Selecting LaPorta over Heyward

[Hate those Rodents]

Is that move looking pretty bad in spite of how the pick landed us CC? For all intents an purposes, we were after a power hitting outfielder and the best one we could find. Not only was Heyward rated higher at the time, but he actually was an outfielder. We didn't know if LaPorta could even make the transition, much less be the better bat than Heyward. I know most will not follow Heyward in the context I am bringing up here during the next several years, but I can't help but think we made a mistake passing on the guy (Heyward) we clearly should have taken even without hindsight.

[Tedaldtada]

Yea, that was def. a mistake, but not a crippling one. LaPorta has proven to be a worthy selection so far. We also passed on Madison Bumgarner and Jarrod Parker. I wonder if Seid would have made the LaPorta pick? I have a feeling he wouldn't.

[endaround]

Not really. LaPorta projected to be ready by 2009, Heyward is still just 20 and while he may come up this year next year seems like a better bet and even projecting a 21 year old to start is a hard thing to do.

[biedergb]

The reverse way of looking at it is this -- to get CC we needed a top prospect to trade, if we traded Heyward, maybe we would have second guessed the CC trade more, but losing LaPorta doesn't seem too bad for the player who single handedly brought the playoffs to Milwaukee.

[804Sox]

You can't look back with 20-20 vision. laPorta was among the most MLB-ready bats in that draft, and had more present power than most guys could even project for. It's rare to get a player with LaPorta's upside that also had his floor and proximity on draft day. You have to consider it a good pick even though, looking back now, you might take Heyward or Bumgarner or Parker instead. Still no guarantee any of those three make meaningful contributions in the majors. LaPorta's there and seems headed for at least a decent career.

[jerichoholicninja]

If we draft Heyward I don't think we trade him for C.C. So no C.C. but we still have Heyward. It seems like a tough call for me but in the long wrong I probably would prefer 5-6 years of Heyward vs. 6 months of C.C., playoffs or not.

[sheetskout]

All this would have meant was that Heyward would be an Indian at this point Remember, at the time Laporta was dealt to Cleveland he was a huge prospect.

[nate82]

All this would have meant was that Heyward would be an Indian at this point Remember, at the time Laporta was dealt to Cleveland he was a huge prospect.

Actually I think Gamel would be in Cleveland right now. I don't think the Indians would have had as much interest in Heyward he would have been in what A or A+ in the minors at the time. I believe you could have easily replaced LaPorta with Gamel in the C.C. trade and the trade still would have gone through with Cleveland.