1st Round Draft picks 1992-1998

[RyDogg66]

In 1992 to 1998, the Brewers selected some pretty awful players with the exceptions of Jenkins and D'Amico.

 

92 - Felder

94 - Willimason

96 - Chad Green

97 - Kyle Peterson

98 - JM Gold.

 

Would anyone who was tracking the drafts back then be able to relive those selections, mainly, who, if anyone else, the Brewers might have been thinking about selecting and if it is was just poor scouting or signability that caused the picks to be so bad.

 

I remember the Chad Green pick being talked about as a cheap selection.

 

Some of the drafts have a lot of guys going after our pick in the first round that never amounted to anything also, so I realize it is a crapshoot in the first round, more than anyother sport.

 

If anyone has any info about our scouting procedures back then and how things have changed today I'd love to read about it.

[colbyjack]

My biggest problem from the Brewers first-round pick from 1992 to 1997 is that they drafted for immediate, specific needs. You just can't draft that way in baseball. I clearly remember reading about how the Brewers wanted to draft the best power prospect available, which is why Felder was our pick. He signed for about what everyone else was around him, so I wouldn't necessarily call him a budget pick. In 1992 the team lacked power in a big way, with Greg Vaughn being the only notable power hitter in our lineup. I don't remember any other players being mentioned for our 1st round pick.

 

In '94 we needed a 3B, and didn't have many left-handed hitters. Williamson was immediately pencilled in as our 3B & #3 hitter of the future. Williamson was more of a budget pick, although not as extreme as one as Chad Green 2 years later. I remember Williamson being the favorite for our pick going into the draft as reported by the MJS several days out. The Arizona State 3B connection to Sal Bando was just too obvious (I do remember watching Williamson in the CWS that year and was quite impressed with his hitting ability).

 

And Green was immediately pencilled in as our CF & leadoff hitter of the future. Pat Listach at this point in time proved that he wasn't someone to rely on, and Darryl Hamilton I believe was long gone. The team also lacked speed. Green was a huge budget pick that year, signing for much less than the other picks around him. Like Williamson, I remember reading in the MJS that Green was the favorite to be our first-round pick before the draft took place.

 

Kyle Peterson actually signed for a little more than those taken around him. I remember the MJS mentioning Peterson as one of their pre-draft targets, and he was one of, if not the most polished pitcher available in the '97 draft. I never had a big problem with Peterson other than the fact that he never was able to fix his delivery, which led to arm problems. As he showed in the minors & at the big league level, when he was healthy he pitched quite well. I don't recall any other players being mentioned as possibilities, but I do recall them wanting a pitcher.

 

JM Gold in my mind cannot be included in this group. Prior to 1998 the team drafted rather conservatively, and as noted they always seem to address immediate, specific needs. In '98 that changed, and I remember reading about how they wanted to add as many young, power arms as possible. This meant higher signing bonuses. With their first-round pick the Brewers intended to nab Nick Neugebauer, whom fell to their 2nd round pick. Instead, the top prep arm in the nation, JM Gold, fell to their spot & they didn't hesitate to select him. I remember reading how thrilled they were to get Gold in the 1st & Neugebauer in the 2nd, as they felt (and many agreed) that they got the 2 best power arms on their board.

 

The Brewers continued to spend more money in the draft in 1999 giving Sheets a record bonus $2.5 million. Sheets wasn't expected to fall that far, otherwise the Brewers would have taken prep righty Brett Myers (now with the Phillies).

 

Of course that changed in 2000 when Dean Taylor replaced Sal Bando & brought in Jack Z. as his scouting director. They immediately started to stress tools & overall athleticism, and stated they wanted to get the player with the most raw tools with their first round pick. When Rocco Baldelli was taken in the top 10 by the D-Rays, the Brewers opted for Dave Krynzel. Of course that led to 3 straight prep players being taken with our first-round picks, with several similar players being taken in later rounds. The draft bonuses were never below slot value, and they haven't been cheap with later round picks & DFE signings either. As noted before, the team increased their draft & overall player development budget from $8 million to $20 million, in a huge shift in organizational philosophy.

 

Even before that the team did start to draft more aggressively starting in 1998, and fortunately we still have Ben Hendrickson & Bill Hall to show for those efforts.

[cressj]

I agree with Colby that the change occurred in 98. Peterson was the main name mentioned ahead of time in 97 and Green was a price thing. In all honesty, the selection of Krynzel was somewhat similar to Green except it was not as much of a reach. Many did not have Krynzel as high as the Brewers' selection.

[RyDogg66]

So it seems that the biggest change from the 1992-1997 years to 1998-2003 is a combination of increasing our draft budget and taking the best player available, to some extent, with the 1st round pick.

 

To me, it would seem like not as smart an idea to draft for immediate need knowing that prospects take time to arrive and that any player can not pan out. Also, by the time that player does reach the major leagues power, or 3b or CF or whatever may not be an immediate need any longer. For example, getting Wes Helms, and finding Scott Podsednik make 3b and CF not immediate needs and we would never have guessed we'd have those two at the time we drafted in 2002. Hypothetically, if the year were 1998 when we got two players similar to Helms and Pods, then the picks of Williamson and Green don't make as much sense.

 

I guess this is the biggest reason that I was pleased with the selection of Prince Fielder depite having Sexson, Nelson ahd Hart at the time at the same position. Likewise taking Tony Gwynn, Jr with Pods and Krynzel already in the system.

 

Do any teams still "draft for IMMEDIATE need?" or is this something that teams have gotten away from.

 

Finally, our immediate AND futre need appears to be Starting Pitching. Is there any chance that with the 5th pick we might be reaching for a pitcher if the first 4 picks are pitchers and position players like Stephen Drew and others are much more highly regarded as prospects.

 

Thanks for the analysis colby, I remember the Brewers and Chad Green talking that he was a "Kenny Lofton" type player. Yeah right.

[cressj]

The great thing about the 2004 amateur draft is you are not likely to "reach" for a pitcher at the top of the draft. With Weaver, Verlander, Niemann, Townsend, Sowers, and Humber available; there is going to be little reaching. On the flipside, any hitter may be a reach at #5. The question may come down to a college pitcher or a high schooler like Adenhart.

[cressj]

Many people felt that the A. Williamson pick in 1994 was Sal's pick, being that he was a former ASU third baseman. The name that I heard back then that they should have picked was Todd Walker.

[cressj]

It seemed like Milwaukee targeted Peterson early in the 1997 draft. The other name that you heard a lot was SS Jason Dellaero.

[cressj]

www.jsonline.com/sports/a...ft6297.stm

[cressj]

No. 11, Milwaukee: Dave Krynzel, OF, Green Valley HS, Henderson, Nev.

Of note: This is the first player that seems truly out of place in the first half of the first round. Most teams did not rank him this highly.

Strengths: Fastest player in the draft is also a top-notch defensive outfielder. Line-drive bat. Played well late in the year after a poor start.

Weaknesses: His swing is inconsistent, and there are questions as to how well he will do against pro pitching.

 

 

Obviously losing a 2nd rounder for Hernandez was not a smart move for a team trying to rebuild. Artman, the 3rd rounder, was considered a great selection at that point in the draft.

[cressj]

Both Gold and Sheets were projected to go 6-7 slots higher than they did.

[colbyjack]

From the MJS story that cress provided, this blurb really says all you need to know about the selection of Chad Green & how they approached the draft:

 

In its draft preview, Baseball America magazine insisted that the Brewers were so concerned about not being able to sign their 1996 pick that they went for a lesser player, Green, merely because he agreed to terms in advance. Bando denies that accusation.

 

"We struck a deal because we had a need for a centerfielder with speed," he said. "Yes, he probably would have gone lower than us, but that was our need."

 

Bando mentions the word "need" twice. Not a good practice when drafting for need.

 

To me, it would seem like not as smart an idea to draft for immediate need knowing that prospects take time to arrive and that any player can not pan out. Also, by the time that player does reach the major leagues power, or 3b or CF or whatever may not be an immediate need any longer. For example, getting Wes Helms, and finding Scott Podsednik make 3b and CF not immediate needs and we would never have guessed we'd have those two at the time we drafted in 2002. Hypothetically, if the year were 1998 when we got two players similar to Helms and Pods, then the picks of Williamson and Green don't make as much sense.

 

Exactly. And even if we didn't get Helms & Pods, you really don't know what is going to happen in the development process. As shown with Felder & Green, they never even made it.

 

This is a point I like to argue when looking for players in trade. Every year as we approach the trade deadline & hear every rumor under the sun, several people complain about the players being mentioned because they don't necessarily fill an immediate need. Even when trading I argue that teams should focus on acquiring the best players they possibly can, and if they fill a hole even better. This is one reason I wasn't as big of a fan of the Sexson trade, because we dealt for quantity over quality.

 

People point to the NBA & NFL & cite teams should & do draft for more specific & immediate needs & rightly so. Draft picks in both sport don't have the immediate impact some people expect, but they still are expected to at least contribute.

 

I guess this is the biggest reason that I was pleased with the selection of Prince Fielder depite having Sexson, Nelson ahd Hart at the time at the same position.

 

Everyone knows I was less than thrilled with the Fielder selection because I was wary of his future ability to play anywhere on the field. Looking back & talking with Jack Zduriencik about him, I am thrilled that they took him, especially now knowing their rationale. Simply put, Fielder was the best hitter on their board. They didn't try to piece him into the system, wondering how he would fit, who was ahead of him, etc. He was just the best hitter available and that pick now looks to be an extremely astute one, as Prince arguably is the best hitting prospect in all of baseball.

 

Do any teams still "draft for IMMEDIATE need?" or is this something that teams have gotten away from.

 

I think most teams draft best player available, but there are instances in which teams draft for more of an immediate need. Maybe not so much as far as where & how that player will fit into the organization, but on how ready a player is to the big leagues. You see this a lot with pitchers. The A's took Ariel Prieto in '95 because he had already enjoyed a great deal of success in Cuba & many believed he could handle the jump to the big leagues. The Reds, Giants & Expos all took college relievers in the first round last year, with Wagner (Reds) & Cordero (Expos) reaching the big leagues by the end of the summer, while David Aardsma (Giants) is expected to be up at some point this summer. We'll probably see that again this June with Texas closer Huston Street & possibly Steven Register, Auburn's closer.

 

Finally, our immediate AND futre need appears to be Starting Pitching. Is there any chance that with the 5th pick we might be reaching for a pitcher if the first 4 picks are pitchers and position players like Stephen Drew and others are much more highly regarded as prospects.

 

Old cliche: You can never have enough pitching. I agree 100%, our biggest need now & in the future is more pitching, but I would also argue that every other team can easily make the same argument even if their rotation is filled with players like Zito, Mulder, Prior, Wood, etc. As cress noted, I don't think that will be too big of an issue this year. Assuming we take a college pitcher with the 5th overall pick, there will probably be more than one guy that can easily be justified for the selection.

 

I would like to add that Antone Williamson was never really considered that big of a stretch. He was a big part to Arizona State's run in the College World Series, and while the #4 overall selection might have been a little high to take him, he was considered a solid pick for the first 10-15 spots.

 

As for other names rumored to be associated with the Brewers in the 90s draft, I remember them being reportedly interested in 3 hitters in the '95 draft: Todd Helton, Geoff Jenkins & Chad Hermansen. The Rockies took Helton just before our pick, although there was a lot of concern about him ever hitting for enough power to be a true 1B. Power was never too big of a concern with Jenkins, and similar to Williamson he was a big part of USC's run in the CWS that year (similar to Williamson the year before, I remember Bando stating that Jenkins would make an ideal cleanup hitter & RF, hitting behind Antone). Hermansen was taken by the Pirates just after the Brewers took Jenkins. I also remember hearing that the Brewers really wanted Kerry Wood that year, but had no chance to get him as Kerry "fell" to the Cubs 4th overall pick.

 

As for Krynzel, he too wasn't that big of a reach. I remember reading those comment by Sickels on Krynzel after the 2000 draft. While he didn't seem to think David would have been a first rounder had the Brewers not taken him, Baseball America had him rated as their #18 prospect overall just before the draft, hardly a reach. Some may argue his results so far, but he is doing far better than several positional players rated above him including Scott Heard, Luis Montanez, Dane Sardinha & David Espinosa. And it's hard to argue about the Brewers not spending the $5+ million necessary to sign Joe Borchard these days.

[RyDogg66]

colby -

 

Well done. Thanks for answering my post so thoroughly.

 

I have one more question to add on.

 

Coould you please compare the top 5 college pitchers ability with other top draft picks over the last 5 years. Obviously there is no Mark Prior here but how do these top five compare to guys like Kyle Sleeth, Brian Bullington, Mark Mulder, etc.

 

Thanks

[colbyjack]

An occasional poster here on this site, CarolinaTommy, did a great comparative study of the pitchers available for this year's draft vs. some of the top pitchers available in recent years over on T1 a month or two ago. I believe he rated at least 3 of the pitchers available for this year's draft above all of the college pitchers that were available in both 2003 & 2002. Justin Verlander was definitely one of those pitchers, and I believe Jeff Niemann was as well. If Tommy pops in I know he can answer that question better than myself because he has seen a lot of these pitchers first-hand several times (and of course he wrote the story, which I was unable to find now on the T1 website).

 

The biggest point I took from it was that the talent available for this June's draft truly is special. I would argue that there is no Mark Mulder, who was an incredible athlete with a great repertoire and the perfect size when the A's drafted him 2nd overall in 1998, but Bryan Bullington & Kyle Sleeth would probably be the the 4th or 5th best prospects in this year's draft. The talent at the top may not be as definite since outside of Verlander it lacks the true high-ceiling, ace starter, as even Jered Weaver isn't considered a true staff ace. It's the depth that makes it special. I would not be surprised at all to see the top 6-7 picks being pitchers, most of those being college arms, and I don't believe that has ever happened.

[RobertR]

Someone should post the Braves' first round draft picks over the last 10 years to highlight the importance of later picks and international scouting.

 

I think Williamson is an excellent example of the faulty premise of drafting for need. When he was drafted, the Brewers also had Jeff Cirillo in the system who turned into a fine third baseman. Ironically, third base might have been the position of least need in the entire system. Of course, it's also ironic that Williamson wasn't regarded as much of a reach.

 

Kyle Peterson was just bad scouting.

 

I think it's fair to say that David Krynzel was a bit of a reach. although not a huge one. He still has many of the problems that Sickels mentioned and it looked suspiciously like a "need" pick on draft day. There were some complaints that the pick was Chad Green, part II.

 

Of course, there was also some controversy over the Prince Fielder pick as well, proving that you can't please everyone. Although, most of that controversy involved his glove, not his bat.

 

Robert

[RobertR]

Just to answer my own question, here's what the last 14 years of Braves first round picks look like.

 

1990 Chipper Jones (Great pick. #1 overall)

1991 Mike Kelly

1992 Jamie Arnold

1993 No Pick (I think they gave this up for the Maddux signing)

1994 Jacob Shumate

1995 Chad Hutchinson

1996 A.J. Zapp

1997 Troy Cameron

1998 No Pick

1999 No Pick

2000 Adam Wainwright, Scott Thorman

2001 Joshua Burrus

2002 Jeffrey Francoeur

2003 No Pick

 

Given the track record, I think giving up those first rounders for a free agent signing was the best choice.

 

Considering that the Braves still produced plenty of talent from their farm system, it's absolute evidence of why giving up a second round pick for Jose Hernandez was foolish. And why there was more problems with the Brewers scouting and farm system than first round flops.

 

Robert

[mothershipconnection]

Yeah, that list does show that you can build a great system solely based on players taken after round 1 and international players. One thing to remember is that, unlike the Brewers, the Braves have been one of the best teams in baseball over that time period, and thus their failures are slightly more excusable since they have generally drafted much later in the round.

[RyDogg66]

Well, it is true that first round picks are not what makes or breaks a draft, or, I guess if you miss on your first pick, you can still have a great draft 4-5 years down the line if you do your scouting and pick the right guys in rounds 2-10. The biggest difference in the Braves picks and the Brewers picks is all of the BRewers picks were very high, where there is a lot of cant-miss talent, where the Braves were picking very often at the end of the first round, when the best players are usually gone. In my mind, it is hard to compare the two. Id say, compare Milwaukee and Minnesota, or Milwaukee and Oakland.

[RyDogg66]

Minnesota

1992 - Dan Serafini

1993 Tori Huner, Jason Varitek (did not sign)

1994 - Todd Walker

1995 - Mark Redman

1996 - Travis Lee

1997 - Micheal Cuddyer

1998 - Ryan Mills

1999 - BJ Garbe

 

Oakland

1992 - Micheal Grigsby

1993 - John Wasdin

1994 - Ben Grieve

1995 - Ariel Prieto

1996 - Eric Chavez

1997 - Chris Enochs, Eric DuBose

1998 - Mark Mulder

1999 - Barry Zito

 

I dont know if this says anything or not. I guess every pick in baseball is a crap shoot because the players are usually still so far from playing in the Majors that a lot has to go right for them to make it. But these teams seemed to do alright with their first round picks for the most part, especially their high ones.