We're Number Five! We're Number Five! - The 2016 MLB Draft Thread

[rwa12]

I think you do that in a weak draft. I think the club needs an "A" player, I'd rather take the chance on that than 2 B+ players. We are pretty stockpiled on quantity, I would focus on quality.

[MrTPlush]

I think you do that in a weak draft. I think the club needs an "A" player, I'd rather take the chance on that than 2 B+ players. We are pretty stockpiled on quantity, I would focus on quality.

 

At #5 we won't get a can't miss guy though. The Astros took Carlos Correa to save money and he ended up one of the best prospects in the game. Just because you are saving money doesn't mean you can't get a top player. Also getting two B+ guys isn't necessarily that bad. That gives us one more chance to hit and actually get a good player.

[paul253]

The Astros took Carlos Correa to save money and he ended up one of the best prospects in the game. Just because you are saving money doesn't mean you can't get a top player

 

We did that a few years ago when we took Medeiros and then Gatewood and Harrison. Obviously there's still a long time before we can judge the picks but none of those guys are exactly setting the world on fire so far. I know I wanted Grant Holmes that year. He was the higher rated player and his career appears to be off to a better start than Medeiros. Not saying Medeiros was a bad pick but it seems like it was a value pick. I think at 5 we have to go quality. We don't need depth. We need impact.

[brewmann04]

I just hope they look into Groome background being a HS kid

[brewmann04]

WE need to go big or go home

[MrTPlush]

The Astros took Carlos Correa to save money and he ended up one of the best prospects in the game. Just because you are saving money doesn't mean you can't get a top player

 

We did that a few years ago when we took Medeiros and then Gatewood and Harrison. Obviously there's still a long time before we can judge the picks but none of those guys are exactly setting the world on fire so far. I know I wanted Grant Holmes that year. He was the higher rated player and his career appears to be off to a better start than Medeiros. Not saying Medeiros was a bad pick but it seems like it was a value pick. I think at 5 we have to go quality. We don't need depth. We need impact.

 

So Carlos Correa wasn't quality? Sure seems like it now. Getting a guy to go under slot doesn't mean you aren't getting quality. Trusting your scouts a bit more though. I don't think the Brewers attempt some kind of money saving move at #5, but if they did they could get a good player still.

[paul253]

So Carlos Correa wasn't quality? Sure seems like it now. Getting a guy to go under slot doesn't mean you aren't getting quality. Trusting your scouts a bit more though. I don't think the Brewers attempt some kind of money saving move at #5, but if they did they could get a good player still.

 

I never said Correa wasn't quality. I never said anything about him at all as a matter of fact. Looking back he may be the best player in that draft. It worked out well for them, especially considering McCullers was one of the guys they got with the saved money. But as I did say we seemed to do it with Medeiros. It was a value pick when higher rated guys were available and, while its still early it doesn't seem to be working out quite as well for us. Gatewood and Harrison still seem to be over their heads in A ball and Medeiros has taken a step back early on this year. So just because it worked out for Houston doesn't mean it will work for us. Our system lacks true high ceiling guys and id rather get the best player available at 5, preferably a pitcher, because we need impact.

[MrTPlush]

So just because it worked out for Houston doesn't mean it will work for us.

 

And just because we tried it once and it didn't worked doesn't mean we should never do it again.

 

The thing is the Brewers Top 100 board probably looks nothing like any of these experts have put out there. For all we know the Brewers don't even like Groome and he isn't even in their Top 10. On the flip side there is a very good chance someone as low as #30 on an experts board is Top 10 in the Brewers. So hypothetically thinking if the Brewers grade Groome a 97 and some player they can sign underslot as a 94 do you take the 94 so with your next pick you can get a 90 vs. an 83?

 

The Astros have done it twice now in recent years and the first was Carlos Correa and they did it last year with Bregman(who is a a Top 20 prospect now). With a GM that has just come over from the Astros I wouldn't be shocked if such a draft move happened.

 

Can't really say it is a good or bad idea if we don't know how the Brewers rate every player and don't know who is going to be gone before us.

[paul253]

And just because we tried it once and it didn't worked doesn't mean we should never do it again.

 

I didn't say they should never do it again. I'm talking about this year. This year they need as big an impact player as you can get. When they did it before, back when they still trying to build up depth in the system, it was a better time to do it. But now we have depth. What we don't have are high impact players.

 

Groome a 97 and some player they can sign underslot as a 94 do you take the 94 so with your next pick you can get a 90 vs. an 83?

 

It's hard to imagine a player they graded at 90 lasting til pick 46. But even if it would happen id still rather they pick the 97 than the 94 in round one, mostly because it's so much easier to get a 94 then a 97.

 

Look I'm not disagreeing with you that it's an option. I just think this is a terrible time to go value. You go value when you need depth. You go value when you want to save money. But when you are completely tearing it down and have a pretty deep system with a lot of good but not great prospects I think you have to go impact. Take the opportunity to get that great prospect.

[reillymcshane]

Latest BA Mock Draft from John Manuel has Brewers taking Groome with our top pick:

 

http://www.baseballamerica.com/draft/mock-draft-2-0/#KO9JOE1slOtlVELQ.97

 

Manuel addresses a 'makeup' comment we heard earlier this week about Groome - specifically saying there are some questions about his maturity. Here's the quote (it's in the area dealing with he Phillies pick):

 

"Groome’s makeup issues (mostly dealing with immaturity, according to industry sources) worry most teams picking in the top 10, and that could weigh down Groome’s draft stock."

[MrTPlush]

An immature high school student? Shocking.

[And That]

If Groome is still there for some reason, the Brewers would be near insane not to take him unless his issues were in the same end of the maturity continuum as Matt Bush and Josh Hamilton. And even then maybe just hire R. Lee Ermey as a personal coach?

[Austin Tatious]

Maybe Groome is too big for his britches or something. If there is some concern about maturity that drops him to Milwaukee, I hope we pounce on him.

 

I get the concern that you draft a high school arm and you end up with a Mark Rogers type disaster and get nothing out of the 5th overall pick. Mike Jones and Nick Neugebauer also say hi. When we drafted Weeks, Braun, and Fielder in the top 10, that was epic. That's also how the Cubs played it with Bryant, Schwarber, Soler, Ian Happ or whoever else they took in the top 10.

 

But Milwaukee has not had a true number one starter come out of the system since Ben Sheets who was a number one pick too. Because of the massive need for a true ace, and if the match is there with a Groome, POUNCE baby.

[MrTPlush]

If Groome is still there for some reason, the Brewers would be near insane not to take him unless his issues were in the same end of the maturity continuum as Matt Bush and Josh Hamilton. And even then maybe just hire R. Lee Ermey as a personal coach?

 

Sucks we don't know what is meant by immaturity. Once he is drafted he won't be around what he is now for the most part...he will be playing baseball. What makes it such an issue the teams in the Top 10 would be so scared?

[fondybrewfan]

The immaturity issues would have to be a lot more than "typical HS kid" for scouts to take notice I imagine. I don't know much about these prospects but from everything I have read if he is there at #5 you would be dumb to pass him up.

[MrTPlush]

The immaturity issues would have to be a lot more than "typical HS kid" for scouts to take notice I imagine. I don't know much about these prospects but from everything I have read if he is there at #5 you would be dumb to pass him up.

 

That's what I was thinking. Still doesn't really help all that much though. Unless it is some type of substance abuse I think I would definitely take him #5.

[splitterpfj]

Groome is so talented, I wouldn't want the Brewers to pass on him, but immaturity issues very often get worse for these kids once they leave home, not better.

 

It's a growing process, and they're kids .... once they're on the road, especially if they got a big signing bonus, now you've added major temptation to the mix. It's a real concern, and teams don't play around with it. If this is a real issue, it'll be about weighing the potential of his talent vs the potential for disaster .... one will win out over the other on someone's draft board.

[brewmann04]

Latest BA Mock Draft from John Manuel has Brewers taking Groome with our top pick:

 

http://www.baseballamerica.com/draft/mock-draft-2-0/#KO9JOE1slOtlVELQ.97

 

Manuel addresses a 'makeup' comment we heard earlier this week about Groome - specifically saying there are some questions about his maturity. Here's the quote (it's in the area dealing with he Phillies pick):

 

"Groome’s makeup issues (mostly dealing with immaturity, according to industry sources) worry most teams picking in the top 10, and that could weigh down Groome’s draft stock."

I can't reveal my sources at this point but yes they need to look hard at his imaturies but then again he is a HS senior

[paul253]

It's a chance they need to take, assuming he's available. I'd be more concerned if it's something like drugs, but if it's something like losing his temper or throwing fits when he loses I think it's something hes likely to grow out of. We need a top of the line pitcher and he seems to be the best shot in this draft.

 

I can't reveal my sources at this point but yes they need to look hard at his imaturies but then again he is a HS senior

 

Without revealing your sources can you at least tell us what they said?

[sfl2hnq17]

If we draft a high school lefty, I would love it if we grabbed Joe Wentz out of Kansas. Callis had some great things to say about him.

[heresrobin]

Alec Hansen's first start after being moved to the bullpen was on Sunday against Kansas State. 6 IP, 9 Ks, 1 BB, 2 hits, 0 ERs.

[MrTPlush]

I love sucking because paid articles are free! PerfectGame has us taking Delvin Perez(SS) at #5. They also have all Top 3 pitchers gone before we pick.

 

http://www.perfectgame.org/Articles/View.aspx?article=12434

[JohnBriggs12]

All guys are immature. When it's out there in public as an issue, it's hard not to conjure up Johnny Manziel.

 

Being able to handle become wealthy overnight requires a level of maturity that most adults don't possess, much less kids coming out of high school. I'd be very wary of Groome.

[MrTPlush]

Jason Groome has had two rough starts in a row. Though after his second outing scouts mentioned his maturity afterwards answering questions etc. Groome has actually been falling down some boards not for his maturity, but just for on the diamond reasons too. One scout said he and his scouting director don't think Groome is a Top 5 talent.

 

Groome is slated for a couple innings today.

[MrTPlush]

Other draft related rumbling in that the Phillies may not take a pitcher at #1.