http://tinyurl.com/3ur8t3

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

How many high-upside players are there in each draft? There would seem to be “few”, by definition … so a team either takes one of them with their 1st round pick, or they don’t … and I’ll agree with you that Carillo nor Schmidt nor Antonelli seem like they were picked for their upside … I’m just saying that each of those pics, being pretty deep into the 1st round, seem reasonable given the state of the Padre farm system … heck, they seem reasonable no matter what … those players were all “consensus 1st round picks” …

What’s your sense for how many “high-upside players” taken after the first 15 picks in the 1st round actually deliver on that upside? I’ve not studied it … do you figure it’s less than 5%? I think the %s for any given drafted player getting to MLB is pretty low … and to subset out those tag’d as “high-upside” seems like, again by definition, will be much lower … but perhaps I’m missing something about what a high-upside player is …

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

The polished / low-risk strategy is nearly everything to the Padres. It’s only one aspect of the strategy employed by more successful teams.

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

Not Great, But Big Leaguers: While the Padres pride themselves on pitching (and with a big league club average just over three runs a game, how could they not?), there’s more coming, and two arms at San Diego’s Double-A San Antonio affiliate caught the eye of one pro scout. Left-hander Steve Garrison and righty Will Inman, both acquired in last summer’s Scott Linebrink trade, are both pitching well for the Missions, and one scout who recently evaluated the pair thought that both will be successful in the majors, although on a somewhat limited level. “Inman is just so unusual,” said the scout. “He’s a fly-ball pitcher with a funky arm angle and a funky breaking ball, and it’s all just kind of weird. I don’t like him as a starter–just too many balls up and flat–but he’d be great for their bullpen in that park.” As for Garrision, the scout gave him a slightly higher grade when it came to upside. “Like Inman, he’s not overpowering, but he’s big-league worthy,” the scout continued. “I could see him starting or relieving, really. The fastball is average, but the other stuff is pretty good, and he’s got plenty of feel, command, athleticism and aggressiveness.” A concise conclusion: “They’re not phenomenal, but they’re good.”

… fyi.

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

Not What They Were Hoping For: In last year’s draft, the Diamondbacks spent a little over a million dollars on a pair of West Coast college right-handers who were high on polish and low on pure stuff. Supplemental first-round pick Wes Roemer and second-round selection Barry Enright both won a ton of college games with average velocity, decent breaking balls and laser-like precision, and that was enough for Arizona to begin both pitchers in the High-A California League. So far, both are still filling up the strike zone, but both are getting hit awfully hard as well. Roemer has an impressive 50 strikeouts against just 17 walks in 58 innings, but he also has a 5.12 ERA thanks to 76 hits allowed, including 10 home runs; Enright has a similar line of 47 whiffs and just 13 walks in 55 1/3 innings but, like Roemer, he’s been torched for 77 hits, leading to a 5.37 ERA. Once seen as a pair of pitching prospects who lacked high ceilings but could move quickly through the system, the brakes are now firmly engaged on both.

… hmmm, sounds like the Padres aren’t the only team with a “high on polish and low on pure stuff” strategy … I wonder why? (note: I’m asking that tonge-in-cheek because I think it’s a necessary / valuable part of many team’s draft strategy … because it often results in value to the organization)

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

More likely that they’d let Weeks play 2b in the Northwest League, then switch him to CF in the winter.

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

I can’t recall us drafting a college reliever, but this year the college starters aren’t deep.

In college, closers aren’t so often failed starters as they are in pro ball. Teams don’t need as many innings from their SP, and college closers are more frequently used like the fireman relievers of the 60s-mid 80s.

There may not be enough information on college relievers to say that they’ve generally failed as draft picks. Teams tend to rush them more than college starters. Cordero was pretty good for a while, and with Street, that’s 2 out of a not-very-big group of recent college relievers. That’s without searching too deep, I expect there are more successes.

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

#18@Tom Waits: Agreed about balancing the picks. If Tyler Ladendorf (JC shortstop) is available at #42, I’d love to see us grab him on the heels of a more polished guy like Weeks.

#19@KRS1: Hewitt is rising like crazy; I don’t see him slipping to #23. Mayo has Ethan Martin going #24, after we take Schlereth. If Martin is available, I hope we don’t pass on him in favor of Schlereth.

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)

I personally do not understand the point of drafting college relievers. Haven’t teams learned by now that relievers are just failed starters? There’s no upside at all, and there appears to be some risk, because Street is probably the only success story of the college relievers thus far.

Current score: 0 (to vote for this comment, please visit the site)