a whopping 11.25. Adam Carr has pitched 3.1 innings with 1ER on 3 hits and 4Ks to 1BB.
Mixed bag really, I don’t think anyone was expecing Desmond, Rhinehart or Davis to light things up down there and the pitchers are seeing such light action it’s tough to draw much of a conclusion on their performance thus far.
Jeff | 15-Oct-08 at 11:32 am | Permalink
Tofu Dog. Steven Strasburg is a one every ten year kind of pitching talent. Let’s not compare him to giving Aaron Crow 1.4 million more than he’s worth. He’s Aaron Crow, not Steven Strasburg.
Pilchard | 15-Oct-08 at 12:27 pm | Permalink
Keep in mind that Strasburg, Green and every other draft eligible prospect has a full high school or college season to play before the draft, and there are those that rise and fall every year from their fall/winter ranking to draft day. No doubt that Strasburg leads by a mile for the first pick, but especially for pitchers, he is always a sore elbow or shoulder away from the lock #1 to a draft day risk.
Over the next 8 months and 60 amatuer games, the evaluation for all draft eligble players could change dramatically.
estuartj | 15-Oct-08 at 2:07 pm | Permalink
Way to spoil the party Pilchard! Since there isn’t much to discus about fall instructional league, Arizona Fall League or international signings we either have to talk post-season baseball (no fun), Redskins Football (really no fun) or hot stove & draft projections.
SlowPitch63 | 15-Oct-08 at 2:36 pm | Permalink
How right you are, estuartj.
In addition, since mistrust reigns supreme, by talking about drafting the best player available we are hoping to make it so.
Let’s play two!