| By Chris Crawford |  | By 06-07-2010 |
Update: 7:26 p.m. See what Churchill has to say about Taijuan Walker right here.
Update: 7:06 p.m. Plenty of Top 25 talent remains, Mariners will have options at 43.
Update: 6:16 p.m. After 23 picks, these impact players are still on the board. Will any of them land in Seattle?
Update: 5:30 p.m. What the Loux, C. Sale, Skole, Simpson overdrafts mean to Seattle, and will the Mariners capitalize?
Update: 5:02 p.m. Mariners hoping prep arms fall to them at 43?
Update: 4:42 p.m. Another first round talent pushed to sandwich round? Early picks indicate it could happen.
Update: 4:19 p.m. The Mock Draft has been updated. Who's rising and falling on draft day? For all the latest scoop, click right here.
Update: 3:18 p.m. Vettleson is the top target for the New York Yankees at 32, could go to Los Angeles Dodgers at 28 if they pass on prep catcher Kellin Deglan. Subscribers can get all the latest draft rumors here.
The Nationals are on the clock at four, but for Prospect Insider the draft started long before that -- and we have a hot rumor to start your morning right. Subscribers can hear the latest draft rumors here.
If you aren't subscribing yet -- shame on you. But you can be forgiven by signing up here.
draft-rumors
Comments
The following 126 comment(s) for this article are shown below:
| 1. By: rocketdawg31 on 06-07-2010 13:46:24 Hmmm. My post is gone. Did I offend by posting here?? If so, apologies. |
| 2. By: baseballman on 06-07-2010 13:52:04 that would be an interesting way to go |
| 3. By: JohnMcD on 06-07-2010 13:53:08 Probably because you talked about the player and said his name. It's for subscribers only so it defeats the purpose of people signing up if someone talks about him. That would be my guess. Not sure though. |
| 4. By: safecochatter on 06-07-2010 13:59:07 What a week for prospects. strasburg and stanton both getting in their first mlb game tommorrow. and the 2010 draft. also i can't find the draft on my local tv lineup.who and when ??? |
| 5. By: rocketdawg31 on 06-07-2010 14:01:02 Ooooooh, good point,John McD. I should've thought of that...I've been on subscriber terms (along with seems like most of us here) that I didn't even think to protect exclusivity. Sorry, fellas. Won't happen again. |
| 6. By: Chris Crawford on 06-07-2010 14:12:57 Ding Ding Ding. Not a big deal, you didn't do it on purpose, it was out of protection of you guys. |
| 7. By: JohnMcD on 06-07-2010 14:20:16 No worries rocketdawg just think it is fair for Jason and Chris for the hard work they do, as well as the subscribers like myself. Safecochatter: I think the draft is on MLB network, but you can always watchnit live at MLB.com Chris: where are more rumors? I am itching to read something new |
| 8. By: Fireballer55 on 06-07-2010 14:20:53 Does anyone know how much power projection he has? I would love to grab someone who slips out of fear of going to college! Better talent! |
| 9. By: baseballman on 06-07-2010 14:24:58 i was wonderin the same thing fireballer. JAC and chris, you guys know what his power numbers could be like? I just hope we go after the absolute best player at 43 and sign him no matter what. we need talent! |
| 10. By: rocketdawg31 on 06-07-2010 14:32:03 Clearly, the Blue Monster hasn't kicked in for me yet! That post #5 was supposed to read "I've been on subscriber terms for a long time".... |
| 11. By: JohnMcD on 06-07-2010 14:50:27 What numbers are the ms top picks? 43, 67 and....can't remember |
| 12. By: Chris Crawford on 06-07-2010 14:51:42 The player in question has the potential to hit for power, but it's not a tool yet. Unless he's a pitcher! IS HE A PITCHER??? No, he's not a pitcher, I've spilled the beans. |
| 13. By: rocketdawg31 on 06-07-2010 15:06:56 JohnMcD....it goes 43, 67, 99...and then 131, 163, 195 I imagine...but I know we have #99. |
| 14. By: Chris Crawford on 06-07-2010 15:15:22 Correct. 43 today, 67 and 99 later. |
| 15. By: Fireballer55 on 06-07-2010 15:17:11 What type of power though? 20hr or 50hr big difference? Im hoping for a player that could reach 35...need one sometime in the next decade! |
| 16. By: Chris Crawford on 06-07-2010 15:24:07 his power right now is probably 40 to 45 with the potential to be 50 to 55. That's based on video footage though -- Jason will have a much more detailed scouting report if/when he's taken. |
| 17. By: jd7979 on 06-07-2010 15:31:00 Chris, Can we expect another update before the draft starts? I'm sure you guys are swamped but I was just curious. Thanks |
| 18. By: bcsimons on 06-07-2010 15:36:00 Any chance the M's take a chance on Austin Wilson? |
| 19. By: baseballman on 06-07-2010 15:38:50 55 for the position he plays would be awesome |
| 20. By: Jason A. Churchill on 06-07-2010 15:40:33 Just so you guys know, I will not be updating other clubs' rumors and things this year unless it directly impacts the Mariners. As I just tweeted, I will update the mock draft for picks 33-43 before the draft starts, and as targets get taken off the board, will add in any news, notes and rumors for subscribers as I get them regarding remaining M's targets, or potential targets. |
| 21. By: Willmore on 06-07-2010 16:08:03 Jason, is there any player that could drop to the Mariners that you could get even slightly excited about? At 43 it seems like a barren desert out there. |
| 22. By: JonathanAicardi on 06-07-2010 16:33:58 The player sounds like a solid way to go for me. |
| 23. By: Jason A. Churchill on 06-07-2010 16:59:07 A lot of you guys are being unrealistic about this. No team is finding a No. 3 or 4 hitter in the sandwich round. It's just not happening. Get over it. There is no quick fix to the M's ridiculously horrible offense. |
| 24. By: Edman on 06-07-2010 17:09:54 I agree, Jason. Even if you had a mid-first round pick, it's going to be hard to get an impact player. I think the guy you mentioned that they're looking at is probably the best you can expect. Some like a James Jones who profiles well, physically, has a good overall set of skills. A high school kid who's not fully developed yet, might be a decent gamble. But, it's probably going to be four years until he's able to help. I watched a video of said kid, and he's got a decent swing, but looks to be more of a gap hitter, then pure power. |
| 25. By: Slurve on 06-07-2010 17:10:42 I like the draft it gives people a chance to dream. I like following draftees and prospects to see if they can make it to the bigs or not. Is his swing long? Can he fix his mechanics? Will he discover an outpitch? Can he make it? It's fun to follow and it's very easy for people to dream big. |
| 26. By: Jason A. Churchill on 06-07-2010 17:21:22 Edman, One thing to remember is that these kids that are 6 feet and 180 pounds now are going to be 6-1 or 6-2 and 200 pounds in four years. Strength isn't typically going to be a big problem for guys like that. I wouldn't think the same of a smaller guy at 5-9, 5-10, because the limits are different. |
| 27. By: Chris Crawford on 06-07-2010 17:22:26 New update. Good one. |
| 28. By: Chris Crawford on 06-07-2010 17:23:15 Also going to use this spot to plug me. Follow me on twitter! www.twitter.com/chriscrawfordPI |
| 29. By: Slurve on 06-07-2010 17:24:02 My personal favourite draftee this year is Jordan Swagerty mainly due to his last name though. |
| 30. By: baseballman on 06-07-2010 17:26:35 that is a good one chris |
| 31. By: Jason A. Churchill on 06-07-2010 17:33:58 I hear Swagerty is going to pass on pro ball and take a gig in the ballet in San Fran. FTW. |
| 32. By: JohnMcD on 06-07-2010 17:42:01 I am now following Chris Crawford. Yea! |
| 33. By: Chris Crawford on 06-07-2010 18:46:17 Yes! Thanks for the follow, I'm pimping myself again: www.twitter.com/chriscrawfordPI. Followers get to hear funny jokes about Pomeranz haircut. |
| 34. By: Chris Crawford on 06-07-2010 18:51:46 Deshields jr. picked, cannot confirm if he is traded for pedro martinez, jr. |
| 35. By: JohnMcD on 06-07-2010 18:53:05 Yea what was with that. I think thats a southern thing. I swear they all have that type of cut. What do you think of the Dbacks pick? Was it a reach? |
| 36. By: rocketdawg31 on 06-07-2010 18:56:54 Bud Selig always looks like he just swallowed a 16-ouncer of lemon juice. Quick thought on DeShields,Jr....thicker legs and butt than what his old man had. More power potential? Cameron Bedrosian looks like a carbon copy of his dad, Steve. |
| 37. By: Chris Crawford on 06-07-2010 19:00:23 John, I think it was a reach, but it wasn't an awful reach. Colon is an awful reach. |
| 38. By: shemberry on 06-07-2010 19:03:39 Any names linked to the last update that the M's hope fall to them? |
| 39. By: Chris Crawford on 06-07-2010 19:06:27 Whitson is the best pick of the first, IMO...that wasn't obvious anyway. |
| 40. By: Chris Crawford on 06-07-2010 19:11:09 Grandal was kinda obvious, but a great pick. |
| 41. By: JohnMcD on 06-07-2010 19:19:08 Why wont the latest update work? Plus do the stros have a chance at Josh Sale or do you see the rangers taking him |
| 42. By: JohnMcD on 06-07-2010 19:27:33 Skole didnt even play all year and Rangers take him? Risky... |
| 43. By: rocketdawg31 on 06-07-2010 19:27:34 Now if we wanna talk REACH with a capital "R", I think the Rangers just pulled one... |
| 44. By: masonb on 06-07-2010 19:38:40 Gotta love how Selig botches up simple names like Sale, haha |
| 45. By: Chris Crawford on 06-07-2010 19:39:30 Some awesome awesome info on the best available and what could happen for Seattle. You are definitely missing out if you're not subscribing. |
| 46. By: JohnMcD on 06-07-2010 19:39:54 Well Tampa answered my question |
| 47. By: JohnMcD on 06-07-2010 19:43:44 Wow excellent up date. I was thinking of the same thing about Sales name |
| 48. By: rocketdawg31 on 06-07-2010 19:51:27 Oh please, oh please, capitalize on this, Mariners. Since Loux was taken, this draft has largely NOT gone how I thought it would... |
| 49. By: rocketdawg31 on 06-07-2010 20:10:59 The Texas Rangers collect their 37th catcher of the future in Kellin Deglan. Actually, it's not a bad pick... |
| 50. By: Blowgun7 on 06-07-2010 20:18:23 Wonder how far Cox will fall. Would love to have him. |
| 51. By: JohnMcD on 06-07-2010 20:18:25 why hasnt Zach Cox been picked? |
| 52. By: baseballman on 06-07-2010 20:19:10 any chance cox actually makes it us? how much is he asking for? |
| 53. By: Blowgun7 on 06-07-2010 20:19:24 I think Cox wants a big payday. If he somehow is still there when we pick, I hope we give him that big payday. |
| 54. By: JohnMcD on 06-07-2010 20:19:57 Just read on twitter cox going to cards |
| 55. By: Chris Crawford on 06-07-2010 20:29:36 We're getting close! |
| 56. By: Blowgun7 on 06-07-2010 20:30:41 Justin O'Connor is my favorite position guy currently left on the board. |
| 57. By: rjfrik on 06-07-2010 20:31:44 Any chance Castellanos, O'Connor, Brentz or Wilson lasts. All big bats and all sliding down the draft. I'll pray!!! |
| 58. By: Slack on 06-07-2010 20:32:07 What do you guys make of the Philadelphia pick? |
| 59. By: JohnMcD on 06-07-2010 20:34:02 What's the deal with the giants pick? Injury prone or head case |
| 60. By: Slack on 06-07-2010 20:37:47 A bold pick by the Dodgers! It will be interesting to see if they can sign him. |
| 61. By: Chris Crawford on 06-07-2010 20:40:01 Philly pick = risk. Giants pick =leadoff hitters should have a hit tool and walk Dodgers pick =perplexing because of their budget |
| 62. By: Blowgun7 on 06-07-2010 20:42:39 So many good talents are falling. But Im not going to get excited. M's could very well make a pick like the Cubs or Dodgers just did. |
| 63. By: Chris Crawford on 06-07-2010 20:46:53 I am willing to guarantee it wont be Cubs bad. The dodgers pick wasn't bad per talent, it was bad because of their situation. Sign him and it's a fine pick. But chicago's pick was....wacky? |
| 64. By: rjfrik on 06-07-2010 20:53:04 Damn. There goes O'Connor. That is the guy I was praying for. |
| 65. By: rjfrik on 06-07-2010 20:54:18 Hoping for Brentz, Castellanos and Wilson now. |
| 66. By: JohnMcD on 06-07-2010 20:54:34 Ya still talent Though |
| 67. By: Blowgun7 on 06-07-2010 21:09:28 I want Wilson. Some good prep arms still out there as well. |
| 68. By: JohnMcD on 06-07-2010 21:10:01 Ms are getting someone good |
| 69. By: Slack on 06-07-2010 21:10:18 The talent just keeps falling! I want A.J Cole. |
| 70. By: rjfrik on 06-07-2010 21:11:54 Dang it. I really wanted Brentz. There is a big power hitter that slid to the comp round somehow. Ugh. |
| 71. By: JohnMcD on 06-07-2010 21:12:25 Rj all your guys are getting taken |
| 72. By: rjfrik on 06-07-2010 21:13:37 Castellanos, Wilson, Cole in that order for me. |
| 73. By: JohnMcD on 06-07-2010 21:14:23 4 more picks |
| 74. By: slick on 06-07-2010 21:15:15 Littlewood or Joc Pederson availble at 67? |
| 75. By: Slack on 06-07-2010 21:15:51 Ranaudo to the Red Sox. No surprise there. |
| 76. By: rjfrik on 06-07-2010 21:16:45 I know John. But it looks like one of the three above will be there when the M's pick. Here's to hoping the M's grab a top 25 talent and not an unheard of guy or a reach like Baron of last year. Come on Front Office!!!!! Give Us A Big Bat!!!! |
| 77. By: Blowgun7 on 06-07-2010 21:16:55 I love how we were happy with Littlewood this morning. Right now, we'd all be pissed if he's the pick. |
| 78. By: rocketdawg31 on 06-07-2010 21:18:03 Slick, I'll bet money right now Pederson's available at #67, but Littlewood won't be. I never thought we might come this close to having a shot at Castellanos... |
| 79. By: rjfrik on 06-07-2010 21:18:06 I like what the Angels are doing the last couple of years. A LOT of Athletes. |
| 80. By: Slack on 06-07-2010 21:18:13 By the way, what do we know about Noah Syndergaard? |
| 81. By: JohnMcD on 06-07-2010 21:18:31 Totally agree RJ |
| 82. By: rjfrik on 06-07-2010 21:19:44 I know Blow but with the talent that is on the board you have to grab the best value here. One more pick. Lets hope the Rays don't grab Castellanos. He is the guy I want!! Come on M's |
| 83. By: JohnMcD on 06-07-2010 21:20:20 Alright let's go Ms Front Office |
| 84. By: JohnMcD on 06-07-2010 21:22:01 Rays take 2 Wa guys |
| 85. By: rjfrik on 06-07-2010 21:22:30 Come on grab Nick. Our 3rd Baseman of the future!!! |
| 86. By: rjfrik on 06-07-2010 21:23:01 A pitcher???!!! Ugh. |
| 87. By: PositivePaul on 06-07-2010 21:23:14 HERE WE GO!!!!! EXCITING!!! OH THE EXCITEMENNNNTT!!! |
| 88. By: DAMellen on 06-07-2010 21:24:07 Taijuan? |
| 89. By: JonathanAicardi on 06-07-2010 21:24:30 Did they just pass on Allie to draft a guy named Taijuan? |
| 90. By: rjfrik on 06-07-2010 21:24:44 Of course Nick goes the pick after. Why a pitcher. I just don't get it. Grab Castellanos and sign him. We have the money!! |
| 91. By: JohnMcD on 06-07-2010 21:25:06 Would of like castellanos |
| 92. By: rocketdawg31 on 06-07-2010 21:25:46 I....am not sure what I think about this. I'm deferring to Jason's opinion on this one. |
| 93. By: Blowgun7 on 06-07-2010 21:26:04 Knew they would screw that up. |
| 94. By: Slack on 06-07-2010 21:26:28 I'm not sure what to think either. I've heard of Taijuan Walker. I think he must have come on strong, late but better talents were available. |
| 95. By: baseballman on 06-07-2010 21:26:58 hmmm, JAC you got anything on walker? |
| 96. By: JohnMcD on 06-07-2010 21:27:09 Jac and Chris what do you think of our pick? |
| 97. By: Chris Crawford on 06-07-2010 21:29:03 thoughts on walker are posted for subscribers. |
| 98. By: Blowgun7 on 06-07-2010 21:29:32 This is a terrible pick and at best won't help us for many years. Don't know the rationale for passing on an Allie or Workman. Not to mention a Jackson or Castellanos |
| 99. By: baseballman on 06-07-2010 21:29:42 OK, good news then JAC. The kid just looks like a pitcher, which is always good, haha. thanks for that little write-up though, feelin more comfortable with it |
| 100. By: Slack on 06-07-2010 21:29:42 Castellanos would have been great. If you are talking pitchers, why not Allie or Cole? |
| 101. By: baseballman on 06-07-2010 21:31:26 blowgun=bavasi? it wont help us for years? ya, we shoulda just drafted a reliever that we could call up right now cuz we're so close...not |
| 102. By: Adam T on 06-07-2010 21:31:31 Walker is not on Law's Top 100, for the record. I guess we have to defer to Zduriencik and Co. here, but some bigger names remain on the board. |
| 103. By: rjfrik on 06-07-2010 21:33:19 I just don't know what to think about JZ drafting any more. You really couldn't screw up Ackley pick last year, it was a free-be and I liked the Franklin pick. I hated the Baron pick, and liked the Poythress, was so so on the Seager pick and loved the Jones picks. Now this year. I just don't know what to think of the Walker pick. With Robles, Pineda, Hensley and the young SP's we have in the bigs right now, I just don't see an immediate need for a SP. With the worst offense in the Bigs and no immediate help I would think they would go grab an offensive player with their first pick, especially when the best H.S. 3b man falls into their laps, a guy who some had going as high as number 10. I guy with big power. I guy who killed the All-American game. A guy I would of loved to see in an M's uni. Lets hope Walker turns out great! |
| 104. By: Adam T on 06-07-2010 21:34:15 NEVER. PICK. FOR. NEED. |
| 105. By: Blowgun7 on 06-07-2010 21:40:20 Bottomline, there were top tier prep bats available. There were better prep arms available, who have a higher chance at success and a faster timetable. I don't like anything I've read about this kid. He has a good fastball and little else right now. Could have easily been had with their next pick. Can't believe they passed on Castellanos. |
| 106. By: Adam T on 06-07-2010 21:41:15 Reading Law's report makes me wonder if Walker would have been available in the second round... |
| 107. By: Blowgun7 on 06-07-2010 21:41:36 BTW, Jack has little success in regards to drafting pitchers. Another reason I would have preferred they went bat, because they know exactly what they are doing in that area. |
| 108. By: rocketdawg31 on 06-07-2010 21:42:33 Post #102: Yeah, a whole slew of them. The first 50 picks are loaded with at least seven guys I've never heard of. I'm taking heart in this, though....perhaps Littlewood DOES make it to #67, or an even greater talent. The whole draft has been a great big Slip 'N Slide... But it'd sure be nice to see some "makes-sense-in-a-shorter-timeframe" moves from Jack when they're OUT there. Maybe I'm just really underestimating this choice. The kid DOES look like the way you'd draw a prep pitching prospect. |
| 109. By: Chris Crawford on 06-07-2010 21:43:21 Guys...Castenallos is very good. Castenallos would have been an impossible sign. He's a hard commit to UM and woulda blown the budget for the year. They have 3 more high picks. They did fine today. |
| 110. By: baseballman on 06-07-2010 21:43:55 bottomline, you're giving a kneejerk reaction on somethin that we all know very little about... you have no clue what the SCOUTS saw/see in him and they have a lot more resources than whatever you read blwogun |
| 111. By: Adam T on 06-07-2010 21:44:56 What I've read in the last 10 minutes (granted, it's not a ton) calls him a project. It just seems like he's the kind of kid who you could get later on. Oh well. I'm not too worked up about it. It looks like we might have good options in the next round. |
| 112. By: baseballman on 06-07-2010 21:45:02 thankyou 109, voice of reason |
| 113. By: southpaw360 on 06-07-2010 21:47:13 I actually really like the pick. Once this kid signs and concentrates on baseball not basketball I could see him taking off. I'll take a guy that is up to the mid 90's and a promising curve when he hasn't even focused on baseball yet. The sky could be the limit. Plus it sounds like he is very signable where that could free up money later on in the draft for other players that drop due to money demands. |
| 114. By: Blowgun7 on 06-07-2010 21:49:17 #110 Must have missed something. I thought a forum is a place where you can share your opinion. You are right, I know very little about this kid. That is why I rely on the folks who follow this stuff for a living and who have had experience in this area. According to them, there were clearly superior players on the board. I also would trust our scouts if they had a track record with prep arms or even drafting college arms successfully. But this has not been a good area for Jack and his scouts. I would be much more willing to trust them if they took an position player given their track record with those. |
| 115. By: slick on 06-07-2010 21:49:24 PnR scouting had him at around 80 all year remember we dont know what the price tags are on the others that were available. If the front office felt he was comparable to smelter (boras client)but thought they could get him for slot then they could go shopping in latter rounds. |
| 116. By: StandinPat on 06-07-2010 21:50:49 rj, so your synopsis of the draft picks are, loved, loved, hated, loved, so-so, loved, and now so-so....and that equals questioning the M's drafting? I don't get how this one pick would be a reason to throw your hands up. It sounds like the kid was grouped with similar talents, and who knows, maybe the scouting department something in the delivery they could tweak, or loved the frame, make-up, etc. |
| 117. By: Blowgun7 on 06-07-2010 21:50:50 #113 We thought the same thing last year after the Baron pick. That they would save some money and grab a kid later in the draft who dropped and pay him over slot. It never happend, so I doubt it happens this time around. We will see. |
| 118. By: baseballman on 06-07-2010 21:53:48 blowgun, you basically just said Jack Z should never ever draft a prep arm because of his supposed track record. thats ludicrous to say that. they will draft whomever they believe is the best player with sign-ability. they are not going to shy away from a player just him being a prep arm, nor should they. if they did, there would be a major problem |
| 119. By: Chris Crawford on 06-07-2010 21:56:04 117. Poythress doesn't get picked if they take someone other than Baron -- or someone like him. Poythress might be the 5th or 6th best prospect in the system now. This is not that bad of pick guys, they coulda done a lil better maybe -- but honestly, as a guy who was ready to break windows over Baron and Franklin (was sure wrong about him), I'm pretty pleased. |
| 120. By: Slack on 06-07-2010 21:57:22 I don't hate this pick. Walker could end up being a TOR starter. There is also time to get good players tomorrow. I would have taken Castellanos, Cole or Allie but I am not a scout. |
| 121. By: Blowgun7 on 06-07-2010 21:58:08 I didn't say he should never draft a prep arm. Just that I don't trust that the prep arms he drafts (especially one who didn't show well this spring and isn't considered one of the top guys) are going to pan out that well. He hasn't shown a strong ability to draft arms in the past. So when you are picking at #43 and you take a prep arm who is very raw and not rated all that high, I'm obviously going to be skeptical. |
| 122. By: Blowgun7 on 06-07-2010 22:02:47 Let me add that I still do not trust this organization as a whole. So while they can say this was the #1 player available when they picked I would venture to say that signability for Chuck and Howard always is a big factor. The fact this kid has no college commitment and probably didn't expect to be drafted before the 3rd round probably means he's going to sign easily and cheaply. |
| 123. By: Lailoken on 06-07-2010 22:05:21 The video over at mlb.com is a solid view. He looks plenty athletic at a legit 6'4 with a serious fastball. Has room to fill out too & add some more velocity. The curve did show some pretty good action but he obviously struggles with the release point (the video shows a few that get away from him). Unless my untrained eye deceives me the video must be a bit old cause those look like curves to me not the slider his scouting report says he turned to after he had so much trouble with his curve at the beginning of his senior year. Definitely a projectable prep arm. I like it. If we sign DePaula then those two make me feel a lot better about potential TOR depth in the system. |
| 124. By: rjfrik on 06-07-2010 22:06:44 The reason I'm so so on the pick is because everything I have read on the guy is he is a project with a fastball that goes 90-94. A curveball that took a big step back this year after he started concentrating on Baseball (which is weird IMO), a slider that is not good and changeup that is awful. The video I watched makes me think he could be a decent pitcher in the future. It's a gamble, like post picks in the draft. I would of much rather drafted a top 15 pick that slid and PAID him to join our club. This is the part of the draft I don't get. If I was the owner and big talent fell to me I would pay for the talent. I would much rather pay for a young talent that could become the next Evan Longoria then pay for a MLBer like Sweeney, Griffey, Snell, Hall, Kothcman, ect. This is why teams like the Rays have all this young talent to plug and play, why the Redsox and Yankees and Angels draft the way they do. I wold like to implement that aspect to the M's draft. We aren't the Pirates or Royals, we have money. Spend it! It's hard to get FA to come here, so we need to spend that money on draft picks in my opinion. |
| 125. By: rocketdawg31 on 06-07-2010 23:06:10 Yeah, I've been chewing this over in my head. I know that from previous trades, we kind of sacrificed a lot of our higher-ceiling talent among A-ball hurlers (Lorin,Adcock, Pribanic,Aumont,Ramirez) in the last calendar year. I certainly couldn't argue for the idea we have TOO MANY premium young arms, and a guy like Walker just doesn't fit. If there's a chance (and doing the math as Jason laid out, it sure looks like there will be) to land higher-grade talent at #67 and #99 than what we all thought there would be, then this is just a high-signability guy with high upside. No blood, no foul. This kid doesn't seem to have academics and college in his future plans, so it's a "sign" we SHOULD get. I'm a lot happier now. |
| 126. By: Edman on 06-07-2010 23:56:24 I just love how some can manage to throw Lincoln and Armstrong into their line of reasoning. You did notice that the M's spent a lot of money on draft picks last season? I didn't see that they forced Jack to draft someone who'd cost less. Will they be right or wrong about Walker? Who knows, since even first round draft picks don't always work out? Could similar things have been said about Chris Tillman before he was drafted? |
Haven't created a Prospect Insider account yet? Sign up!
|
|
 |
|
|
| Copyright 2010 Prospect Insider | Created by AQ Central Prospect Insider is optimized for Mozilla Firefox and Google Chrome |