Pretty much agree with your analysis, except they took Roccaforte way too early according to all of the draft sites. But the overarching issue is that the Royals historically are very bad at drafting and developing players. It is very hard to hear the optimism of JJ Piccolo and Danny Ontiveros after years of no results by these same people. Are we really expected to believe them when they imply Mitchell is the second coming of Bryce Harper? How do these guys keep their jobs?
Based on draft rankings, they took Roccaforte quite early. I didn't know much about him, but I also know that around the third round there are quite a few reaches. Just using MLB Pipeline rankings, half of the last 14 picks were reaches of at least 30 spots higher (or lower? how do you say that?) than the draft position.
And you're right. The history is they haven't developed anyone and if that's the takeaway, fine, but then who cares who they pick?
Hmmmm. IDK David. I’m not going to pretend I know anything about these guys. I don’t, I don’t spend the time looking into them. I follow you guys that do so that I don’t have too. So I’m not going to get too worked up. But, and this is a big but, I don’t know if its lazy…..maybe you guys can think it is because I don’t know the details….but I know the odds and the first two picks were the two riskiest profiles you can pick? So does that mean JJ feels very secure in his job? Because, I strongly feel like he shouldn’t and this has the highest probability of going south of almost all the things you could have done. Watched Alex Duvall lose his mind last night on a podcast, so that concerns me. You saying you don’t really like it. So that concerns me. I’m not going to get on them because I don’t know, if they work they work. But at this point in time, the Chapman trade and this trade has done nothing to make me think…these guys have it figured out. Like you mentioned last week, last years draft MINUS CROSS…is looking pretty solid. This can as well…..but they have instilled zero confidence in me…and they’ve fairly earned that….to give them the benefit of the doubt here.
There is so much more nuance in the MLB draft, I think, than any other draft. That's because there isn't instant gratification like with every other sport. So I really struggle with analyzing it sometimes, and that's why I sort of stay on the periphery generally outside of digging in on a few players. We just don't know. So when I say I don't like a pick, what do I really know? I know what I know at this particular moment.
Here's what I'll say about Mitchell. He has top-10 offensive upside. IF he can catch and IF he reaches even 70% of the upside with the bat, it's a great pick in the end. But if he can't catch, he needs to reach 90% of the upside probably. If he doesn't reach the upside, he has to catch. I just think there are too many variables and where I agree with Alex is that they didn't need to swing for the fences here. They needed to add a little more surefire talent early on and I think they passed on some bats I would have liked quite a bit more.
I also think they've absolutely earned the skepticism from everyone involved. There's no reason to believe they will get it right and, as Soren always says, that's the business they're in. So we'll see. And also, similar to trade season, evaluating a draft after two rounds is a little like deciding if you like a meal after a bite or two. It gives you a good starting point, but you need to finish to determine if it was good or not.
What I didn’t say very well is…..if we have all these analytical guys now…and are using the numbers. College hitters have still been shown to be the best investment. If they got scared off because of Cross……surely that can’t be the case….then this is a stupid process. Thought we were using the numbers now? Hang on, hang on…I said I wouldn’t get on them…..
David - I want to thank you for making this season far more interesting and informative than I would have thought it could possibly be. And I genuinely mean that! I've learned a great deal from you and I truly appreciate the knowledge.
But it's only mid-July and already it's evident to me that some (not all) of these guys are just going through the motions. (Presumably that's in an effort to keep those big fat MLB paychecks rolling in.) This team simply doesn't deserve any more of my attention and they especially don't deserve any more of my valuable time.
Maybe I'll reconnect with you next spring if I'm still around. But thank you sincerely for making this season, which is on track to be by far the most futile in team history (one of the very worst seasons in the entire live ball era) more interesting than it had any right to be. I just can't get amped up anymore about hopeful projections and assumptions about young and kinda-young players and minor-leaguers and new coaches and the bright shiny futures they all have in front of them.
I've heard it all too many times before, and none of that wildly speculative stuff does anything for me now. The terminology changes from one era to another. So do the various methods and quality of analysis. But the underlying reality does not, and that reality remains stubbornly non-negotiable no matter how well it is described or analyzed.
Could Lopez starting in the outfield on Sunday be seen as trying to add some trade options for him? While he played well, just seems odd place for him given he hasn't played there since high school.
Also DFAing Amir, seems likely the Royals will eat another contract.
Oh yeah, I wanted to ask about the Amir Garrett DFA. Look, I always thought he was over-rated as he continually walked too many guys. But people smarter than me always felt like there was a trade market for him…and I can see why, hard throwing lefty. It just seems odd that you would DFA him now…before the trade deadline. They almost have to have a trade lineup up already don’t they? That whole move is just really weird to me.
I was surprised by it, but I really think they must have a deal lined up and they needed the roster spot, so it made perfect sense. We'll see, I guess.
I do think they were showcasing Lopez's versatility. There are a lot of teams in need of that who are very willing to move guys around.
As for Garrett, I'd be pretty surprised if they don't trade him during the DFA limbo and they may even already know who they're trading him for and just got a jump on it to clear the spot for Yarbrough.
I know this is just me emptying air into the void, but I just really dislike much about baseball's "salary cap" and draft system. It would make the sport so much more interesting if they had a parity system in place like football. Nobody can argue that it hasn't made a HUGE difference in keeping small market teams relevant (see current KC team for details). The largely unbalanced system coupled with the screwball signing bonus pool for the draft just really seem like a system designed to continue to hamstring small market teams like the Royals.
Let me be straight about the draft pool, though. I actually like the idea of this. I think it adds a fun layer of strategy and would really be a huge boon to teams able to find the right kind of analytical minds to lead their drafts. But pairing that with a system where some teams can just skip most of this and buy whatever talent they want later just means that teams like the royals end up picking risky prospects early in the draft to try and mitigate risk later in the draft, ending up with them getting a more average draft result over all, keeping bad teams average unless they can get really lucky on some hits. It also makes it tough for fans like us to get excited about draft picks since it will be even longer before we have any chance of seeing if they pan out.
I just don't like it and wish they'd change it. I know this has big Abe Simpson shaking his fists at the clouds energy, but I like the Royals and hate that they have to overcome so many hurdles just to be competitive when other teams simply don't.
Oh, the draft pool system is terrible. I know that people like to point to Derec Ladnier leaving, but the Royals drafts went south when the pool system was put in place. I think Ladnier leaving and Goldberg taking over didn't help, but I also think there were more factors put in place and they were designed to take away some of the few times the smaller market teams could flex a little financial muscle. I hate it and wish they'd just go to hard slotting and be done with it if they're going to do it.
If it wasn't for the uneven salary cap, I'd actually kind of like this system. It would be a great way to reward teams who really put the work into scouting and analysis, I think. But requiring a team to be aces at that to even have a small chance to compete in the league overall because they can't possibly compete on acquiring/keeping the best talent once it's established just sucks. I'm a little bit nerdy and love adding layers of complexity to things, as long as they offer commensurate rewards--and if the playing field is level for everyone who is playing on it to begin with, which it isn't in baseball.
There they go again, defying conventional (and most other) wisdom in the draft. Well, at least it’s resulted in a good MLB team. Not exactly. But at least they have a great farm system. Uh, no. But at least they’ve had a complete front office overhaul. Ugh. I’m running out of reasons to follow this team.
I’ve seen the Reds and Orioles play in the last couple of weeks, and they are the fun up-and-coming type of teams the Royals should be. David, maybe you can start writing about them?
Lol, actually…..what if we do this. If you write about the Diamondbacks….they are fun this year for a week. And get into their farm system a little bit. Then come back to this train wreck and inform the readers what the Diamondbacks are doing better right now and what the Royals need to improve on.
And after my little MJ Melendez meltdown last week, I’m starting to wonder if Q isn’t a little part of the problem. No reason to think that really, and generally I think everyone they brought in gets a pass yet. But when you are historically bad, you start looking at everything and wondering….it’s tough out there!
Good draft thoughts, appreciate the perspective. Totally agree on the let's not look back to '97 stuff. Also, as you note, or at least imply, below, doing MLB draft analysis is a crapshoot at best. A huge chunk of the top tier baseball talent globally isn't even in the draft. Elly de la Cruz was signed as a 16 yr old international free agent w/ no clue as to what he might turn into one day (definitely not what he is) -- and yes, I get that other clubs are acquiring or at least developing draft talent much better than KC (Baltimore, etc). If I were GM, given all the uncertainties, I would be tempted to just draft nothing but arms and hope for some nuggets. But draft strategy definitely way above my pay grade, it would be hard to find someone more ignorant about the MLB draft than me, so thanks for the intel and rational explanation. Also, as for the MLB club at intermission: knock on wood, but BWJ's offensive numbers continue to climb. There's a world in which he's slashing at a fairly respectable rate by the end of the year (OBP, of course, definitely needs some serious work). Also in on Garcia and Fermin, some warm fuzzies on Pratto, Massey/Waters/Isbell/Lopez can take or leave, and as for MJ, not even sure what to say. Feel like pitching staff (younger arms) and MJ in same bucket -- can't believe we have to give up on them, wish there were more legit glimmers of hope, but things look bleak / getting close to just cut loose and totally start over territory (although did appreciate RY's effort yesterday). Willing to be talked out of this, in large part bc this is just watching from the peanut gallery kind of analysis, but fwiw. And finally, there's luck - some teams have it, KC definitely doesn't. Here's to hoping for a little more of it in the back half.
I do think there are positives for the Royals, which you outlined well. I actually feel better about someone like MJ because there's very clear issues - his approach - so you know there's something to work on. Some guys just may not be very good. And that's frustrating. But some guys are pretty close to saying that the evaluation year has led to the evaluation that they should be gone.
But also, yes, the Royals don't seem to have much in the way of good luck. Some of that they bring on themselves but some of it just doesn't seem to hit them.
I think the big issue with high school catchers vs. college catchers is the ones who aren't going to make get weeded out some. But generally, every college catcher was once a high school catcher unless we have a baseball Doogie Howser situation, which would make for a truly terrible Disney show I'd watch.
Yeah, I think the surprising thing to me isn’t that it’s a high school vs college. It’s a little more about all the talk about analytics looking at numbers, etc, etc. Then you turn around and grab the two riskiest profiles and spend the most money on them when the numbers say “in general” those don’t work out the most. There is just a disconnect there that I’m quite shocked at. Could be the right players, I have no idea. I’m not going to waste any energy defending them because they haven’t earned that. But maybe they will with these picks in the end. Who knows. They need to be right though, or they won’t be around…so I think…they think….they made the right moves.
I’d argue that teams draft human beings, not data points. If we’re just gonna go off rankings and probability, we might as well assign players to teams based on a list and not do this at all.
I think that's a good point. Trends point to analysis, so I understand the idea that this position at this age doesn't do well or whatever. But even so, what Kyle Skipworth did has very little to do with what Blake Mitchell will do. This is obviously a super extreme example, but the Chiefs couldn't draft/develop a quarterback. Until they did. Banking on the exception is a risky proposition, but using that data only tells you so much.
Yes, absolutely you are both right. I can’t defend them or argue against because we don’t know. But are we really using the data more if trends tell you one thing and you completely buck them? IDK. History tells me maybe they should be going with the consensus. But again, we won’t know and they may not be able to develop…until one day they do. IDK.
Pretty much agree with your analysis, except they took Roccaforte way too early according to all of the draft sites. But the overarching issue is that the Royals historically are very bad at drafting and developing players. It is very hard to hear the optimism of JJ Piccolo and Danny Ontiveros after years of no results by these same people. Are we really expected to believe them when they imply Mitchell is the second coming of Bryce Harper? How do these guys keep their jobs?
Based on draft rankings, they took Roccaforte quite early. I didn't know much about him, but I also know that around the third round there are quite a few reaches. Just using MLB Pipeline rankings, half of the last 14 picks were reaches of at least 30 spots higher (or lower? how do you say that?) than the draft position.
And you're right. The history is they haven't developed anyone and if that's the takeaway, fine, but then who cares who they pick?
Hmmmm. IDK David. I’m not going to pretend I know anything about these guys. I don’t, I don’t spend the time looking into them. I follow you guys that do so that I don’t have too. So I’m not going to get too worked up. But, and this is a big but, I don’t know if its lazy…..maybe you guys can think it is because I don’t know the details….but I know the odds and the first two picks were the two riskiest profiles you can pick? So does that mean JJ feels very secure in his job? Because, I strongly feel like he shouldn’t and this has the highest probability of going south of almost all the things you could have done. Watched Alex Duvall lose his mind last night on a podcast, so that concerns me. You saying you don’t really like it. So that concerns me. I’m not going to get on them because I don’t know, if they work they work. But at this point in time, the Chapman trade and this trade has done nothing to make me think…these guys have it figured out. Like you mentioned last week, last years draft MINUS CROSS…is looking pretty solid. This can as well…..but they have instilled zero confidence in me…and they’ve fairly earned that….to give them the benefit of the doubt here.
There is so much more nuance in the MLB draft, I think, than any other draft. That's because there isn't instant gratification like with every other sport. So I really struggle with analyzing it sometimes, and that's why I sort of stay on the periphery generally outside of digging in on a few players. We just don't know. So when I say I don't like a pick, what do I really know? I know what I know at this particular moment.
Here's what I'll say about Mitchell. He has top-10 offensive upside. IF he can catch and IF he reaches even 70% of the upside with the bat, it's a great pick in the end. But if he can't catch, he needs to reach 90% of the upside probably. If he doesn't reach the upside, he has to catch. I just think there are too many variables and where I agree with Alex is that they didn't need to swing for the fences here. They needed to add a little more surefire talent early on and I think they passed on some bats I would have liked quite a bit more.
I also think they've absolutely earned the skepticism from everyone involved. There's no reason to believe they will get it right and, as Soren always says, that's the business they're in. So we'll see. And also, similar to trade season, evaluating a draft after two rounds is a little like deciding if you like a meal after a bite or two. It gives you a good starting point, but you need to finish to determine if it was good or not.
What I didn’t say very well is…..if we have all these analytical guys now…and are using the numbers. College hitters have still been shown to be the best investment. If they got scared off because of Cross……surely that can’t be the case….then this is a stupid process. Thought we were using the numbers now? Hang on, hang on…I said I wouldn’t get on them…..
Drafting who they drafted had absolutely nothing to do with Cross and his struggles. That much I can promise you.
Zero confidence is absolutely right. How do they keep their jobs?
David - I want to thank you for making this season far more interesting and informative than I would have thought it could possibly be. And I genuinely mean that! I've learned a great deal from you and I truly appreciate the knowledge.
But it's only mid-July and already it's evident to me that some (not all) of these guys are just going through the motions. (Presumably that's in an effort to keep those big fat MLB paychecks rolling in.) This team simply doesn't deserve any more of my attention and they especially don't deserve any more of my valuable time.
Maybe I'll reconnect with you next spring if I'm still around. But thank you sincerely for making this season, which is on track to be by far the most futile in team history (one of the very worst seasons in the entire live ball era) more interesting than it had any right to be. I just can't get amped up anymore about hopeful projections and assumptions about young and kinda-young players and minor-leaguers and new coaches and the bright shiny futures they all have in front of them.
I've heard it all too many times before, and none of that wildly speculative stuff does anything for me now. The terminology changes from one era to another. So do the various methods and quality of analysis. But the underlying reality does not, and that reality remains stubbornly non-negotiable no matter how well it is described or analyzed.
Could Lopez starting in the outfield on Sunday be seen as trying to add some trade options for him? While he played well, just seems odd place for him given he hasn't played there since high school.
Also DFAing Amir, seems likely the Royals will eat another contract.
Oh yeah, I wanted to ask about the Amir Garrett DFA. Look, I always thought he was over-rated as he continually walked too many guys. But people smarter than me always felt like there was a trade market for him…and I can see why, hard throwing lefty. It just seems odd that you would DFA him now…before the trade deadline. They almost have to have a trade lineup up already don’t they? That whole move is just really weird to me.
I was surprised by it, but I really think they must have a deal lined up and they needed the roster spot, so it made perfect sense. We'll see, I guess.
I do think they were showcasing Lopez's versatility. There are a lot of teams in need of that who are very willing to move guys around.
As for Garrett, I'd be pretty surprised if they don't trade him during the DFA limbo and they may even already know who they're trading him for and just got a jump on it to clear the spot for Yarbrough.
I know this is just me emptying air into the void, but I just really dislike much about baseball's "salary cap" and draft system. It would make the sport so much more interesting if they had a parity system in place like football. Nobody can argue that it hasn't made a HUGE difference in keeping small market teams relevant (see current KC team for details). The largely unbalanced system coupled with the screwball signing bonus pool for the draft just really seem like a system designed to continue to hamstring small market teams like the Royals.
Let me be straight about the draft pool, though. I actually like the idea of this. I think it adds a fun layer of strategy and would really be a huge boon to teams able to find the right kind of analytical minds to lead their drafts. But pairing that with a system where some teams can just skip most of this and buy whatever talent they want later just means that teams like the royals end up picking risky prospects early in the draft to try and mitigate risk later in the draft, ending up with them getting a more average draft result over all, keeping bad teams average unless they can get really lucky on some hits. It also makes it tough for fans like us to get excited about draft picks since it will be even longer before we have any chance of seeing if they pan out.
I just don't like it and wish they'd change it. I know this has big Abe Simpson shaking his fists at the clouds energy, but I like the Royals and hate that they have to overcome so many hurdles just to be competitive when other teams simply don't.
Oh, the draft pool system is terrible. I know that people like to point to Derec Ladnier leaving, but the Royals drafts went south when the pool system was put in place. I think Ladnier leaving and Goldberg taking over didn't help, but I also think there were more factors put in place and they were designed to take away some of the few times the smaller market teams could flex a little financial muscle. I hate it and wish they'd just go to hard slotting and be done with it if they're going to do it.
If it wasn't for the uneven salary cap, I'd actually kind of like this system. It would be a great way to reward teams who really put the work into scouting and analysis, I think. But requiring a team to be aces at that to even have a small chance to compete in the league overall because they can't possibly compete on acquiring/keeping the best talent once it's established just sucks. I'm a little bit nerdy and love adding layers of complexity to things, as long as they offer commensurate rewards--and if the playing field is level for everyone who is playing on it to begin with, which it isn't in baseball.
I think that's fair. One or the other but not both.
There they go again, defying conventional (and most other) wisdom in the draft. Well, at least it’s resulted in a good MLB team. Not exactly. But at least they have a great farm system. Uh, no. But at least they’ve had a complete front office overhaul. Ugh. I’m running out of reasons to follow this team.
I’ve seen the Reds and Orioles play in the last couple of weeks, and they are the fun up-and-coming type of teams the Royals should be. David, maybe you can start writing about them?
Ha maybe!
Lol, actually…..what if we do this. If you write about the Diamondbacks….they are fun this year for a week. And get into their farm system a little bit. Then come back to this train wreck and inform the readers what the Diamondbacks are doing better right now and what the Royals need to improve on.
And after my little MJ Melendez meltdown last week, I’m starting to wonder if Q isn’t a little part of the problem. No reason to think that really, and generally I think everyone they brought in gets a pass yet. But when you are historically bad, you start looking at everything and wondering….it’s tough out there!
Good draft thoughts, appreciate the perspective. Totally agree on the let's not look back to '97 stuff. Also, as you note, or at least imply, below, doing MLB draft analysis is a crapshoot at best. A huge chunk of the top tier baseball talent globally isn't even in the draft. Elly de la Cruz was signed as a 16 yr old international free agent w/ no clue as to what he might turn into one day (definitely not what he is) -- and yes, I get that other clubs are acquiring or at least developing draft talent much better than KC (Baltimore, etc). If I were GM, given all the uncertainties, I would be tempted to just draft nothing but arms and hope for some nuggets. But draft strategy definitely way above my pay grade, it would be hard to find someone more ignorant about the MLB draft than me, so thanks for the intel and rational explanation. Also, as for the MLB club at intermission: knock on wood, but BWJ's offensive numbers continue to climb. There's a world in which he's slashing at a fairly respectable rate by the end of the year (OBP, of course, definitely needs some serious work). Also in on Garcia and Fermin, some warm fuzzies on Pratto, Massey/Waters/Isbell/Lopez can take or leave, and as for MJ, not even sure what to say. Feel like pitching staff (younger arms) and MJ in same bucket -- can't believe we have to give up on them, wish there were more legit glimmers of hope, but things look bleak / getting close to just cut loose and totally start over territory (although did appreciate RY's effort yesterday). Willing to be talked out of this, in large part bc this is just watching from the peanut gallery kind of analysis, but fwiw. And finally, there's luck - some teams have it, KC definitely doesn't. Here's to hoping for a little more of it in the back half.
Draft analysis is DIFFICULT, so I totally get it.
I do think there are positives for the Royals, which you outlined well. I actually feel better about someone like MJ because there's very clear issues - his approach - so you know there's something to work on. Some guys just may not be very good. And that's frustrating. But some guys are pretty close to saying that the evaluation year has led to the evaluation that they should be gone.
But also, yes, the Royals don't seem to have much in the way of good luck. Some of that they bring on themselves but some of it just doesn't seem to hit them.
I’m kind of being a snot here, but … ya know who else was a high school catcher 3 years ago? Kyle Teel. I’m just saying.
I think the big issue with high school catchers vs. college catchers is the ones who aren't going to make get weeded out some. But generally, every college catcher was once a high school catcher unless we have a baseball Doogie Howser situation, which would make for a truly terrible Disney show I'd watch.
Yeah, I think the surprising thing to me isn’t that it’s a high school vs college. It’s a little more about all the talk about analytics looking at numbers, etc, etc. Then you turn around and grab the two riskiest profiles and spend the most money on them when the numbers say “in general” those don’t work out the most. There is just a disconnect there that I’m quite shocked at. Could be the right players, I have no idea. I’m not going to waste any energy defending them because they haven’t earned that. But maybe they will with these picks in the end. Who knows. They need to be right though, or they won’t be around…so I think…they think….they made the right moves.
I’d argue that teams draft human beings, not data points. If we’re just gonna go off rankings and probability, we might as well assign players to teams based on a list and not do this at all.
I think that's a good point. Trends point to analysis, so I understand the idea that this position at this age doesn't do well or whatever. But even so, what Kyle Skipworth did has very little to do with what Blake Mitchell will do. This is obviously a super extreme example, but the Chiefs couldn't draft/develop a quarterback. Until they did. Banking on the exception is a risky proposition, but using that data only tells you so much.
Yes, absolutely you are both right. I can’t defend them or argue against because we don’t know. But are we really using the data more if trends tell you one thing and you completely buck them? IDK. History tells me maybe they should be going with the consensus. But again, we won’t know and they may not be able to develop…until one day they do. IDK.
Joel just summed up the entire draft. Will this guy be good? Idk.
"Doogie Howser, O.B.P."?