For those of you who haven't joined the mass suicide over the cataclysmic disaster that was the Giants draft, I did some thinking yesterday and thought I would add my two cents. I really don't understand why people are so bent out of shape over using their first two picks on pitchers rather than hitters. In this decade (the 2000s or oughts or whatever we call it) these are the Giants first round picks (only true first rounders, supplementals not included):
2000- Boof Bonser (21st)
2001- Brad Hennessey (21st)
Noah Lowry (30th)
2002- Matt Cain (25th)
2003- David Aardsma (22nd)
2004- No pick
2005- No pick
2006- Tim Lincecum (10th)
There are plenty of things that you can criticize Brian Sabean and the Giants organization for. But their ability to evaluate and develop first round pitchers is absolutely not one of them. Every one of these guys has gone on to be a productive big league pitcher (with Aardsma admittedly being very borderline). If you expect more than this out of the draft then I would suggest that you don't really understand the draft. I didn't have the inclination to do the same research for every other team but I would be willing to bet there is are very few teams that have had that kind of consistent success with their first round picks.
If insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results; would you rather be drafting Calvin Murray, Tony Torcato, and Arturo McDowell over and over again, or would you rather be drafting Brad Hennessey, Noah Lowry, and Matt Cain? When Sabean was on ESPN2 during the draft he made reference to the fact that developing pitching has been the organization's strength, which I saw as sort of a sly and tacit acknowledgment of "hey we suck at developing hitters but we are pretty damn good at developing pitchers."
Clearly the organization needs to look at making some changes to their development process for hitters, but that is a different discussion than the instant evaluation of this draft. I am not saying that the Giants should abandon drafting hitters all together, and they didn't do that this year. My point is just that when your turn comes up to pick, if you have relatively similar evaluations of Pitcher Pete and Hitter Hank, is it really that bad of an idea to take into account your recent success and failures and lean heavily toward Pitcher Pete?