Longgone Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 2 hours ago, tiger2022 said: There's a reason why 1st basemen never go super high in the draft...except for when Avila picks. It's one of the easiest positions to find hitting talent. So unless the guy ends up top 3 in the league, it really is a bad positional selection. Shortstops or outfielders offer the best positional value. But the Tigers always seem to have the smartest guy in the room in charge. You take all that into consideration when grading players Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Longgone Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 2 hours ago, tiger2022 said: There's a reason why 1st basemen never go super high in the draft...except for when Avila picks…. But the Tigers always seem to have the smartest guy in the room in charge. Likely every other team in baseball would have taken Tork 1-1 also, and if he was hitting and fielding like he appeared capable, you’d be fine with it. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 1 hour ago, Longgone said: Likely every other team in baseball would have taken Tork 1-1 also, and if he was hitting and fielding like he appeared capable, you’d be fine with it. I guess if you had it to do over the pick might be Patrick Bailey, that would have been panned as a reach at the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 7 hours ago, Longgone said: You never draft based major league needs. You take the best available talent, period, it always works itself out. I don’t know about that as an absolute. Valuation is relative, but if my system is lousy with first basemen and way short on shortstops, I might take a SS I rate at 92 over a 1B I might rate at 95. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 7 hours ago, tiger2022 said: There's a reason why 1st basemen never go super high in the draft...except for when Avila picks. It's one of the easiest positions to find hitting talent. So unless the guy ends up top 3 in the league, it really is a bad positional selection. Shortstops or outfielders offer the best positional value. But the Tigers always seem to have the smartest guy in the room in charge. Your smartest guy in the room got ****canned in August of 2022. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 4 hours ago, Longgone said: Likely every other team in baseball would have taken Tork 1-1 also, and if he was hitting and fielding like he appeared capable, you’d be fine with it. Yes, anyone would have taken Tork 1-1, and Avila is anyone, and so is everyone else. But while Tork has been doing terrible this season, is now the time to telegraph to him and everyone else that his days are numbered here? The timing is my question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Longgone Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 8 hours ago, chasfh said: Yes, anyone would have taken Tork 1-1, and Avila is anyone, and so is everyone else. But while Tork has been doing terrible this season, is now the time to telegraph to him and everyone else that his days are numbered here? The timing is my question. Tork will figure it out, or he won’t, it has nothing to do with the evaluation and drafting of the best available talent. No need to psychoanalyze situations like this. Drafting a first-basemen, or any position, in no way signals anyones days are numbered because things rapidly change and work themselves out, as we have seen time and again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 1 hour ago, Longgone said: Tork will figure it out, or he won’t, it has nothing to do with the evaluation and drafting of the best available talent. No need to psychoanalyze situations like this. Drafting a first-basemen, or any position, in no way signals anyones days are numbered because things rapidly change and work themselves out, as we have seen time and again. I don't that's true. Drafting another college first base bat-first guy who profiles almost exactly like Tork tells everyone Tork is done here, and it's about something other than simply sending a despondent Tork boo-hoo-hooing to some psychoanalyst's couch. It's about ignoring positions of actual need by choosing a college bat-first guy at a position we can put half a dozen guys at already and leaving positions we need filled quickly—shortstop, catcher, probably second base—open and vulnerable, all while paying $5.7 million for the privilege. It's also about signaling to the marketplace that Tork is now in the bargain bin so come and get it, pennies on the dollar. Is that how we want to dispose of him? Besides, Avila took what he thought was best available talent all the time and look what he achieved by the time he'd left: a top-of-the-system riddled with outfielders, first basemen, and pitchers of various stripes. In any event, I doubt bat-only first basemen are on Scott Harris's first dance card. I doubt Kurtz would profile as the best available talent on Harris's spreadsheet before a crooked-number round. You can have a good laugh on me if I'm wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenacious D Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 Ironically, we have more organizational depth at SS than 1B. I disagree that it’s easy to find a good 1B, probably because of the expectations around the hitting profile associated with that position and the dearth of hitters that match it. Most of the high school position players that get drafted are SS and CF, because the best athletes play there. And then move. For example, both Nick Castellanos and Colt Keith were drafted at SS, and the Tigers never expected either to stay there. If the best player is a 1B when we draft at 11, I’ll be cool with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 9 minutes ago, Tenacious D said: Ironically, we have more organizational depth at SS than 1B. Is Krediler at the top of that depth chart? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Longgone Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 23 minutes ago, Tenacious D said: Ironically, we have more organizational depth at SS than 1B. I disagree that it’s easy to find a good 1B, probably because of the expectations around the hitting profile associated with that position and the dearth of hitters that match it. Most of the high school position players that get drafted are SS and CF, because the best athletes play there. And then move. For example, both Nick Castellanos and Colt Keith were drafted at SS, and the Tigers never expected either to stay there. If the best player is a 1B when we draft at 11, I’ll be cool with it. Hypothetically, if both Tork and Kuntz end up 900 ops guys that would be awesome, they’ll find a place for them. In any case Kuntz is probably 2-3 years from helping, so a lot can happen. But I do agree with Chas on one thing, the odds of the Tigers drafting Kuntz are low, but it won’t be because of Tork. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenacious D Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 59 minutes ago, chasfh said: Is Krediler at the top of that depth chart? No—I’d put McGonigle there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongLiveMaroth Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 https://www.mlb.com/news/mlb-pipeline-2024-mock-draft-june-27?t=mlb-draft-coverage Looks like MLB Pipeline has been listening. Mocked Kurtz to us at 11. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toddwert Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 32 minutes ago, LongLiveMaroth said: https://www.mlb.com/news/mlb-pipeline-2024-mock-draft-june-27?t=mlb-draft-coverage Looks like MLB Pipeline has been listening. Mocked Kurtz to us at 11. hoping Tibbs or Rainer drops to us Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenacious D Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 I like Kurtz—almost 1.5 walks to strikeouts and is LH bat. Unless they are named Pujols or Miggy, I want my 1B to be left-handed. It’s just American. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Longgone Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 17 hours ago, chasfh said: I don’t know about that as an absolute. Valuation is relative, but if my system is lousy with first basemen and way short on shortstops, I might take a SS I rate at 92 over a 1B I might rate at 95. Name one 1b only prospect in the system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 1 hour ago, Longgone said: Name one 1b only prospect in the system. I don't think I would like a first base-only prospect in the system, and I would bet you a dollar that Harris will not bring one in for his first round pick, which would basically tell everyone, including the market, that Tork is done here, and unless there's something they see inside that's unfixable, I would think it's almost job #1 to fix him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Longgone Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 23 minutes ago, chasfh said: I don't think I would like a first base-only prospect in the system, and I would bet you a dollar that Harris will not bring one in for his first round pick, which would basically tell everyone, including the market, that Tork is done here, and unless there's something they see inside that's unfixable, I would think it's almost job #1 to fix him. I understand this is your opinion, it just has no basis in reality. It would have no effect on Tork, would not change anyone’s opinion of his value or availability, and it surely shouldn’t have any impact on draft strategy. No one cares about crap like that. Kuntz is likely a couple of years away, and if they both reach their ceilings that would be a fortuitous scenario and they’d make it work. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Longgone Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 These are athletes, they’ve been competing their whole lives. They thrive on it or they fade away. And this is how you build a system, you accumulate a pipeline of talent where you have to compete hard for jobs, and if you’re good at it, enough will make it to field a competitive core. Most won’t make it, but you keep the pipeline coming. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
microline133 Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 1 hour ago, chasfh said: I don't think I would like a first base-only prospect in the system, and I would bet you a dollar that Harris will not bring one in for his first round pick, which would basically tell everyone, including the market, that Tork is done here, and unless there's something they see inside that's unfixable, I would think it's almost job #1 to fix him. Just because you keep saying it and apparently believe it to be true, doesn't mean it is in any way true. It's simply not. That's not the way the league operates relative to the draft and any impact on MLB player valuation. The Tigers could draft another first baseman at 1-1 this year and it still wouldn't signal to the rest of the league what they think of Tork. It would simply signal that based on their scouting and modeling, they felt that player was the best available in the draft. Nothing more. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 (edited) 20 minutes ago, microline133 said: Just because you keep saying it and apparently believe it to be true, doesn't mean it is in any way true. It's simply not. That's not the way the league operates relative to the draft and any impact on MLB player valuation. The Tigers could draft another first baseman at 1-1 this year and it still wouldn't signal to the rest of the league what they think of Tork. It would simply signal that based on their scouting and modeling, they felt that player was the best available in the draft. Nothing more. OK. I accept that your belief—or knowledge, based on experience—is that major league teams take the best available player for each draft pick, irrespective of the player's position as it relates to the state of the organization's system at the time, and thus do not acquire players based on organizational positional needs. IOW, strictly best available remaining, period. I further grant that you are in a far better position than I to know that based on your access to inside information, versus my gleaning of information I have read as an outsider through the years. Have I articulated this accurately? Either way, I'll still bet a dollar that Harris doesn't take Kurtz if he's available. Edited June 28 by chasfh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
microline133 Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 In the first few rounds, yes, you have stated it correctly. You will see minor deviation from this if a team is trying to manipulate their draft bonus pool, but in those instances they still will not draft for positional need early in the draft; shifting focus to some blend of potential ability and bonus demands. Late in the draft they will grab guys at a specific position to fill out low level rosters rather than strictly BPA (e.g., we still need a shortstop to put on 'X' team)....less so with the contraction of the minor leagues, as they don't have as many rosters to fill, but it still occurs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 8 minutes ago, microline133 said: In the first few rounds, yes, you have stated it correctly. You will see minor deviation from this if a team is trying to manipulate their draft bonus pool, but in those instances they still will not draft for positional need early in the draft; shifting focus to some blend of potential ability and bonus demands. Late in the draft they will grab guys at a specific position to fill out low level rosters rather than strictly BPA (e.g., we still need a shortstop to put on 'X' team)....less so with the contraction of the minor leagues, as they don't have as many rosters to fill, but it still occurs. So, total hypothetical: say an org has the 1-1 pick, and their shortstop is the worst shortstop in the majors who's backed up by nothing but bad-to-below-average shortstops in the system; and they also have an established, perhaps All-Star first baseman locked up for the next few years; and there's a great college shortstop available who's maybe the second or third best guy in the whole draft, but the consensus is that there's a high school first baseman slugger who projects to be the best player in the draft ... the org still takes the first baseman because he's the best available? Honest question because I want to understand how immutable this truism is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sports_Freak Posted June 29 Share Posted June 29 41 minutes ago, chasfh said: So, total hypothetical: say an org has the 1-1 pick, and their shortstop is the worst shortstop in the majors who's backed up by nothing but bad-to-below-average shortstops in the system; and they also have an established, perhaps All-Star first baseman locked up for the next few years; and there's a great college shortstop available who's maybe the second or third best guy in the whole draft, but the consensus is that there's a high school first baseman slugger who projects to be the best player in the draft ... the org still takes the first baseman because he's the best available? Honest question because I want to understand how immutable this truism is. From what I've read, most teams don't take 1st basemen in the 1st round. That's why the Tigers tried to move Tork to 3rd base. Many 1st basemen are defensive liabilities at other positions Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted June 29 Share Posted June 29 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Sports_Freak said: From what I've read, most teams don't take 1st basemen in the 1st round. That's why the Tigers tried to move Tork to 3rd base. Many 1st basemen are defensive liabilities at other positions Most orgs have enough guys that start at 3B and don't have the arm or as MIF and simply outgrow their quickness that they don't have trouble finding guys to move to 1st in the natural course of things. That said, with the National league adopting the DH, more than ever there is always a place for a great bat Edited June 29 by gehringer_2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.