Not to beat a dead horse but....
by Hobbes2d on Dec 11, 2008 10:27 PM PST
55 comments
Going back to the 2007 MLB Draft, who would you rather have taken now? I'm guessing a lot fewer people have a problem with us talking MadBum with our first pick over Porcello or Heyward. And Alderson isn't looking bad either. I know there was outcry for us to take hitters, but can't say I can really blame the Giants for getting who they did. Especially with their track record for developing pitching, and the lack of quality bats in that draft. Really only Heyward and Mills profiled as big time bats that were taken after MadBum, although I must say I was a fan of Dominguez for his overall package with both defense and potential at the plate (though there were big questions about him hitting wise).
Obviously the only real gripe we have is Jackson Williams. Especially when Josh Donaldson can actually hit, and I'm willing to bet he's better behind the dish too. But he's not named Jackson!
Thoughts? Happy with the MadBum? Or are you still wishing we had our 5 tool potential OF in Heyward?
This FanPost is reader-generated, and it does not necessarily reflect the views of McCovey Chronicles. If the author uses filler to achieve the minimum word requirement, a moderator may edit the FanPost for his or her own amusement.
0 recs |
55 comments
Email
Print
Comments
lol sweet
I see the future, and it is Pablo
by CB30 on Dec 11, 2008 10:41 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
beautifully done.
Giants: World Series Champions...in 2011.
by Giants_Junkie on Dec 12, 2008 1:29 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
i wanted Mitch Canham at the Williams pick and I still do
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
PABLO SANDOVAL AM STEAL DEATH, DESTROYER OF WORLDS.
by jponry on Dec 11, 2008 10:48 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
this
"While conservatives tell you 'leave things alone and no one will lose,' and liberals tell you 'interfere a lot and no one will lose,' baseball says 'someone will lose.' Not only says it - but insists upon it! ... Democracy is lovely, but baseball's more mature." BVCE supports SF Dugout and Manny Burriss.
by BaronVonCurrentEvents on Dec 12, 2008 5:59 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
well, that just like your opinion, man
Psycho killer, qu'est-ce que c'est?
by shikantaza on Dec 12, 2008 6:41 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
How is Canham doing? I remember when OSU won the CWS, living in Oregon you would have thought the Trail Blazers won the NBA title.
I can haz homerunz!
by jbowl on Dec 12, 2008 3:46 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
he hit .282/.382/.434 in high-a last year. old for the league, but still a hell of a lot better than Williams
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
PABLO SANDOVAL AM STEAL DEATH, DESTROYER OF WORLDS.
by jponry on Dec 12, 2008 3:49 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I wish they would have picked Mike Mussina rather than Adam Hyzdu in the first round of the 1990 draft
by FluLikeSymptoms on Dec 11, 2008 11:01 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
You heard it here first
Mussina’s gonna be a huge bust.
by Useful_Idiot on Dec 11, 2008 11:07 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
well, I’m going to follow Mussina’s career and if he winds up being better than Hyzdu I am going to keep bringing it up around here and remind you guys how right I was.
by FluLikeSymptoms on Dec 11, 2008 11:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Cito Gaston is not high on that guy
"Forget it Donny, you're out of your element"-Walter Sobchak
by icanplaythird on Dec 12, 2008 3:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
hyzdu wasn’t the bad pick. he broke all of ken griffey’s records at moeller high. it was eric christopherson right before the mussina pick. i was scratching my head about that pick then, and i’m still scratching. mussina being local stanford guy, high profile player, etc.
Uribe to Thompson to Clark: Don't tinker ever with chance
by tellusfrank on Dec 12, 2008 12:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
draft preference
Charlie Culberson was another huge overdraft, just like Jackson Williams. Many of us cynically believe(d) that after the first four picks (MadBum, Tim2, Fairley, Noonan) the organization was essentially out of money and choose guys they figured they could sign without busting the budget. I still see that as a golden opportunity that was only partially taken advantage of (note to grammarians: never end a sentence or phrase with "of").
And yes, I’d still prefer Rick Porcello or Justin Heyward to MadBum. As for Mills, maybe, but probably not, honestly.
I’d have taken Noonan where we took Fairley, and then in Noonan’s spot I’d have taken C Travis D’Arnoud or OF Michael Burgess or 3B Matt Mangini.
For Culberson’s spot, I’d have preferred any of the above, along with LHP Nick Hagadone, C Mitch Canham (I agree with Jenny), or SS Ryan Dent.
For Williams’s spot, whoever of those folks was left over.
Sergio Romo: striking out professional hitters since 2005.
by Lyle on Dec 12, 2008 5:14 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Personally i was happy with the first 4 picks, there’s always differences that you’d make, due to personal preferences, and in hindsight, but i think those 4 picks were decent ones. I didn’t like the Williams & Culberson picks & would have chosen others in those spots (Canham & Burgess were the ones i was interested in at those points)
The Williams pick still strikes me as strange, i know they liked William’s defense but given that they went with a catcher, Canham seemed a better bet at that point. Culberson i’m less bothered about, as at least he had some projection & upside (plus obviously he was taken afterwards, when Burgess was gone & Canham didn’t make sense)
It certainly is a case of beating a dead horse though, in any draft we can over-analyse every pick & say we’d have done different things. On the whole, i think we had a good draft, and so whilst i’d have done things slightly differently, there’s nothing to really worry about.
Proud owner of the most boring Username! Alex Hinshaw: Now showing in a bullpen near you!
by GiantFan on Dec 12, 2008 5:47 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Lyle
“many of us cynically believe(d) that after the first four picks…they choose guys they figured they could sign without busting the budget”
You have to let that go! Your suffering will never end. You can say they were bad picks, but you can’t still be hanging on to the money savings angle after seeing they signed for amounts appropriate for their position in the draft. 95% of the guys any expert would have taken at those spots would have signed for the same $
by melottfan on Dec 12, 2008 8:47 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
But....
And it’s all that I can do
I’m a sight for my sore eyes
But it’s all I am so
Don’t tell me
How to be
‘Cause I like some suffering
Don’t ask me
What I need
I’m just fine
Here finding me
Sergio Romo: striking out professional hitters since 2005.
by Lyle on Dec 12, 2008 10:52 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
DrB hasn’t been the same since we picked Madbum. I thought the brain damage wasn’t supposed to be permanent.
My adopted Giant: "Raptor Jesus" Guzman
by Goofus on Dec 12, 2008 5:48 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I imagine himself sitting in a corner, drool dripping off his chin, and chanting: “MadBum…MadBum…MadBum…MadBum….”
/deer head
Bay City Ball
by xanthan on Dec 12, 2008 6:24 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I like the 07 draft except for Williams. Even though he showed improvement in San Jose, I didn’t like the pick on draft day and I don’t like it now.
"While conservatives tell you 'leave things alone and no one will lose,' and liberals tell you 'interfere a lot and no one will lose,' baseball says 'someone will lose.' Not only says it - but insists upon it! ... Democracy is lovely, but baseball's more mature." BVCE supports SF Dugout and Manny Burriss.
by BaronVonCurrentEvents on Dec 12, 2008 6:01 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Expecting the Giants to have picked THE best player at each and every one of their picks is asking for a little too much unless your GM is Nostradamus. Considering how the picks have looked so far, there is absolutely nothing we should complain about.
Brian Sabean's dad- will make a few phone calls to help his son find a new job after next season
by rxmeister on Dec 12, 2008 6:06 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Nostradamus would be great GM. He’d know if we were wasting our time on building foir the future if the world was gonna end before the 2010 season. “Screw the future; there is no future! Gimme Texiera , Sabathia and Manny…and trade everyone not on the major league roster! We’re going out with a bang, boys!”
My adopted Giant: "Raptor Jesus" Guzman
by Goofus on Dec 12, 2008 8:26 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think Nostradamus was the GM of the 1997 Marlins. But he was off on his estimate of when the world would end.
by FluLikeSymptoms on Dec 12, 2008 12:48 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Mark
It’s not that those picks have turned out to be poor ones in light of late 2008 information, it’s that they were poor picks at the time they were made; there were (presumably) better choices available. If, for example, they had chosen Nick Hagadone in Culberson’s spot….and then Hagadone had blown out his elbow and become useless for at least 2-3 years and with no certain future…….that still would have been a better choice at the time.
Sergio Romo: striking out professional hitters since 2005.
by Lyle on Dec 12, 2008 10:56 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
yeah, but you can’t make the best pick in every spot, Lyle, that’s my point. Maybe another GM picks Hagadone over Culberson or anyone over Jackson Williams, but he then also picks Beau Mills over Bumgarner or Nick Schmidt over Alderson. You’re not going to be right with every pick, but any draft where your first four picks were Bumgarner, Alderson, Fairly and Noonan is not a draft you should have a problem with. The previous year he picked Tim Lincecum with the number ten pick. Would I rather have the other nine GM’s making our draft picks?? The LAST problem I have with Sabean and the organization is the way they have drafted.
Brian Sabean's dad- will make a few phone calls to help his son find a new job after next season
by rxmeister on Dec 12, 2008 12:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
With the number six selection in the 2009 draft the Giants' new GM picks.....
Brian Sabean's dad- will make a few phone calls to help his son find a new job after next season
by rxmeister on Dec 12, 2008 12:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Now all we need is random generator to pick which of 6 ,or so, Sabeanisms appear inside the crystal ball!
Lets see:
“At the end of the day”
" kick tirers"
" $%^& work let’s drink"
Any other nominations?
Ivan Ochoa - Heir to the legacy of Rob Andrews & Rikkert Faneyte!
Here comes Captain Obvious wearing his Atomic Wedgie!
by daveinexile on Dec 12, 2008 1:01 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Suffice it to say
My adopted Giant: "Raptor Jesus" Guzman
by Goofus on Dec 12, 2008 2:35 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I understand your point, Mark
But I’m trying (poorly, it seems) to make a slightly different point. Forget how it looks now – I’m talking about essentially evaluating the draft immediately after it concludes. Of course, you can’t know how the players selected will turn out, and so you can’t know if it was ultimately a great, good, fair, or poor draft in that sense – that determination will be made by history. But you can grade it based on a preponderance of the scouts’ evaluations at the time. And at the end of that first day of the 2007 draft, this was a good – but not great – draft. And with six high picks like we had, that should have been a real bonanza.
I realize that if Alderson and Bumgarner both turn into major league pitchers of even average skill, we can look back on the draft as being relatively successful – because most years a team is fortunate to get two ML-average players out of a draft. But this wasn’t most years – we had an unusual advantage in 2007, and so I think we should expect more from it. I don’t think we took full advantage of it.
Maybe another way to say it is this: I’m judging our draft against all the other GM’s. If our GM had picked Beau Mills over Bumgarner and then picked Hagadone over Culberson, to me that would have been preferrable. AT THE TIME. Yes, it appears so far that Bumgarner and Alderson were huge steals of that draft, and so in hindsight, so far at least, we’d all prefer to have Bumgarner and Culberson rather than Hagadone and Mills. At this time, but not at that time. Is this just arguing about pointless trivia? Well, given the Giants’ track record in drafting the last 30-odd years, I would be much more comfortable if we could say, at the end of a draft day, “Well, it looks like we did the best we could, given our position.” I couldn’t say that on Draft Day 2007. And that wasn’t encouraging. Maybe it all turns out great. I hope so. I’m a huge Giants fan, and I want the team to do well in drafting as well as in on-field play.
Sergio Romo: striking out professional hitters since 2005.
by Lyle on Dec 12, 2008 8:21 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I philosophically disagree with evaluating a draft this way
I don’t think a draft should be judged based on a preponderance of scouts evaluation. I would trust the Giants (or any other team for that matter) scouting and player personal staff at least as much, if not more, than a preponderance of what Baseball America, Baseball Prospectus, Perfect Game, Keith Law, etc. say. Five years down the road (when most agree a draft should be judged) if a team’s picks have turned out better than what those scouts thought, the team should be given credit for good scouting and evaluation, not just seen as lucky (and vice-versa of course if they turn out worse). To make a judgment on draft day that a team didn’t draft well because these outside scouts disagreed on some picks, is flawed. By the way, I would apply this same principle to the Giants 2008 draft, which has been universally loved by these scouts and publications.
Here is a semi-related analogy: College Football experts are baffled why Notre Dame has had bad teams recently despite continually having recruiting classes that are heralded by scout.com, rivals.com, ESPN, the Sporting News, etc. (a preponderance of scouts). But, it has been suggested by some that the problem is lazy recruiting; the recruiting and coaching staff just going after the High School players that show up at the top of these lists, rather than doing their own talent evaluation and recruiting based on that evaluation. The coaching staffs that do their own evaluating end up with recruiting classes that may not be ranked near the top on national signing day, but they actually end up with better talent and build better teams.
by FluLikeSymptoms on Dec 13, 2008 1:43 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I would say that you are much more willing to trust Brian Sabean’s drafting acumen than I. Other than the possible exception of the last 2 drafts, I believe the 5-year results of the past 20+ years support my bias.
Sergio Romo: striking out professional hitters since 2005.
by Lyle on Dec 13, 2008 3:01 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I was making a more general point about trusting an MLB front office over the preponderance of scouts. Unless an organization has demonstrated sustained incompetence in the draft (like the Pirates previous regime) I would trust them more than a bunch of Baseball America and Baseball Prospectus writers (not to disparage those guys, I read them and respect them as much as anybody).
As far as Sabean’s track record I think you are being a little hard on it. It hasn’t been a great record, but hasn’t been bad either, considering the lack of high picks, both because of giving them away (sometimes stupidly, sometimes necessarily) and because the team was good for so many years. If you look at some of his recent 5 year results in the upper rounds:
2003 wasn’t very good: Aardsma, Roger Whitaker, Jeff Jennings, Schierholtz, Brian Buscher (with a great find of Brian Wilson in the 24th round)
2002 was excellent: Cain, Lewis, Ortmeier, Correia with Clay Hensley, Ishikawa, and Hinshaw as later finds
2001 was decent: Hennessey, Lowrey, Linden, Foppert, Julian Benavidez
If you look ahead a bit 2004, is not going to be good (except a find of Sanchez in the 27th round), 2005 is almost not even worth counting because they didn’t pick until pick #132, and 2006 is going to be great no matter what because of Lincecum.
so all in all, not a great track record, but not one that I think should make you automatically take Goldstien, Manuel, Law, Sickles, etc. opinions over his
by FluLikeSymptoms on Dec 13, 2008 4:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Well said, I just happen to disagree. For me, Brian Sabean and his predecessors all get the same decision as Nebuchadnezzar: “Mene, Mene, Tekel, Uparsin.”
Sergio Romo: striking out professional hitters since 2005.
by Lyle on Dec 14, 2008 3:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
well, hopefully we will hire Kevin Goldstein to be our next GM
by FluLikeSymptoms on Dec 14, 2008 9:12 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I’m fine with MadBum.
Psycho killer, qu'est-ce que c'est?
by shikantaza on Dec 12, 2008 6:42 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
if 2 of these players
make it to the majors and produce at a high level i will be happy.
by krazybalr on Dec 12, 2008 8:29 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
i was happy with MadBum until i saw this
Upside potential: All-Star-caliber right fielder in the Dave Parker mold. He’s also drawn comparisons to Willie McCovey.
http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/minorleagues/prospects/y2009/profile.jsp?t=p_top&pid=518792
by cazzuno on Dec 12, 2008 12:12 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Um, I think you didn't click on the link....? He's referring to Jason Heyward.
(Or maybe you’re just being silly…)
Giants: World Series Champions...in 2011.
by Giants_Junkie on Dec 12, 2008 1:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'd go with #2.
Natto doesn’t really participate in these serious discussions like we do.
Heh…#2.
The Basil Fawlty Moderating Strategy:
"We could run a nice blog here if we didn't have all these members getting in the way."
by WalrusMan on Dec 12, 2008 5:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
hyzdu wasn’t the bad pick. he broke all of ken griffey’s records at moeller high. it was eric christopherson right before the mussina pick. i was scratching my head about that pick then, and i’m still scratching. mussina being local stanford guy, high profile player, etc.
Uribe to Thompson to Clark: Don't tinker ever with chance
by tellusfrank on Dec 12, 2008 12:34 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
posted wrong place
Uribe to Thompson to Clark: Don't tinker ever with chance
by tellusfrank on Dec 12, 2008 12:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
cc was fat.
Uribe to Thompson to Clark: Don't tinker ever with chance
by tellusfrank on Dec 12, 2008 12:37 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
3 picks in the first round… Who the H is Arturo Mcdowell?
by Useful_Idiot on Dec 12, 2008 5:29 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't know
but we should be mad about it for the rest of our lives
by FluLikeSymptoms on Dec 12, 2008 5:38 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Now you’re just beating a dead horse
by Useful_Idiot on Dec 13, 2008 11:41 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
A change in approach
In 2008, the Giants changed their approach to the draft. With the #5 overall pick they chose Buster Posey, even though they knew as soon as they did so that they would have to play him a LOT more than they had ever paid a prospect.
I wanted them to make that change a year earlier. The two players I wanted them to spend money on were Rick Porcello and Kyle Russell. As it turns out, spending the dough on Russell would probably have been a mistake. He returned to the University of Texas and although he was drafted a round earlier, wound up signing for about half what he could have received in 2007. He is now rated by Kevin Goldstein of BP as only the Dodgers’ #10 prospect. He would likely have been a better pick than either Jackson Williams or Charlie Culberson, but probably not by enough to justify the extra money.
And it’s hard to argue for the much more expensive Porcello over the fine progress of Mad Bum and Timmy Two. But here is an intriguing possible scenario.
I don’t know how possible this was, but I would think it MIGHT have been possible that if the Giants had taken Mad Bum at #10, Porcello at #22 — they might STILL have been able to draft Timmy Two at #29. Perhaps Alderson would have been gone by #29, but that would ruin my story. :)
If he had still been available and if the Giants had chosen him, they would have drafted three-fifths of a very fine rotation all in one year. It might have been the best single draft of pitchers by any team ever.
If the Giants had all three of those pitching prospects PLUS Posey PLUS the #6 overall pick in 2009, WOW!
by sharksrog on Dec 14, 2008 9:17 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- How a Chicago guy learned to love Albert Pujols of St. Louis
- Bud's All-Star tie tops our non-steroid controversies of decade
- D12: Revisiting the Twins decision of Mauer over Prior (again)
- After locking up of AL MVP, it's time for Twins to lock up Mauer
- November means R&R for Raiders fan CC Sabathia and others
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
