Positive Evaluation of Giants Draft

I don't know much about the author, but he is a frequent blogger on Sickel's site and has just started his own. He seems to do a ton of research and sounds like he is quite knowledgeable. Seems to like the Giants draft. Sabes, Barr and Co SCORE again?!

4 months ago baseballjunkie 13 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

That is some very high praise right there! I feel pretty good about this draft… I think it was sort of unspectacular, especially in comparison to the last few, but it seems really solid.

Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
PABLO SANDOVAL AM STEAL DEATH, DESTROYER OF WORLDS.

by jponry on Jun 12, 2009 1:18 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

We are just used to having crazy amounts of praise heaped upon us. It feels like a disappointment to have merely a very good draft.

Merkin Valdez? Manuel Mateo? A rose by any other name...

by rotorueter on Jun 12, 2009 1:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Drafts evaluations would better be served on Aug 18th this year and then again in 4 or 5 years

by wilriv21 on Jun 12, 2009 1:19 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

We could just save all evaluation for 20 years from now—-that way we’d know for sure.

Merkin Valdez? Manuel Mateo? A rose by any other name...

by rotorueter on Jun 12, 2009 1:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

TURNS OUT WE SHOULD HAVE DRAFTED CHUCK KNOBLAUCH INSTEAD OF STEVE HOSEY. DAMMIT!

Bay City Ball

by xanthan on Jun 12, 2009 1:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

+1

For instance, everybody is heaping praise on the Rockies now, mainly for the Matzek pick, but I don’t think they have much of a chance of signing him unless they come up with “Porcello money” and I don’t think they can afford that for one guy.

"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner

by Fla-Giant on Jun 12, 2009 3:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I guess they could let him play first base too.

Proud father of Juan Carlos Perez. Think Albert Pujols at second.

by marcello on Jun 12, 2009 4:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

So if Strasburg doesn't sign

does that mean the Nats had a bad draft?

The article was really just looking at the quality of the players taken and their potential. That is the essence of the draft anyway… finding the players with the most potential. At the very least it suggests that the Giants are doing a good job of scouting and finding talent beyond the earliest rounds, which bodes well for the future as they will (hopefully) no longer have such high draft picks.

Of course future results will be the ultimate judge of the draft, but poor choices in the present all but guarantee future mediocrity or failure. It is at least good to know the Giants seem to be making wise choices in the present.

by baseballjunkie on Jun 12, 2009 4:08 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Finding the players with the most potential doesn’t do you a damn bit of good if you don’t sign said players. If the Nationals don’t sign Strasburg that absolutely means they had a bad draft.

by FluLikeSymptoms on Jun 12, 2009 4:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs