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

[nate82]

Right now the Brewers are basically guaranteed a pick between 3 and 7. As the Brewers would need to somehow make up 6.5 games to finish outside of the range of the top 7 picks which with the Brewers schedule is just not possible. After the game with the Reds today the Brewers only play the Padres who are below .500 and the Brewers have to play 4 games against the Cardinals and 6 games against the Cubs with 3 games in San Diego.

 

Looking at the other teams who are close to the same record as the Brewers they have just about the same type of a schedule. I think the Brewers will end up with the 4th pick in the draft. I don't see the Brewers losing every game to the Cubs and Cardinals and they should win at least one game against the Padres. The Brewers need to go 3-10 to secure the 3rd pick of the draft. I think that is do able with 10 of those games being against the Cubs and the Cardinals. It is also beneficial for the Brewers that the Cardinals series is going to be a crucial series for the Cardinals to knock the Pirates out of the NL Central race. The Cubs series is also a crucial series for them to secure a wildcard spot. If they sweep the Brewers in the first 3 game series I believe they will have secured a playoff spot.

 

I think the Brewers will end the season going 4-9 winning one game against the Cardinals, one against the Padres and two against the Cubs.

[colbyjack]

One name absent from YoungGeezy's list is Blake Rutherford. He's #1 on my personal list with one of the easiest, prettiest and most powerful left-handed swings I've seen. Very similar to David Justice when he was coming up with the Braves in the late-80s/early-90s. I hate to actively wish the Brewers would lose, but given how things are going this year, the higher the pick the better.

[clancyphile]

One name absent from YoungGeezy's list is Blake Rutherford. He's #1 on my personal list with one of the easiest, prettiest and most powerful left-handed swings I've seen. Very similar to David Justice when he was coming up with the Braves in the late-80s/early-90s. I hate to actively wish the Brewers would lose, but given how things are going this year, the higher the pick the better.

 

I'd rather get the impact bat at this point... too much has gone wrong on the high-end arms.

[MrTPlush]

One name absent from YoungGeezy's list is Blake Rutherford. He's #1 on my personal list with one of the easiest, prettiest and most powerful left-handed swings I've seen. Very similar to David Justice when he was coming up with the Braves in the late-80s/early-90s. I hate to actively wish the Brewers would lose, but given how things are going this year, the higher the pick the better.

 

I'd rather get the impact bat at this point... too much has gone wrong on the high-end arms.

 

And that is how teams live in mediocre for years. You will never make it to the world series playing it safe.

[Jenkins5]

I left him off due to our large amount of OFs. I know you don't draft by position depth however I'd prefer us to go get something we have lacked a long time, a possibly dominant Ace. Rutherford , Banks, Beer are all guys I'd normally like a lot but hard not to pull trigger on one of those arms.

 

Of course if Rutherford looks like he will be next great MLB Bat & is BPA on our board..... I won't be upset at all. To bad he can't play Corner IF/3b

[Hammer]

I don't care what position a guy plays right now. BPA all draft please...

[Jenkins5]

Pint (or other elite possible ace) & Rutherford are on board at 3 (if that's what we get) what way do you go? Elite bats are far and in between & there is a lot of arm depth. Think that is the big question, which is best way to go

[splitterpfj]

This draft has plenty of pitching at the top, for sure, but don't get hung up on that.

 

Whatever spot the Brewers wind up with at this point, they're going to have multiple elite talents to pick from, they need to get an impact player, and worry about what position he plays later.

[paul253]

I disagree. While in general I go along with BPA I think the Brewers are in a spot where position should at least be considered. When you are absolutely loaded from the top of the system down at a position (outfield) and absolutely barren from top down at others (third base and catcher) I think that if two players are equal or very close to equal you select the one who plays a position of need. Now don't get me wrong. I am NOT saying you simply select the top rated catcher or third basemen. I am saying if, for instance, the top rated player on your board is an outfielder and a close second or third is a catcher I don't think it would be a mistake to pick the catcher. If, however, you don't have catcher until number seven or eight on your list then of course you don't pick him. I don't think you automatically pick the outfielder because he's number one on your list. The talent level in that case is close that either one would be a acceptable pick.

 

People always assume the problem of too many guys at one position will always work itself out but I don't think that's true. I think this offseason the Brewers are going to be forced to do something that they wouldn't have done if they weren't in the situation they are in. I think either they are going to trade Davis or play either Santana or Braun out of position (cf or 1B respectively). And even though I am fine with moving Braun to 1B that doesn't change the fact that it is being done out of necessity because you have two guys for one position. And this doesn't even get into what's going to happen if/when Phillips Taylor Reed, who will all be in AAA, and Coulter are ready.

 

So anyway, getting back to next draft I think if the talent level between your options is close enough you avoid picking the outfielder. That's just my opinion. Personally I think the opportunity to obtain a potential ace is so rare that you can't pass it up (this of course is assuming there still is a potential ace available). That's what my ideal scenario is. A potential ace (I'm rooting for Pint or Groom) to be our pick.

[logan82]

Draft picks take years to get to the majors. A lot of things can change in that time. You take the best player available because you don't know what will happen.

[paul253]

I think simply repeating "best player available" is overly simplistic. I think that not only should you look at other factors but that you'd be foolish not to. Again, I'm not suggesting you reach for a player. Im just saying if the players are comparable it wouldn't be the worst thing to take the player who plays a position of need.

 

I'll put it this way. If come Brewers pick they have two players in mind. Both players are given the exact same grade by the Brewers. I have no idea how the team grades players but let's say they do it on a 1-100 scale. Both players are graded at 93. One plays corner outfield and one plays catcher. If you called the shots which player would you pick? I'm guessing probably the catcher. Why? Well for one it is a position of desperate need. But how about also because good catchers are much more difficult to find then good outfielders? Or because a player.....for instance Ryan Braun....who can't cut it in the infield can usually head off to the outfield and be at least adequate defensively. Very few, if any, players can do that at catcher. So go back to the draft. Instead of grading both players the same you have the outfielder as a 93 but the catcher as a 92. Do you automatically pick the outfielder because he's the "best available"? Or does the fact that it's so much harder to find a catcher, meaning this might be your last chance for awhile, AND the fact that your system is loaded with outfielders while being barren of catchers, outweigh the fact that you view the other player as slightly more talented? I'd argue that those facts do outweigh that and I'd pick the catcher still. What if the catcher is a 91 or a 90? Well that's when you have to decide if the perceived drop off in talent is worth taking a chance on a position of need that is much more difficult to fill. But again I don't think you automatically pick best player available if second or third best are just slightly behind him in talent and fill a huge position of need.

[Jenkins5]

Draft picks take years to get to the majors. A lot of things can change in that time. You take the best player available because you don't know what will happen.

 

The problem then though is the situation we will have between Helena/Wisconsin where we have to many deserving OFs who are promising but nowhere to play them. Clark, Harrison, Stokes, Collymore, Demi, Belonis, Segovia, Martinez, Denson (plays out there a decent amount) Pierre....Possible hold overs like Rubio & Diaz who have a ton of upside but a still developing. You want BPA. While these picks take years to get to majors, a Rutheford, Beer, Banks could be in the Wisconsin/Helena mix my end of June....We will have OFs over pouring with limited talent at other keye positions.

[logan82]

One plays corner outfield and one plays catcher. If you called the shots which player would you pick? I'm guessing probably the catcher.

I would take the catcher because it is further left on the defensive spectrum. I would always take the guy based on best player available or general scarcity across MLB, not based on need.

[logan82]

Draft picks take years to get to the majors. A lot of things can change in that time. You take the best player available because you don't know what will happen.

 

The problem then though is the situation we will have between Helena/Wisconsin where we have to many deserving OFs who are promising but nowhere to play them. Clark, Harrison, Stokes, Collymore, Demi, Belonis, Segovia, Martinez, Denson (plays out there a decent amount) Pierre....Possible hold overs like Rubio & Diaz who have a ton of upside but a still developing. You want BPA. While these picks take years to get to majors, a Rutheford, Beer, Banks could be in the Wisconsin/Helena mix my end of June....We will have OFs over pouring with limited talent at other keye positions.

Trade some.

[paul253]

So you take the catcher because defensively it's more valuable. Does that only come into account if the players are exactly equal? If one is slightly slightly better but plays a position that isn't as valuable and is an organizational surplus you'd still pick him? We'll have to agree to disagree because I think that'd be a mistake. I think you'd be setting yourself up for problems down the road. You suggested trading from your surplus. What if you can't get what you need or can't get a good enough return? This year is the perfect example. Yes we could solve an issue by trading Davis but whose to say we can get a third baseman or first baseman in return? You can't just assume we can always trade from a surplus and get a need. At some point I think you have to look at what position a player plays. We're seeing right now what happens when you ignore a certain position for too long.

[logan82]

How many MLB SS did we have 3 years ago? Things can change fast. You should never draft for need.

[splitterpfj]

THIS JUST IN ....

 

The Philadelphia Phillies are still valiantly holding on in their fight to remain worst.

[brewcrewdue80]

Paul, you are over-valuing Catcher way too much. There are 13 HOFs at the catcher position according to BREF. Their 7yr best avg WAR is 33.8. That is below 5WAR a season over 7years for Hall of Famers. That 7year best avg. of 33.8 would put a Catcher 26th ALL-Time in WAR at the position.

Let's go through the Positions and 7year avg:

1b 42.4

2b 44.4

3b 42.7

SS 42.8

LF 41.5

CF 44.0

RF 43.0

SP 50.3

RP 28.3

 

33.8 or 50.3. Plain and Simple that shows off Catchers should not be drafted for Need. Aces and as many as you can acquire are going to give you far more value in 7years than Catchers will.

[brewcrewdue80]

On to subject at hand. Cincy has once again put it's grips on #3. Oak/Colorado manage to find ways to lose and continue to hang around 4th and 5th. Brewers are now solidly in 6th. 4th-6th it appears. Gotta take 5th at worst! Come on Rox/A's!

[nate82]

On to subject at hand. Cincy has once again put it's grips on #3. Oak/Colorado manage to find ways to lose and continue to hang around 4th and 5th. Brewers are now solidly in 6th. 4th-6th it appears. Gotta take 5th at worst! Come on Rox/A's!

 

No the Brewers are in 5th place the A's had a better record than the Brewers did last season so the tie breaker goes to the Brewers. The A's, Rockies, and the Brewers all have the same record with the Rockies winning the tie breaker with the Brewers and the A's.

[paul253]

brewcrewdude I was just using catcher as an example. My point is that if you have two comparable options, even if one may be ranked just a tad bit higher, I see no problem taking the one who plays the position you have a desperate need for.

 

I do have to say this though. After watching the Brewers with Lucroy these past few years vs the Brewers with all the crap they threw behind the plate before him (Miller, Moeller, Kendall, Casanova, Rivera, Perez, Estrada, etc) I may be overvaluing catcher but it sure is nice to have a competent player behind the plate and I do not look forward to the post Lucroy era.

[brewcrewdue80]

On to subject at hand. Cincy has once again put it's grips on #3. Oak/Colorado manage to find ways to lose and continue to hang around 4th and 5th. Brewers are now solidly in 6th. 4th-6th it appears. Gotta take 5th at worst! Come on Rox/A's!

 

No the Brewers are in 5th place the A's had a better record than the Brewers did last season so the tie breaker goes to the Brewers. The A's, Rockies, and the Brewers all have the same record with the Rockies winning the tie breaker with the Brewers and the A's.

 

My post was before both the A's and Rox games were completed in which they both won creating a tie.

[paul253]

Looks like we're going to pick between 4 at the highest and 6 at the lowest. Between us, Colorado and Oakland for those three spots. Cincy and Miami have kind of separated themselves from the pack.

[MrTPlush]

Catchers are garbage picks if you ask me. How many first rounder catchers are relevant right now? How long does their peak last? Injury issues? Playing every day? Consistency over 162 games?

 

I will just take an average veteran with some defense and draft someone else Top 5. We picked Clint Coulter in the first round and he now isn't even at the position and has the bat that we could have gotten in the later rounds. Horrible value.

[paul253]

Nobody is suggesting we simply take the best available catcher. And while it's true that most catchers don't end up being all that great that doesn't mean you pass up on the chance to take one if you think he could be good. I'm sure TB is kicking themselves for passing on Buster Posey. And Joe Mauer was a darn good player for many years. If you can get away with a garbage offensive player who plays good defense fine. But you have to look no further than the Brewers to see what it's like to go years and years and years without a quality catcher. It is very difficult to find a good catcher. I almost think that's more reason to take a chance on one if he is comparable to your other options.