Draft

Now that the Milb draft is over....How do you think you did? Feelings on other teams draft picks?

I would have grabbed Jorge Lopez with one of my last three choices if you hadn't nabbed him.

I have no idea, but my 2 favorite moves were team bud somehow getting the 4th pick and using it well and Jake with Josh bell.

I'm a little pissed at Power Plant for taking Panik 2 spots before I'd figured on taking him...GRRRR.
Have seen him play a dozen times for Salem/Keizer and was undoubtedly the best player on the field every time. Very advanced approach as a hitter. Smooth up the middle on defense.

Paxton at 14 was nice.. and the Hultzen swoop

Story, Mahtook, and Panik in round 2

lots of others. really fun draft .. can't tell how i did overall

I still think there are some guys not taken from the 2011 draft class that will make MLB rosters this season either out of spring training or called up in Sept.

Picks I really liked:
Yoenis Cespedes
Paxton (Fell WAY too far)
Daniel Norris
Leonys Martin (Mid-Season 2011 he might have been a top 5 pick)
Mikie Mahtook (Guy just seems underrated and he killed it in AFL)
Robbie Grossman (Probably should have gone 10-12 picks higher)

Picks I didn't like:
George Springer (Solid upside but with more proven guys on board like Martin...)
Jermaine Mitchell (Umm isn't the guy like 27?)
Ronald Guzman (Total lottery ticket)
Austin Hedges (Defensive first, no bat catcher with no pro record)
Kevin Matthews (Small lefty, and a couple solid lefties were still on board)

Couldn't believe Paxton fell to me that far.
Leonys Martin what a steal in the second round!
Elier Hernandez has uber potential, and land the guy in the middle of 3rd round..nice pick!
Agree that Springer is getting too much love..
Guzman could pay off...

I thought Paxton fell too far as well.

Guerrerri was an excellent pick at 20, I thought hard about him, but the Rays move their pitchers up at a crawling pace, was probably the biggest reason I didn't pick him.

Mendez at 50 was also a nice pick as well.

The King Maker wrote:

I thought Paxton fell too far as well.

Guerrerri was an excellent pick at 20, I thought hard about him, but the Rays move their pitchers up at a crawling pace, was probably the biggest reason I didn't pick him.

Mendez at 50 was also a nice pick as well.

I have to admit - I contemplated Paxton and decided to grab Jungmann. Did I make a mistake?

I too thought he should have gone higher at first, but looking at the draft, I'm not exactly sure where he could have gone. This reminds me of trade offers by fans on WFAN - they want guy X, but don't want to give someone up. I don't see who or where there was an outright BAD pick above him that he no question should have replaced. Again, I know hard one to answer b/c nobody wants to offend anyone (and this could devolve into an argument from whoever you pinpoint). But, I'd be interested to hear which guys he should have undoubtably replaced (as opposed to the general - he's really good and it seems he SHOULD have gone higher).

I am far from the expert here, so this is an honest question. A few folks have said the same thing, so I'm interested to learn (if someone's willing to teach). I'd have to assume Jungmann is one of them (which obviously I'm now 2nd guessing).

Thanks.

jamcam13 wrote:

The King Maker wrote:

I thought Paxton fell too far as well.

Guerrerri was an excellent pick at 20, I thought hard about him, but the Rays move their pitchers up at a crawling pace, was probably the biggest reason I didn't pick him.

Mendez at 50 was also a nice pick as well.

I have to admit - I contemplated Paxton and decided to grab Jungmann. Did I make a mistake?

I too thought he should have gone higher at first, but looking at the draft, I'm not exactly sure where he could have gone. This reminds me of trade offers by fans on WFAN - they want guy X, but don't want to give someone up. I don't see who or where there was an outright BAD pick above him that he no question should have replaced. Again, I know hard one to answer b/c nobody wants to offend anyone (and this could devolve into an argument from whoever you pinpoint). But, I'd be interested to hear which guys he should have undoubtably replaced (as opposed to the general - he's really good and it seems he SHOULD have gone higher).

I am far from the expert here, so this is an honest question. A few folks have said the same thing, so I'm interested to learn (if someone's willing to teach). I'd have to assume Jungmann is one of them (which obviously I'm now 2nd guessing).

Thanks.

With respect to how every one picks their teams, and acknowledging that everyone has a different plan for their team, I'll see if I can answer this. Obviously I've been wrong many times before, so just take it as my opinion.


The 7 are fine, and it went pretty much as I expected it (with a few variations in which player went where, but my top 7 went in the top 7). I would've taken Paxton over everyone else. The proximity to the majors (even for a good HS prospect, you're waiting 3 years to get a return on your investment), upside (excellent stuff for Paxton), team (Seattle is an excellent team for a pitcher to come up through, and with Montero, Smoak, Ackley, their offense in the future shouldn't be as anemic as in past years), home park (again, Seattle) all match up for Paxton. Even opportunity matches up.

To answer your question more directly, Jungman is a fine real life pitcher, but his value diminishes in fantasy. He's not a high K guy, more of a weak contact pitcher. He'll be good, and he'll move fast, but he doesn't have fantasy ace upside. His fastball isn't overpowering, and he doesn't have one plus plus pitch. His calling card is control and 3 good pitches. But without a dominant fastball, as he moves through pro ball, I expect him to have lower K rates. So he's going to be more of a contact guy, and he'll be a good contact guy, but not be a top notch ace. In essence, I would've taken Paxton over him, mainly because he is closer to the majors, already proven in the minors, has higher upside, and is in a good situation with his surroundings.

Now for all I know, Jungman could increase velocity in pro ball with better coaching (although unlikely, since Texas is a major program with very good coaches) or Paxton could fall by the wayside with control issues. From your standpoint, I would've taken Paxton, although Jungman isn't that bad at all.

On others, it's a bit harder to judge, because I'm not sure what their needs are. Maybe someone wanted an infield prospect because their infield was old, so it might not be about pure talent. I'm just basing it on my opinion as who I thought was the best player available after the top 7.

If I had kept my pick at 9, I would have likely gone with Norris over Paxton just because I usually take guys with the high ceiling over the high floor. As far as who Paxton pitches for currently, there is no guarantee he stays in Seattle, the bigger key would be is he a flyball or groundball pitcher (currently has a good GO/FO ratio) and does he have a solid defense behind him.

The King Maker wrote:

With respect to how every one picks their teams, and acknowledging that everyone has a different plan for their team, I'll see if I can answer this. Obviously I've been wrong many times before, so just take it as my opinion.


The 7 are fine, and it went pretty much as I expected it (with a few variations in which player went where, but my top 7 went in the top 7). I would've taken Paxton over everyone else. The proximity to the majors (even for a good HS prospect, you're waiting 3 years to get a return on your investment), upside (excellent stuff for Paxton), team (Seattle is an excellent team for a pitcher to come up through, and with Montero, Smoak, Ackley, their offense in the future shouldn't be as anemic as in past years), home park (again, Seattle) all match up for Paxton. Even opportunity matches up.

To answer your question more directly, Jungman is a fine real life pitcher, but his value diminishes in fantasy. He's not a high K guy, more of a weak contact pitcher. He'll be good, and he'll move fast, but he doesn't have fantasy ace upside. His fastball isn't overpowering, and he doesn't have one plus plus pitch. His calling card is control and 3 good pitches. But without a dominant fastball, as he moves through pro ball, I expect him to have lower K rates. So he's going to be more of a contact guy, and he'll be a good contact guy, but not be a top notch ace. In essence, I would've taken Paxton over him, mainly because he is closer to the majors, already proven in the minors, has higher upside, and is in a good situation with his surroundings.

Now for all I know, Jungman could increase velocity in pro ball with better coaching (although unlikely, since Texas is a major program with very good coaches) or Paxton could fall by the wayside with control issues. From your standpoint, I would've taken Paxton, although Jungman isn't that bad at all.

On others, it's a bit harder to judge, because I'm not sure what their needs are. Maybe someone wanted an infield prospect because their infield was old, so it might not be about pure talent. I'm just basing it on my opinion as who I thought was the best player available after the top 7.

Yeah. You're probably right. How it eventually turns out is a bit beside the point. It's near impossible to predict the ways it could go. But, good points. Thanks. To be honest, I can't remember why I finally went for Jungmann. I actually think it might have been age and progression (Jungmann is a year younger, and I don't think much further away from the majors. And I don't see AA as much above college at this point - though Paxton's numbers are eye popping. But, that final thing may be where I went wrong). I think I also liked the reports that indicated he didn't overuse his fastball. It's not that he needs to pick up a tick (though that would be helpful). But, he may need to pitch differently. And it seems it's easier to unleash your fastball than it is to learn how to pitch (ie. will Paxton be blowing away Major Leaguers like he did A and AA'ers).

So, maybe I do remember why I chose him. And, you're probably right, and I'm probably wrong. But great insight. Thanks.

Knuckleball wrote:

If I had kept my pick at 9, I would have likely gone with Norris over Paxton just because I usually take guys with the high ceiling over the high floor. As far as who Paxton pitches for currently, there is no guarantee he stays in Seattle, the bigger key would be is he a flyball or groundball pitcher (currently has a good GO/FO ratio) and does he have a solid defense behind him.

REally Norris over Paxton? The ballpark alone makes me want to shy away from Norris..

aaronfoster13 wrote:

Knuckleball wrote:

If I had kept my pick at 9, I would have likely gone with Norris over Paxton just because I usually take guys with the high ceiling over the high floor. As far as who Paxton pitches for currently, there is no guarantee he stays in Seattle, the bigger key would be is he a flyball or groundball pitcher (currently has a good GO/FO ratio) and does he have a solid defense behind him.

REally Norris over Paxton? The ballpark alone makes me want to shy away from Norris..

Yes, because there is no guarantee that Norris will spend 15 years in Toronto or that Paxton will spend a decade in Seattle if all you are going to do is base it on park factors. Because like I said, I look at ceilings and I think Norris can be a 1/2 where Paxton is more of a 2/3 so waiting another year or so and ending up on a better team that can actually get you wins and play defense is better than just relying on a park.

in response to Jam, its REALLY hard to tell what the hell is gonna happen. so i agree with him. i think its the biggest factor going on.. in our 2009 draft, Starlin Castro went in the 5th round, while most of the 1st rd didn't pan out... i don't think this draft will be exactly like that.. but i'm sure it'll look nutty 2 years from now