Draft Pick Discussion, Rounds 1-5

[southpaw121505]

Once again I think Jungmann will be a good pitcher but basing it off his stats is dumb.

It's dumb to think a pitcher will be good because he has been good in the past?

[TheCrew07]

I wouldn't say it's dumb, but it's like getting excited about college players who blown away the competition in Helena.

 

Another comparison would be taking a college QBs' stats and saying he'll be a good pro QB because he succeeded in college, if it were that simple a whole lot of GMs in football and SDs in baseball would look a whole lot smarter.

[paul253]

I'm hoping for Esposito or Westlake in the Second round! Come on hitters!

[brewerguy71]

It's dumb to think a pitcher will be good because he has been good in the past?

Good in college and projectibility to become a major leage player are two separate planets. Young Geezy hits the nail on the head.

 

Safe picks yet unspectacular. I would have rather had about 3 or 4 other players than Jungmann and Bradley. Barnes, Gray, Swihart.. Barnes and Gray have higher ceilings with higher reward with not really all the much risk.

 

[YoungGeezy]

To an extent yes. If you look at a stat like ERA, that is not 100% on the pitcher but how good is fielders are, how lucky or unlucky they are (BABIP and LOB% above or below norm). The competition. Jungmann played against good competition so can't knock him there but Arnett pitched great, had and awesome ERA but was is the Big 10. It is a good start point but can't be the means all to rating a pitcher. If it was there is zero chance that Bauer would have not been consenses #1 pick. Jungmann would have been right on his heals. Cole's stats don't absolutely knock you over for worship but he has the stuff that COULD produce elite stat lines. There are way to many factors involved. Do do stats such as ERA tell you mechanics? No. Do they tell you velocity? No. Do they tell you secondary pitches. No. Do they tell you movement? No. They are just a portition of the overall scouting process. So yes, say "hey that Taylor Jungmann was very effective, really nice stat line." Then ask yourself how many more hits and runs are saved because he has one of the best defensive SS's in all of college baseball that other pitchers may not have. Not every pitcher is blessed with the caliber defenders they Texas has (if you ever watch them, they are usually very sound defensively). I'm just using that as an example and not to take away from what Jungmann accomplished but to demostrate why stats are not the end be all.

 

Jungmann's college stats will not make him a great prospect but his fastball command and how how much he can improve is slider, change-up, and curveball which all need work. Not to forget his mechanics may need to be twecked a bit. Those are what will make or break him. College success and stats can only carry you so far.

[FVBrewerFan]

Add me to the list of guys who don't follow the draft prospects, but very interested in the Brewers picks. Just no time to track draft prospects, barely enough time to stay on top of prospects in the minors. With that said, I've always believed in drafting as many college pitchers as possible. HS pitchers always seemed like more of a gamble.

 

Now I'm not so sure. Maybe the answer is drafting the best sticks you can find in the 1st 1-5 rounds or so. Drafting pitchers in general tends to be a crap shoot, whether they're HS or college. So why not continue drafting the Weeks, Braun, Laporta, Lawrie types? Build your organization with plenty of bats, some you will use, others can be traded for pitching. Seems to e working at the moment? Just by shear numbers you'll hit on a couple guys in the middle rounds that will eventually be in the rotation, trade for a couple more, then have a Wolf type for your #4 or #5 starter. Isn't it true that history shows a lower flame-out rate for position players? So if you can draft and produce more MLB level players, that should translate into a better MLB roster right?

 

As far as these picks go, how would you compare Jungmann to Odorizi or Thornburg? If I remember right, Thornburg wasn't seen as a real high ceiling guy (and he still may not be.) But I have seen him pitch several times, and while he may not have filthy, nasty stuff he does pitch like he has complete control over the game. That's what I look for in a starting pitcher.

[YoungGeezy]

Add me to the list of guys who don't follow the draft prospects, but very interested in the Brewers picks. Just no time to track draft prospects, barely enough time to stay on top of prospects in the minors. With that said, I've always believed in drafting as many college pitchers as possible. HS pitchers always seemed like more of a gamble.

That is a myth, they are about equal. The major difference is that college pitchers are a little more maxed out and polished where as high school pitchers have higher ceilings but are harder to read. Even if you look at this draft class many of these top college pitcheres were not elite prospects but grew into it. That is why you will see more lower drafted high school pitchers (like a Braddock or Scarpetta) really shot up the prospects board. You never know exactly how much more they will mature and improve. Some would argue that 18-21 is where a pitcher makes the most gains. So a college pitcher had already hit the "pitching growth spurt" where a high school guy hasn't.

 

 

As far as these picks go, how would you compare Jungmann to Odorizi or Thornburg? If I remember right, Thornburg wasn't seen as a real high ceiling guy (and he still may not be.) But I have seen him pitch several times, and while he may not have filthy, nasty stuff he does pitch like he has completecontrol over the game. That's what I look for in a starting pitcher.

I don't think either are good fits for Jungmann. It many just be me but I think Heckathorn may be the closest if you got to see him. Has a good power arm and pretty good secondary stuff. He will throw strikes and attack hitters. While he may not completely dominate a game with k's he will not allow many to score and will be very effective.

 

As for Bradley, I think if he adds a fourth pitch he could be more of a lefty Yo. As of right now he has good command of all three pitches and can throw them in any count. He mixes it well and he has a similar fastball that sits 91-94. That is a stretch but Yo is the first person who really pops in my head

[EdgarDiazRocks]

got a question thru to Kevin Goldstein.

 

edgardiazrocks (upper left): What separated Bradley from Anderson?

Kevin Goldstein II: I assume you mean Jed. Jed is bigger. Jed throws harder.

 

[YoungGeezy]

Oh Boy Derek Fisher (HS OF) is still available! He is one of the guys I am most excited about in this draft, hope he is in the mix! Still ton of talent left however Bichette Jr. went #51 and Grayson Garvin went #59. SS T. Story, OF L. Greene both came off the board.

[heresrobin]

I think that we are all missing Bradley's most important statistic: his full name is Jedidiah Custer Bradley.

[Never Outhustled]

As far as these picks go, how would you compare Jungmann to Odorizi or Thornburg? If I remember right, Thornburg wasn't seen as a real high ceiling guy (and he still may not be.) But I have seen him pitch several times, and while he may not have filthy, nasty stuff he does pitch like he has completecontrol over the game. That's what I look for in a starting pitcher.

I don't think either are good fits for Jungmann. It many just be me but I think Heckathorn may be the closest if you got to see him. Has a good power arm and pretty good secondary stuff. He will throw strikes and attack hitters. While he may not completely dominate a game with k's he will not allow many to score and will be very effective.

 

As for Bradley, I think if he adds a fourth pitch he could be more of a lefty Yo. As of right now he has good command of all three pitches and can throw them in any count. He mixes it well and he has a similar fastball that sits 91-94. That is a stretch but Yo is the first person who really pops in my head

Jungman compares to Matt Morris on the high side and Mike Pelfrey on the low side.

 

Bradley compares best to David Purcey and Jeremy Sowers.

 

[colbyjack]

I'm pretty excited about Jed Bradley, and kudos to the Brewers for taking him at #15. He looked as though he could go among the top 3-5 overall picks at one point in time. I love the way he pitches, a true power pitcher who attacks hitters with his fastball and also has a really good slider. He pitches off his fastball, which I like, and he commands it well. He's the better of the two picks as prospects IMO.

 

Jungmann is good too. Some people swear by him, and he has been incredibly consistent. Both guys could move fast, although we may not see much of them this summer.

 

Plenty of good players heading into day 2. Getting two college arms like Jungmann and Bradley at 12 & 15 and having so much impact talent left on the board really is a tribute to the depth of talent this year.

 

And Bradley is from Huntsville.

[jjfanec]

It is interesting how much negativity there is toward these picks in this thread. When I look at different sites a lot of the "experts" seem really high on the Brewers picks. I was glad to see colby chime in. His analysis has me excited for the two guys we drafted.

[RyDogg66]

Almost all of the negativity is coming from one or two posters, repeatedly. If a guy like colby is excited about Jed Bradley, that is good enough for me.

[paul253]

Wait.....Daniel Norris is still available? What happened there? I think Milwaukee has to take him if he lasts. And what about Matt Purke or John Stilson? Are they worth taking a chance on with the second round pick?

[Tedaldtada]

Norris has had very inconsistent velo this spring, plus there are concerns he is already maxed out.

 

Purke and Tilson are both huge injury risks that will want a butt load of cash.

[tyguy20204]

X ellence wrote:

Bradley has a career ERA over 4 1/2. I'm not sure why some think his stuff is so good. If he has decent stuff why doesn't he use it to get people out? Top pitchers dominate college baseball, he hasn't.

Gerrit Cole put up a 3.31 ERA this year. He also has a fastball that reaches 100 MPH and a plus change-up. I doubt you could find one scout that would tell you Cole has anything less than above-average stuff.

 

Which comes to the point: It's foolish to judge a pitcher strictly based upon ERA, and even more-so, a college pitcher's career era. By using his career ERA, you hope to skew the statistics in your favor, when in reality a pitcher that comes into college as a freshman is not going to be the same player that exits a few years later.

 

Bradley put up a 3.49 ERA this year, which yes, is not "dominating" as far as ERA goes in the college game. But since when is ERA the be-all, end-all of statistics in judging a pitcher's ability? At the major league level, a pitcher can put up a high ERA due to a combination of bad-luck on balls-put-in-play, or simply because there's a poor defense behind them. Why would college be any different in this regard?

 

It's not like Bradley has a problem missing bats. He had a K/9 of 9.73 this year, a WHIP of 1.22, and only allowed one home run all year. So he's already displayed two key aspects of a successful pitcher - missing bats and keeping the ball in the ball park.

 

I find your argument that Bradley has a ceiling as a LOOGY in the majors to be dumbfounding. Perhaps that was an attempt at hyperbole on your part, but if so, it goes a bit too far, even, in that regard. I respect your opinions on the draft, but I really think you're grasping at straws here.

[YoungGeezy]

Ill take Colby's analysis on Bradley over the extremely negitive Xellence one. ERA is not the only thing that matters. Woke up this morning really liking our 1st round.

[paul253]

Purke and Tilson are both huge injury risks that will want a butt load of cash.

 

I know they want a lot of money, but it may be worth it. I don't really know much about the injuries, but Purke was back and he pitched pretty well in the NCAA playoffs didn't he? This injury he suffered....was it his first major injury or is he considered injury prone? He was a possible number one overall pick before he got hurt. He may choose to go back to school to improve his stock but who knows, maybe you can throw enough money at him to get him to sign. I'm not calling for it, just something to consider. It's not like the talent isn't there.

[YoungGeezy]

Christian Lopes is a name to keep an eye on today. Coming into the season many scouts were as high on him as Lindor. He will be able to stick at SS and is good with the bat.

 

Wonder if there is any chance to sign Norris or purke now. Price tags are going to be really high.

[homer]

Ill take Colby's analysis on Bradley over the extremely negitive Xellence one. ERA is not the only thing that matters. Woke up this morning really liking our 1st round.

Obviously, X is entitled to his opinion, but he was just about as ornery after a few of Ted Thompson's drafts on the Lambeau Leap board.

 

And those turned out OK.

 

As for me, I am neither excited nor disappointed. I'm of the opinion that drafting pitchers is a total crap shoot. I'll wait and see how these guys do on the field.

 

And to those worried that the Brewers would only draft high floor low ceiling guys to re-stock the system, I say "Dylan Covey".

 

Homer out!

[Never Outhustled]

Which comes to the point: It's foolish to judge a pitcher strictly based upon ERA, and even more-so, a college pitcher's career era. By using his career ERA, you hope to skew the statistics in your favor, when in reality a pitcher that comes into college as a freshman is not going to be the same player that exits a few years later.

 

Bradley's career ERA shows he doesn't have a long track record of success. If his ERA was just unlucky, why did his coaches pull him from the Friday starter job? Why does he struggle against the toughest match-ups? Why are you comparing Bradley's ERA this to ERAs of the past when the new bats have clearly altered the game and require this years stats to be curved? Doesn't it concern you at all that Bradley gave up twice as many runs as the top pitchers?

 

Doesn't it concern you at all that other teams passed and Bradly and the team that did select him has zero credibility in selecting pitchers?

 

Can you name me a few college pitchers who have had such mediocre careers that have turned out sucessful?

 

I find it interesting that some of the people who are excited for Bradley were the same people who where excited for Jimmy Nelson, a pick I correctly identified as a throw away.

 

I apoligize for being such a dark cloud on Bradley. I like Jungman even though I don't like gambling on pitching. I remain hopeful for high quality pick in round 2, and there are players available to get excited about today, unlike last year when almost all the talent was gone before round 2.

[Tedaldtada]

X, Justin Verlander is an example of what you are looking for.

 

And maybe we can give Jimmy Nelson a little more time? Sheesh.

[Never Outhustled]

Obviously, X is entitled to his opinion, but he was just about as ornery after a few of Ted Thompson's drafts on the Lambeau Leap board.

 

Enough of this crap. I slammed the selections of Justin Harrel and Abdul Hodge. You loved Hodge. I correctly identified 3rd rounder Jason Spitz as a back-up in this system. I participated in 1 draft on that board, and I challenge you to find me a pick where I was wrong. I haven't been on that board in 5 years, so you have no idea how I lauded some of the quality selection they've made.

[fondybrewfan]

I just looked at Covey's stats at USD this year. Ouch. Maybe we dodged another bullet there?

 

My knowledge is very limited when it comes to the draft but Jungmann's stats really jump off the page. If he is a 91-95 MPH pitcher what is not to like? He isn't a one year wonder like Arnett either. Bradley seemed OK last year; I'll trust the scouts that say the talent is there on him.

 

Since they are both college guys would it be reasonable to expect them to start in Wisconsin if they sign soon?