Positions of Need: Left Handed Pitchers
Posted on May 1st, 2012 by Purple_Haze in 2012 MLB Draft, tags: Brian Johnson, Hunter Virant, Matt SmoralLast week I talked about a few picks that fit the Cardinals’ drafting style with the logic that past success will lead to repetition despite the personnel changes that have occurred throughout the organization. This week (and perhaps also in the coming weeks), I take the opposite hypothesis, foreseeing a change in philosophy due not only to the aforementioned personnel differences but also to the surplus that such a consistent style has created.
The Cardinals have some of the most distinctive sets of preferences when it comes to the draft. In general principle, it is best to take the top talent left on the board rather than focusing on the specific needs of the system, as there are no guarantees in the draft and major league caliber players will find a way to contribute value by performance or by trade. However, years of following a well-defined pattern has led to a wide disparity between strengths and weaknesses, to the point where getting the full value out of everyone may prove less than trivial.
One of the most notorious weaknesses in the system of late has been the dearth of left-handed pitching prospects. I am a John Gast fan and his performance this year has been encouraging but he remains a scouting-first prospect with a number of pressing questions that need answering. Behind him there is little save for a handful of possible LOOGYs.
Perhaps the primary reason I was initially so disappointed in last year’s pick of Kolten Wong in the first round was the fact that there were so many high-upside lefties in that draft class. At the time, rumors were swirling connecting the Cardinals with guys like Daniel Norris and Henry Owens, both of which were available when the Cardinals’ turn came up.
The depth in left-handed pitchers, just as every other aspect of this year’s draft class, is not quite so strong as last year’s crop. However, the gap is not so wide as it is in other aspects, making this a prime opportunity to replenish a system which hasn’t seen a lefty in its top ten since Jaime Garcia.
Brian Johnson – University of Florida
At 6’4, 225 pounds, Brian Johnson is a big dude. He’s either a power-hitting first baseman or he’s a workhorse lefty, although he actually hasn’t thrown too many innings at the college level. He’s been a reliever mostly and never fully focused on pitching, which could end up to his advantage as he definitely has the frame of a starter and not too many innings on his arm.
Despite his inexperience, Johnson is not all that raw. He has moments of arm action inconsistency (at times he allows his elbow to fly out, creating the inverted something-or-other) but, for the most part, his mechanics look pretty smooth, especially from the stretch. I’d say he has below average injury risk if Mike Zunino doesn’t manage to kill him.
His fastball stays around 91-92, topping out at 94 with decent movement and he commands it well. Johnson is pretty much fully developed physically, so I wouldn’t expect any more velocity on top of that but it’s plenty for a lefty. He has a slurvy breaking ball which could become his best pitch but there’s not much on his offspeed stuff. The stuff wouldn’t be all that impressive on a righty but given his split concentration and left-handedness, it looks quite good indeed. He’s perceived as having a lower ceiling but I don’t see it.
All told, I’m really not sure he’s a better pitcher or hitter. The guy has some of the best raw power in the draft and has been creaming the ball with regularity with a .402 wOBA. He’s definitely not playing anything other than first, though, so if you asked me which we needed more, I think the answer is pretty clear.
Matt Smoral – Solon HS, Ohio
Playing the Henry Owens of this year’s draft, Matt Smoral is a huge high school lefty but his stuff lags a little behind. He sits in the high 80s, low 90s, topping out at 94. He could use more of his huge legs and push off the mound a little harder. His arm mechanics can get out of whack, too, causing his control to waiver. He often comes from an arm slot that is too low and doesn’t allow him to take full advantage of his vertical plane and he has a tendency to fall off the mound in a slightly awkward manner.
All that is fixable, though, and there’s tons of upside there to see past the kinks. He has a wipeout slider that destroys righties and he has the loose actions on the mound that you can’t teach. And when you’re 6’8 and you’re a southpaw, you don’t stay on the board for long. Even so, there’s a good chance that he’ll be around when the Cardinals pick as he hasn’t been as heavily scouted as, say, Max Fried, and he’s a good student committed to North Carolina who might have a higher asking price. I would be very excited with Smoral at #19.
Hunter Virant – Camarillo HS, California
Yet another tall lefty but this one has a little more room to fill out. A lanky 170 pounds with natural, fluid motions on the mound, Hunter Virant gets tagged with that praise of indeterminate value for pitchers: “athletic”. The results of his athleticism are already showing up in results, however. He’s got more fastball speed than the other two and he’s been gaining it fast. He’s been measured up to 96 as of late and has been jumping up draft boards, having started off the season with a no-hitter and hardly slowed down since.
Virant is also one of the most polished high school pitcher of the year, making him not so much a project as Smoral. His 3/4 is buttery smooth and he’s got an arsenal of secondary pitches which are rapidly improving as well. The curve ball remains his best offering and challenges Max Fried for the best in the draft. He also has a slider and a change up, both of which could be major league quality pitches.
Virant offers something of a happy medium between Brian Johnson and Matt Smoral with his advanced technique and #2 upside. His projection is starting to realize itself as we speak, however. It might be too far along for the Cardinals to get a shot at him by the time draft day comes along.
Entries (RSS)
Regarding your Wong comment I agree. I was very upset the time too. Some of the more well connected draft guys had heard specific information that the Cardinals were going to draft Owens. I wanted Norris but he was supposed to be a tougher sign but Owens would have worked great.
I didn’t know Virant was up to 96. He is a interseting combo. A polished lefty but has upside to as his velocity is improving.
Not really a fan of Johnson but I would take Smoral and Virant.
Althought you speak of a dirth of LHP prospects don’t forget Hector Hernandez who has done great this year despite getting bombed today. Anthony Ferrarra who has picked up at Palm Beach where he left off last year and the injured Kevin Siegrist who was the best lefty in the system last year.
Wouldn’t trade Wong for any LH pitcher signed last year.
I’m not sure anyone expected Wong to be this good this quickly. I knew his bat wasn’t going to take long but he’s easily surpassed by expectations.
Now I wouldn’t. But I didn’t expect him to be this good this quick.
Regarding the comment about normally not drafting for need, thats actually what they did with Wong. THey were sick of the merry go round 2nd base for years so they just wanted to draft a guy and get it handled. I”m a little worried they will draft Marrerro or Cecchini this year because of the success with Wong last year. Mo mentioned a few weeks ago that SS is one position they are really looking to strengthen in the system.
Why do you say that? Pretty sure Mo said after the draft that Wong wasn’t drafted because of need but because they saw him as the best player on the board. Do you have something specific or do you make this stuff up as you go along?
He said that the 5 guys they had wanted were all off the board and he was the next on the list. Of course the fact that he was a 2nd baseman played a part in the selection. He mentioned his success in the Cape combined with how major league ready he was and how this position had been one where we needed to strengthen in the minors.
He was drafted because he can hit.
Seriously, you can draft any number of college SS and thirdbaseman and make them a second baseman.
Again, no basis for your statement. The comments by Mo were simply facts, not reasons for the pick.
Come on your smarter than that, when someone makes a pick and then says everyone we wanted to pick was gone and we are happy because he fills a position we have been weak at for a long time we can put 1 + 1 together and find out at least some of the reason for the pick was to finally handle the 2nd base problem in the system.
So a GM is supposed to be negative a guy they drafted?
Your right but putting 1 + 1 together. A few o f the guys we really wanted were gone. Mo saw a chance to sew up 2nd base for half a decade so he drafted him. That doesnt mean he was the top of the Cardinalslist at that time. Only that they saw a relatively sure bet and the opportunity fill a need. I’m not against it now seeing how it’s worked out. It also allowed us to go overslot in the 2nd round with Tilson.
It’s like we haven’t drafted for need before in the recent past. Remember Pete Kozma? We needed a SS, he wasn’t the top of our board but we feared he wouldn’t make it to our next pick so we traded him.
You do realize that getting that OF away from 2nd and getting a real 2nd baseman last year is what allowed us to win the WS? Right?
Andrew,
You are using after the fact information to draw conclusions.
Wong was a sure bet. They probably draft him no matter what position he plays. He was picked for his bat, not position.
The year we drafted Kozma was not for a reach for a need. He went about where he was expected to go. That was a terrible draft year. I mean who did the cards miss out on? Porecello? No thank you. People think putting zack cox on the 40 man roster is a bad idea, then sticking an 18 year old pitcher is inexcusable.
Also, every year you need short stops.
I think 2010 proves the cards look at needs secondary. 3 first round picks and they go with a bat similar to wongs and 2 RH pitchers. They pick 3 RH pitchers in a row. I think the cox pick is telling about the type of profile hitter they are comfortable with. They like the bat. The position was irrelevant.
So Nick Punto was the reason we won the WS? Nick Punto is that real second baseman? David Freese, Yadi Molina, Chris Carpenter, the bullpen had nothing to do with the World Series…It was Nick Punto? You do realize that Shu and Theriot were platooning to start the playoffs right? And that LaRussa went with Punto becasue of the Skip injury and then Jay struggled.
Punto and Furcal allowed us to strengthen the up the middle defense. With Theriot and Sch up the middle we wouldn’t have made the playoffs.
Not true.
The deal for furcal allowed them to strengthen the SS position. Theriot was struggling at that point.
Out of the 4 available middle infielders, Skip shumake played the most second base after August 1.
We did reach the playoffs with skip at second. We would not have reached the playoffs without skrabble, dotel, jackson and Jon Jay in center.
Also,
The GM sees enough value in skip shumaker that they brought him back this year.
No disrespecting “the shredder”.
Answering Zuke, they brought him back and saw him more as a “Super Sub” type. I guess Mo and Matheny have already lost faith in Greene and Descalso at 2nd so Skip is back there now.
Andrew:
I think its more of going with the hot hand. However, Matheny has descalso in the line up tonight i think.
Your mention of the the Kozma is a good example of something i have mentioned other places.
The biggest overlooked benefit of the DH happens on draft day. A prime example is J.P. Arencibia. A guy like that has much more value to an AL team that an NL team does. Its less risk for an AL team.
You are out here alone on island, unable to make a convincing case and you want to question my intelligence on this matter? I’m not the guy who said these two statements on the same subject in slightly over an hour.
“That doesnt mean he was the top of the Cardinalslist at that time.”
“….and he was the next on the list.”
Where did I say he was next on the list? I said that Mo mentioned that the 5 guys we really wanted were gone and Wong was next on the list. I didn’t say that.
I”m saying now it was a good pick BUT I don’t believe for a second the fact that he was a 2nd baseman didn’t play a major role in the matter. We saw a chance to sure up a major position of weakness while still be able to stay at slot. That pick allowed us to spend on Charlie Tilson. Carioca-Do you think if Wong played 3rd base and was the same bat that we would have drafted him over say Owens?
That is exactly what we are saying. They did the year before.
They did not draft zack cox and put him on the 40 man roster ahead of Terrel Jenkins because they were short on thirdbaseman. They drafted him because they like his bat.
Just like they drafted Wong because of his bat.
We had Freese pegged at 3rd but he was hardly locked in when we picked Cox. Moreover, I’m not sure whether the Cards were thinking 3rd or 2B with Cox. Turns out 2B is pretty much out of the question, but, he played 2B in Arkansas. Clearly his offense was the dominant draft consideration but that doesn’t force the issue with Wong.
I’m more open minded about the Cards decision to select Wong. Many thought we’d go with a LH pitcher or other high ceiling pitching options. Wong fit a very nice niche in St Louis. Not only does he present a great bat, but, he plays an above average 2B….a position we haven’t locked anyone in since Vina.
There is no way we know how calculated the selection of Wong was, but to dismiss his 2B attributes is indefensible. Wong may have been someone who not only represented best option at the time, but also fit a cogent need. Why can’t our draft situation be that clearly defined? After all, God is a Cardinal fan.
I think if Wong was the same bat relative to other 3rd basemen that he was relative to other 2B than yes we would have drafted him. In other words, if he was a 3B that had a pretty solid shot of being a top 25% bat at his position and we were confident he could stick at the position, then yes we would have drafted him. You can’t compare bats at one position to those at another. You can only compare them relative to those at the same position.
i dont see the Cards having a history of being overly worried about having an all-star 2B. As mentioned elsewhere, we’ve won a couple of world series with that model so I doubt the team sees an imperative to change.
So quoting Mo as evidence is only valid when it supports your position?
So they take a polished 3rd baseman in Cox in 2010. Freese has a breakout year in 2011 and we draft another polished 3rd baseman in 2011?
In general I’m against drafting for need but we got lucky with Wong. And at a position that has been so weak for so long I have no issue trying to get a 2nd baseman.
The Cardinals often draft many at a position to try to get one to stick. Mo mentioned needed more athletes in the OF and they go out and draft Tilson, McElroy and Martini in the first 5 rounds. They see a need and they try to fill it either with 1 player or multiple players.
This year Mo mentioned getting the SS issue handled. I’m expecting a SS early if available but I hope I’m wrong.
Once you get past the second and third round, its a different story.
What separateness guys at this point is very minuscule, so its easy to lean a different direction.
In 2010, the cards drafted a SS, C and OF with their 3-5 round selections.
What made 2011, is that they only had 1 first round shot, followed by a late second and third round picks.
Don’t get confused becasue they were the cards 2nd – 4th selction. They were still later picks. If they were selected this year, they would be the cards 7th, 8th and 9th selection. So just becasue they lean one way for their 7th slection, it does not dictate their philosophy regarding first and second rounders.
SO you are all for best player available but only when it fits a need? That kind of talk will get you into the fence straddler HOF.
You always advocate us signing highly ranked guys that drop and one of the reasons you give is that we can trade them. We could just as easily trade an excess 3B if he was a stud.
what is early for you? I’d say there is a 50% chance of drafting a SS with one of our first 5 picks just as a random act.
I am for best player available.
I think that term becomes much harder to define after the second round.
You could say that about any position.
They draft a first baseman…Well they did that because they lost a first baseman.
They draft a SS…Well they did that because they have no replacement for furcal
They Draft an CF…Well Jay can’t stay there forever.
In reality, the cards have won 2 WS with a Hodge podge of players at second. They converted an OF to make him a second baseman. I think they realize that second base is not a need to have position.
Wong was selected because he was an advanced college hitter, something the cards are relatively good at identifying and developing (Wallus, Descalso, Carpenter, Craig, Jay, Robinson).
Carioca-Regarding this discussion I didn’t think Wong was BPA last year. It’s possible I turn out to be wrong or its possible someone drafted after him turns into a better player. Yes you can trade excess players. It’s unquestioned though that it has worked out weel because he may well fill a major hole for us.
I forgot what this argument is even about? I remember you think Wong was BPA at the time and I said that I believe that his position played a crucial factor in us choosing him.
I dont necessarily think Wong was BPA last year. My only argument is that there is no evidence to make the claim that he was chosen due to position need, In fact we have evidence to the contrary. You make the claim with seeming certainty that it was due to position need and offer basically no evidence to support that.
Do you remember the reports right before the draft about howmuch we liked Henry Owens and Daniel Norris? Mo talked about how he was wanting to get left handed pitching in the draft. It’s possible those were just smoke screens. Not sure if the disinformation is as important in the MLB draft as it is in the NFL draft. Mo mentioned the 6 players they wanted were already taken so Wong was the next one on the board, which doesn’t make sense if you believed they liked Owens and Norris so much. In fact Frank Piliere had mentioned that the Cardinalas believed Norris wouldn’t make it to 23 but when it seemed like he would at the very end they would take him.
Carioca-So your saying that you don’t think Wong was BPA but you think the Cardinals did?
I know I have no evidence but it adds up to me. I could be wrong though. Everything coming into the final week of the draft said we wanted a LHP but we draft a 2b at slot money?
I believe the Cards saw Wong as the best value on the board. The Cards never said anything about Owens or Norris that I know of. They never said they wanted a LH pitcher in the first round (wouldn’t that be the same thing – drafting for need?) In fact, if they had said they wanted a LHP ( a need pick) and took Wong instead, it would be just more evidence that they didnt take Wong due to need but because they saw him as better value (regardless of position).
I’d work on those math skills if I was you :)
When you say best value that takes into account more than the best player. It takes into account how much they will cost and how long they will take in the system.Did the Cardinals want more of a project at 2 mil that would take 4 years or a safe bet at a position of need for 1.3 mil?
BPA is best player available without worry about price or organizational need. It was clearly not that. IMO the person still on the board at that time with the most upside was Norris or Guerriri. Who was BPA at the time? No clue.
That is the key. The player “With the most upside”
Always going “most upside” is a terrible strategy. You have to balance your draft.
So if you discount all college players becasue of upside, you are not going to have a productive farm system. Look at the cards major league roster. The ones they developed…most were college players with lower ceilings.
What that has to do with a discussion of whether the Cards took Wong mostly because he was a 2B I have no idea. I never made any comment about BPA (until you asked). That is not what this discussion has ever been about.
I meant to say took him because 2B was an area need.
Andrew,
I know what people say about the draft every year. They hate it when the cards take college players. For some reason, many see no value. Jon Jay had no value. Allen Craig had no value. Matt Carpenter had no value. Wong Had no value.
Truth is, there is an assumption that college players are terrible picks because of a lower ceiling. But nobody ever takes into consideration that they are more likely to make an impact.
I agree that Wong could be considered drafting for need but he could also be considered a prime example of a Cardinals pick: contact-first college hitter, success with wood bats, middling tools. Just one of those moments when the Cardinals draft philosophy coincides perfectly with an area of need. We should have seen it coming.
I’m with you on Deven Marrero. It’s stunning, shocking to me that anyone thinks he’s worthy of a first (or even second) round pick. He hasn’t hit since they took the Ping! bats out of college two years ago. I don’t care what kind of glove he’s got, if he cannot hit.
And Deven Marrero cannot hit.
I don’t have any strong feelings about drafting a southpaw…but with 5 of the first 60 picks, I imagine there’ll be a decent lefty (mid-rotation potential) available, if the Cards make that a priority.
Me, I want Richie Shaffer. ;)
I also am not a Deven Marrero fan either. There’s always a few college middle infielders who get boosted up the ranks for being advanced enough to play their position and not look terrible with the bat. The scarcity of major league MIF means someone will take him earlier than he probably deserves.
Not to be contrarian, but would someone explain to me why this is an area of, quote unquote, “need”? Lack of talent in the system beyond Gast and maybe Hernandez or Ferrara or Siegrist, for sure, but need? Teams get along just fine in the majors with an all-RHP rotation (most do have an LH starter, but it’s hardly mandatory), and you don’t draft guys high with the expectation of them becoming LOOGYs.
I hope that when draft day comes, they take the best pitcher available with at least one of the high slots. If that pitcher is a lefty, all the better. But taking a good one trumps taking a left-handed one, in my opinion.
Yeah, I think looking at needs is the worst thing you can do in the baseball draft. The Cards have tons of picks, lots of good prospects currently, and can afford to just take the best players on the board.
When we took Wong I was very upset, but not because I didn’t like the prospect. I was upset because a kid like Wong- who is a 2B only prospect- has nowhere to go if the bat isn’t good enough to get to the big leagues. If the bat’s not good enough at 2B, it definitely isn’t at LF, and so I saw it as a risky pick. SS’s can go to 3B or 2B, CF’s can go to LF or RF etc. but Wong is a 2B-only guy. The fact that he has so much polish, was an underaged college kid so he had some upside, and his work ethic is so strong are some of the things I underestimated in Wong. Very good prospect, and a guy who looks like he could make his debut next year. When given the chance, you should take the position prospect over the pitcher anyway, and I’d definitely take Wong over Owens or Norris right now (even though both are good prospects in their own right).
True, you don’t technically “need” to have left-handed pitching, although it certainly helps, especially in this era when lefty relievers are becoming more and more of a requirement. It would have been nice to develop the left side of our bullpen as we did the right side rather than trading away good value for it (Rzepcynzski) or signing mediocre veterans (Romero) to cover the gap.
Nonetheless, the “position of need” was basically used synonymously with “organizational weakness” in this column and perhaps shouldn’t have been. Also, drafting for need, as I said above, remains a generally bad practice, although if the best talent on the board when we pick is a college third baseman, I think we should consider going for second-best.
Really, I’ve just been trying to find some organizing concepts to tackle the draft from a Cardinals-centric perspective and there aren’t many ways to do that without some special insight into the Cards’ draft room. I could do a “Risers and Fallers” type of thing that focuses in on more recent action, or I could try some kind of ranking thing, maybe. This column is for you guys so I’m interested in how you’d like to see your draft coverage laid out.
And that is a good point.
I think the quantity of picks will allow the cards to look a particular direction.
Your efforts are appreciated. A Risers and Fallers thing would be useful, as would an ear to the ground on any rumblings out of the front office, although that might be hard to do as the Mozeliak operation seems to pride itself on opsec.
Your comment about a college third baseman is to the point. There are times when the best available player is in such an area of strength for an organization as to reduce that organization’s need for him. That’s very different, however, from reaching way past the best available player because of need.
In my opinion, if you get beyond about the top ten guys in a draft class, the differences in rank become so small that by the time one drafts in the #19 slot, “best player available” is unlikely to have a clear title holder, particularly if it’s based only on information available to us fans. When drafting in the #19 slot, if the top 18 guys are already gone by the time you draft, it may be better to take the fifth highest-ranked remaining guy if he fills a need rather than the top-ranked guy if he doesn’t, because the real chances of the two making it to the Show are essentially the same, all else equal. That isn’t true if you’re drafting #5 overall; the fifth-best overall prospect is MUCH more likely to make it than the tenth, so screw need, take the big talent. But the Cardinals aren’t in that position, haven’t been for some time, and won’t be again soon, hopefully.
I think you can still find a decent amount of separation through the first round. but agree 100% for the third round and beyond.
You certainly can’t find that separation based on the historical likelihood of players to make it to the Show. There is very little difference between the probability of a #20 choice making it and a #30 choice. For those wanting data (from B-R), here are slot numbers, probability of reaching the majors, combined career WAR for all draftees in that slot:
Slot 15: 46% success, 222 WAR
Slot 16: 58%, 238
Slot 17: 65%, 229
Slot 18: 55%, 99
Slot 19: 70%, 290
Slot 20: 53%, 307
Slot 21: 63%, 130
Slot 22: 63%, 326
Slot 23: 48%, 118
Slot 24: 55%, 93
Slot 25: 55%, 102
Slot 26: 44%, 110
Slot 27: 55%, 97
Slot 28: 57%, 96
Slot 29: 51%, 216
Slot 30: 57%, 325
I see absolutely nothing in those data that suggest a significant dropoff rate in successful drafting as the second half of the first round (or, in the old days when there weren’t enough teams for the first round to take 30 slots, the first and top of the second round) proceeds.
Your discussing something different. The data you posted is success rates. That is different from teams being able to make a definitive choices on players.
I guarantee that teams are much more comfortable with their first round selection than their third round pick. Teams have a good idea who will be available and have a lot more data on them then the later picks.
Compare those success rates to the second and third round.
A Risers and Fallers column would be much appreciated. For example, I have read that Stryker Trahan is falling a little bit this spring. I’d be curious to know why that is. He would seem like great pick for the Cards if he is there to me.
I am not sure why so many people are still upset with the Wong pick.
Wong was very conservative, which is a good strategy with so many few picks. Now this year with so many picks, they need a couple of high ceiling guys.
I don’t think anyone is saying they are still upset with Wong.
Then they should be because the results shouldn’t matter that much.
It should be no surprise that one of the most complete college players is doing better than high risk high schoolers. That is the problem with wanting only high upside guys. You have to accept that failure is the most likely scenario.
I don’t think that’s necessarily fair to Wong. He’s quite young for his league and I don’t think success in the high minors a year after being drafted should be taken for granted for anyone except maybe college seniors. He”s advanced but he’s only 21. His tools limit his upside but his age relative to league mean he could push those tools further than most.
It’s the same question that you have to ask about a guy like Jurickson Profar (and maybe Oscar Taveras too), whose tools are better than Wong’s but is still primarily a skills guy. However, he’s 19 in AA, normally the sign of a very high upside. So what do you make of their performance? Do you say “Oh, he’s a really advanced hitter, he should be hitting well in AA.”? Or do you say “Oh, he’s only 19, if he hits well it’s great news.”?
Not at all.
I am not saying it as a knock on wong, but as a knock on the philosophy that advanced college hitters should be overlooked in favor of high school pitchers.
Each type of draft pick has its place.
i’m not sure what you mean.
Out of these guys…of course I would take Virant. The ball doesn’t come out of Smoral’s hand well at all. He had one pitch in the video other than the slider that looked “live”, otherwise it was a straight dead ball.
Virant control looked iffy but there were throws that just fooled me on the video. There was some silky arm action throwing some boring fastballs and then the exact same action threw some junk.
I was higher on Smoral until reading about his injury.
http://www.baseballamerica.com/blog/draft/2012/04/smoral-to-have-surgery-on-right-foot/
With him signed to a big-time college program as well, the two combined are a nasty red flag.
As for the other two LHP prospects, either one would be huge with the 2nd pick in round one. For the Albert pick, I’m really hoping for another Shelby moment where the Cards get a high upside high school pick termed a ‘tough’ sign.
That is of course tougher with the new rules about set signing bonuses and over-slot laws, but a kid can hope right?!
What does the surgery have to do with anything? Despite the fact he may be falling if we take him with one of our first 2 picks he will most likely still sign. Smoral at 19 or 23 would be our Shelby moment of this year most likely. I think the only way Smoral doesn’t sign is if he slides to the supplemental round.
“At 6’4, 225 pounds, Brian Johnson is a big dude. He’s either a power-hitting first baseman or he’s a workhorse lefty, although he actually hasn’t thrown too many innings at the college level. He’s been a reliever mostly and never fully focused on pitching, which could end up to his advantage as he definitely has the frame of a starter and not too many innings on his arm.”
Johnson has been a weekend starter in his 3-year career while also starting for the YD Red Sox in the Cape Cod League last summer. Through May 3rd, 2012, Johnson has made 44 appearances in his career with 41 of them being starts. He was a reliever for Team USA in the summer of 2010 (while making one start). Not sure he was going to start too many games with 1st rounders Gerrit Cole, Sonny Gray and Matt Barnes leading the way. Let’s not forget 1st rounders Sean Gilmartin and Tyler Anderson on the staff as well. Johnson still threw 14.1 innings, good enough for a 0.63 ERA along with a 16:5 K:BB ratio with 6 hits allowed and only 1 ER.
Not really sure where his stats showed that he was a reliever.
Draft the Best Player Available. Period.