2021 MLB Draft Prospects Thread

[Taylor]

2 hours ago, Angel Oracle said:

There is a pitcher who will be a FA after this season, who is dominating so far, who would make taking BPA if non-pitcher with #9 pick preferable.

Carlos Rodon

Sub 2.00 ERA, sub 1.00 WHIP, and 88 Ks in just 59 innings (around 6 innings/start)

Was the #3 overall pick by the ChiSox in 2014 out of NC State.

Downside is he’s had injury issues the past few seasons prior to 2021.

Has he finally maintained being healthy?   Will the ChiSox throw big money at him?

How many Rondons is one Rodon worth?

[Docwaukee]

There's really no one you can get in any given year that's gonna fill an immediate need outside of the top 3 and maybe down to 5.  The path of a college pitcher is obviously shorter to the bigs but your most likely grab after the top 5 picks is gonna be for a lower ceiling guy with a high floor.  But no matter how quickly a guy gets to the bigs, he's likely gonna have growing pains at age 22/23 when he gets to the bigs.  

My assumption is that a 1st round draft pick is unlikely to be truly helpful for 2-3 years at best even as a college player.  The landscape of a team changes so much in that period of time so the expectation should be that any draft will be for at least a couple years from the time it occurs.  

The Angels have been in the unsustainable cycle over the last 10 years of prioritizing more immediate value over future value.  You typically can't do that over the long term unless you get really lucky where several of your draft prospects or intl players end up better than expected.  

Ultimately you can't fill you major league team with trades or spending without major complications.  There's typically no magic.  There are no shortcuts.  It takes time and not just 2-3 years but 5-7 years even if you do it right.  

The way the dogs did it a few years ago where they spent a shit ton of money on a roster with tons of holes so they could essentially rebuild their entire infrastructure is really the only way to shorten the path and the Angels are never going to take it to the level that it would require to do that.  Filling gaps with 1yr players can keep you competitive but when you're doing it for 9 spots on your roster, the likelihood of it succeeding decreases substantially.  Maybe you get a good year from that crapshoot here and there but long term you are never going to maximize your value by exchanging future assets for immediate needs.   

My biggest concern is the lack of attention to scouting and development if that's true.  I'm still of the mind that your success rate is gonna increase when you have 20 smart people making decisions instead of 3.  I know it's not that simple and you can actually be strategic but I feel like we're a long ways away from worrying about the law of diminishing returns.  And to me, while you have to be aware of that 'problem' it's a much easier problem to sold than not having enough people to do what needs to be done and spreading them so thin that it actually decreases their ability to do their job the best way possible.  

[Angels in 2030]

Rocker making himself some money today.  

[ukyah]

the angels have to get one of the top college pitchers with the 9 pick. i just can't see them going any other way. hopefully, they get the opportunity to pick the right guy and make a wise pick.

[halomatt]

4 hours ago, Taylor said:

Bitching and defense win championships.

If this is true, this message board would be world champions.  Nobody bitches like us!

[tdawg87]

Just now, halomatt said:

If this is true, this message board would be world champions.  Nobody bitches like us!

Yeah but we don't really defend well. 

[halomatt]

Just now, tdawg87 said:

Yeah but we don't really defend well. 

This is true. 

[Revad]

33 minutes ago, tdawg87 said:

Yeah but we don't really defend well. 

I disagree.  This can be a pretty tough and smart crowd, as well as funny.

[Lou]

2 hours ago, Fourts said:

Rocker making himself some money today.  

He dominated.

[Stax]

2 hours ago, Fourts said:

Rocker making himself some money today.  

No chance Rocker be available when the Angels draft.

[Lou]

3 minutes ago, Stax said:

No chance Rocker be available when the Angels draft.

I don't think anyone here believes that he will be.

[rafibomb]

 

 

[Docwaukee]

No chance Rocker is there at 9.  

[Docwaukee]

2 hours ago, ukyah said:

the angels have to get one of the top college pitchers with the 9 pick. i just can't see them going any other way. hopefully, they get the opportunity to pick the right guy and make a wise pick.

there's such a massive difference in getting one of the top or top two college pitchers vs. that next tier characteristically.  If a college pitcher falls to 9, he's likely not top tier.  Unless of course the draft is unbelievably deep.  

[ukyah]

3 hours ago, Dochalo said:

there's such a massive difference in getting one of the top or top two college pitchers vs. that next tier characteristically.  If a college pitcher falls to 9, he's likely not top tier.  Unless of course the draft is unbelievably deep.  

i'm certainly no authority on amateur players, but from what i've seen on the college pitcher's projected for top 15, combined with the high school position players that are projected in the top 10, there should be no shortage of the angels getting a high caliber college pitcher in the top 10. they're not getting one of the top 3, but they've got a shot at quite a few others that should be there for the taking. i really can't see them going in any other direction.

[Docwaukee]

11 minutes ago, ukyah said:

i'm certainly no authority on amateur players, but from what i've seen on the college pitcher's projected for top 15, combined with the high school position players that are projected in the top 10, there should be no shortage of the angels getting a high caliber college pitcher in the top 10. they're not getting one of the top 3, but they've got a shot at quite a few others that should be there for the taking. i really can't see them going in any other direction.

my point is that after the top 2 or 3 it's not clear cut.  Not that it ever is with prospects but the top 5 is usually pretty obvious.  And that includes position players like those HS SS you're talking about.  

Let's look at 5-12 for pitchers over the last 20 years.  In particular those college guys.  
Jered Weaver 2004
Tim Lincecum 2006
Max Scherzer 2006
Madison Bumgarner 2007
Mike Minor 2009
Drew Pomeranz 2010
Chris Sale 2010 (He was 13 but I'll include him anyway)
Aaron Nola 2014

There's a bit of potential after that and there are about two to three times as many as I mentioned that maybe got a cup of coffee at best.  Overall, it's a pretty miserable success rate on college pitchers for where we're at.  If a guy is that good, he'll go in the top 3.  Otherwise he goes into the pool of other 1st round college guys where you might as well pick him at 28 than 9.  

At nine you still have a chance to get a special player and if you do it's likely gonna be a HS position player who's gonna take 5 years to develop.  

[Docwaukee]

33 minutes ago, ukyah said:

i'm certainly no authority on amateur players, but from what i've seen on the college pitcher's projected for top 15, combined with the high school position players that are projected in the top 10, there should be no shortage of the angels getting a high caliber college pitcher in the top 10. they're not getting one of the top 3, but they've got a shot at quite a few others that should be there for the taking. i really can't see them going in any other direction.

and btw.  I'm far from an authority as well.  I typically play the odds game with drafts as opposed to pretending to know a ton about certain specific guys.  It's really a half assed way to think about it in many regards because it doesn't take into account the whole point of scouting.  Most of the draft is Han Solo as opposed to Spock.  Guys see stuff and that's why they have jobs.  

I just don't like our odds for Catchers (unless truly elite), 'Advanced' college hitters (at 9 anyway), and then it's gets a shade better for college pitchers and about the same for HS pitchers.  And when I'm talking success, I'm talking ceiling.  Just about everyone in the top 10 is gonna make it to the bigs.  You want a chance at getting an elite player from that spot.  At least that's my opinion so I'd pass on the #4 college starter.  

And Detmers could buck the trend.  He looked like the typical mid to back end starter at best out of college but someone saw something and now's he's added 4mph to his fastball.  Is there another Detmers in this class?  Maybe.  I hope we find him but I don't want a 'quick to the majors' guy just for that reason.  

[Lou]

Leiter is pitching right now vs ECU in the Super Regionals.

ESPN2

[Stradling]

3 minutes ago, Lou said:

Leiter is pitching right now vs ECU in the Super Regionals.

Is he still good?  

[Lou]

1 minute ago, Stradling said:

Is he still good?  

I'm watching the England vs New Zealand test match. 

[jsnpritchett]

50 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Is he still good?  

1 hit, 1 BB, 8 K in 4 IP so far.

 

[Angels in 2030]

Thru 6 shutout innings now: 10ks, 1 hit, 2 bb

[Lou]

England were shite.

[DCAngelsFan]

On 6/11/2021 at 10:44 PM, Dochalo said:

and btw.  I'm far from an authority as well.  I typically play the odds game with drafts as opposed to pretending to know a ton about certain specific guys.  

This is where I kinda wish MLB allowed trading of draft picks - I mean, if you could trade a #9 pick for two last-first-round picks, or what have you, that would certainly make things more interesting.  

Of course, the baseball draft is worlds different from the NBA or NFL draft and it's very difficult to understand how that would be valued in reality.   

Here's an older chart from Hardball Times that's kind of useful - so, to my eye, that #6-10 pick is "worth" roughly 2x picks in the 21-30's.  My stats are pretty weak, but I think the chances of turning two 21-30 draft picks into 2x 10+WAR players is about 2%, but getting one of them is, I think 21% - as compared to 25% for the 6-10 slot you traded out of. 

Of course, teams don't *have* two 1st round picks to trade, except.   

We've had two diametric experiences with a cluster of early picks - 1st two rounds: 

2009 - Grichuk, Trout, Skaggs, Richard, Kehrer, Corbin in the 1st two rounds, netting >100 WAR and counting

2010- Cowart, Bedrosian, Clark, Lindsey, Bolden, TIllman - netting 0.1 WAR and counting

2010 should have been a generational draft - and I won't even delve into what might have been by naming the players we *could* have drafted that year - it's too depressing.

 

 

[Docwaukee]

5 hours ago, DCAngelsFan said:

This is where I kinda wish MLB allowed trading of draft picks - I mean, if you could trade a #9 pick for two last-first-round picks, or what have you, that would certainly make things more interesting.  

Of course, the baseball draft is worlds different from the NBA or NFL draft and it's very difficult to understand how that would be valued in reality.   

Here's an older chart from Hardball Times that's kind of useful - so, to my eye, that #6-10 pick is "worth" roughly 2x picks in the 21-30's.  My stats are pretty weak, but I think the chances of turning two 21-30 draft picks into 2x 10+WAR players is about 2%, but getting one of them is, I think 21% - as compared to 25% for the 6-10 slot you traded out of. 

Of course, teams don't *have* two 1st round picks to trade, except.   

We've had two diametric experiences with a cluster of early picks - 1st two rounds: 

2009 - Grichuk, Trout, Skaggs, Richard, Kehrer, Corbin in the 1st two rounds, netting >100 WAR and counting

2010- Cowart, Bedrosian, Clark, Lindsey, Bolden, TIllman - netting 0.1 WAR and counting

2010 should have been a generational draft - and I won't even delve into what might have been by naming the players we *could* have drafted that year - it's too depressing.

 

 

that 2010 draft was disappointing but really not that far off from your chart.  

we had about a 32% chance of hitting 3 WAR with Cowart.  So about 1 in 3
a 23% chance of hitting that with Bedrosian or Clarke.  1 in 4 to 5
a 15% chance with Lindsey and Bolden.  1 in 7

so if I am calculating the odds correctly, there's about a 100% chance that at least one of those happen.    Bedrosian hit about 3 fWAR or pretty damn close.  

Considering that 3 WAR still kinda sucks, that should be the litmus but from the Angels first pick at 18 through 50 ie  32 picks, there were 3 players who have put up 10 WAR or more.  Or about 1 in 11.  And that doesn't include the pool of players that extend beyond the first round.  There was one player with above 10 WAR of the 32 picks in the second round.  Is it realistic that any of those player could have been take from 18-52 in the first round?  

Realistically is was probably about 1/20 because we didn't have multiple shots at all 4 of those players in the top 70 picks.  So it was about a 20% chance of getting a 10 WAR player from one of those top 5 picks.    BTW, those with a WAR above 10 were Yelich, Syndergaard, Castellanos and Simmons.  

So let's be realistic and say that we should have gotten one of those guys.  So your expectation of that being a generational draft is wildly unrealistic even if we did better.  18 of the first 50 picks didn't even make it to the majors.  Another 16 of the 50 have put up less than 1 WAR.  That's 34 of the top 50 with less than 1 WAR.  From the time the halos picked at 18 it's even worse.