2011 Draft: Day Two Links
By
Through two days and 30 rounds, the Yankees have yet to select a middle infielder in this year’s amateur draft. In fact, they’ve taken just nine position players total, and only two are projected to stick at an up-the-middle position long-term. That’s unusual, but I’ll talk about that more in-depth in tomorrow’s grand recap. For now, we’ve still got the final 20 rounds to worry about. The draft resumes at noon ET and can be followed on MLB.com’s Draft Tracker. Audio of the conference call is available through that link. Based on last year, today’s liveblog should last “only” five hours, which sounds great after yesterday’s ordeal. Here’s a collection of links regarding the last two days…
- Here’s what Keith Law had to say about the Yankees’ haul in his AL Day Two recap (Insider req’d): “I always expect them to shoot more for upside than they do; they did go for some with New Hampshire prep righty Jordan Cote (3) and Virginia prep player Jake Cave (6), listed as an outfielder (he’d be a corner bat with doubles power) but also a prospect as a left-handed pitcher. Greg Bird (5) can hit but is fringy behind the plate. Right-hander Philip Wetherell (8) is probably a reliever in pro ball. Right-hander Zach Arneson (9) from Lewis & Clark State has two average pitches and probably also goes to the pen.”
- My favorite pick of Day Two: 20th rounder Dan Camarena, a high school southpaw from California. He reportedly sits 88-91 with his fastball and backs it up with a very good changeup and a solid curveball. I’m not sure if he’ll add any velocity given his almost maxed out frame (6-foot-1, 205 lbs.), but Camarena is lauded for attacking hitters and being aggressive. High school kids with three legit pitches are fantastic picks in the double digit rounds, especially ones that could have gone as high as the third or fourth round.
- Last month, KLaw mentioned 18th rounder Hayden Sharp as a pop-up guy (someone that burst onto the scene this spring), noting that he has run his fastball as high as 98 at times while often sitting 93-96. That’s huge velocity from anyone, but especially from a high school kid with room to fill out his 6-foot-6 frame.
- Joe and I talked about the concept of drafting makeup guys and how their work ethic could help them improve weaknesses in their game (especially on defense) on yesterday’s podcast, and scouting director Damon Oppenheimer pretty much confirmed that yesterday. He told Jack Curry that “talented kids who are willing to work at defense will succeed.” First pick Dante Bichette Jr. fits that mold, but so do kids like Matt Duran (4th round) and Greg Bird (5th).
- Speaking of Bird, he played the whole “it’s a win-win situation” card when asked by The Denver Post if he’s rather turn pro or follow through on his commitment to Arkansas. Third rounder Jordan Cote had the same reaction when speaking with The New Hampshire Union Leader. You’ll hear a lot of that, but it’s just agent speak. Kids will cost themselves a few bucks if they come off as overly anxious to sign.
- As for Bichette, Oppenheimer told Curry he doesn’t “think we’ll have any trouble signing him. He wants to play.” He might be under contract in time for the rookie level Gulf Coast League season, which starts in less than two weeks. Chad Jennings recapped the Joe Girardi-Dante Bichette relationship last night, in case you missed it.
You can see all of the Yankees’ selections right here. Probably should have mentioned that earlier.
Update: After running through Baseball America’s list of the top 200 draft prospects, the following players are still available …
- Jake Reed, RHP, California HS (ranked 128th overall)
- Dante Flores, 2B, California HS (148th)
- Chris Mariscal, SS, California HS (168th)
- Michael Cederoth, RHP, California HS (169th)
- Pat Connaughton, RHP, Massachusetts HS (170th)
- Ricky Jacquez, RHP, Texas HS (189th)
I wrote about Jacquez earlier this spring, and I’m a definite fan. He’s probably going to end up going to school though.
Update Part Deux: Here’s a great article on Cote from The Concord Monitor. It says he’s already asked the Yankees for more than slot money, which isn’t surprising. Slot for the 118th overall pick is somewhere around $250,000.
170 Comments»
RAB Info
The Founders
Mike Axisa, Ben Kabak, Joe Pawlikowski
Editor-In-Chief
Mike Axisa Archives | Email
Managing Editors
Ben Kabak Archives | E-mail
Joe Pawlikowski Archives | E-mail
Contributing Editors
Larry Koestler (Archives)
Moshe Mandel (Archives)
Stephen Rhoads (Archives)
Weekend Writers
Hannah Ehrlich (Archives)
Matthew Warden (Archives)
Special Contributor
J.R. O'Grady (Archives)
Technical Consultant
Jay Gordon
Subscribe to RAB by RSS and Twitter
Follow @RiverAveBlues Search RAB
Banner Design By
The Mason Williams Watch
Dunno why but this makes me feel a whole lot more optimistic about what the Yanks did in the draft. I guess I really didn’t hate any of the picks. I was more disappointed that the Yanks didn’t draft a big name. But I guess its better to spread your money around then to risk blowing half of your budget on a consensus guy who turns into a bust.
agreed—something about the recap makes it all sound better. its not the haul I hoped for but i guess i didnt know what to expect beign that NYY didnt have a pick in the top 30. Sounds like they got some talent but where the heck all all these pitchers going to play? lots of fringy guys.
We took a lot of corner IF/OF guys too, I think they’ll work out though. Remember that not all of these guys will sign, chances are they have a set allotment of spots they can fill and they’ll use that as leverage against some of these guys when it comes to contracts.
There’s 50 rounds to the draft, so every team drafts a lot of “fringy guys” every season.
Plus a consensus guy is not necessarily a better prospect than someone the Yankees FO thinks is better.
I feel the same way as KLaw on this. With our financial capabilities, I always feel like we don’t take enough upside guys with the draft. It’s probably made worse by the fact that the other teams in the division, Rays/Sox/Jays are really aggressive about taking big name guys with obvious upsides.
I get that big name guys don’t always pan out but if you miss out on a high upside guy, even if you whiff, you could possibly still end up with a decent player; if you pick a guy that doesn’t have much upside, well, that’s as much as you’ll get.
I wonder how much of that is just perception. Clearly, the Red Sox have a much more open relationship with the media, so the consensus big name guys are going to more closely resemble their draft board than a different team’s board. The Yankees don’t seem to have nearly as many leaks within their scouting department. I have no idea where the Rays and Jays stand in that regard.
Upside is a subjective thing… Keith Law’s view of a player’s upside is not necessarily Damon Oppenheimer’s.
The Yankees took a guy with great power, a lefty who throws 96, and a big HS RHP who apparently needs to totally re-tool his mechanics… I think the upside there is huge. It’s more the probability I see as a problem than the upside.
Plus Keith Law basically calls his opinion on a player “upside.” He says he’s all about upside, but the way he throws the word around to describe every prospect he likes I think he often confuses upside with probability.
I think upside is a word that can be used to express both pure upside potential or a hybrid of pure upside and probability to reach that potential. I’ve seen it used both ways and I’m not sure either is wrong.
This is a silly semantic argument, but aren’t you basically saying ‘yeah but some people use a word to mean something other than it means, so I think that word can have that other meaning?’ It’d be like if I said “the wall is blue” and someone else said “the wall is red” and you said “yeah, well I’ll just take ‘red’ to mean the same thing as ‘blue.’”
LOL.
Keith Law is a Harvard Grad with an MBA. I’m pretty sure he knows what the word “upside” means.
I’m not attacking Law here, I don’t even follow him closely enough to know how he uses the word.
One thing though… Look, I think Law does an excellent job at what he does, but I’d caution against using the whole ‘he went to Harvard’ argument against any criticism of him. Plenty of people went to very good schools, and those people still make mistakes sometimes.
You can always tell a Harvard man, but you can’t tell him much.
And a Harvard Grad with an MBA is more than capable of using the word upside in many different ways with different connotations and different loaded meanings.
“Upside” is a very nebulous term in general. Having a Harvard degree doesn’t mean Heyman can use it in the “correct” meaning of the word, or even that a universal consensus as to what the correct meaning of the word even exists.
Yeah I guess I’m assuming there’s one meaning here but the definition itself might be nebulous. I tend to think the word has a specific meaning but whatever, I’m not going to argue the point too strenuously.
And yeah, I used the word nebulous, because I went to good schools and you shouldn’t question me.
Yeah, and if it wasn’t for Harvard MBAs running Wall Street we wouldn’t have gotten to enjoy the financial crisis of the last three years.
There’s not necessarily one right way to use it…
Basically, though, Law says he’s all about upside. The logical thing to take from this is that he’s about upside more so than probability, that probability is the thing he’s less about in being all about upside. Then he uses the word “upside” to describe a whole lot of the players he likes. This makes sense. Most players he doesn’t like have no “upside.” Often times, though, he seems to be confusing upside with probability. A lefty who throws 96… there’s great upside there. If he gets his command, his off-speed stuff, etc. together… he can be a hell of a pitcher. The issue is not upside, it’s probability. Volatility. Same for Bichette and Cote and others… Stafford’s velocity is just more easily quantifiable than Bichette’s power or Cote’s raw talent.
Personally, I think a lot of this stems from Law’s over-inflated ego. The can’t tell a Harvard man much thing you mention. Law takes his opinion to be fact, which is a huge pet-peeve of mine. I would contrast him to Mel Kiper Jr. Mel has been doing what he’s been doing a lot longer and the odds just suggest he (or anyone) has a much higher chance of being right about an NFL prospect than an MLB prospect… still Mel constantly refers to “his board.” He doesn’t belittle exec.s who deviate from the Kiper board. He says he disagree, but he doesn’t act like he’s right. Law often takes his own opinion as more valid than the opinion of others… even if his opinion is a compilation of other people’s opinions… it’s still his opinion.
I think he knows he’s pretentious at times and it’s at least partly schtick. He’s a smart guy, you really think he thinks his opinions on prospects are fact and there’s no room for argument?
I think Law is much more in on the joke than you perceive.
I don’t know what he thinks, but that’s often the way he presents it. I can’t really comment on what’s going on in his brain, merely what he writes and says. Same thing with commenters here. Can’t guess at what they meant or what they’re thinking most times… just what they write.
Again I contrast him with Kiper Jr., who goes out of his way to talk about “his board.” To me, that’s the right way to present your information: this is what I think, but there’s no reason I as a journalist am more right than the guy who is actually paid a large sum of money to make this decision.
Ironically, I would have thought that a Harvard Grad with an MBA would have more ‘upside’ than being a sports reporter.
Shouldn’t his upside be owning a giant CPA firm or CEO of a Fortune 500 Company or something?
just saying
touche.
It doesn’t work that way. My mother is a Princeton grad with a Columbia MBA and I still know plenty of crap she doesn’t and am right in disagreements about as often as she is even though I only went to Saint Louis University undergrad.
Going to Harvard and even knowing the definition of a word does not preclude you from misusing it or from holding such a high opinion of yourself that you take your own opinion to be the truth.
I think KLaw is more about pure upside whereas BA is more about Upside*Probability. At least that’s kind of how they describe their top 100 rankings. I assume there is some carryover when judging amateur talent.
Yeah, that’s what Law says. Based on his use of the word, though, I think he’s a little confused. Every prospect he likes has “upside” while every prospect he doesn’t like doesn’t have “upside.” Dante Bichette’s power/work ethic, Stafford’s velocity/left-handedness, and Cote’s raw talent give them all great upside… the issue is just that their chances of reaching that upside are lower than say a Josh Bell, Daniel Norris, or Dillon Howard in Law’s opinion.
If anything I think the Yankees did shoot for upside to a very high degree with those first three picks. They took raw guys who if they develop have the ceilings to be very good. Their chances of developing just aren’t seen as all that good relative to other guys available by Law and other journalist-scouts, because they are not currently as polished.
I am not sure. I think he believes that Josh Bell has a higher upside than Bichette Jr. That’s not a slight on Bichette Jr, as it is a compliment to Bell’s perceived talent.
Bell might have been a bad example, but I’m not even sure it is… if Bichette can be a 900 OPS guy in the best case, how much higher can Bell’s ceiling really be? Maybe there’s a 1-5% chance he’s Albert Pujols or Manny Ramirez compared to 0% for DB… So maybe not the best example, but I still think the point stands: with those first three picks I think the Yankees took a whole lot of upside, but not a whole lot of probability.
Ok. I just think that Klaw really believes that if both reach their full potential, Bell will be the much better player. I might be putting words into his mouth, but that’s what I interpret from his stuff.
At times, yes. And again the Bell/DB example may be a bad one. Other times I feel like he’s mistaking upside for probability. A penny tech stock might have just as much upside as google’s stock… it’s just not at all likely to get there.
It’s not just about one example, though you’ve chosen to focus only on Bell/DB. Maybe Maw really doesn’t like Bichette’s upside, and maybe even the Yankees think Bell has way more upside but just won’t sign. Law used upside to refer to their day 2 haul, anyway, not day 1. I should have never mentioned Bichette. I just think that from Law’s use of the word upside he’s often confusing it with probability. Bell might not be the right guy, but Bichette’s, say, 30+ HR, .900 OPS kind of upside is pretty freaking good offensively. It’s more a matter of his odds of reaching that upside from everything I’m reading. Again, though, maybe Bichette is a poor example. I’m not saying Law is wrong on Bichette… I have no idea what Bichette’s upside is. I’m just talking very generally about Law’s use of the word upside as sort of his tagline.
I gotcha. I like the stock analogy. That’s my realm.
I think that while a penny stock may have the chance to be a 10 bagger easier than Google’s chances, there is way less than a %1 chance that the penny stock will ever reach Google’s market cap or valuation as a company.
It’s not just KLaw’s view though. If you read BA/BP, etc, it’s obvious that all three of those teams took higher end talents, both in term of upside and probability to reach those.
Do those guys miss and miss a lot? yeah probably, that’s the nature of things. But I think by and large, they are right about a lot of guys too and being a lottery type thing, you want to have as many tickets as possible and in my view, the Yanks didn’t get enough of those tickets.
Doesn’t mean we’ll end up with a worse draft in the end because you just never know who’s going to develop and who’s not, kind of like the lottery. But the likelihood of hitting the jackpot is higher when you have 10 such guys instead of 3.
“It’s not just KLaw’s view though. If you read BA/BP, etc, it’s obvious that all three of those teams took higher end talents according to Klaw/BA/BP, both in term of upside and probability to reach those.”
That’s a more accurate statement.
I hear what you’re saying, but you’re basing your conclusions wholly on what those services say. Ted’s whole point, which is totally valid, is that just because those guys may say something doesn’t make it true. (Also, there’s more differences in opinion btw those services than you seem to allow for, it’s not like they all say the same thing about every prospect.)
Agreed.
Oh no doubt they are not the same on every prospect but if you look at a top 100 from all these things, there are probably at least 50 of the same names on all these lists in different order. There are guys that obviously have toolsets that’s more likely to succeed.
Like I said in the earlier post, these draft gurus fail plenty often because that’s the nature of baseball players: even the best tools don’t always turn into good players. They do also get it right plenty of times too. I see Ted’s viewpoint but lately there are so many people that say oh DOpp knows better than these guys so whatever he drafts is OK and I guess it frustrates me a little bit.
“…lately there are so many people that say oh DOpp knows better than these guys so whatever he drafts is OK and I guess it frustrates me a little bit.”
I agree, having blind faith in the Yanks’ guys is silly. But it’s silly in the same way that having blind faith in the other guys is. Don’t react to one mistake with an equal and opposite mistake.
“There are guys that obviously have toolsets that’s more likely to succeed.”
No. It’s a subjective thing. If Keith Law and Jim Callis and some other journalist all say player x is more likely to succeed than DB Jr. but Opp and two Yankees scouts all say DB Jr. is more likely to succeed… what makes the first three opinions more valid? Nothing.
“They do also get it right plenty of times too.”
And so does Damon Oppenheimer. Again, you are failing to prove why those guys’ opinions are more valid than Damon Oppenheimer’s.
“oh DOpp knows better than these guys so whatever he drafts is OK and I guess it frustrates me a little bit.”
It’s not that he knows better. It’s that his opinion is just as valid, at least unless you are going to do a long-term study and test the results of various people’s rankings.
Law, BA, BP… again, I really don’t care. Best case scenario is that whoever is ranking those prospects has as many resources as Damon Oppenheimer.
“in my view, the Yanks didn’t get enough of those tickets.”
No. In Law’s view (and he wasn’t even particularly negative about their draft other than the Bichette pick) and in Callis’ view and in other guys you don’t know’s views.
“Doesn’t mean we’ll end up with a worse draft in the end because you just never know who’s going to develop and who’s not, kind of like the lottery.”
It’s not just about the development from here on out. It’s also about the raw talent going in. You are basing all your opinions on hearsay.
Mike – Any way to look into the thing about the Yanks possibly having a very small amateur scouting staff? I think you or someone else mentioned in the draft-chat yesterday that someone (Conor Glassey maybe?) had said something to that effect, that the Rays/Sox have the biggest staffs while the Yanks have a very small staff.
I saw that tweet yesterday, someone dropped it in the liveblog. It wasn’t from Glassey, it was just a random person it looked like. The bio didn’t have any info other than “baseball fan” or something like that, and usually a journalist puts their info there. It might be true, but I’m not going to believe it based on that one tweet.
Ah, thanks. It was just so random, I’ve never heard anything like that before and, based on what we know about Cashman and what he thinks is important, it seemed strange. If it was from some random tweeter and not someone with some credibility in the area then who cares.
I should start a fake Twitter account under the name “@someguy” or “@randomtweeter” and just spout baseless, bullshit allegations about anything and everything all day long, so people can foolishly use me as a primary source.
————-
“Obama announces plans for immediate invasion of Algeria, Chad, France”
http://www.twitter.com/someguy
I just checked again. It’s the real Conor Glassey. He’s followed by Callis and has a profile. He did say the Yanks have one of the smallest staffs and that the Rays and Sox have two of the biggest.
Look at 21 hours ago.
conorglassey
@conorglassey conorglassey
@rwolfe09 Not coincidentally, the Red Sox and Blue Jays have two of the biggest scouting staffs. Yankees? One of the smallest.
http://twitter.com/#!/conorglassey
Argh, you’re right. Here it is:
http://twitter.com/#!/conorgla.....8607422465
John Heyman already does this.
Does what?
I laughed.
TJSC–not @someguy but @sourceswithintheorganization sure, you’ll have REALLY short tweets, but damn! I’ll be able to quote ‘sources within the organization’ ALL THE TIME.
Me? I’m changing my name this afternoon to ‘generic republican’ because I think that’s my best chance to win an election here in alabama.
I obviously don’t have a source, but I feel like the Yankees would have a pretty sizable department on that end. RAB linked to the article on the pro scouting department and how they analyzed Russell Martin in the offseason. The article says that each player of interest is seen by 3 different scouts. If they put that much diligence into the pro scouting, I assume that they do the same for the amateur scouting.
With regards to the Yankees drafting vs. Sox and Jays, obviously I think there is some inherent bias. There are so many players available that it’s impossible to see all of them. It’s different in Football and Basketball, where you can analyze a smaller subset (basketball < football, obviously).
Thoughts: 1. The Red Sox always seem to be drafting guys that are high on the KL/BP/BA lists. Do those 3 groups have sources within the Red Sox FO? I wouldn't be surprised. Peter Gammons was reliably one for years, I would bet. Not to say it's a bad thing, but that's just how the team operates. The Yankees picked a bunch of kids off the beaten path. Maybe they're truly hidden gems in the mainstream sense, but maybe high quality guys to those who have studied them more. We'll just have to wait and see.
2. KL, isn't he a former FO member of the Jays, pre-Riccardi? I bet he still has sources there who tell him what they think of players.
3. The Yankees have done well in the draft since Cashman exerted his power circa 2006. Do they get the big sexy names up top? No. They kind of sucked in the late 90's, early 2000's. But since Phil Hughes and then around 2006, they have done well.
“I obviously don’t have a source, but I feel like the Yankees would have a pretty sizable department on that end. RAB linked to the article on the pro scouting department and how they analyzed Russell Martin in the offseason. The article says that each player of interest is seen by 3 different scouts. If they put that much diligence into the pro scouting, I assume that they do the same for the amateur scouting.”
As far as I know the pro-scouting department and the amateur-scouting department are totally different entities with different staffs, no?
Sorry, I clearly didn’t read through the whole part I quoted there. You’re saying that since they have a big pro scouting department they probably have a big amateur scouting department also.
I’m still not so sure that’s true, but maybe. It could just be that the organization places a higher emphasis on one over the other, who knows.
You are correct. I should have clarified in saying that even though they are 2 separate departments, they probably adopt the same philosophy and resources on both sides.
I re-read this article from a couple of years ago: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03.....ppler.html
It’s a profile of Billy Eppler, director of pro-scouting. Again – basically the message to extrapolate is that the FO is very secretive about it’s scouting operations on the pro end, and I would assume they do the same for the amateur department. They like to keep their moves hush-hush.
Yeah I hear you. I’m still interested to know why Glassey would say that the Yanks have one of the smallest amateur scouting staffs, I think Ima tweet at him.
Report back your findings.
http://twitter.com/#!/JoeRo23/.....9881870336
I assume (if he responds) he’ll just say something to the effect of ‘they just do.’ It’s not like he’ll have some report to point to or anything. Probably a silly question to ask, but whatever, I’m curious.
And here’s his response:
http://twitter.com/#!/conorgla.....1540377601
Conor Glassey: “By my count, they have 23 scouts. Blue Jays have 70. Red Sox have 71.”
Wow. For every scout the Yanks have the Jays/Sox have 3. It may not be exact, but even if he’s off by a decent amount, that’s a huge difference.
Good stuff Mike. Thanks for all your work on the draft coverage.
Biggest thing that interests me about the draft when the kids are taken is just getting info on who they took, their basic scouting report. No way to know who will work out and who won’t… or even who will sign. It’s interesting to get a Law or Callis’ opinion, but ultimately it’s not necessarily worth anything more than any scout the Yankees employ let alone Opp’s.
i wonder how much hate for the yankees’ draft haul is because they didn’t go for consensus “sexy names” or guys mike profiled here on RAB. cote and sharp sound like intriguing guys. confirmed by mark newman, the system has really lacked power at all levels. seems like some of these guys can help fix that. who knows what they’ll become 2 or 3 years down the line.
“i wonder how much hate for the yankees’ draft haul is because they didn’t go for consensus ‘sexy names’…”
I’d say about 99% of it. But that leads to the relevant questions… Do the popular scouting services like BA/ESPN and the organizations that draft the players that tend to pop up in those services’ rankings know more than the Yankees? Is there just such an immense universe of amateur players that different services and organizations just unearth different prospects sometimes? Do the Yanks’ scouts just see things differently (whether better or worse) on certain players than those services/organizations do?
Probably no way to answer these questions. Maybe in 10 years we look back at the drafts from like 2005-2010 and can make some sense of it.
One more thing I’ve been thinking the last couple of days… I think, like you noted above, that the fan reaction is based on not drafting the “consensus sexy names,” and I think it’s heightened a bit, in the case of Yankees fans, because it seems like they used to go for those names a bit more often. It’s really only the last 3 drafts in which the Yanks haven’t taken a “sexy name” early, or even late like with Betances. I wonder if fans were just conditioned to think that the Yanks would grab some of those names at some point and now that they aren’t it seems like something is wrong, because they used to.
I also wonder if maybe we’re seeing a bit of a Moneyball-effect here… What I mean by that is the A’s had certain practices that it seems a lot of other teams caught on to in the years following Moneyball (and in the years before, it’s not like the A’s necessarily invented the theory of looking for market inefficiencies)… And maybe a similar thing has happened with the draft? The Yanks have a financial advantage in the draft, but it’s not like they spend that much more on the draft than the other teams do. (This is an overly simplified way of looking at it, but for example I think they last few years they haven’t been the top-spender.) Maybe other teams have seen what the Yanks and Sox and some other teams were doing in the draft and adjusted their philosophies accordingly, so that the approach the Yanks had isn’t so unique anymore and they can’t play those advantages the same way?
I don’t know, totally just spitballing ideas here.
I think there’s definitely something to that. I don’t have the numbers, but you hear a lot about how small-market teams like the Royals, Rays, Pirates, etc. have realized that to compete they have to develop players in-house. To develop the best players, they have to draft the best prospects and get them signed. Even if they pay a buttload to sign some kid with a 33% chance (or something…) of ever doing anything, it’s more efficient than paying Jose Guillen $10 mill per for several years or AJ Burnett $17 mill per. That’s basically the new moneyball.
Yankees absolutely might see a chance to arbitrage by going against the consensus. The “new moneyball” phenomenon means that less consensus top prospects might fall. The ones that do will often be the ones that really won’t sign and/or will expect more $ since everyone is paying more (there is a point of diminishing returns as far as individual bonuses handed out).
There’s also probably plenty of it that’s just circumstantial and not a sweeping strategic decision. If the Yankees thought Dillon Howard was going to sign, they might have taken him. Same for Bell or Norris or whoever, but the Yankees were rumored to be in on Howard strongly and in doing their due diligence might have felt they would definitely get Coled by Howard or that the risk of that was too high. They might have also taken Bichette cause he’s Girardi’s buddy and thought Howard/whoever would still be there at 88.
Do the Yanks’ scouts just see things differently (whether better or worse) on certain players than those services/organizations do?
I’d say, of course they do. Because it takes a very special positional player to actually accomplish anything on the big league club, Yank scouts surely seek greatest upside. So they take more risks than other clubs.
I just wish the top guys they’ve taken flyers on had better psychological profiles.
I think 100% of the hate comes from that…
I think you have to knock that down to the high 90s. There are still people like Mike, for example, who, while his opinion on the draft haul might change as he spends more time looking at what the Yanks got, didn’t like the haul as the draft was happening not because there were no sexy names but because he wasn’t seeing a lot of upside to the players the Yanks actually picked (based on scouting reports he was reading, not based on name-value alone).
The name value is based on the scouting reports, though. To me it’s the same thing. The “sexy names” are based on the scouting reports of Keith Law and other high profile journalists.
You see a HS kid on a good day and write “his [insert off-speed pitch of choice] and command comes and goes, potential for three plus pitches.” I see the same kid a week later and say “no command, no off-speed pitch, no upside.” Who is right? Even if you are literally a pro scout, you’re going to be wrong way, way, way more often than you are right just based on the nature of the beast. So, even as a pro scout I could care less what your opinion of a draft is as it’s happening or the day after. Unless you actually go out and scout the players yourself, you’re relying on hearsay. As someone who reads the opinions of pro scouts… I could really care less.
It can be interesting to read, but drawing conclusions is a waste. If the Yankees get one position starter, 2 or 3 guys for the staff (rotation or pen), and a couple pieces with at least some trade value (can be a Marquez, not necessarily an IPK or AJax) out of this draft… it was a hit.
So, 99% or 100%… either way I don’t see much use in reacting too strongly right after the draft. If Bell signs with the Pirates and is a HOFer… yeah, it sucks that the Yankees missed him. If he refuses to sign or signs and stinks while Bichette is a 30 HR RF or 3B… it was a lot of fuss about nothing.
You’re right. Aside from the top 20 or so players most of the media scouts get the list of players to research from teams. Some teams are more public with the players they like than others. So if a team like the Yankees likes a shortstop from Rochester more than anyone, then they might not tell many people about it and when he gets picked it’s a surprise and the organization gets questioned by a lot of the media scouts. Conversely, if a team likes a Mississippi shortstop and wants him to fall to the later rounds due to a big bonus demand they tell everyone about him and get lauded when they eventually pick him in the third round.
With high schoolers you have to remember that just about anyone who is deserving of a bonus of a million or above they’ll almost ALWAYS look good as they’ll most likely always be BY FAR the best player in the area and probably the state. So perhaps if the Yankees told everyone about Cito Culver prior to the draft he’d be a bit more highly regarded.
So were left with the team’s track record, while Yankees have had quite a few highly regarded prospects…other than Gardner, Robertson, and Joba (all college guys) which ones are currently helping the team at the pro level?
“So were left with the team’s track record, while Yankees have had quite a few highly regarded prospects…other than Gardner, Robertson, and Joba (all college guys) which ones are currently helping the team at the pro level?”
AJax and IPK and Coke are all helping out a whole lot in CF and the #2 hole right now. Yankees have traded a bunch of other drafted prospects too.
Hughes was helping until injury.
If you want to talk in general terms with no regard to who actually made the pick… Jeter and Posada and Pettitte have helped for years. Oppenheimer has only been in charge since, what, 2006? So looking at what happened before 2006 is pretty useless. Looking at the drafts since 2006 is premature. Even a fast riser like Joba who had spent a whole lot of time in the bigs is only 25 this season. If he becomes a HOF closer or moves back into the rotation or if he totally bombs from here on out… that’s going to make or break the pick. Like Joba, Dellin Betances was also a 2006 draft pick. Guy is still only in AA. Is he going to flame out in AAA, become a mediocre reliever, or be a HOF starter? Who knows? And that was his earliest draft, returns on the more recent ones are far less certain. Again, too early to really judge Opp.
I think the early returns are quite good, though. Just looking at how the Yankees did from 2006 to present without considering what picks they had or how the rest of the league has done is useless. They’ve gotten good prospects, contributors, trade pieces…
Oh yeah, I think they’ve done a good job of trading players. Hughes? Meh. Hard to judge where that one went wrong, who’s to blame? Is there someone to blame? Besides, wasn’t he drafted in 2005 with the Pettitte pick? I also agree that it’s too early for a grade, but I don’t think it’s too early to ask questions.
“Hughes? Meh. Hard to judge where that one went wrong”
When you draft a kid and give him a $1.4 mill bonus and he contributes to your MLB team for several years… absolutely nothing went wrong. Around the spot Hughes was drafted about 1 in 4 or 1 in 5 draft picks historically have every made a positive impact in MLB.
“I also agree that it’s too early for a grade, but I don’t think it’s too early to ask questions.”
If you’re talking about this draft: You can ask those questions about any team’s draft, though. That Boston picked guys Keith Law liked does not mean they made better decisions with their draft picks.
If you’re talking about Opp: When they have a top 5-10 farm composed of a lot of the guys he’s made the call on drafting, what negative questions could you possibly want to ask? Why are Betances, Romine, Heathcott, Murphy, Bryan Mitchell, Brett Marshall, Dante Bichette Jr., etc. not in the majors yet? Have some patience.
When you draft a kid and give him a $1.4 mill bonus and he contributes to your MLB team for several years… absolutely nothing went wrong. Around the spot Hughes was drafted about 1 in 4 or 1 in 5 draft picks historically have every made a positive impact in MLB.
If by several you mean two, then you might have a point. Except, he was expected to do more. He was the number one pitching prospect in all of baseball, I think one good season in relief and one good half as a starter is quite the disappointment.
If you’re talking about this draft: You can ask those questions about any team’s draft, though. That Boston picked guys Keith Law liked does not mean they made better decisions with their draft picks.
Regarding Boston, they had more first round picks than the Yankees did. I think picked thrice, before the Yankees picked once. They should do better, they had a chance at Swihart, the Yankees didn’t. That’s not my complaint, my complaint is that there are players that not just Keith Law liked better but EVERY published scout liked better that they passed on. These guys feel because of money concerns, this is the Yankees were talking about…they should be able to sway anyone with their purse and jewelry. I’m just curious why they didn’t take some of these players and why they took their guys instead. Bichette I’m not that happy with, I see a giant hole in his swing and questions about his athleticism. I think those are fair questions.
If you’re talking about Opp: When they have a top 5-10 farm composed of a lot of the guys he’s made the call on drafting, what negative questions could you possibly want to ask? Why are Betances, Romine, Heathcott, Murphy, Bryan Mitchell, Brett Marshall, Dante Bichette Jr., etc. not in the majors yet? Have some patience.
When you’re talking about a top 5-10 farm you have to realize that there are accusations that the Yankee farm is overrated. I mean, they’ve had some good prospects, not a whole lot of guys producing yet. Impatience? Yes. Reason for impatience? Well the last Yankees that were in the top 30 prospect list were Phil Hughes, Joba Chamberlain, Ian Kennedy, and Austin Jackson. Three underwhelming players and one guy that was traded away. I see where they’re coming from.
“Except, he was expected to do more. He was the number one pitching prospect in all of baseball, I think one good season in relief and one good half as a starter is quite the disappointment.”
A. He’s in his mid-20s… we have no idea how many good seasons he’ll have.
B. You are contradicting yourself… the Yankees can’t draft well, but they drafted the #1 pitching prospect in baseball late in the first. Which is it? They can’t draft well, or they made a great draft pick?
“not just Keith Law liked better but EVERY published scout liked better that they passed on.”
Why are those journalists’ (not scouts… they are journalists… they are paid to write about prospects for the public which makes them jounralists… if a team paid them to scout players, that would make them scouts… two distinct professions) opinions more valid than Damon Oppenheimer’s? I am not saying they are less valid. I am asking why they are right, in your opinion, and Oppenheimer and his team of scouts are wrong.
“I’m just curious why they didn’t take some of these players and why they took their guys instead.”
No. You are not curious. You are ripping them for it. If you are curious, write them and ask.
“Bichette I’m not that happy with, I see a giant hole in his swing and questions about his athleticism.”
How many guys are #51 do you see no questions about? Even studs like Bell and Howard have not only questions in their games, but HUGE questions about whether they’ll sign.
A. He’s in his mid-20s… we have no idea how many good seasons he’ll have.
B. You are contradicting yourself… the Yankees can’t draft well, but they drafted the #1 pitching prospect in baseball late in the first. Which is it? They can’t draft well, or they made a great draft pick?
A.) I’m guessing the number is “zero.” Besides, you were the one that said “several good years.”
B.) False, on two grounds. One I’m not saying they can’t draft well, just that I understand where they’re coming from. Two, prospect rankings mean jack when the guy’s put up two useful seasons out of the five years that he’s been up.
Why are those journalists’ (not scouts… they are journalists… they are paid to write about prospects for the public which makes them jounralists… if a team paid them to scout players, that would make them scouts… two distinct professions) opinions more valid than Damon Oppenheimer’s? I am not saying they are less valid. I am asking why they are right, in your opinion, and Oppenheimer and his team of scouts are wrong.
Ted, you must have an issue with reading comprehension. I never said any pinion was more or less valid than the other, simply I want to know why they took them. Besides, Keith Law and Frankie P were scouts who took jobs as journalists now. I’m sure a few of the BA guys or Jonathan Mayo could get the gig, but are enjoying their current careers.
No. You are not curious. You are ripping them for it. If you are curious, write them and ask.
You’re losing it Ted…one, the chances of them reading the letter are extremely small. Two, the chances of them responding in any meaningful manner are smaller. That’s a pretty stupid thing to say, unless you’re baiting me.
How many guys are #51 do you see no questions about? Even studs like Bell and Howard have not only questions in their games, but HUGE questions about whether they’ll sign.
Well I guess this is the crux of the disagreement. Bichette doesn’t have the hit tool yet, and there’s questions as to whether or not it will develop is an even bigger question. Holes that big in swings are pretty big question marks, this isn’t a Betances/Brackman type lottery ticket. Furthermore, even if it does develop what’s the guy’s realistic ceiling? Joe Crede without the glove? At least Culver already had a hit tool and was primed to stay at short stop. Bell’s questions aren’t so much about his game, just whether or not he’ll sign. I’d rather take the projectable HS arm or the big HS bat that will take a lot to sign then someone who is sure to sign but would have to develop tools that you don’t typically develop in the minors. It’s not uncommon for an 18 year old to hone his command in the minors, but from going to not having a hit tool to getting one in the minors…ehh. The standards are high enough for the Yankees. Why take someone who already has questions about the hit tool?
Mike, just ballparking it, would you say that any of the draftees crack your top 30?
Oh yeah, certainly. Bichette and Camanero for sure, probably a few others as well once I sit down and really think about it.
I thought Bichette was the worst pick in the history of drafting?!?!
Seriously, though, what’s up with Bichette and the fact that he has two completely different batting stances and swings?
Know who else changed their batting stance all the time? CAL RIPKEN JR.
Helllooooooo Hall of Famer Dante Bichette, Jr.
I don’t know about Ripken, but Mike posted a video of Bichette yesterday that shows him with two different stances. During the same at bat. It was almost like he had one stance (feet together, long stride) for less than 2 strikes and then a second one (more typical) for 2 strikes.
He’s in HS.
Cal Ripken, Jr. had approximately 4,385,621.72 stances. (In one AB.)
i saw that AB…it was a long one.
Joe West was PISSED.
Did it happen in a Yankees game? No?
Then it was just fine. No problem at all.
Cote, Stafford and probably Cave would probably be in the mix for some of the last couple spots. I think Rookie Davis (either as a huge power guy or a RHP with a low 90′s fastball and a good curveball already) is a guy that could be interesting too but he sounds unsignable.
Davis is not unsignable. I read that he had some lengthy discussions with the yanks and he gave them a solid figure that it would take to sign him. He sounded pretty esctatic to be taken by the Yanks.
Some picks I really like. Hayden Sharp, Jordan Cote, Rookie Davis (as a pitcher), Jake Cave, Daniel Camarena, and Matt Duran. I also liked Justin James and Sam Stafford.
I don’t hate this draft so far, especially if we can get all of these guys signed.
I agree Same. Another one who intrigued me was 12th rounder Cody Grice. Saw that he has a rare combination of speed, athleticism and power that scouts love. Anyone know anything else about him?
Yeah, I think on the whole it seems like a pretty solid haul of upside arms and power bats.
Everyone is remarking about the paucity of middle infielders among the Yankees’ 1-30 round selections but the consensus (which is taken for gospel around here for everything else about the draft)was that it was a very weak year for middle infielders (Kolten Wong was the highest-rated second baseman). Wouldn’t surprise me if the Yankees have a number of shortstops/second basemen in the IFA pipeline come July.
Yairo Muñoz, Dawel Lugo, and/or Ronniel Demorizi, perhaps?
http://www.prosportsdaily.com/.....p?t=607911
Munoz is the most intriguing but I hear the Cardinals are in heavy on him. Could be a $2+ million price tag.
I wonder if Dawel is anything like that piece of shit Julio.
LOL
I’m kind of excited because of the fact that they are signable guys…we might see these guys in action sooner rather than later. Then we can begin the true evaluation period.
I really like Stafford (college LHSP throwing 92+ consistently and with a decent slider and curve) and Chaz Hebert (high school LHSP who is still growing and more recently started throwing 92 with thin but long “projectable” body – 6″2′ and only 180#). Both have front of the rotation potential, and are must signs for this draft to look good, in my opinion. Besides, being left handed adds a whole lot to your prospect glow/value, so with our minor league system’s success at developing mid to back rotation RHSP types from middling prospects we could really cash in with some trade chips if we were able to do the same with lefties.
This is the Yankees. They have more resources than any organization in baseball, they’ve had more success than any organization in sports, they’re the most recognizable organization in sports, they should be able to do better than “I don’t hate this draft.”
No amount of resources in the world can guarantee success (or even a modicum of success) in the crapshoot of all crapshoots that is the MLB draft.
The Yankees resources has allowed the team to consistently have the largest overall collection of talent (be it amateur draftees, international free agents, traded-for big league superstars or garden-variety MLB free agents) of any big league organization over the past 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, and 90 years, and that superior overall talent base has enabled the team to remain in title contention for about 80% of the past CENTURY of baseball.
Nitpicking beyond that macro-level portrait of success is just that: nitpicking.
No amount of resources in the world can guarantee success (or even a modicum of success) in the crapshoot of all crapshoots that is the MLB draft.
I guess, the point I was trying to make that you’re addressing was that if they’re worried about players not signing…they shouldn’t be. They’re the most successful franchise in all of sports, when they pick they should be able to pick the player who they feel is the best and not worry about him signing. Obviously there’s some exceptions, but overall I think they should be able to “get their guy.” I get the impression that they’re a bit worried about not getting him, but this is all conjecture.
“They’re the most successful franchise in all of sports, when they pick they should be able to pick the player who they feel is the best and not worry about him signing. ”
Because offering Gerrit Cole and Cliff Lee the most money got them to sign, right?
Of course they have to consider signability. Some players just will not sign. Other players are not worth, say, the $6 mill bonus it would take to sign them or even the $1-2 mill bonus it would take.
“they should be able to do better than “I don’t hate this draft.””
These players have not even signed yet let alone played a pro game… your expectations are ridiculous. Totally foolish. Whether or not you liked the draft the day it happened has nothing to do with how the draft went. You think Cardinals fans were jumping for joy when their team nabbed Pujols in the 13th round?
They’re the best fans in baseball for a reason, Ted.
You realize that I’m not too upset over this just yet, right? I’m just saying that I understand where the discontent fans are coming from. For the hardcore fans they should be able to deliver some prospects that people are excited about.
Would you rather have players you are excited about on draft day, or players who have the best careers? How excited you and I are on draft day is totally meaningless and the Yankees should not make decisions based on that.
Probably a solid draft especially based on draft order and plenty to invest on IFA’s left in the budget. Thanks for the long hours and insights, Mike.
The Angels took my boy Mike Papi.
#poursoneout
I am curious to see how much the total $ spent on this year’s draft is. That will tell a lot of the story here.
From the Cote article:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXDoxxlgNG0 (safe, if not necessarily tasteful)
I hated the Bichette pick, wanted more upside…perhaps an arm given the current state of the rotation, also though, considering what happened to the last few highly touted the Yankees had, maybe a position player is better. I still think they could have done better than Bichette.
I think it’s way too early to call for Oppenheimer or Cashman’s job; however, I think it’s worth reconsidering how the Yankees draft and scout talent. Not saying they’re wrong, but I think some second guessing is healthy given that the way they view talent and the way the scouting press views talent seems to be drastically different the scouting press’ and perhaps the rest of baseball’s. A team’s first pick is supposed to be the talent they view as the best available, or at least one of the three best talents available. I realize there’s signability issues with some talents, but they’re the Yankees, they have the most resources in baseball and they’re the most well known franchise in sports…circumstances where they can’t sign the player they view as the best available should be very rare.
If the Yankees are a closed book when it comes to scouting, then the only thing you can look at is the recent success of the players they’ve drafted and developed. The current crop hasn’t really been all that great. Joba Chamberlain, David Robertson, and Brett Gardner. Two relievers and a rock solid left fielder, not really good for a team with the resources that the Yankees have, nor is this anything to write home about. Just about any team that’s made the playoffs in the past two or three years has a list that’s better than this. Phil Hughes kinda counts, but he’s only had one good season as a starter and a season as a lights out reliever. Yeah, I know they drafted Derek Jeter and Jorge Posada, but that was well over a decade ago…so it’s kinda hard to count them. I think a lot of the negative feelings towards the Yankee farm is that in the past ten years they haven’t really drafted and developed a star player in the past ten years. Over the past ten years look at the Red Sox, they’ve produced Kevin Youkilis, Dustin Pedroia, Jon Lester, and Clay Buchholz. The BJs have at least produced Ricky Romero, the Os have Brian Matusz and Zack Britton at least looking promising. The Rays, well…we all know what they’ve done. The Twins have Joe Mauer, the Angels have Jered Weaver, the Reds have Joey Votto and Jay Bruce, and we can play this game for quite sometime. The Yankees really haven’t drafted and developed many players of that caliber over the past decade. To be fair, they also haven’t traded away Hanley Ramirez.
Of course there’s other mitigating circumstances: they have Alex Rodriguez, Derek Jeter, Jorge Posada, Mark Teixeira, they’ve had a few good RFs (Abreu and Swisher) and now Curtis Granderson in center field. The list of players who are better than those guys at their positions is pretty fucking small. So, that presents a set of problems that makes the Yankees scouting department and farm system a bit harder to judge.
There’s also the “it’s harder to be a Yankee” problem to deal with. Of course if you’re the Giants you can afford to let your pitchers take their bumps, and the bumps will be a bit softer because you aren’t facing top notch competition. Other teams would have kept Phil Hughes, Ian Kennedy, and Joba Chamberlain in the rotation and perhaps things would have turned out differently for them.
While some people will be quick to point out the flaws in Boston’s system and the hype that surrounds it, there is value to having hype surrounding your organization. Using prospects in a trade, I think the Yankees have done well in this regard. They’ve used prospects to trade for players like Bobby Abreu and Curtis Granderson (I don’t count Swisher because that’s more Kenny Williams being dumb) and I think they’ve done a good job of keeping hype around their players.
I think a lot of people would stop bitching about the farm system and the scouting department if they just had one successful home grown starter in the rotation. You’d be surprised how far one success goes. That’s why I think Phil Hughes is so important, he was a chance for the organization to prove that they can develop and properly evaluate pitchers successfully. It’s important to realize the difference between “hasn’t” and “can’t,” in the era of over saturation of prospect talk, it’s natural for fans to get impatient. However, for a team that’s had two of the number one pitching prospects in baseball to have a rotation that’s in the state that it currently is in…that doesn’t inspire confidence.
Very well written post. I think you should post this in the live blog thread because it speaks to why ppl are upset about the draft. You mentioned what was going through my mind while reading comments regarding who the Yankees drafted. The Yankee fan base desperately wants the farm to do well because it speaks to how well the scouts evaluate talent. I think portions of the fan base are tired of paying or spending for players that either don’t want to be here or are just looking to cash in. So when the Yankees don’t draft top talent or the farm doesn’t produce high end talent Yankee fans become frustrated. They look at other teams and wonder where is our Verlander or Lincecum or Cain or Hamels or any other top young pitcher in the league. If Joba and Hughes were both 1′s or one was a 1 and the other was a 3 or both were 2′s then you’re right no one would say a word about the Yankees because the big 3 made it or at least 2 out of 3 did. This anger that ppl have all goes back to the Big 3. Many of us haven’t gotten over what they have done so far. That doesn’t Hughes can’t turn it around because he can but with the shoulder issue who knows for sure.
Look how often Yankee fans say we have a top 5 farm system. It appears in almost every post no matter if the topic is about the farm or not. But let me ask you this question what was the system ranked last yr 15 or 18 around there maybe 20 I can’t remember. So it goes back to what I said about them not just wanting the farm to do well but to hopefully see the fruits of their labor come up and produce.
“The Yankee fan base desperately wants the farm to do well because it speaks to how well the scouts evaluate talent.”
Their farm system was in the top 10 of every single ranking I saw, and top 5 of a lot of them. Any Yankee fan with half a brain knows that the farm system *is* doing well.
“They look at other teams and wonder where is our Verlander or Lincecum or Cain or Hamels or any other top young pitcher in the league.”
This is why your point is beyond ridiculous and borderline insane: Verlander was the #2 pick in the draft, Lincecum was the #10 pick in the draft, Cain was the 25th pick in the draft, and Hamels was the 17th pick in the draft. THE YANKEES DID NOT HAVE A PICK WHERE THEY COULD HAVE DRAFTED ANY ONE OF THOSE 4 PLAYERS YOU MENTION IN THE DRAFTS THEY ACTUALLY SIGNED OUT OF.
“So it goes back to what I said about them not just wanting the farm to do well but to hopefully see the fruits of their labor come up and produce.”
Oppenheimer has only been in charge since 2005. Dellin Betances was a 2006 HS drafty… you need to have some patience.
If you think that Cano, Joba, Hughes, Gardner, Nova, Robertson, Cervelli, Nunez, Noesi, AJax/IPK/Melancon/all the other traded prospects, and a top 5-10 farm system stacked with talent is not very good production from the system… your standard is impossibly high.
This is why your point is beyond ridiculous and borderline insane: Verlander was the #2 pick in the draft, Lincecum was the #10 pick in the draft, Cain was the 25th pick in the draft, and Hamels was the 17th pick in the draft. THE YANKEES DID NOT HAVE A PICK WHERE THEY COULD HAVE DRAFTED ANY ONE OF THOSE 4 PLAYERS YOU MENTION IN THE DRAFTS THEY ACTUALLY SIGNED OUT OF.
Well that’s a fair enough point, there’s other players that have been drafted later that have been available. The point is that as far as drafting and developing, the Yankees haven’t been as good compared to the rest of the league.
If you think that Cano, Joba, Hughes, Gardner, Nova, Robertson, Cervelli, Nunez, Noesi, AJax/IPK/Melancon/all the other traded prospects, and a top 5-10 farm system stacked with talent is not very good production from the system… your standard is impossibly high.
Well a few of those are IFAs and some of them have contributed marginally at best. So I wouldn’t call that “impossibly” high standards.
“The point is that as far as drafting and developing, the Yankees haven’t been as good compared to the rest of the league.”
This is not true. They have a top 5-10 farm system compared to the rest of the league composed of tons of drafted prospects as well as IFAs… since 2006 they have been very good compared to the rest of the league.
“Well a few of those are IFAs and some of them have contributed marginally at best. So I wouldn’t call that “impossibly” high standards.”
The point I was responding was about the farm in general.
In terms of the draft… ignoring guys like Heathcott, Murphy, Mitchell, Warren, Steonburner, Phelps… not smart.
Marginal contribution from prospects is the norm… so, yeah, they are impossible expectations. The Sox are not bringing up a new Youkalis every season.
You’re not being realistic.
This is not true. They have a top 5-10 farm system compared to the rest of the league composed of tons of drafted prospects as well as IFAs… since 2006 they have been very good compared to the rest of the league.
Well a lot of people have complained that their farm is overhyped so…
(for the record I still think they’re improving over all)
In terms of the draft… ignoring guys like Heathcott, Murphy, Mitchell, Warren, Steonburner, Phelps… not smart.
Well you’re counting guys who haven’t even experienced success above AA and in some cases not even above A ball.
Marginal contribution from prospects is the norm… so, yeah, they are impossible expectations. The Sox are not bringing up a new Youkalis every season.
I understand that you need to get marginal contributions from your prospects. Relievers, bench players, etc. that’s one of the most important usages of a farm system. Getting role players for cheap, that way you can avoid paying a Rafael Soriano 12M a year. However, the only impact player that they’ve brought up and stuck with through the farm in the past decade was Cano. He was an IFA. I think they’re on the right path, but I still think there’s lots of work to be done. Plenty of room to improve.
“Well you’re counting guys who haven’t even experienced success above AA and in some cases not even above A ball.”
I am not counting them… I am saying that it’s too early to pass real judgement. Early returns, though, are good. If those guys were all struggling badly it would be a lot easier to criticize those guys. The Yankees drafted 18-22 year old kids thinking they would be X type of prospects with an X% chance of MLB success… that’s all they can do… and to date it’s gone well.
“However, the only impact player that they’ve brought up and stuck with through the farm in the past decade was Cano. He was an IFA.”
Again, though, Oppenheimer cannot possibly answer for decisions made before he took over.
“The Sox are not bringing up a new Youkalis every season.”
The point is they already brought up a Youkilis and a Pedroia for that matter
How could Oppenheimer have possibly drafted stars in drafts he did not run? It’s not possible. You are criticizing him for not drafting MLB stars and unwilling to acknowledge that most of the guys he did draft who have been successes are highly touted prospects who could not possibly have had MLB success yet since they haven’t debuted in MLB yet…
No I’m critiquing the Yankees for not producing a star or at least a b level star since starting the plan yrs ago. They had two guys who projected to be top of the rotation guys one is a reliever and the other is back on the DL. Hughes still has time on his side and hopefully he turns it around but so far over his career it’s been up and down.
Most of the guys they’ve acquired since starting the plan are in the minors still. Dellin Betances was a 2006 draft pick.
“They had two guys who projected to be top of the rotation guys”
They drafted those guys… you say they can’t draft, and then you say they drafted guys who were really good. You are contradicting yourself. Which one is it? They can’t draft, or they draft really well and the guys they took didn’t pan out?
“Their farm system was in the top 10 of every single ranking I saw, and top 5 of a lot of them. Any Yankee fan with half a brain knows that the farm system *is* doing well. ”
Do well in terms of producing talent. Obviously the farm has been ranked high by many outlets but the fans want more.
“This is why your point is beyond ridiculous and borderline insane: Verlander was the #2 pick in the draft, Lincecum was the #10 pick in the draft, Cain was the 25th pick in the draft, and Hamels was the 17th pick in the draft. THE YANKEES DID NOT HAVE A PICK WHERE THEY COULD HAVE DRAFTED ANY ONE OF THOSE 4 PLAYERS YOU MENTION IN THE DRAFTS THEY ACTUALLY SIGNED OUT OF.”
I understand they have high picks but there are high picks that fail or never make it out of the minors. My point is the Yankee fans want more from the franchise that they follow and watch every day. No no one expects them to have HOF spects at every position but I don’t think it’s unfair to question what they have produced.
“Oppenheimer has only been in charge since 2005. Dellin Betances was a 2006 HS drafty… you need to have some patience.”
Again I understand things take time but it’s not wrong to question what we have seen so far. No one is saying they can’t improve but so far the results are what they are.
“If you think that Cano, Joba, Hughes, Gardner, Nova, Robertson, Cervelli, Nunez, Noesi, AJax/IPK/Melancon/all the other traded prospects, and a top 5-10 farm system stacked with talent is not very good production from the system… your standard is impossibly high.”
How many of those guys are high impact players. No one expects the Yankees to be great throughout the farm but fans are not unreasonable to think that things could be better. I mean If I wanted to be a negative I could poke holes through the names you just posted.
“Obviously the farm has been ranked high by many outlets but the fans want more.”
Mostly the irrational fans… Having a top 5 farm system entering the 2011 season doesn’t mean you instantly graduate 10 instant MLB All-Stars over the course of the 2011 season. Have some patience.
“My point is the Yankee fans want more from the franchise that they follow and watch every day.”
More than 27 Championships and 15 playoff trips in 16 years and one of the best records in the AL? What fans are these that want more than that? Every fan wants their team to win every game… that’s not reasonable to expect, though. I want to walk down the street and find $1 million. I don’t decide to blow up every street I walk down and don’t find $1 million on, though.
“it’s not wrong to question what we have seen so far. No one is saying they can’t improve but so far the results are what they are.”
And the results are a whole lot better than you’re giving credit for. That’s my point. It is one thing to analyze the results. It’s another thing to hold the results to ridiculous standards and expect kids drafted out of HS in the last few years to be doing more than guys like Heathcott, Murphy, Culver, Gumbs, Betances, Romine, Mitchell, Williams, etc. have done.
“How many of those guys are high impact players.”
Again… your standards are impossible. How many high impact players does any team turn out?
“fans are not unreasonable to think that things could be better”
Not all fans are unreasonable. YOU are unreasonable. Things could always be better. You have to look at things in context… relative to other comparable things.
“Mostly the irrational fans… Having a top 5 farm system entering the 2011 season doesn’t mean you instantly graduate 10 instant MLB All-Stars over the course of the 2011 season. Have some patience. ”
Opp has been in charge since what 05 and the results have been ok. Not horrible or God awful but ok. The point is over the time you would expect at least one high end guy. A fan being irrational would expect to a high end guy after 2-3 yrs but this is yr 6 of the plan.
“More than 27 Championships and 15 playoff trips in 16 years and one of the best records in the AL? What fans are these that want more than that? Every fan wants their team to win every game… that’s not reasonable to expect, though. I want to walk down the street and find $1 million. I don’t decide to blow up every street I walk down and don’t find $1 million on, though. ”
They want to see the team do what they claim they wanted to do since 05 which is not rely on retreads or FA pick-ups. Wanting to win every game is unreasonable and we can all thank George for that mentality but wanting to see at least 1 high end guy after six yrs of accumulating talent is not unreasonable IMO.
“And the results are a whole lot better than you’re giving credit for. That’s my point. It is one thing to analyze the results. It’s another thing to hold the results to ridiculous standards and expect kids drafted out of HS in the last few years to be doing more than guys like Heathcott, Murphy, Culver, Gumbs, Betances, Romine, Mitchell, Williams, etc. have done. ”
I think the opinion of the results is a fair one. They have made strides but let’s not act like the work is done.
“Again… your standards are impossible. How many high impact players does any team turn out? ”
Reds have Votto and Bruce. Brewers have Fielder and Braun. Now I’m sure you’ll mention that those guys are high picks but there are high picks that fail. My point is after 6 yrs they should have at least 1 high impact player that they drafted.
“Not all fans are unreasonable. YOU are unreasonable. Things could always be better. You have to look at things in context… relative to other comparable things.”
Unreasonable because after 6 yrs they have good relievers and a role playing LF. That’s the fruits of their labor so far. Not terrible but also nothing to go crazy.
“A fan being irrational would expect to a high end guy after 2-3 yrs but this is yr 6 of the plan.”
No… criticizing drafts that turn out a bunch of MLB talent because they don’t turn out one instant star before his 25th birthday is totally irrational. Criticizing draft picks that can’t drink legally and are highly regarded prospects for not being MLB All-Stars is irrational. Totally and completely irrational.
You can question and analyze all you want. If your conclusions are that Damon Oppenheimer is a below average drafter because he hasn’t produced an MLB star, I think you are being seriously irrational.
“They want to see the team do what they claim they wanted to do since 05 which is not rely on retreads or FA pick-ups.”
Which is what they have been doing… It’s going pretty well. Could be better, but going well. A 16 or 18 year old kid in 2006 would only be 21 or 23 years old… you’re lack of patience is astounding.
“I think the opinion of the results is a fair one. They have made strides but let’s not act like the work is done.”
Obviously the work is not done… that’s the whole point. A 19 year old kid in ExST cannot be expected to be a starting SS in MLB. That’s irrational. That Banuelos and Betances and Warren and Phelps and all the others haven’t been pushed to the MLB level yet does not mean they weren’t good pick-ups.
“Reds have Votto and Bruce. Brewers have Fielder and Braun. Now I’m sure you’ll mention that those guys are high picks but there are high picks that fail.”
Again… you are being ridiculous. Some high picks fail. Obviously. The point is not that every high pick will succeed. It’s that high picks have a much higher likelihood of succeeding. Where did/do you go to school, honestly…
Prince Fielder was drafted in 2002 anyway. So was Votto. Do yourself a favor and do some research.
“Unreasonable because after 6 yrs they have good relievers and a role playing LF.”
Yes 100% unreasonable. That kids who are 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 years old are in the minor leagues is normal. Expecting that they should all bare instant success is unreasonable.
“No… criticizing drafts that turn out a bunch of MLB talent because they don’t turn out one instant star before his 25th birthday is totally irrational. Criticizing draft picks that can’t drink legally and are highly regarded prospects for not being MLB All-Stars is irrational. Totally and completely irrational. ”
No one is doing that.
“You can question and analyze all you want. If your conclusions are that Damon Oppenheimer is a below average drafter because he hasn’t produced an MLB star, I think you are being seriously irrational. ”
Irrational to think that after six yrs all they have to show is 2 relievers and a LF(no knock on Gardner because I like him but he is what he is)
“Which is what they have been doing… It’s going pretty well. Could be better, but going well. A 16 or 18 year old kid in 2006 would only be 21 or 23 years old… you’re lack of patience is astounding. ”
Again no one is expecting a 16 yr old to be a young A-rod or Griffey but the established guys that they drafted didn’t turn out to well. Most of the beef has to do with the big 3. They were the ones that have most of the fan base up in arms
“Obviously the work is not done… that’s the whole point. A 19 year old kid in ExST cannot be expected to be a starting SS in MLB. That’s irrational. That Banuelos and Betances and Warren and Phelps and all the others haven’t been pushed to the MLB level yet does not mean they weren’t good pick-ups. ”
Again no one is saying a 19 yr old has to become the best SS in the game but out of the earlier group it’s not unreasonable to think that at least one star could have been produced.
“Again… you are being ridiculous. Some high picks fail. Obviously. The point is not that every high pick will succeed. It’s that high picks have a much higher likelihood of succeeding. Where did/do you go to school, honestly…”
Why do you always feel the need to insult someone or curse because they don’t agree with your view on the direction of the farm. No one insults you or makes rash generalizations but you always feel the need to insult someone’s intelligence and put them down. Is it bad to question Cashman and Opp because the results have been decent or ok. Is it a crime because we all don’t believe the Yankee farm system is the best in the world and in a yr or two we’ll produce players at a high rate. Calm down Ted this is baseball not life or death.
“Yes 100% unreasonable. That kids who are 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 years old are in the minor leagues is normal. Expecting that they should all bare instant success is unreasonable.”
They should have at least 1. A blind squirrel finds a nut but so far the Yankees haven’t.
“No one is doing that.”
Right after you say this… you do it: “Irrational to think that after six yrs all they have to show is 2 relievers and a LF”
Literally right after you say you’re not doing it… you do it. After 6 years most of the guys are still in the minors.
“Most of the beef has to do with the big 3. They were the ones that have most of the fan base up in arms”
First, the fanbase is not up in arms… only you.
Second… Hughes was not drafted by Oppenheimer.
Third… the Big 3 were a RIDICULOUS drafting SUCCESS!!! Taking 3 first round picks, signing none to particularly huge bonuses, and getting 3 MLB contributing pitchers is ridiculously good. Again, it’s your standards that are off here.
“Why do you always feel the need to insult someone or curse because they don’t agree with your view on the direction of the farm.”
I didn’t insult you. I think you are being completely unreasonable.
“No one insults you or makes rash generalizations but you always feel the need to insult someone’s intelligence and put them down.”
Yes… it happens every day… get off your high horse.
“Is it bad to question Cashman and Opp because the results have been decent or ok.”
When you are basing it 100% on ONE DRAFT? Yes. Your whole point is that Hughes, Joba, and IPK have not turned into Aces. You are ignoring that they drafted 3 successful MLB pitchers… that is bad. You are ignoring their youth… that is bad. You are ignoring the luck involved… that is bad. You are ignoring that Opp didn’t even fucking draft Hughes… that is bad. You are ignoring that Betances was also a 2006 draft who looks very good… that is bad. You are ignoring all of Opp’s drafts since 2006… that is bad. Judging a guy based on things he had zero control over that happened before he was promoted to his job and then all of 2 drafts, one of which was the best the Yankees have had in a generation? Yes. That is “bad.”
The 2006 draft was a great draft for the Yankees. Really great returns. The jury is still out on certainly all the drafts since 2008.
“They should have at least 1. A blind squirrel finds a nut but so far the Yankees haven’t.”
AGAIN… you are not giving Oppenheimer enough time. What happens with Betances, Salde, Murphy, Mitchell, Culver, Gumbs, Bichette… some of these guys become the studs you’re looking for? Then your point that they don’t have any studs looks completely ridiculous. That’s why you need to have some patience.
“Right after you say this… you do it: “Irrational to think that after six yrs all they have to show is 2 relievers and a LF”
Literally right after you say you’re not doing it… you do it. After 6 years most of the guys are still in the minors.”
Forget about the 19 yr old kids no one expects those guys to even be here yet. Guys like Joba and Hughes haven’t panned out. A guy like Brackman has taken steps back this yr. A guy like Horne has never even made it to the bigs.
“First, the fanbase is not up in arms… only you.”
Sections of it are. Unless you think everyone is fine with the results of the farm.
“Second… Hughes was not drafted by Oppenheimer.”
But ppl count him when talking about what the farm has produced. Lester was drafted when Theo was there but ppl consider him apart of the core they have built.
“Third… the Big 3 were a RIDICULOUS drafting SUCCESS!!! Taking 3 first round picks, signing none to particularly huge bonuses, and getting 3 MLB contributing pitchers is ridiculously good. Again, it’s your standards that are off here. ”
Ridiculously good? No one knows if Hughes will be what he was before he got injured. He still has time on his side but we don’t know if he’s going to return to form. Kennedy got us Granderson and Curtis has been great but we can’t take bows for his development. The kid is no longer here and was tossed to the side once he struggled like most young pitchers do early in their career. And Joba is a reliever. He’s done well this yr but he’s still a reliever.
“I didn’t insult you. I think you are being completely unreasonable. ”
This ia not an insult “Where did/do you go to school, honestly…”
“Yes… it happens every day… get off your high horse.”
Well if they do then they shouldn’t but go bite my head off because other ppl.
“When you are basing it 100% on ONE DRAFT? Yes. Your whole point is that Hughes, Joba, and IPK have not turned into Aces. You are ignoring that they drafted 3 successful MLB pitchers… that is bad. You are ignoring their youth… that is bad. You are ignoring the luck involved… that is bad. You are ignoring that Opp didn’t even fucking draft Hughes… that is bad. You are ignoring that Betances was also a 2006 draft who looks very good… that is bad. You are ignoring all of Opp’s drafts since 2006… that is bad. Judging a guy based on things he had zero control over that happened before he was promoted to his job and then all of 2 drafts, one of which was the best the Yankees have had in a generation? Yes. That is “bad.”
The farm has made strides we can all agree on that but I think it’s ok to want more from the richest franchise in sports is it not. I don’t expect them to have great players all over but they should have more to show their yrs of work.
“AGAIN… you are not giving Oppenheimer enough time. What happens with Betances, Salde, Murphy, Mitchell, Culver, Gumbs, Bichette… some of these guys become the studs you’re looking for? Then your point that they don’t have any studs looks completely ridiculous. That’s why you need to have some patience. ”
The jury is out on those guys because it’s early but the previous drafts haven’t produced the returns ppl expected.
“Forget about the 19 yr old kids no one expects those guys to even be here yet.”
So forget about the majority of the work Oppenheimer has done and focus instead on the context-less results of a tiny sample? Every pick he made that didn’t work out perfectly, that’s terrible because other team’s draft picks in the late 1st work out so often? Even picks he did not make like Hughes should be blamed on him? We should not consider the context of what reasonable expectations are compared to the rest of the league and if they don’t turn out exactly one stud that’s a problem?
“But ppl count him when talking about what the farm has produced.”
Reasonable people, in judging Opp’s job performance, would not do that.
“Ridiculously good? No one knows if Hughes will be what he was before he got injured.”
You’re missing my point completely. You are contradicting yourself. The Yankees draft the wrong guys? Or the Yankees draft amazing guys who should be front-line starters by their mid-20s? Which is it? They are mutually exclusive.
“This ia not an insult “Where did/do you go to school, honestly…””
No, that’s a question. I am honestly curious about your age and level of education.
“The farm has made strides we can all agree on that but I think it’s ok to want more from the richest franchise in sports is it not. I don’t expect them to have great players all over but they should have more to show their yrs of work.”
What they have for their years of work under Oppenheimer’s direction is all in the minors. Why do you still refuse to acknowledge that. This is your second point of contradiction. You say forget the young guys, then you say Oppenheimer hasn’t picked the right guys (or he’s picked studs who haven’t worked out… first contradiction)… the guys Opp has picked are predominantly young guys.
The only part of the fan base that questions the Yankees drafting ability are the ones who a. don’t realize Oppenheimer only took over in 2005/6 and b. the ones who put 100% stock in what they read journalists write about prospects.
“perhaps an arm given the current state of the rotation”
Do you see a problem with talking about a pick who is years away from his 20% chance of making the rotation as a solution to a current rotation problem?
“I hated the Bichette pick, wanted more upside”
“I still think they could have done better than Bichette.”
Do you scout the thousands of draft eligible players personally? If not, what are you basing these bold statements on?
“I think it’s way too early to call for Oppenheimer or Cashman’s job; however, I think it’s worth reconsidering how the Yankees draft and scout talent.”
Before the draft is even completed? Before a single drafted player has played in a pro game? Yeah. I’d say it’s way, way, way too fucking early and you need to relax a little.
“If the Yankees are a closed book when it comes to scouting, then the only thing you can look at is the recent success of the players they’ve drafted and developed. The current crop hasn’t really been all that great.”
Again… way, way, way too fucking early and you need to relax. Opp has only been in charge of a few drafts. We have little idea what the returns on Dellin Betances (a 2006 pick) are, let alone an Angelo Gumbs who has played 7 pro games or a 2011 pick who hasn’t even signed yet.
” The Yankees really haven’t drafted and developed many players of that caliber over the past decade.”
They also had absolutely no chance to draft some of the players you mention. If you didn’t have a top 4 pick in 2008, how were you going to draft Brian Matusz?
“I think a lot of people would stop bitching about the farm system and the scouting department” … if they used their brain?
” It’s important to realize the difference between “hasn’t” and “can’t,” in the era of over saturation of prospect talk”
This is honestly the only thing that makes any sense in that whole rant.
Do you scout the thousands of draft eligible players personally? If not, what are you basing these bold statements on?
Well by that logic we can neither complain nor laud the draft. However, what am I basing this on? Well, I don’t know…the fact that there’s a whole in his swing the size of Keith Law’s ego. Is it fixable? Well I hope so.
Before the draft is even completed? Before a single drafted player has played in a pro game? Yeah. I’d say it’s way, way, way too fucking early and you need to relax a little.
Well there was the whole four other drafts that he’s made. Keep in mind, I don’t hate Oppenheimer or Cashman. I understand why fans are upset, though.
Again… way, way, way too fucking early and you need to relax. Opp has only been in charge of a few drafts. We have little idea what the returns on Dellin Betances (a 2006 pick) are, let alone an Angelo Gumbs who has played 7 pro games or a 2011 pick who hasn’t even signed yet.
Well, there have been players who, you know…have made the majors. What’s happened so far hasn’t really been too inspiring.
They also had absolutely no chance to draft some of the players you mention. If you didn’t have a top 4 pick in 2008, how were you going to draft Brian Matusz?
Well the point wasn’t that they could have had these players!!!!!!!!!! They could have had Albert Fucking Pujols, the point is that other teams have had quite a bit more success than the Yankees in the past decade.
“They could have had Albert Fucking Pujols, the point is that other teams have had quite a bit more success than the Yankees in the past decade.”
Exactly that’s the point. That doesn’t mean things won’t change this decade but when you match it up against other teams they could do better.
Look at Boston 2 starters, 2 relievers, 3 position players. They have one of the best starters in the game, 2 position players that have been to the AS game one of them won an MVP, and last but not least an AS closer. Now if someone wants to say it’s too early to include Ellsbury, Bard and Buchholz that’s fine we can take them out but what they have still trumps what the Yankees have.
No. The point is that Oppenheimer cannot answer for decisions he did not make.
“Look at Boston 2 starters, 2 relievers, 3 position players.”
A. That’s one team… Obviously every team can do better, that’s not the point. The point is how well are they doing compared to the entire league.
B. Lester: 2002 draft pick. Buchholz: 2005 pick. Youkilis: 2001 pick. Pedroia: 2004 pick. Ellsbury: 2005 pick. Paps: 2003 pick. Bard: 2006 pick.
You are comparing apples and oranges. Since 2006 when Oppenheimer took over, only one of those guys have been picked. By your own metric… Oppenheimer is better at drafting that the stupid fucking Red Sox. He has produced at least two relievers to Boston’s one. It is a ridiculously stupid metric, though, considering most of the guys drafted in that time are still… you know… in the minors. The fact that college relievers are the only guys either team has produced since the 2006 draft is not a coincidence. Other guys are still developing.
You are just rambling on and bitching about nothing of any relevance or importance… I’m not sure what it says about me that I’m actually responding.
“A. That’s one team… Obviously every team can do better, that’s not the point. The point is how well are they doing compared to the entire league.”
They probably aren’t doing well compared to the entire league when you think about it.
B. Lester: 2002 draft pick. Buchholz: 2005 pick. Youkilis: 2001 pick. Pedroia: 2004 pick. Ellsbury: 2005 pick. Paps: 2003 pick. Bard: 2006 pick.
“You are comparing apples and oranges. Since 2006 when Oppenheimer took over, only one of those guys have been picked. By your own metric… Oppenheimer is better at drafting that the stupid fucking Red Sox. He has produced at least two relievers to Boston’s one. It is a ridiculously stupid metric, though, considering most of the guys drafted in that time are still… you know… in the minors. The fact that college relievers are the only guys either team has produced since the 2006 draft is not a coincidence. Other guys are still developing.”
Wingman’s point was over the past decade. That’s why response referenced those players over the past 10 yrs or so.
“You are just rambling on and bitching about nothing of any relevance or importance… I’m not sure what it says about me that I’m actually responding.”
It says you get way too upset when ppl critique the Yankee farm. No one said it was the worst farm ever.
“They probably aren’t doing well compared to the entire league when you think about it.”
I have thought about it. I have looked into it. It takes 15 minutes to go to baseball-reference and scroll through various teams drafts. The Yankees drafts look pretty good… which is a big reason they have a top 5-10 farm right now. If Cole had taken their $4 mill offer… then I am willing to bet you wouldn’t be complaining at all.
“Wingman’s point was over the past decade. That’s why response referenced those players over the past 10 yrs or so.”
It’s not fair to judge Oppenheimer based on drafts he had no control over. If I criticize you for wingman’s comments how fair would you feel that was?
“It says you get way too upset when ppl critique the Yankee farm. No one said it was the worst farm ever.”
I am not upset about critiquing the farm. I am upset about irrationally critiquing the farm and expecting that kids who can’t drink legally yet should all be MLB All-Stars.
And to critique Opp for going against the mainstream… which I don’t know if that’s you that’s done it or wingman… one cannot possibly be looking past the last two drafts. To kids who are still teenagers. Guys like Brackman, Cole, Heathcott, Murphy… all highly thought of by the mainstream to varying degrees.
I’m actually ok with the Dante Jr. pick.
“I have thought about it. I have looked into it. It takes 15 minutes to go to baseball-reference and scroll through various teams drafts. The Yankees drafts look pretty good… which is a big reason they have a top 5-10 farm right now. If Cole had taken their $4 mill offer… then I am willing to bet you wouldn’t be complaining at all. ”
If one of the big 3 turned out to be a 1 a 2 or even a 3 you wouldn’t hear a word from anyone.
“It’s not fair to judge Oppenheimer based on drafts he had no control over. If I criticize you for wingman’s comments how fair would you feel that was?”
If I agreed with what he said I wouldn’t mind you criticizing me.
“I am not upset about critiquing the farm. I am upset about irrationally critiquing the farm and expecting that kids who can’t drink legally yet should all be MLB All-Stars.”
Who is doing that no one is saying a guy like Heathcott should be up here tearing the league up.
“If one of the big 3 turned out to be a 1 a 2 or even a 3 you wouldn’t hear a word from anyone.”
That’s a huge problem, though… it’s too small a sample to make any judgments… and even then they’re too young to make an judgments. IPK turned into about 1/3-1/2 of Curtis Granderson… the Yankees’ best hitter this season. That’s HUGE. Joba looks like a future closer, and might even get back into the rotation at some point. Hughes had a solid season… was easily a #2 or #3 starter… and is hurt.
“If I agreed with what he said I wouldn’t mind you criticizing me.”
You have no idea who Damon Oppenheimer would have drafted with those same picks, though. It’s totally impractical to expect he would rip his predecessor to shreds and call him an idiot… you have no idea if he agreed or disagreed.
“Who is doing that no one is saying a guy like Heathcott should be up here tearing the league up.”
You are criticizing Opp’s drafts. Even back in 2006 he took a guy like Dellin who is a stud in AA right now. By criticizing him, you are necessarily being impatient.
Joba’s not going back to the rotation and I don’t think he’s the closer of this club. Not saying he can’t do it but I don’t thinl he replaces Mo. IMO the closer of the Yankees isn’t on this team.
“You are criticizing Opp’s drafts. Even back in 2006 he took a guy like Dellin who is a stud in AA right now. By criticizing him, you are necessarily being impatient.”
I’m judging my opinions based on what has happened so far. Some of that is based on the big 3
“Joba’s not going back to the rotation and I don’t think he’s the closer of this club.”
That’s your speculation.
“I’m judging my opinions based on what has happened so far. Some of that is based on the big 3″
Again…
A. Too small a sample.
B. You are contradicting yourself by saying they can’t draft, on the one hand, and then saying they draft these stud pitchers who should have become front-line starters before they turned 25 years old, on the other. It can’t be both. Either they didn’t draft good talent, or they drafted great talent that didn’t work out. Which is it?
“Well by that logic we can neither complain nor laud the draft.”
EXACTLY! The day after the draft you have no business whatsoever complaining about or lauding draft picks that you have never even seen play. None whatsoever. Take a look at who they got and see how they do.
“Well there was the whole four other drafts that he’s made.”
Which have gone very well by any reasonable standard of judgement.
“Well, there have been players who, you know…have made the majors.”
Again, your frame of reference is totally scewed. For a player to merely make the majors is HUGE. How many non-top-20 picks since 2008 have had a big MLB impact so far in their careers? I’ll help you out: http://www.baseball-reference......=&
“the point is that other teams have had quite a bit more success than the Yankees in the past decade.”
The point is that Damon Oppenheimer does not have a time machine to go back and overrule the decisions of his predecessors… if I blamed you for the comment left by the person before you commented… how unfair would that be? The point is also that not many teams have had much more success with non-top-20 picks. And the point is that by ignoring these realities and jumping to irrational conclusions… you are being ridiculous.
EXACTLY! The day after the draft you have no business whatsoever complaining about or lauding draft picks that you have never even seen play. None whatsoever. Take a look at who they got and see how they do.
So I guess we shouldn’t cover the draft at all then? I mean come on that’s ridiculous, I don’t see you yelling at anyone praising Bichette or Culver.
Which have gone very well by any reasonable standard of judgement.
A couple of relievers. Smashing.
Again, your frame of reference is totally scewed. For a player to merely make the majors is HUGE. How many non-top-20 picks since 2008 have had a big MLB impact so far in their careers? I’ll help you out: http://www.baseball-reference……=&
The point is that Damon Oppenheimer does not have a time machine to go back and overrule the decisions of his predecessors… if I blamed you for the comment left by the person before you commented… how unfair would that be? The point is also that not many teams have had much more success with non-top-20 picks. And the point is that by ignoring these realities and jumping to irrational conclusions… you are being ridiculous.
My point was again, that it’s okay to ask questions about Oppenheimer’s drafts by now. The big prospects that have made the majors have not lived up to expectations, with the exception of recently departed Ian Kennedy. Given that, perhaps it’s even reasonable to question his draft selections.
“So I guess we shouldn’t cover the draft at all then?”
Did I ever say that? We can cover the draft to learn who they picked and a bit about each prospect without judging the results of the draft the day it happens.
“I mean come on that’s ridiculous, I don’t see you yelling at anyone praising Bichette or Culver.”
Who is praising those guys? Show me any posts where people are praising them.
“A couple of relievers. Smashing.”
You know why only a couple of college releivers have been produced? Because they have the least development time. If you expect Heathcott to be producing in MLB already or Culver or fucking Dante Bichette Jr you are an idiot. That is why your standards are ridiculous. Geting upset that 18, 19, 20 year old kids are not MLB All-Stars yet is ridiculous.
Listen dipshit… I am sick of this. You have not actually looked at the drafts the Yankees have had compared to other teams. Who have the Red Sox drafted since 2006? Daniel Bard. That’s it. Period. No other big MLB producers on the Sox team were drafted since 2006. You have made up your mind without even looking at the information. Great job.
“The big prospects that have made the majors have not lived up to expectations, with the exception of recently departed Ian Kennedy.”
Again… the big prospects who Opp has drafted can’t drink legally yet and are where they belong: the minor leagues.
Again… your standards are ridiculous. The vast majority of prospects will not work out. That a few Yankees haven’t become HOFers by 25 years old does not mean the Yankees don’t draft well. Even most HOFers aren’t HOFers at 25 years old.
Did I ever say that? We can cover the draft to learn who they picked and a bit about each prospect without judging the results of the draft the day it happens.
Part of covering the draft is ****GASPS**** learning about players that are available, so…maybe, maybe fans could have an idea of who they’d like the team to pick. Just maybe, they’d have preferences…hmmm, I dunno. There’s a few leaps here that I’m missing.
You know why only a couple of college releivers have been produced? Because they have the least development time. If you expect Heathcott to be producing in MLB already or Culver or fucking Dante Bichette Jr you are an idiot. That is why your standards are ridiculous. Geting upset that 18, 19, 20 year old kids are not MLB All-Stars yet is ridiculous.
Listen dipshit… I am sick of this. You have not actually looked at the drafts the Yankees have had compared to other teams. Who have the Red Sox drafted since 2006? Daniel Bard. That’s it. Period. No other big MLB producers on the Sox team were drafted since 2006. You have made up your mind without even looking at the information. Great job.
To be fair, I was just baiting you with that comment. I like you Ted, and sometimes it’s fun to mess with the Homers. However, to be fair if were only counting the success from 2006 on, then Hughes doesn’t count either.
Again… the big prospects who Opp has drafted can’t drink legally yet and are where they belong: the minor leagues.
Again… your standards are ridiculous. The vast majority of prospects will not work out. That a few Yankees haven’t become HOFers by 25 years old does not mean the Yankees don’t draft well. Even most HOFers aren’t HOFers at 25 years old.
Again, my stance is “there’s room for improvement and questions need to be asked why they drafted who they drafted,” not “FIRE CASH AND OPP LET RANDY LEVINE RUN THE FARM!!!!”
“maybe fans could have an idea of who they’d like the team to pick.”
There is a HUGE difference between saying “I would have liked to see the Yankees take Player X” and “the Yankees did not do well in this 2011 draft.” HUGE.
“there’s room for improvement and questions need to be asked why they drafted who they drafted,”
You can say that about every single team in every single draft… the difference between saying that and other things you’ve said about their “failed” draft history under Opp is HUGE.
There is a HUGE difference between saying “I would have liked to see the Yankees take Player X” and “the Yankees did not do well in this 2011 draft.” HUGE.
Not really, there’s a difference between not doing well and doing poorly. By all accounts this is a fairly underwhelming draft, nothing to get excited about. When you have the Yankees’ budget I think it’s fair to expect more.
You can say that about every single team in every single draft… the difference between saying that and other things you’ve said about their “failed” draft history under Opp is HUGE.
Yeah, but I would say that the Yankees have a lot more room for improvement than a lot of teams. The Rockies and the Rays both seem to draft well, granted they’ve been at it longer than the Yankees. Also, I never used the word “fail,” not once. My point was that I understand why fans want more.
“The big prospects that have made the majors have not lived up to expectations, with the exception of recently departed Ian Kennedy. Given that, perhaps it’s even reasonable to question his draft selections.”
I remember 3 yrs ago being on another board and ppl complained about the farm. I felt at the time it was irrational because it had only been 3 yrs or so since Opp took control of the draft. But now we’re on yr six not 3 but 6 yrs and so far the results have been ok. The farm has improved but the work on the big league level has been ok.
There is so much wisdom and simultaneously so much foolishness in that post, it’s staggering.
My point was that I understand the critics’ point. I think enough time has passed to where we could ask questions about their process, however, I don’t think enough time has passed to decide whether or not any of them are good/bad at their jobs.
I guess CANO doesn’t qualify as a Superstar type player??? IPK will also be around for the long haul, barring injury!
Cano was an IFA. Doesn’t count for draft purposes.
Seems the farm was in question as a whole. Dunn, Coke, Melancon aren’t super stars but did recently graduated from the farm as well.
Being a long time Yankee fan, I’m thrilled with how the Farm has turned around and is producing again, as the best is yet to come.
I’m even more thrilled with this year’s draft, considering. 6 of their top 7, being HS talent?? Then again, you must prefer HS talent over college players. Seems Oppemheimer focus on Talent/Developement on the youngest level!!!
I’m probably one of the few ppl that actually like the Dante Jr. pick.
They drafted those guys… you say they can’t draft, and then you say they drafted guys who were really good. You are contradicting yourself. Which one is it? They can’t draft, or they draft really well and the guys they took didn’t pan out?
——————————————-
Probably a little bit of both. They pass on guys ppl feel they should have drafted and then draft talents but then those guys don’t pan out.
So you’re criticizing them for not being perfect basically and also for drafting the guys their scouts like instead of guys you liked? We’re back to your expectations not being reasonable. It is not reasonable to expect every draft pick or every highly ranked prospect to reach their ceiling. You are also talking about a really small sample. A lot of variability. Bad luck can come into play. Just like you don’t judge a player on two 1-5 games, you shouldn’t bash Opp for taking a bunch of stud pitchers in the 2006 draft (IPK, Joba, Betances, McAllister, Robertson, Melancon, McCutchen, and Norton were all 2006 picks… that’s a ridiculously good draft http://www.baseball-reference......=&
and a couple of them failing to live up to lofty expectations before they’re 25, 26.
Lofty expectations that the Yankees placed on them though. Joba and Hughes were billed as future aces were they not.
The Yankees drafted them, did they not? Your argument is that they don’t draft well. To prove that you say they draft great players. Do you really not see a problem with that argument?
BA and other publications do not take organizations’ words for who are good prospects… the hype around Joba and Hughes was largely generated outside the Yankees organization. That they have both suffered injuries that may or may not have negatively impacted their careers may or may not have anything to do with the Yankees… it may or may not be sheer luck that Joba ducked a Pudge throw-down and Hughes’ shoulder is brittle.
Although they received fan fare outside of the Yankees organization many of the praise came from within. Didn’t Kay quote Cashman who said Joba could be our Justin Verlander. Hell Brian was the one that said Betances could be their best pitching prospect ever.
Again… every team says that about their prospects. What do you want them to say? Our prospects are bad, we don’t like them, please do not trade for them?
of course not but at the same time if they are hyped up and fail then ppl shouldn’t be surprised about a backlash.
“So forget about the majority of the work Oppenheimer has done and focus instead on the context-less results of a tiny sample? Every pick he made that didn’t work out perfectly, that’s terrible because other team’s draft picks in the late 1st work out so often? Even picks he did not make like Hughes should be blamed on him? We should not consider the context of what reasonable expectations are compared to the rest of the league and if they don’t turn out exactly one stud that’s a problem?”
My point is we shouldn’t just say give him time because it’s too early. It’s been six yrs not 2 or 3. I understand Betances is still learning in the minors.
“You’re missing my point completely. You are contradicting yourself. The Yankees draft the wrong guys? Or the Yankees draft amazing guys who should be front-line starters by their mid-20s? Which is it? They are mutually exclusive.”
As I said earlier a little bit of both. They pass on guys ppl feel they should have drafted and then draft talent players but then those guys don’t pan out.
“No, that’s a question. I am honestly curious about your age and level of education. ”
Brooklyn College
“My point is we shouldn’t just say give him time because it’s too early. It’s been six yrs not 2 or 3.”
But at the same time we cannot credit him for any player who has not had MLB success yet? A guy who is crushing in the minors should not be considered? You say that it’s been 6 years, but you acknowledge that the last 4-6 of those years are too soon to judge properly. Do you not see the contradiction?
“As I said earlier a little bit of both. They pass on guys ppl feel they should have drafted and then draft talent players but then those guys don’t pan out.”
I responded to that before too… They can’t draft, they can’t develop… yet they have a top 5-10 farm by all accounts, lots of trade chips every year, guys coming up and helping their 1st place team out of the minors… man are they awful.
If we are not judging all of those drafts… it has not been 6 drafts. You are judging him on the results of only one or two drafts. Not all 6. Not sure how you can’t see that.
“But at the same time we cannot credit him for any player who has not had MLB success yet? A guy who is crushing in the minors should not be considered? You say that it’s been 6 years, but you acknowledge that the last 4-6 of those years are too soon to judge properly. Do you not see the contradiction?”
No he gets credit for improving the farm and I have stated that throughout this blog post but at the same time it hasn’t lived up to expectations. Do I expect stars everywhere of course not but you have to give me more than 2 relievers and a role playing LF.
“They can’t draft, they can’t develop… yet they have a top 5-10 farm by all accounts, lots of trade chips every year, guys coming up and helping their 1st place team out of the minors… man are they awful.”
No they’re perfect everything they do is perfect and there are no mistakes. Again the farm has improved but last yr when the farm was ranked lower than it is now I didn’t hear every Yankee fan repeatedly scream what number the farm was ranked.
I give up.
“at the same time it hasn’t lived up to expectations. Do I expect stars everywhere of course not but you have to give me more than 2 relievers and a role playing LF.”
You are still saying that guys who are still in the minors haven’t lived up to expectations. If in two years, five years, whatever Manny, Dellin, Jesus, Slade, Culver, Dante, Gumbs, Hughes, Joba, Robertson, Romine, Mitchell… etc, etc, etc… have all failed that is completely different than if they have 3 studs and several other solid MLB players out of that group.
You are still judging almost exclusively the work that was done before Oppenheimer took over in judging guys who would be in their primes right now… that’s the point I’ve been making all along that you refuse to acknowledge. That’s why I question your age and education level.
“Joba’s not going back to the rotation and I don’t think he’s the closer of this club.”
“That’s your speculation.”
So are you on him potentially being the closer
“I’m judging my opinions based on what has happened so far. Some of that is based on the big 3?
Again…
A. Too small a sample.
B. You are contradicting yourself by saying they can’t draft, on the one hand, and then saying they draft these stud pitchers who should have become front-line starters before they turned 25 years old, on the other. It can’t be both. Either they didn’t draft good talent, or they drafted great talent that didn’t work out. Which is it?
For the 3rd time it’s a little bit of both and the sample size isn’t large but it’s not to small either. For example it’s not out of LF to question if Hughes is durable enough to be a rotation mainstay for the next 5 – 7 yrs
Oh my god you both need to STFU and move on.
Sincerely,
EVERYONE.
(I keed, but seriously… It’s pointless.)
Ted and I go longer than Yankee vs. Red Sox games
That’s what Mrs. Nelson said.
“So are you on him potentially being the closer”
No potentially being a closer is true for any MLB reliever, but especially one who does well. *Potential* to do something is different from saying someone will or will not do something. That’s not even a subtle difference. It’s huge.
“For the 3rd time it’s a little bit of both”
So you’re nitpicking… sometimes the Yankees don’t draft well. Sometimes they draft really, really amazingly well and it doesn’t pay instant dividends. Again, any team that is true for.
“Hughes is durable enough to be a rotation mainstay for the next 5 – 7 yrs”
You can’t draft a guy knowing for a fact that he will be a MLB stud for 5-7 years… every pick is a risk. This is why your expectations are ridiculousness.
“So you’re nitpicking… sometimes the Yankees don’t draft well. Sometimes they draft really, really amazingly well and it doesn’t pay instant dividends. Again, any team that is true for.”
Yea I sure but I’m concerned with what the Yankees do since this is the team I root for.
“You can’t draft a guy knowing for a fact that he will be a MLB stud for 5-7 years… every pick is a risk. This is why your expectations are ridiculousness.”
It’s not based on what he was on a draft it’s based on hia history since being drafted.
“Yea I sure but I’m concerned with what the Yankees do since this is the team I root for.”
But if you judge them against perfection you are always going to be disappointed.
“It’s not based on what he was on a draft it’s based on hia history since being drafted.”
Again… judging against perfection (including perfect luck) is always going to leave you disappointed and is just not a good standard to judge against.
But if you judge them against perfection you are always going to be disappointed.
Again… judging against perfection (including perfect luck) is always going to leave you disappointed and is just not a good standard to judge against.
————————
Not perfection but give me something besides relievers and a role playing LF