The Official 2023 MLB Amateur Draft Thread

[Dave Saltzer]

9 hours ago, Stradling said:

We’re about to enter my favorite part of the season.  The @John Smith part of the season. 

Nobody outdoes @John Smith

[Dave Saltzer]

Just a thought for those who seem down on the draft. There seems to be some consensus on here that Schanuel, at peak, should be a .280/.380/.520 hitter with 25+ HR potential. People seem to think that those numbers are pedestrian and can be filled easily at 1B.

 

Numbers like that would make him the second best offensive 1B in the AL in terms of OPS (way above Vladdy Jr right now). Numbers like that would make him the 3rd best in the NL by way of Ops, not far behind Freddie Freeman. 

 

So, does that change some minds if Schanuel pans out to what we think he can? 

 

 

[arch stanton]

2 hours ago, Dave Saltzer said:

Just a thought for those who seem down on the draft. There seems to be some consensus on here that Schanuel, at peak, should be a .280/.380/.520 hitter with 25+ HR potential. People seem to think that those numbers are pedestrian and can be filled easily at 1B.

 

Numbers like that would make him the second best offensive 1B in the AL in terms of OPS (way above Vladdy Jr right now). Numbers like that would make him the 3rd best in the NL by way of Ops, not far behind Freddie Freeman. 

 

So, does that change some minds if Schanuel pans out to what we think he can? 

 

 

 

Nope. Definitely should have drafted athletic high schoolers to replace Adell and Adams when they age out of the system

[Revad]

3 hours ago, Dave Saltzer said:

Just a thought for those who seem down on the draft. There seems to be some consensus on here that Schanuel, at peak, should be a .280/.380/.520 hitter with 25+ HR potential. People seem to think that those numbers are pedestrian and can be filled easily at 1B.

Where in the draft do you suppose he would have gone if he was a 3b instead of 1b?

[totdprods]

4 hours ago, Dave Saltzer said:

Just a thought for those who seem down on the draft. There seems to be some consensus on here that Schanuel, at peak, should be a .280/.380/.520 hitter with 25+ HR potential. People seem to think that those numbers are pedestrian and can be filled easily at 1B.

Numbers like that would make him the second best offensive 1B in the AL in terms of OPS (way above Vladdy Jr right now). Numbers like that would make him the 3rd best in the NL by way of Ops, not far behind Freddie Freeman. 

 

So, does that change some minds if Schanuel pans out to what we think he can? 

Respectfully, no. Even if Schanuel is a Top 5 1B in a couple years, which is far from a given still, I still would think it wouldn’t be as valuable as another Zach Neto-type talent complimenting him at second base or perhaps third. They’re harder to come by, and organizationally speaking, it feels like there’s a real chance Rendon winds up at 1B given that he seems to have some early arm issues. In the extreme short-term, there at least stands a chance Walsh, Drury, Thaiss, and perhaps even Ward all could see 1B time if their production merits then lingering around into 2024-25.

Supply and demand…it’s usually much easier to address 1B with something of quality, even if it isn’t a top 5 1B production, than it is the rest of the infield, and since they’re obviously drafting with an intent to move players to the bigs relatively quickly, I’m factoring that in. 

Not to mention a top prospect at 2B, SS, or 3B tends to have way more trade value. Drafting a Shaw, Troy, or Gonzales makes it a little more feasible to move some of our other MIF depth in trades, or they themselves down the line. Easier to convert those guys (or other MIF prospects) to other positions. Sounds like Schanuel is pretty much set at 1B, with maybe a fringe shot at corner outfield - another position not to difficult to fill. 

Maybe Schanuel is the next Freddie Freeman - he has great contact and discipline, but I’m worried he’ll be more like another Matt Thaiss, who ironically could be moved over to 1B if a O’Hoppe/Quero timeshare emerges (around the time Schanuel probably hits the bigs too).

Edit: and it wasn’t even underslot 

Edited July 13, 2023 by totdprods

[mmc]

All this talk about how the Schanuel pick wasn’t worth it because of how easy it is to acquire a good hitting first baseman, yet when’s the last time this team actually had one?  Walsh for a few months against RHP?

[mmc]

 

[mmc]

 

[totdprods]

6 minutes ago, mmc said:

All this talk about how the Schanuel pick wasn’t worth it because of how easy it is to acquire a good hitting first baseman, yet when’s the last time this team actually had one?  Walsh for a few months against RHP?

Why does that matter? That’s in the past. They didn’t need to acquire one for 9.5 years because of Albert, and then their next in line was an immediate All-Star before whatever happened out of the blue to him, be it health or otherwise. It wasn’t a need until recently. 

It proves both of our points, but they’ve been able to bring in about a half-dozen guys to cover 1B this year either internally or externally and no, no one has taken it, but also shows how easy it is to acquire potential options for it. It hasn’t happened, but if one guy sticks and puts up an .800 OPS - nothing wild - then it’s done. 

What do we do with Schanuel if Rendon is at 1B for the rest of his contract? What if Thaiss is retained due to the catchers holding it down? What if Drury sticks at 1B next year because Paris and Neto are up the middle and Rendon is at 3B? What if Sonny DiChiara winds up hitting again? 

I like Schanuel just fine, it’s just a somewhat limiting pick when there were three guys in Gonzales, Troy, and Shaw who I think would have fit the teams needs - now and later - better, and would’ve been easier to convert to other positions as needed. And it’s traditionally much more difficult to acquire above-average midinfielders than it is 1B/corner outfield, regardless of the Angels struggling to do that in recent years (though they haven’t done much better elsewhere in the IF either)

[mmc]

3 minutes ago, totdprods said:

Why does that matter? That’s in the past. They didn’t need to acquire one for 9.5 years because of Albert, and then their next in line was an immediate All-Star before whatever happened out of the blue to him, be it health or otherwise. It wasn’t a need until recently. 

It proves both of our points, but they’ve been able to bring in about a half-dozen guys to cover 1B this year either internally or externally and no, no one has taken it, but also shows how easy it is to acquire potential options for it. It hasn’t happened, but if one guy sticks and puts up an .800 OPS - nothing wild - then it’s done. 

What do we do with Schanuel if Rendon is at 1B for the rest of his contract? What if Thaiss is retained due to the catchers holding it down? What if Drury sticks at 1B next year because Paris and Neto are up the middle and Rendon is at 3B? What if Sonny DiChiara winds up hitting again? 

I like Schanuel just fine, it’s just a somewhat limiting pick when there were three guys in Gonzales, Troy, and Shaw who I think would have fit the teams needs - now and later - better, and would’ve been easier to convert to other positions as needed. And it’s traditionally much more difficult to acquire above-average midinfielders than it is 1B/corner outfield, regardless of the Angels struggling to do that in recent years (though they haven’t done much better elsewhere in the IF either)

It matters because it shows it’s not nearly as “easy” as everyone seems to think, or at least it hasn’t been for this team, so why not try something else like using a high draft pick to fill the hole?  And Pujols was a net negative for the back half of his contract, so it was absolutely a “need” during that time

[totdprods]

1 minute ago, mmc said:

It matters because it shows it’s not nearly as “easy” as everyone seems to think, or at least it hasn’t been for this team, so why not try something else like using a high draft pick to fill the hole?  

Again, there was no need for most of the last ten years, and that was two other FOs for a bulk of the time. 

Same logic…we’ve had just as much of a void at 2B, 3B, and one corner outfield spot much of that time. Why not address those via the first pick in the draft? They’re usually harder to find on the FA market. More expensive to sign good players there. 

[mmc]

6 minutes ago, totdprods said:

Again, there was no need for most of the last ten years, and that was two other FOs for a bulk of the time. 

Same logic…we’ve had just as much of a void at 2B, 3B, and one corner outfield spot much of that time. Why not address those via the first pick in the draft? They’re usually harder to find on the FA market. More expensive to sign good players there. 

This team hasn’t had adequate production from the position outside of one year of Walsh being a good platoon bat since 2016, no clue how you can say it hasn’t been a need for most of the last 10 years.

[totdprods]

11 minutes ago, mmc said:

This team hasn’t had adequate production from the position outside of one year of Walsh being a good platoon bat since 2016, no clue how you can say it hasn’t been a need for most of the last 10 years.

They were never going to displace Pujols. There was no need to acquire another 1B no matter how much Pujols sucked because he was going to be at 1B regardless.

Starting last year they had confidence in Walsh because he was coming off an All-Star campaign. 

This past winter was the first winter in a decade where they actually had to do something about 1B given that Walsh sucked last year. What did they do? They went and acquired Drury and Urshela - two guys who were working out well until they got hurt - to offer 1B insurance if Walsh didn’t pan out. That’s how easy it was to address 1B depth. They were able to get two guys behind their first choice. And they’ve been able to acquire two other guys in the time since. Neither have worked so far, but neither have bombed and it’s only been about two weeks. 

Edited July 13, 2023 by totdprods

[Angels in 2030]

There's a reason why nobody picks 1B in the draft that early....and even in the whole 1st round rarely.  Arguing the point is a losing cause.  Facts are facts.  

I think i'm more annoyed that it was not an under slot signing than the actual selection of a 1B.  Still, you have the #11 pick -- time to get a true difference maker and at a valued position.  Whether that be a SP or somewhere else.  1B is a bad selection.

[mmc]

Talking about whether a position should or shouldn’t have been selected that high and being upset about it is pure snowflakery. All I care about is that we took good players and I would sure hope that our front office would take the guys they actually want and think will be good rather than caring about pre draft rankings, publication opinions, or fan expectations.  The fact that people would be significantly more happy with a SS when he could easily be another Will Wilson just because the position “makes more sense at that spot” is insane to me.  Perry’s drafted some great prospects for us already, some of which have already contributed at the major league level.  No reason for me to think this class will produce anything different

[totdprods]

To further @Skips point, here are the last decade's worth of first basemen taken in the first round.

• 2022: Xavier Isaac (Rays)
• 2021: none taken
• 2020: Aaron Sabato (Twins)
• 2019: Andrew Vaughn (0.5 career WAR), Michael Toglia (-0.5 career WAR)
• 2018: Grant Lavigne (Rockies)
• 2017: Brendan McKay (-0.1 WAR), Pavin Smith (-0.3 WAR), Nick Pratto (-0.5 WAR), Evan White (-0.6 WAR)
• 2016: none taken
• 2015: Josh Naylor (3.5 WAR), Chris Shaw (-0.9 WAR)
• 2014: Casey Gillaspie (didn't make it to majors)
• 2013: Dominic Smith (0.2 WAR)

See why I'm a little concerned about using the first pick to address 1B?
As I said, maybe he's the next Freddie Freeman and I eat my shoe, but history isn't on the Angels side here. 
Rolling the dice on Jacob Gonzalez, Tommy Troy, Matt Shaw, maybe even Enrique Bradfield or Brock Winfield feels like it would've given the Angels a lot more utility from their pick, both in money, projectability, convertibility, trade value...

So here's hoping Perry and Co. are right and Schanuel is a perennial All-Star candidate.

[mmc]

Just now, totdprods said:

To further @Skips point, here are the last decade's worth of first basemen taken in the first round.

• 2022: Xavier Isaac (Rays)
• 2021: none taken
• 2020: Aaron Sabato (Twins)
• 2019: Andrew Vaughn (0.5 career WAR), Michael Toglia (-0.5 career WAR)
• 2018: Grant Lavigne (Rockies)
• 2017: Brendan McKay (-0.1 WAR), Pavin Smith (-0.3 WAR), Nick Pratto (-0.5 WAR), Evan White (-0.6 WAR)
• 2016: none taken
• 2015: Josh Naylor (3.5 WAR), Chris Shaw (-0.9 WAR)
• 2014: Casey Gillaspie (didn't make it to majors)
• 2013: Dominic Smith (0.2 WAR)

See why I'm a little concerned about using the first pick to address 1B?
As I said, maybe he's the next Freddie Freeman and I eat my shoe, but history isn't on the Angels side here. 
Rolling the dice on Jacob Gonzalez, Tommy Troy, Matt Shaw, maybe even Enrique Bradfield or Brock Winfield feels like it would've given the Angels a lot more utility from their pick, both in money, projectability, convertibility, trade value...

So here's hoping Perry and Co. are right and Schanuel is a perennial All-Star candidate.

 

46 minutes ago, totdprods said:

Why does that matter? That’s in the past.

 

[Blarg]

32 minutes ago, Skips said:

There's a reason why nobody picks 1B in the draft that early....and even in the whole 1st round rarely.  Arguing the point is a losing cause.  Facts are facts.  

Frank Thomas was the 7th pick of the 1989 draft. Mo Vaughn was drafted 23rd in the first round that year as well. I'm sure there are plenty more over the years but I am too lazy to look all of them up.

Thomas has the highest career WAR from that first round with Vaughn checking in at third. Let me ask you, would you have passed on Thomas or even Mo Vaughn for that matter?

 

[Blarg]

Side note, the Angels picked 9th that year in the first round and chose pitcher Kyle Abbot over a 1st baseman. The Angels picked JT Snow in the 5th round of the 1989 draft and got a 5th round value 1st baseman.

[Angelsfan1984]

If he's freddie freeman...great. If he's anything less than exceptional its a poor selection. When you pick that high and some highly ranked prospects are sitting there. Can never have too many top end pitchers.

[mmc]

9 minutes ago, Angelsfan1984 said:

If he's freddie freeman...great. If he's anything less than exceptional its a poor selection. When you pick that high and some highly ranked prospects are sitting there. Can never have too many top end pitchers.

How many 11th overall picks go on to be “exceptional”?

[Blarg]

6 minutes ago, mmc said:

How many 11th overall picks go on to be “exceptional”?

You can go on baseball reference and look up every player ever drafted by round and answer that question for yourself. But a quick three are Scherzer, McCutchen and Springer. 

https://www.baseball-reference.com/draft/?overall_pick=11&draft_type=junreg&query_type=overall_pick&from_type_jc=0&from_type_hs=0&from_type_4y=0&from_type_unk=0

[Angelsfan1984]

8 minutes ago, mmc said:

How many 11th overall picks go on to be “exceptional”?

all of them.

[mmc]

2 minutes ago, Blarg said:

You can go on n baseball reference and look up every player ever drafted by round and answer that question for yourself.

Or he can admit it’s a dumb expectation 

[Angelsfan1984]

9 minutes ago, mmc said:

How many 11th overall picks go on to be “exceptional”?

The guy can hit, thats not a knock on him. Its just much easier in todays game to replace a 1B than it is a pitcher/2b/3b. Thats all hes saying. Its not beneficial to use up a spot so easily replacable or in the Angels case, a spot that a number of players can be thrown into on spot start basis. Again, if he is an allstar caliber player for years to come then that is wonderful. I actually believe that Perry is a very good drafter.