Los Angeles Angels MOD #1
by mrkupe on May 15, 2010 3:06 PM EDT
Email
PrintGreetings and salutations to all! I'll be running the LAA draft this year, which is a pretty intimidating task. Here's our pick list for the mock draft: 18, 29, 30, 37, 40, 81, 111, 115
I'll be posting my ideas later today as to whom to take where, but I wanted to get this out there now for some input. One thing that should be noted: I don't tend to weigh actual team philosophy TOO heavily (that's a good way for me to get a draft that I don't feel good about), but realism is a big deal to me. With this many picks, the Angels really can't afford to go too much over slot in any one case, and there's definitely going to have to be some easy signs in here. Of course, I have a few names in mind that I might jump 15-20 picks ahead of where they'll go in the real draft that I absolutely love, which simulates signing a guy for over-slot in a later slot position.
8 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Realism
I agree that a realistic draft is best! However, I don’t know how you can have a realistic draft UNLESS you try to select players you believe the Angels would take.
Some general thoughts:
1. Eddie Bane believes that the strength of this draft is RHP.
2. The Angels are not afraid to draft high school players, and they particularly like players from their own backyard.
3. When it comes to signing bonuses, they GENERALLY stick to slot (or close to slot). However, it is a mistake to think that they will “overdraft” just to get a “cheap” sign. The Angels have plenty of money, and even if they choose to go “over budget” on one pick, it will not affect their ability to sign other picks.
good stuff
Given the sheer numbers of picks, I can’t see them going TOO over-slot anywhere . . .5 picks in the first 40 is pretty crazy for any team. But maybe somewhere.
I really like the RHP as well . . .I have a RHP I’m targeting right now with the first pick, and another that I plan to take off the board at No. 29/30. Really looking for a college bat at 29/30 or 37, possibly Hunter Morris.
With the 18th pick . . .
Covey would absolutely be the prototypical Angel pick. If he is off the board, it is likely that someone like Cole, Whitson, Castellanos, or Josh Sale (unlikely) would be available. I would also consider Allie, but you would have to consider the signability issue.
The Angels will then have 4 picks between the 29th and 40th positions. I am thinking there will be 20-30 interesting players who potentially will be available in these slots, so the key will be to maintain flexibility and not be set on taking any one player for fear that he will be gone before the next pick. Lots of variables, but my crystal ball says:
1. At the end of the first round, one or more college arms with plus stuff from the following group will be available and would be a good fit: Hahn, Harvey, Eibner, Workman, Solis or Wojciechowski.
2. I would like to add another quality athletic outfielder, preferably with some power. Jarrett Parker is at the top of my list and would be a good pick here. LeVon Washington or Gary Brown are other possibilities, but I have residual concerns about Washington’s arm and whether Brown projects to hit with enough power (but he would be very signable).
3. In the supplemental first, I agree that Hunter Morris would be an excellent addition. Do you have any insight on how Morris projects defensively in the outfield? Solid defense in the outfield would add significantly to his value.
4. Finally, I would add one (or two) of the less-polished, but high upside, prep arms, such as Jenkins or Tago.
more stuff
My top 3 for pick 18 in order are: Covey, Kevin Gausman, Justin O’Connor
Tago is one of my favorite prep arms in the draft and I might take him at 29/30, as I think he could go before 37. Parker would be decent, but I really like Austin Wates and might pop him with the other one of 29/30 to keep him from going off the board before he reaches me.
Not sure on Morris’ defense. Another OF I’m looking hard at is a prep, Reggie Golden. Really like his athletic upside. If I took Covey/Gausman and Tago in the first round, I’d probably be inclined to go with two college guys to balance out. One other possibility is Tony Wolters, a prep middle infielder with a very promising bat.
Possible draft:
18: Covey
29: Tago
30: Wates
34: Morris
40: Wolters
Thoughts?
Re: thoughts?
18: yes
29: I like Tago, of course, but would take the risk he will be available later.
30: I am not big on Wates—if I were going that direction, I would prefer Brown. I believe Brown’s tools are better, and the Angels are already his favorite team. However, I really like Parker, and would not sell him short. Playing at Davenport, his stats do not give a true picture of his power, and he has a decent chance of becoming a 25-35 HR player (offensively, I think he is similar to Ryan Zimmerman). This is in addition to his plus speed and defense.
34 (37): yes
40: Nothing against Wolters, but I just don’t see any major need at 2b where Wolters projects. This is where I would target Tago.
response
One concern is that somebody earlier in the draft will like Covey and move on him, in which case I’d need alternatives. I’m not huge on A.J. Cole, so that’s out. I really like Gausman’s upside so I think I’d buy on him, as I suspect he’ll be gone by 29/30. Otherwise, I might roll with Justin O’Connor, who would be a big time prospect if he played outside of the Midwest.
Brown would be a good choice, safe pick with easy signability. I think there’s some Clay Buchholz-like potential in Tago, but he’s inconsistent and will need some time. One concern IRL is that he’s looking like an increasingly problematic signability risk, which might preclude his selection by the Angels . . .and if that’s the case, then I don’t think I’d want to select him here.
I don’t draft for need, but Wolters would offer a nice safety/upside blend at premium positions to complement the other selections.
New possible slew of choices. This scenario assumes Covey is gone by 18, and that Tago is not realistically signable.
18: Gausman
29: Barret Loux, college pitcher
30: Parker
37: Morris
40: Golden / another signable prep player?
That would be a pretty decent blend. If Morris were taken by 37, I’d consider grabbing Wates there. Two college bats in this class seems to make sense for the Angels. I know Andy Seiler has them moving on Griffin Murphy and Chevez Clarke at 29/30 . . .what do you think of them? I think Clarke is a bit too raw for my liking, but Murphy is intriguing.
Plan B
If Covey is gone at 18, my sentiment would be to first look at players who were expected to be gone, but are still available. Would you take Colon at 18? I would, even if he ends up signing for over-slot (I don’t think it would take much over slot).
While I wouldn’t draft for “need,” the Angels could use some 3B prospects, and if Cox or Castellanos were available, either would be good choices. I would add Kaleb Cowart into the mix, recognizing he would require more than slot to sign.
I would not select Gausman at 18. As an older prep pitcher, who reportedly has inconsistent stuff, I would put him on my “to be considered” in the supplemental first list.
O’Connor is an intriguing prospect—I just don’t have enough knowledge to make a rational decision as to whether he would be a steal or an absolute over-draft at 18.
I realize that Loux is moving up on some draft boards, but I haven’t jumped on that bandwagon. An alternative is Paxton, but I would like to see two or three more starts in indy ball before deciding. This is in addition to Hahn, Harvey, et al. who I mentioned previously.
Regarding Tago, what are the concerns about him being a tough sign? The Angels have had a good track record signing players from southern California, especially players who have played on the Angel’s Elite team (such as Tago).
To me, Murphy is more of a second round talent, but he would not be a horrible selection in the supplemental first. Good command, but, like many southpaws, less than ideal velocity.
Golden is another outfielder I would consider in the supplemental first. I would take him over Clarke. Regardless, I wouldn’t target more than one outfielder prior to the second round (when in doubt, pitching, pitching and more pitching).
yeah
I’ve moved off Gausman in round 1, although I still like him.
I’m willing to entertain the thought of an over-slot guy, but I don’t expect any of those types will fall to the Angels in this scenario. Colon maybe, most likely not. Another guy I’m looking at if Covey isn’t there is Kolbrin Vitek, a good bet to provide a solid ROI and would allow me to take some more preps. Vitek, Morris and three prep pitchers would be a really nice crop.
I really like O’Connor and think he might be undervalued due to his cold weather background. At 18 he might be a slight overdraft to some but he’ll almost certainly be gone by 29. Oh, and Cowart supposedly wants to be a position player, which would make drafting him as a pitcher a risky proposition.
Tago recently switched his college commitment from UCLA to Cal State Fullerton, a baseball powerhouse whose recruits usually don’t come cheaply to the pros. There’s really no reason for him to do that at this point unless he A) is seriously thinking about college and/or B) he thinks he’s worth a lot of money. I’d reach for him though and count on the Cali connection to bring it home.
Basically, my goal is to end up with three pitchers (at least 2 of them being preps), and 2 position players out of the first 40 picks. The round 2 pick is an interesting one . . .I love Drew Cisco but don’t think he’ll get to 81 in this draft. Any thoughts on the last 3 picks? I’m going to put together a preliminary big board for the mock draft in a bit through the first 40 picks to start formalizing the process.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
