CheezWizHed

For comparison's sake, here are Jack Z's years as Director of Scouting. I didn't grade these. The main difference I see in the draft success comes down to 3 people: Weeks, Fielder and Braun. Drafted at #2, #7 and #5 positions in the draft, where Bruce has never had a chance. Round 2000 Draft 1 David Krynzel 3 Dane Artman 4 Eric Henderson 5 Jason Belcher 2001 1 Michael D. Jones 2 James J. Hardy 3 Jonathan G. Steitz 4 Bradley Nelson 5 Judd A. Richardson 9 Dennis S. Sarfate 15 Tim Dillard 2002 1 Prince G Fielder 2 Joshua A Murray 3 Eric M Thomas 4 Nicholas A Carter 5 Jarrad M Page 16 Dana J Eveland 25 John A Vanden Berg 34 Jeff D Housman 35 Tim Dillard 40 Hunter A Pence 2003 1 Rickie D Weeks 2 Anthony K Gwynn 3 Louis R Palmisano 4 Charlie Fermaint 5 Bryan H Opdyke 11 Adam R Heether 12 Carlos F Corporan 16 Mitchel B Stetter 19 Ty A Taubenheim 40 Robert Hinton 2004 1 Mark E Rogers 2 Yovani Gallardo 3 Joshua G Wahpepah 4 Joshua H Baker 5 Angel I Salome 17 Lorenzo L Cain 18 Darren R Ford 2005 1 Ryan J Braun 3 William B Inman 4 Matthew L Gamel 5 Kevin W Roberts 6 Steven J Hammond 7 Michael C Brantley 8 Jemile N Weeks 10 Stevenson N Garrison 18 William Z Braddock 25 Taylor W Green 2006 1 Jeremy R Jeffress 2 Brent E Brewer 3 Cole B Gillespie 4 Evan J Anundsen 5 Christopher J Errecart 10 Michael McClendon 2007 1 Matthew V LaPorta 3 Jonathan C Lucroy 4 Eric M Farris 5 Caleb C Gindl 6 Daniel W Merklinger 11 Cody M Scarpetta 14 Donovan Hand 2008 1 Brett R Lawrie 1 Jacob Odorizzi 1 Evan S Frederickson 2 Seth T Lintz 2 Cutter K Dykstra 2 Thomas C Adams 3 Logan E Schafer 4 Joshua M Romanski 5 Maverick A Lasker 8 Erik J Komatsu 13 Robert D Wooten 18 Nicholas B Bucci 21 Lucas L Luetge 49 Dan Meadows

As for Rodon, that would be a definite A+ if he signed but they didn't pay him the extra 600k or whatever it was so I think that should be an F. I'm trying to separate the identification of talent (and swinging for a long shot in the late rounds) and the ability to sign them. I don't know if Rodon would have signed for that much or not. Seems that I remember he had a pretty strong college commitment. My 2012 grades are pretty early for sure, but I tried to give a loose judgement on what I remember them contributing. Coulter and Taylor doing well at Rookie+ as HS picks are pretty good. Three guys that I still have high hopes to become "A" picks are: - Jimmy Nelson: Has injury concerns and a little wildness, but a 94MPH sinking FB is pretty exciting - Jed Bradley: Maybe its still Kool-Aide, but I still suspect he wasn't 100% all of last year and will bounce back strong this year. - Victor Roache: If he heals up, could be the big-time power we were looking for.

A quick peek at how I think Seid has done. Overall, he seems like Ron Wolf in that he fails early, but hits on later rounds. The 2009 draft was abysmal for his early rounds, but also one of his stronger late drafts. I'm not down on Taylor/Bradley as much as others are here. I think both are going to turn out fine and I still have hopes of high end for Bradley. I picked out the top 5 rounds of each draft and added the significant others that came later. Grades are based on position in the draft vs. what they have done back. So the late round "As" don't mean they are better than the first round "B". Just that Seid did a good job finding someone of that caliber at that draft round. Round 2009 Grade 1 Eric Arnett F 1 Kentrail Davis D 1 Kyle Heckathorn D 2 Max Walla D 2 Cameron Garfield C 3 Josh Prince C 4 Brooks Hall C 5 D' Vontrey Richardson D 6 Hiram Burgos A 13 Sean Halton A 16 Scooter Gennett A 22 Mike Fiers A Round 2010 Grade 1 Dylan Covey INC 2 Jimmy Nelson B 3 Tyler Thornburg A 4 Hunter Morris B 5 Matt Miller C 8 Austin Ross B 9 Yadiel Rivera B 10 Rafael Neda B 44 T.J. Mittelstaedt A Round 2011 Grade 1 Taylor Jungmann B 1 Jed Bradley C 2 Jorge Lopez D 3 Drew Gagnon B 4 Nick Ramirez D 5 Michael Reed C 7 David Goforth B 16 Carlos Rodon A+ 18 Chris McFarland A Round 2012 Grade 1 Clint Coulter A 1 Victor Roache INC 1 Mitch Haniger B 2 Tyrone Taylor A 3 Zachary Quintana Too Early 4 Tyler Wagner Too Early 5 Damien Magnifico Too Early

With Luc injured right off the bat, Tobias was given the SF starting reigns from the beginning of training camp. He had his moments, but nothing really to lock it up. You can argue that he wasn't given enough time, but he wasn't buried at the end of the bench (to start the season anyway). He was getting over 18 minutes per game for the month of November. I'm obviously no NBA talent scout, but no scout that saw this trade really bemoaned the loss of Harris either.

I'll actually chime in as one who is in favor of this trade. Initially, I didn't like that they gave up Tobias Harris. But as I thought about it more, I realize how big of a chance he was given and how little he has worked out. I realize that he is young and could still work out, but honestly, those cases are rare. I think they already saw what they needed out of the guy. I don't think he is a throw-away (like a few of our previous #1 picks), but he will probably be an average player in the NBA at best. And he might be a few years away from that also. I have an inkling that they have longer term plans for Redick and getting him now gives them a leg up on signing him long term. Plus, Jennings and Redick seem like a more natural pairing. Jennings and Ellis seem far too similar (short, quick, driving types, with poor outside shooting).

the question is if the upgrade from Rogers/Narveson to him is worth the contract and loss of a draft pick. And losing the pick is doubly painful, as we lose it to the Cardinals. So it knocks our draft down a bit, but also boosts our rivals.

At least at 1B, they have one of their better prospects in the mix in Morris. There isn't much difference between Khris Davis and Morris in terms of MLB prospects for this year. Both have their issues that could hold them back (Davis' bat speed, Morris' lack of walks). Morris probably has the higher ceiling, but Davis is more proven at this point. And seeing that Davis could be a backup OFer vs. Morris a starting 1B... I would think 1B is the more crucial issue.

My guess is that when the evidence comes out to the general public, we will find that the list of names that links most of these players to BioGenesis is from the owner's Fantasy Baseball team...

But if Lyle comes back... would "OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO" be the same?

East Coast Sports Writer Template 2.0: [big market team] is targeting [small market team] and is looking to acquire [super star player from small market team] because [insert random reason]. List of possible reasons: 1. [small market team] only won [wins for small market team in previous season (note: number is irrelevant)] and is looking to rebuild. 2. [super star player from small market team] couldn't resist the allure of playing for [big market team] after muddling along for years at [small market team]. 3. revenue poor [small market team] couldn't possibly afford [super star player from small market team]. 4. we are [big market team] and no one cares about [small market team]. Do they even have any fans? 5. no one wants [small market team] in the WS because who would watch it? 6. it makes it so much easier for East Coast Sports Network to cover all the good players if they are on one of 4 teams.

If he were in another team's system, we likely wouldn't even know about him. We wouldn't know about him, but if you don't have front office personnel monitoring other team's prospects and who might be available in trades due to being blocked, you should be fired. I'm not sold on Gennett as an MLB player, but I'm certain prospect status and MiLB level are high enough that every other front office knows about him.

Agreed. A very nice pickup. Solidifies our backup IF position, ok bat off the bench and if the worst comes, he might be a decent target for a deadline trade if we are out of contention.

Do they actually send a check for one dollar, or is it just a formality. I just find the idea of guys worth a billion or nearly a billion dollars writing a one dollar check.... Nah... Mark A just walked down to the vending machine and stuck in a $5 bill to buy a Mountain Dew. Then he took one of the Susan B. Anthony dollars from the change and mailed it in.

[sarcasm]Great! Now he is sandbagging on having the surgery![/sarcasm]

I struggled for years to try to teach myself. There are a few things that if you learn wrong make it much harder to play. I ended up taking 2 years of lessons and really enjoyed it. I paid $15 per 30 minute lesson. I'd at least take a year of lessons to get the basics down then it will make it easier to go on your own.

I don't know what to tell you; because there's NO way the Brewers offer Gomez that much. The Brewers will definitely give Gomez a QO next off season. I don't think anyone can say definitely. Even if he repeats what he did last year, is that really worth it for the Brewers to risk paying $14 million for that? Well, I guess I made my point about Gomez being questionable for the QO... One "absolutely", one "no way" and one "its risky". But now the Brewers have fewer compensation chances year-to-year. Yes, agreed. But so does everyone. Everyone is going to have fewer compensation choices because there are fewer players getting a QO overall. But deep pockets has always allowed a team to give a QO or arby to players that might be "questionable" to other teams. Its still not drastically different than it was, there are simply fewer compensation picks overall.

Yes, lets forget that he is in a contract year and that missing 6 weeks of the season will hurt his value, not to mention getting a bigger hit on the "injury prone" label. Lets jump right to sandbagging. [sarcasm]bill hAll Star and his classic post 122.[/sarcasm]

It's one thing to be able to offer Arbitration to a player and not have to worry about him accepting it or not. It's a totally different thing to offer a 13.5million dollar QO and have the player accept it. Its not totally different at all. The difference is that the QO is no longer variable (determined by arby), its a fixed amount. In the past, we debated whether to give Player X arbitration. For that person Arby may be $5M or $10M or $20M. Now, that QO is $13.5M for everyone. For every team, that means less QOs will be given out. But its still easier for a deep pocket team to offer it to a player that would be considered marginal for that money. In the past, we have debated giving Felipe Lopez arby (for maybe $5M?) but didn't. But no team is going to give him a QO of $13.5M. Obviously, someone like Fielder (last year) would be given a QO by any and every team. Now, lets take Carlos Gomez. Lots of debate around BF.net whether he is worth a QO of $13.5M. So its questionable by the Brewers to do that or not. But if he was with the Yanks or Dodgers and they needed a CF, that decision might be easier for them. It doesn't change the old system by much, it just narrows the number of players that might be in it by raising the $$ bar. But because it forces teams to give an offer, the system still favors the deep pocket teams because they have more money to play with. The NFL system of FA compensation is better because it compensates those teams that lose players without signing equivalent players. Its about losing FAs, not about if you can afford to offer a certain contract or not.

Yes, this is my biggest complaint. A "Riches" team like NY can QO any player they wish and take on the payroll if accepted or lose the player, gain an added draft pick. But that is no different now than it was in the old system. Teams with deeper pockets could afford to offer arby to more questionable FAs. They should just use a system like the NFL so it has nothing to do with a QO, but simply a compensation system for teams that lose players.

Based on Ram's grading system, remember that a D+ is only two steps below "Met Expectations" ©. So perhaps your remembering your 8th grade English teacher and the resulting punishments from your parents. Here a D+ is a disappointment, but not a disaster from Peralta. Second, his time at AAA was a disappointment last year. One main statistic was his calling card last year: 2008: 2.9 BB/9 2009: 4.0 2010: 3.9 2011: 3.5 2012: 4.8 Peralta has been slowly improving his control year after year, but took a large step backwards last year and his other results suffered because of it. As I said in my other post, his MLB performance was very encouraging so it tempers that a little bit. (I was actually shocked he did so well in the MLB given his AAA control issue). So given Ram's grading system, I don't think a D+ is all that far off. At minimum, its a C- considering the whole year.

I would guess these two numbers are the main issue: Stats (AAA): 28 GS, 146.2 IP, 4.66 ERA, 8.8 K/9, 4.8 BB/9, 1.83 K/BB, 3.83 FIP But I would think that even his small sample stint at the MLB level would temper that some, since it was quite a positive step for him: Stats (MLB): 6 G (5 GS), 29.0 IP, 2.48 ERA, 7.14 K/9, 3.4 BB/9, 2.09 K/BB, 2.65 FIP

Josh Prince got a lot of press for being a utility player, but TJ Mittelstaedt is the consummate utility player. I see a lot of Mark Loretta in him.

And listing Coulter's alternate position as DH, instead of 1B, for a NL club? Why is that a problem? Just because we don't have a DH, doesn't meant it isn't his future position. Fielder had the same label and look where he is now... in AL. Maybe the NL will have the DH by the time he is up in the bigs...

I think most people who frequent this forum are educated on the numbers. True. But we are the minority. Most fans expect NFL draft success, not MLB draft success. I remember a thread where someone (here) was complaining about the number of 4th round draft picks that the Brewers "miss" on. I think my response was that in 4-5 years of 4th round draft picks (drafted more than 5 years ago), there was only 1 or 2 names that were familiar as MLB players.

before we start claiming WOAH SOLVVD. What are you talking about? We have great catching talent and depth...