The Official 2023 MLB Amateur Draft Thread

[Inside Pitch]

38 minutes ago, Hubs said:

My point was here are the 1B drafted in the first round. Some of these guys are legit. Some are not. I don't think it's a higher percentage of failure, and I am too young to remember Thomas out of college in 1989.

Has anyone argued that 1B never get drafted in the first round?

[Second Base]

5 minutes ago, Inside Pitch said:

Has anyone argued that 1B never get drafted in the first round?

I mentioned that teams are hesitant to do it except in special cases where they think the bat will really play, like Cron, Thaiss, Andrew Vaughn, guys like that. 

[Inside Pitch]

1 hour ago, Second Base said:

I mentioned that teams are hesitant to do it except in special cases where they think the bat will really play, like Cron, Thaiss, Andrew Vaughn, guys like that. 

Well, hesitant may be a stronger word than I would have used but you're not wrong --it's become the norm.  There are also guys like Evan White who were taken because they actually were premium defenders -- White was so good he was seen as an option in CF.  Smoak is another guy where people talked up his defensive profile and I'll be honest, I thought the dude had rock hands.  Carlos Pena was another.

The shift away from 1B started right about the time Moneyball switched from looking for value via OBP to finding value defensively, it's not that 1B were a worse bet, it just became evident that a SS capable of 70% of a 1B's offense was likely a much more valuable player.

Baseball isn't like football where half the league changes schemes depending on what the most recent SB winner does, it's a much slower process, but there is no question the vast majority of the league values players much differently than they did 10 years ago ... the draft is the one place everyone and their brother tries to maximize their value.  Ditto Latin America.

Anyway, it's not like 1B are worse bets, they just typically have lower value defensively.

[Dave Saltzer]

23 hours ago, Angel Oracle said:

I don’t understand paying full #11 slot value for a guy projected to go near the end of the 1st round.

Can someone help enlighten me on that?

There were several teams rumored to want him near where we took him. The rankings weren't where other teams valued him, so I guess we offered him full slot. 

 

I'm still okay with it, as I think his plate discipline could make him an elite bat. 

[Blarg]

4 hours ago, Skips said:

ok, so a handful of guys over the course of the past 20 years (600+ picks).  If anything, i think you just proved my point that 1B are not valued by teams so early in the draft.  This guy in particular was not rated that high and thus the expectation he'd go under slot.  No need to get upset with me.  I'm not the only one saying it -- here and throughout the media "experts".  Heck, i hope the guy because the greatest hitting 1B ever and a HOFer.  

 

BTW: i'm supposedly all insults to you (i said his "post was idiotic") and yet him initially telling me to Fck-off beforehand is conveniently ignored.  Kind of weird/odd to go after me with that comment.  My response to him telling me to fck-off seemed pretty tame, but i guess you didn't. interesting.

I am just responding to your broad statement that the position is not chosen in the first round but history says it is and in some seasons multiple candidates. These are facts, not a general statement without any supporting data.

As for Schanuel he was rated as a first round pick by multiple outlets and no lower than a high 2nd round pick, which the Angels didn't have. You don't like the pick because it didn't match your criteria, that's obviously not the same as the Angels that took into account every player already in their system and if any would be MLB ready any time soon. The pick represents their understanding of their resources and how they have to navigate through the next four years as their pitching becomes more and more expensive and they can't shed some dead weight contracts.

The only one upset here is you, tossing out insults rather than having a conversation because you can't uphold your argument.  

[Second Base]

1 hour ago, Inside Pitch said:

Well, hesitant may be a stronger word than I would have used but you're not wrong --it's become the norm.  There are also guys like Evan White who were taken because they actually were premium defenders -- White was so good he was seen as an option in CF.  Smoak is another guy where people talked up his defensive profile and I'll be honest, I thought the dude had rock hands.  Carlos Pena was another.

The shift away from 1B started right about the time Moneyball switched from looking for value via OBP to finding value defensively, it's not that 1B were a worse bet, it just became evident that a SS capable of 70% of a 1B's offense was likely a much more valuable player.

Baseball isn't like football where half the league changes schemes depending on what the most recent SB winner does, it's a much slower process, but there is no question the vast majority of the league values players much differently than they did 10 years ago ... the draft is the one place everyone and their brother tries to maximize their value.  Ditto Latin America.

Anyway, it's not like 1B are worse bets, they just typically have lower value defensively.

Exactly, I don't think worse bet is the term I would use to describe drafting a 1B in the first round. Yes, they'll come with lower defensive value even if they're pretty solid defensively. But then again, that value discrepancy could be offset with the bat. 

I wouldn't even call it a strategy really, when I examine it. Because there's no strategy, it's just a complicated measure of projected value. The Angels projected that Schanuel's value was high enough to draft 11th, likely because he would be fast to the majors, fill a team need long term and would be a left handed bat the in middle of the lineup.

If we juxtapose that with taking someone like Arjun Nimmala, you're looking at the potential for greater offensive and defensive value, but much more risk and a few more years of necessary developmental time. 

I won't blow smoke and defend the pick as something great, but I also won't belittle the pick simply because he's 1B from a smaller conference. There is justification either way. I'll simply say they made a pick that falls within the range of expected picks. 

[Angels in 2030]

9 minutes ago, Blarg said:

I am just responding to your broad statement that the position is not chosen in the first round but history says it is and in some seasons multiple candidates. These are facts, not a general statement without any supporting data.

As for Schanuel he was rated as a first round pick by multiple outlets and no lower than a high 2nd round pick, which the Angels didn't have. You don't like the pick because it didn't match your criteria, that's obviously not the same as the Angels that took into account every player already in their system and if any would be MLB ready any time soon. The pick represents their understanding of their resources and how they have to navigate through the next four years as their pitching becomes more and more expensive and they can't shed some dead weight contracts.

The only one upset here is you, tossing out insults rather than having a conversation because you can't uphold your argument.  

Except that's NOT what i said.  I said picking a 1B that early isn't done by teams and if done, it's rarely.  Trying to change my words to now say that i'm saying no 1B has ever been drafted in the 1st round is dishonest and is making you both seem like your more interested in supporting whatever the team does 100% rather than have a discussion.  Look at the drafts recently -- 1B only guys is incredibly rare.  Last year a 1B wasn't drafted until 29th.  Usually, it's a guy who has multiple positional options.  Is it that hard for you to understand this point?  Others have shown this to be the case, yet you go on like this selection of a 1B only guy at #11 is not even the slightest bit surprising.  I guess pretty much every media draft reviewer and agency is wrong too.  

 

I'm still unsure why you are calling me out for insults.  Maybe that other guy is related to you or something...that's the only thing i can think of for you to be saying i'm insulting him when he is the one who told me to "fuck off".  It's a weird line in the sand to draw with me saying gramps is the end all for you; yet being told "fuck off" is acceptable.  But you do you.  Obviously you have some agro going on internally for continuing with this ridiculous back & forth.  

[mmc]

 

[mmc]

 

[mmc]

 

[jsnpritchett]

2 minutes ago, mmc said:

 

Seems kinda random that he'd get the highest NDFA bonus.  Turns 23 in a few weeks and didn't seem to have crazy numbers until this season.  Angels are definitely making moves that go against the so-called "experts" and pre-draft rankers.  That's fine, of course, as the Angels SHOULD know more than them...Just hope some of these dudes pan out.

[Angel Oracle]

26 minutes ago, mmc said:

 

One over slot signing done, one to go (Kent)

[jsnpritchett]

 

[jsnpritchett]

Sorry if these have been posted elsewhere, but I haven't seen them.

Chase Gockel (9th round) signed for $1,000.

https://www.riverbender.com/articles/details/98-mph-fastball-former-edwardsville-pitcher-chase-gockel-signs-with-la-angels-66448.cfm

https://www.mlb.com/angels/news/angels-2023-draft-signings-tracker?t=mlb-draft-coverage

Chris Barazza (10th round) signed for $7,500:

https://www.mlb.com/angels/news/angels-2023-draft-signings-tracker?t=mlb-draft-coverage

So looks like they took the savings from those two, plus Chris Clark, to get the extra $ for Wimmer.

[jsnpritchett]

 

[Stradling]

2 minutes ago, jsnpritchett said:

 

Weird. 

[jsnpritchett]

3 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Weird. 

If you mean it's weird that he got the max bonus without counting against the pool, I agree.  He apparently falls into that group of guys who the Angels seem to value more than everyone else does.  We'll see.  Strange stats for him, as I noted earlier in this thread, I think.

[Warfarin]

12 minutes ago, jsnpritchett said:

If you mean it's weird that he got the max bonus without counting against the pool, I agree.  He apparently falls into that group of guys who the Angels seem to value more than everyone else does.  We'll see.  Strange stats for him, as I noted earlier in this thread, I think.

It was an interesting draft.  They seemingly prioritize players who could hit, regardless of position, out of the gates.  Then thereafter, they mainly shifted towards pitchers and SSs, with a few of the reports notable bonuses being for the SSs (and even the non-drafted SS).

[ThisismineScios]

The weird thing about drafting/scouting is that it's not an exact science, and talent/upside is king. You "don't" draft a reliever early because of what you might be missing out on. But what if you knew you were drafting Devin Williams? That's what I've been mulling over with Bachman, and to a certain extent C-Rod. Yes, a starter that can throw 90 pitches with great stuff is way more valuable. But what if Bachman turns out to be a 40 pitch monster in the pen? 1.50 ERA and 11-13 K/9? Obviously I'm not saying he's there, but at a certain point don't you stop trying over and over again to make a guy something he may not be? I think C-Rod needs to focus on being a great RP. My understanding is that stretching him out didn't cause any setbacks or anything with his recovery, but I think he'd be a killer set up guy/high leverage guy. 

My point is this: if we knew Schanuel was going to be an All-Star like 2-3 years and always being in the conversation to make it, would we be upset about it? I get that we don't know that but I don't get the gripe with not taking a more "premium" position. We have a ton of young MIF, and several young OFs. We don't have much at the corner IF in the system that stands out. We don't even have any good young catchers or good hitting/poor fielding OF that could shift. I think it's fine to recognize a hole, see the sure bat/eye, and say let's plug one hole (easy as it may seem to fill) and then worry about the others. 

[Docwaukee]

I'm not sure why a bunch here keep thinking that what the halos are doing is weird.  And by weird, I presume they mean unconventional or against the grain if you will.  This year seems pretty on par with the last two drafts.  

They did finally take a HS position player this year in Wimmer and another in rd 19.  

Two years ago we had almost no scouting info from the pundits.  Last year it was still pretty limited.  This year there was a ton more.  So I don't think it's Perry and crew doing anything different than they've been doing, it just seems more against the grain this year because others have their conventional scouting info to compare it to.  Good or bad, I think the Angels rely heavily on their spreadsheets.  Which likely included a lot of pitch track and batted ball data that most scouts and very few people in the general pop have.  

I do have some concerns that there might be some 'smartest guy in the room' mentality here.  And for the record, I really don't think the halos are using 'close to the majors' as much as people thing.  College guys just have more data available to evaluate them.  They're just more predictable.  Sure they're gonna take a couple flyers here an there.  

The dogs have a great system because they choose guys who match with the things they value in terms of how they development.   HS players in general are a pretty bad bet.  People still have PTSD from the Dipoto day of the supposed 'high floor low ceiling' approach that essentially amounted to low floor no ceiling.  

Or to put it another way, maybe the approach to getting Zach Neto was a bit of a fluke but to the people that took him he's exactly what they thought he would be.  It might not work as well with Schanuel, but if I'm the Angels I think I'd double down pretty hard on the eval process that got me the last guy.  

One more thing that might be important and we'll use Schanuel as an example even though I don't know the answer and it probably applies to Zach Neto as well.  Not only can you see what the player has done but you can parse out what a player did against them.  Schanuel and Neto came from smaller schools with supposed lesser programs where they likely faced lesser competition.  But not on every pitch they saw.  I guarantee they faced some tough pitchers or more importantly, some tough pitches from guys who probably didn't through tough pitches all that often.  What did those guys do against pitches with major league level vertical and horizontal movement and spin rates and velos?   I have no idea, but I bet the Angels do.  But I bet they would have far less info of that type if at all for HS position players.  

Anyway, I have no idea what info they have, but I guarantee it ain't just a scouting report with 'good face' or 'high ass' checked off.   

[Dave Saltzer]

32 minutes ago, Docwaukee said:

I'm not sure why a bunch here keep thinking that what the halos are doing is weird.  And by weird, I presume they mean unconventional or against the grain if you will.  This year seems pretty on par with the last two drafts.  

They did finally take a HS position player this year in Wimmer and another in rd 19.  

Two years ago we had almost no scouting info from the pundits.  Last year it was still pretty limited.  This year there was a ton more.  So I don't think it's Perry and crew doing anything different than they've been doing, it just seems more against the grain this year because others have their conventional scouting info to compare it to.  Good or bad, I think the Angels rely heavily on their spreadsheets.  Which likely included a lot of pitch track and batted ball data that most scouts and very few people in the general pop have.  

I do have some concerns that there might be some 'smartest guy in the room' mentality here.  And for the record, I really don't think the halos are using 'close to the majors' as much as people thing.  College guys just have more data available to evaluate them.  They're just more predictable.  Sure they're gonna take a couple flyers here an there.  

The dogs have a great system because they choose guys who match with the things they value in terms of how they development.   HS players in general are a pretty bad bet.  People still have PTSD from the Dipoto day of the supposed 'high floor low ceiling' approach that essentially amounted to low floor no ceiling.  

Or to put it another way, maybe the approach to getting Zach Neto was a bit of a fluke but to the people that took him he's exactly what they thought he would be.  It might not work as well with Schanuel, but if I'm the Angels I think I'd double down pretty hard on the eval process that got me the last guy.  

One more thing that might be important and we'll use Schanuel as an example even though I don't know the answer and it probably applies to Zach Neto as well.  Not only can you see what the player has done but you can parse out what a player did against them.  Schanuel and Neto came from smaller schools with supposed lesser programs where they likely faced lesser competition.  But not on every pitch they saw.  I guarantee they faced some tough pitchers or more importantly, some tough pitches from guys who probably didn't through tough pitches all that often.  What did those guys do against pitches with major league level vertical and horizontal movement and spin rates and velos?   I have no idea, but I bet the Angels do.  But I bet they would have far less info of that type if at all for HS position players.  

Anyway, I have no idea what info they have, but I guarantee it ain't just a scouting report with 'good face' or 'high ass' checked off.   

 

They do. Here is some of the publicly available info on Schanuel. From: https://www.mlb.com/news/nolan-schanuel-guide

 

Schanuel played five games this season against either the Gators or another high-major, top-25 squad in the Miami Hurricanes. He went 12-for-21 with seven home runs.

Random fun facts

[arch stanton]

Maybe they just felt that Paris or Jackson were closer to cracking the ML level as infielders than anyone the could draft in that spot so why not just take the 1B who spent the year crushing baseballs?

[Docwaukee]

11 hours ago, Dave Saltzer said:

 

They do. Here is some of the publicly available info on Schanuel. From: https://www.mlb.com/news/nolan-schanuel-guide

 

Schanuel played five games this season against either the Gators or another high-major, top-25 squad in the Miami Hurricanes. He went 12-for-21 with seven home runs.

Random fun facts

that's not at nearly the level of detail that I'm referring to.

[Revad]

Maybe I just don’t remember it well, but it seems to me that the Adell pick, which was risky, didn’t get as much criticism as Schanuel, whose only flaw is he plays first base. 

[Inside Pitch]

1 hour ago, Docwaukee said:

that's not at nearly the level of detail that I'm referring to.

I think McIlvain talking about his averages .vs FBs and the sort is likely what you meant and I wholeheartedly agree.  I was very much out front of the F-Dipoto, F-high floors debate and while I'm sure some see this as more of that, I think there's a lot more to this than just "he's got a good eye so at least we won't have to teach him that."

The guy may grade out as a 50/55 in most areas but he seems to have some elite skills in very specific areas.  The entire draft seemed to focus on specific skill sets.