Rule V picks shouldn't make Top 10's. Just sayin'...

Rule V picks shouldn't make Top 10's. Just sayin'...

I'm pretty sure Flaherty was in the Cubs top 10.

FWIW - I consider that Thed's biggest misstep thus far... Yes, Flaherty is/was a 'SS' in the same way that Jake Fox was a 'C' - but I do think Flaherty has a good chance to be a relatively valuable utility guy playing 3B/LF/RF/1B, perhaps as an emergency option up the middle, putting up decent numbers hitting solely against RHP.

I'd be shocked if he doesn't stick and turn out to be 50K very well spent.

Since 2001, the Orioles have drafted;

2001 - 7th LHP Chris Smith
2002 - 4th LHP Adam Loewen
2003 - 7th OF Nick Markakis
2004 - 8th RHP Wade Townsend
2005 - 13th 1B Brad Snyder
2006 - 9th 3B Billy Rowell
2007 - 5th C Matt Wieters
2008 - 4th LHP Brian Matusz
2009 - 5th RHP Matt Hobgood
2010 - 3rd SS Manny Machado
2011 - 4th RHP Dylan Bundy

And this is what they have to show for it. Maybe we should give the Rays a bit more credit than saying "well they always draft high!"

I'm pretty sure Flaherty was in the Cubs top 10.

Nah. I agree that he should have been protected, but that placement is strictly a function of how weak the O's system is.
I expect him to stick as well.

Maybe we should give the Rays a bit more credit than saying "well they always draft high!"

Most definitely.

This is a little off-topic, but what should the O's rotation be in 2012? I was thinking about this last night - it's a bit of a mess.

This is a little off-topic, but what should the O's rotation be in 2012? I was thinking about this last night - it's a bit of a mess.

They've got Guthrie, Chen and Wada now and Simon has probably earned the 4th spot. The kids, Arrieta, Britton, Tillman, Bergesen and Hunter have all been given chances and failed. I'd let them fight it out for the 5th spot and move everyone else to the bullpen (except Bergesen whom I would dump).

There's no question that the orioles have done a lousy job in the draft (although I suspect it's really more a function of development than drafting), but they've never had the 1st or 2nd pick, and only had the 3rd pick once. THe Rays have had the #1 pick four times. It's far too simplistic to say "well the Rays always draft high," but it's not irrelevant. Of course, all that shows is that orioles should have been much more committed to rebuilding throughout much of the decade and allowed themselves to truly suck instead of slapping bandaids on problems, resulting in seasons that were bad, but not bad enough.

This is a little off-topic, but what should the O's rotation be in 2012? I was thinking about this last night - it's a bit of a mess.

You've already answered your question. The O's rotation in 2012 is a bit of a mess.

If Guthrie isn't traded, the rotation will probably be him, Chen, Arrieta, Britton, and Wada. Matusz and Tillman will start in AAA unless they look great in ST. Hunter and Simon will probably be in the bullpen, but will get a shot at starting soon enough.

I'd like to see them trade Guthrie for a prospect or two and go after Jackson. I don't get the sense that there's much of a market for him, and if they can sign him for something like 4/$48M he could be the steal of the offseason. 180-200 innings of 100-110 ERA+ pitching is pretty valuable.

#8: That's what I was thinking too; thanks guys...

(although I suspect it's really more a function of development than drafting)

Agree. Hobgood was an awful pick the second it was made, but Loewen, Townsend and Matusz were all good pitching prospects and they all failed spectacularly.

They've got Guthrie, Chen and Wada now and Simon has probably earned the 4th spot.

Yeah, I think Guthrie, Chen and Wada are probably all close to locks to be in the Opening Day rotation. Since Chen and Wada are lefties I'd think they may only pick one of Matusz/Britton for one of the remaining slots and then let Simon/Tommy Hunter/Jake Arietta and Chris Tillman duke it out for the other slot. I guess it is kind of a mess in that it's undefined, but they have plenty of options and it wouldn't surprise me to see them cobble together a passable rotation from it.

I find Chen very intriguing. I've got him projected to up an ERA of about 4 based on his NPB translations which would probably make him the O's best starter.

I find Chen very intriguing. I've got him projected to up an ERA of about 4 based on his NPB translations which would probably make him the O's best starter.

So this Chen is not Bruce Chen?

This is a little off-topic, but what should the O's rotation be in 2012? I was thinking about this last night - it's a bit of a mess.

Sadly it's been a long time since an offseason when this question didn't apply....

Dan has Chen @ 10-10 4.44, ERA+ of 96.
However, if he regains his pre-'11 velocity, that's probably pessimistic.

So this Chen is not Bruce Chen?

Nope. It's Wei-Yin Chen, a Taiwanese pitcher who's been pitching in Japan. He's a lefty who throws in the low 90s but had some injury issues last year.

Dan has Chen @ 10-10 4.44, ERA+ of 96.

That's pretty close to what I have, I've got him at 4.31 as an Oriole.

Maybe we should give the Rays a bit more credit than saying "well they always draft high!"

Absolutely.

Desmond Jennings - 10th round
Jeremy Hellickson - 4th round
Matt Moore - 8th round
Wade Davis - 3rd round
James Shields - 16th round

Those guys have produced more WAR than the Cubs last 18 first rounders combined. In a couple of years, they will probably have more combined WAR than all the Cubs first rounders going back to 1986.

Nope. It's Wei-Yin Chen, a Taiwanese pitcher who's been pitching in Japan. He's a lefty who throws in the low 90s but had some injury issues last year.

Huh, B-Ref doesn't list him on the Orioles' roster. When did he sign?

When did he sign?

Monday, I think.

Agree. Hobgood was an awful pick the second it was made, but Loewen, Townsend and Matusz were all good pitching prospects and they all failed spectacularly.

Hobgood was an overdraft, but he was projected as a late first round pick going into the draft, so it's not like he came out of nowhere. He still should have been more productive. It sounds like he injured his shoulder pretty quickly, and it's entirely possible that the orioles are at fault.

There's no question that the orioles have done a lousy job in the draft (although I suspect it's really more a function of development than drafting), but they've never had the 1st or 2nd pick, and only had the 3rd pick once. THe Rays have had the #1 pick four times. It's far too simplistic to say "well the Rays always draft high," but it's not irrelevant.

Yes, the Rays have had great success with some of their high picks (Price, Longoria, Upton), but also just as many busts (Delmon Young, Josh Hamilton, Dewon Brazelton). Maybe with a top 3 pick in 2006 they select Longoria or Kershaw instead of Billy Rowell*, but maybe they take Luke Hochevar or Greg Reynolds (who went 1,2). 4 of the top 8 picks in 2006 have produced little to no MLB value, and a 5th looks to be no more than a league average innings eater, a valuable guy to have, but not the sort that is going to turn the around O's fortunes. More of the Rays current roster value has come from developing later round picks than the first rounders, guys who were available to everybody.

* and the guy taken immediately after Rowell? You guessed it, Tim Lincecum.

but also just as many busts (Delmon Young, Josh Hamilton, Dewon Brazelton).

Since they were able to turn Young into Bartlett and Garza, he doesn't really count as a "bust" for the Rays. Also, Hamilton was not a talent/development bust. I don't know how you're supposed to scout for propensity to turn into a crackhead.

BTW, Chen's only 26. As a foreign signee (from Taiwan) he was able to attain free agency far earlier than most domestic NPB players.
Lefty FB/SL guy - normally around 91, lost a few MPH last year - supposedly has most of that back now. Good slider, also has a forkball and curve. Not a lot of movement. Drop and drive delivery. K rate has been falling (especially last year, but before that too).
Had a fluky great year in '09 (1.51 ERA / league average 3.55).

It is interesting that few of the Orioles signees have ever made it to the majors with other teams; which may indicate that they were not good picks more than they were not developed well. There have been a lot of failed and injured pitchers although the parent club seems quite rigid about low pitch counts for starters in the system.

On the other hand, how are the Orioles draft choices much different than anyone else's? The day after the draft I imagine that the O's picks look much like any other teams' selections - some good ,others reaches, many unknowns.

It is probably fair to fault the team for not doing enough work with foreign born players but what exactly needs to be corrected with the drafting process and player development? Must be a better answer than Peter Angelos is evil incarnate?

Since they were able to turn Young into Bartlett and Garza, he doesn't really count as a "bust" for the Rays. Also, Hamilton was not a talent/development bust. I don't know how you're supposed to scout for propensity to turn into a crackhead.

Well you can see if he's using drugs at the time you draft him. In any case Hamilton is far from a bust. The Rays chose not to protect him on the 40-man and no doubt regret that decision.

The Rays chose not to protect him on the 40-man and no doubt regret that decision.

Maybe in the same way I regret not picking the winning powerball number last week. At the time, Hamilton was a 25 year old who hit .260 with no power in low A ball, after being out of baseball for 3 years. How many of those guys make 40 man rosters?

And the point about Young and Hamilton, is that despite getting no value from Hamilton, and no value (other than what they later made of him) from Young, the Rays have produced a great number of valuable players, who have contributed. Yes it helps to have the #1 pick, but it helps a lot more to turn a bust of a #1 pick into 2 valuable players. And the latter has nothing to do with draft position.

If Guthrie isn't traded, the rotation will probably be him, Chen, Arrieta, Britton, and Wada. Matusz and Tillman will start in AAA unless they look great in ST. Hunter and Simon will probably be in the bullpen, but will get a shot at starting soon enough.

I remember reading that the front office like Hunter's ability to pitch deep into games (LOL) so I'm guessing he'll replace Wada in your list above.

I don't see why the O's pay that much for Wada unless they first want to try him in the rotation - but others don't agree.

I don't see why the O's pay that much for Wada unless they first want to try him in the rotation - but others don't agree.

Two years, $8.15 for Wada. I think the O's are paying Kevin Gregg more to dramatize Orioles fans and close games.

But he's a known commodity. :)

And he has playoff experience.

Oriole Picks in top 40, since 2000:


Mets picks:


That's 55.1 for the Mets, 28.9 for the Orioles, over half of each team's total is one player, remove that player and the Mets still beat the Orioles, and the Mets have NOT drafted or developed well imho.

This is a little off-topic, but what should the O's rotation be in 2012? I was thinking about this last night - it's a bit of a mess.

Whatever the rotation is they need to put a worthwhile defense on the field behind them. They were one of the worst defensive teams in the majors last season yet they're trying to develop a bunch of young pitching. It's just dumb, especially when it still only results in a middle of the pack offensive team.

It is interesting that few of the Orioles signees have ever made it to the majors with other teams; which may indicate that they were not good picks more than they were not developed well. There have been a lot of failed and injured pitchers although the parent club seems quite rigid about low pitch counts for starters in the system.

On the other hand, how are the Orioles draft choices much different than anyone else's? The day after the draft I imagine that the O's picks look much like any other teams' selections - some good ,others reaches, many unknowns.

It is probably fair to fault the team for not doing enough work with foreign born players but what exactly needs to be corrected with the drafting process and player development? Must be a better answer than Peter Angelos is evil incarnate?

This is a point I've brought up before in this offseason. The Orioles player development system both in the minors and the majors is most likely garbage, they have gotten so little out of their minor league system and the players who do look good have tended to flop, fail to meet expectations, or start out well enough and fail to progress much. They need a massive overhaul of pretty much everything because nothing much is working right.

Yes it helps to have the #1 pick, but it helps a lot more to turn a bust of a #1 pick into 2 valuable players. And the latter has nothing to do with draft position.

This is such an important point about Young. Chuck Lamar would NEVER have made that trade, it wouldn't have even been on his radar. For one thing at the time it wasn't a blatant ripoff which was a prerequisite to any major trade he pursued but the main thing is that a toolsy guy with flaws but great upside would have been gold to him, he could never have brought himself to give up that type of raw talent even if it improved the team overall by solving multiple problems.

To continue re drafts:
2000-2008, here has how each team has done with respect to picks made with one of the top 40 picks:

Phillies 10 / 75.9
Giants 14 / 67.5
Twins 17 / 64.6
Rangers 14 / 61.4
Brewers 12 / 58.1
Athletics 21 / 57.7
Devil Rays 10 / 57.5
Mets 11 / 57.5
Royals 13 / 48.3
Diamondbacks 11 / 47.8
Braves 17 / 47.4
Dodgers 14 / 39.8
Blue Jays via Rangers 13 / 36.6
Marlins 12 / 35.6
Angels 9 / 34.9
Orioles 13 / 31.9
Rockies 9 / 30.9
Nationals 11 / 30.4
Tigers 11 / 29.9
Red Sox 9 / 23.3
Pirates 9 / 22.5
Reds 12 / 19.6
Indians 16 / 17.7
Mariners 7 / 15.5
Cubs 11 / 13
Yankees 10 / 12.9
Cardinals 12 / 9.9
Padres 12 / 9.9
White Sox 12 / 5.8
Astros 8 / -0.1

The 1st number is the # of such picks each team had, the second is accumulated WAR to date.

The 2nd list is WAR/pick:

Phillies 7.6
Devil Rays 5.8
Mets 5.2
Brewers 4.8
Giants 4.8
Rangers 4.4
Diamondbacks 4.3
Angels 3.9
Twins 3.8
Royals 3.7
Rockies 3.4
Marlins 3.0
Dodgers 2.8
Blue Jays via Rangers 2.8
Braves 2.8
Nationals 2.8
Athletics 2.7
Tigers 2.7
Red Sox 2.6
Pirates 2.5
Orioles 2.5
Mariners 2.2
Reds 1.6
Yankees 1.3
Cubs 1.2
Indians 1.1
Cardinals 0.8
Padres 0.8
White Sox 0.5
Astros 0.0


This does not take into account relative draft position- but I do take back what I said about the Mets- actually they (unlike the Orioles), have drafted reasonably well (at least with 1st/suppl round picks)
How bout them Phillies?
that success is basically 3 players:
Cole Hamels 
Gavin Floyd 
Chase Utley 
that was 2000-2001- of course they have not drafted as high since

The Astros? basically they drafted Lidge in 1998, and since then?
Well other than Jason Castro briefly fooling people (really, slugging .517 in half a season at at LANCASTER* in the Cal league ain't all that impressive, especially for a 22 year old who has barely hit a lick anywhere else before or since- but hey BA ranked him twice so what do I know)- perhaps they should simply pass on 1st round picks

*Koby Clemens, same age, hit .341/.415./.620 there that year- full year, HE even hit a little in AA, but no one really mistakes him fro a prospect anymore either

what exactly needs to be corrected with the drafting process and player development?

International scouting, obviously, which is why the Orioles brought in Fred Ferreira and Ray Poitevint.

I really think it's not so much that Angelos is evil, as that he just doesn't care about the minors. Peter Kirk, who owned Frederick, Bowie, and Delmarva for a long time before moving on to indy league baseball, found dealing with the organization frustrating. Teams that have good minor league organizations, year in and year out, do so because they treat the minors as an investment, and give it time, attention, and (most importantly) resources. The Orioles don't.

-- MWE