The first day of the amateur draft started tonight, and I was on the refresh and expansion of the front to the bottom that I could see on the board. Please read those Bourbos and explore the Tool Level section to get a better idea of what I think about the players. The goal of draft rankings is to evaluate and rank as many players as possible so that they have enough talent to jump into the main part of the Pro Prospect Prospect list to port it to the professional side of the board as soon as possible after the selection. Players who really come for it tend to stand out in the fourth and fifth rounds of the draft, as the bonus slots are priced under $500,000. The overslotted exception is the obvious exception. By the seventh round, we were mostly talking about organizations that were selected to bring together the team’s reward pool puzzles, or players who needed significant development to be truly considered prospects. This usually means ranking about 150 players, and this year’s courses are correct in that range. Now, I have 152 guys there.
It’s a pretty average draft course, about the number of players who usually make the top 100 list (usually six, given or got, eight this year). Its number of participants in high school positions is above average, but the characteristics of participants in college positions are below average. Usually, my 45 FV level has been through almost the end of the first round, and this year it has had a sensation of 33 players. More than 40 FV layers are usually Peters in the middle of the second round, but this year’s group runs in the second round due to a lot of interesting high school students. These are exciting development players, but have no obvious impact on prospects. Readers can kind of get the idea of the value of a draft pick in the area where the 45 FV tier transitions into the 40+ tier, because we just saw a one-for-one, big-leaguer-for-draft-pick trade when the Orioles dealt a good middle reliever (Bryan Baker) to the Rays for the 37th overall pick, right around where I think there’s a drop-off into the next tier of talent. When we talk about baseball prospects and the draft capital, close is value.
Readers should carefully read the reconnaissance reports and tool levels for every 45 fv player. Those players will rank at the top of the team’s prospects in the selection team. Below this, unless you are reading 20,000 words, I have a player cluster of chefs that I think you should check:
High school, high school student based on projection
This is the first level of the player from No. 34 to No. 45. High school students in this range usually have a current flaw that keeps them away from the first round of rankings, but large, projectable athletes who can not only abandon these issues, but also advance to higher game levels by physically maturing and developing. It is expected that the teams of these players will improve, or that their player developers can help them implement new gear, which could be on these guys in the first round. Gavin Fien and Daniel Pierce fit into this category. Compared to others, I had similar players in the 50s (Mason Ligenza, Alec Blair, Dean Moss, Michael Oliveto).
Start/Relief Online College Pitcher
Fangraphs readers have no doubt that Pro Teams’ development team often makes college pitchers better. College Weapons I think the 48-68 range already has an exciting foundation and is most mature. Some of them lost their representation due to injuries (such as AJ Russell), or were multi-sport athletes (such as Riley Quick) or transfers (such as Anthony Eyanson), or spent most of their colleges in bullpens (such as Mason Morris). I tend to see aspects of potential skill sets that are shrouded or underdeveloped for some reason as positive factors. If two pitchers look exactly the same, only one started at a university for three years and the other was a third-level guy who had never been exposed to tools of modern development, I want a second person. These pitchers have something similar to them.
Weird college outfielder
The three midfield prospects rank first. 82-84 (Korbyn Dickerson, Indiana, James Quinn-Irons, and Southern Jake Cook Miss of George Mason) all have rare tools that can provide college players with huge tools that can have huge ceilings if they clear some development barriers. Dickson has the added strength and speed, but his swing sometimes looks long and looks impossible. This is purely a visually recognizable problem, and it requires a level of experience (mostly making similar batsmen mistakes and learning from them) to identify. Cook is a conversion pitcher and probably the fastest player in the draft. Quinn-Irons, a 6-foot-5 elementary batsman with some of the best raw power in the draft, posted contact rates even with his swing being messy.
At the top guy
I think Liam Doyle and Ethan Holliday are weird enough to separate themselves from the rest of the people. I wrote about my concerns about Holliday’s swing and show performance, but they still exist. Druw Jones had a similar warning flag when he was in high school, but he didn’t have this physical level and bat speed. My risks associated with Holliday’s swing and performance (read more on the report) are the reasons why he didn’t rank first, but he’s too talented to be stuffed.
I will continue to do the simulation work so that I can post a little before the first round begins. As always, I will be in the first round of chat, where can I chat.
