1. Oddschecker.com:(overall draft grade) C (tied for the lowest grade they gave any team)
"The Guardians went reaching for Ralphy Velazquez. But if he's their guy then he's their guy. Honestly, they reached for Andrew Walters and CJ Kayfus, too. They are trusting their scouts but no other analysts agree"
2.Bleacher Report (overall draft grade) - B+
3. Baseball Lifestyle 101 (first round only) C+
"Velasquez has some of the most raw power of any prep player in the class, wth the ability to make consistent hard contact putting himself in talks of going in the first round. He has more athleticism than he gets credit for, he will get the chance to stick behind the plate but could make the move to first base"
NOTE: They rated the Braves pick of Hursten Waldrep an "A"
4. Sporting News (first round only) - B-
NOTE: They rated the Braves pick of Hursten Waldrep an "A".
5. CBS Sports (first round only) - B
NOTE: They graded the Braves pick of Hursten Waldrep an "A"
6. SportsKeeda (first day only) - B
"The Guardians first-round pick Ralphy Velazquez was a decent one considering the season he put together last year. However, the second round pick Alex Clemmey is the one who shows more potential in the long run. Their third pick was Alex Walters from Miami".
7. DraftKings (first round only) - B-
"Velasquez blew up this spring, crushing the ball on the showcase circuit and watching his draft stock rise. The bat has middle-of-the-order potential; there's a ton of raw power with better feel for hitting than you'd expect, and his exit velocities are among the best you'll see from a high schooler. The real question is whether he can stick behind the plate, the answer to which depends on which particular scout you ask. If he doesn't, first base is really the only other viable option, which will put a ton of pressure on his bat to live up to the billing.
NOTE: Draft grade for Atlanta for Hursten Waldrep: A-
8. My analysis (entire draft) - C-
Ralphy Velazquez was a reach at #23, the typical late riser who was not rated this highly during the winter and early spring, and even if you think that he can stay at catcher, you have now added another catcher to about 7 other quality catching prospects (all international signings) who are between 17-19 years old and are highly thought of by the organization. Similar to our current situation with middle infielders, this organization has not shown the ability to break the logjam by executing successful trades of the guys who don't meet the club's needs/expectations. In the best world (Velasquez can stay at catcher) they will, de facto, bump a good prospect off the depth chart (or maybe none of the international signees ARE good prospects!). In the worst situation (he can't catch at the big league level) they have to count on his bat being great to play him at 1B or DH, not something you want to gamble on for a first round high school hitter in an organization not known for their ability to develop HS hitters. Hursten Waldrep was the consensus choice for this pick after Emerson was gone (or maybe even if Emerson was still available). Even Colin Houck would have been a much better choice than Velazquez.
Alex Clemmey in the second round is an excellent choice except that Cleveland has done a poor job of developing/keeping healthy high school arms who they drafted high in the draft. This would have been a good gamble if Waldrep (high floor/high ceiling guy) had been taken in the first round. If you put the gamble portion aside, Clemmey's value comes with his bonus. He was the 50th ranked player in the country. His draft slot as the 58th player selected was $1.4 million. He is likely to receive a $2+ million bonus (as evidenced by the announcement of his early signing: see Jacob Zibin's inflated bonus for his draft slot last year after a similar, early announcement of him reaching an agreement) which would make him the 43rd (or higher) best talent of the draft. So while he was not a BAD selection at 58 he was not a steal there, either, and the VALUE of his selection is tied to his accepting slot or slightly above slot (say $1.7 million). Anything more than that would indicate they probably overpaid Clemmey and, I believe there were probably players with less risk and as much, if not more, talent than Clemmey who would have signed for a slot-appropriate bonus leaving money for Cleveland to sign some of their late round picks. It is also likely that these would have been players, probably college draftees, who the Guardians would be much more likely to have success in developing.
For selections for 2C through 7 all you have to do is look at their draft slot and where they were rated:
Besides drafting guys (except for Mooney) much higher than they were ranked, they went way over the top drafting contact first/no power college hitters with little room left to develop any power. By way of explanation, there were 4 players listed in the MLB Pipeline top 250 draft prospects who had power listed below a "40" grade (20-80 scouting grading system, ML average is 50). The Guardians drafted 3 of them. Only one player in the entire MLP Pipeline listing had a ranking in ANY category (hit, power, speed, defense, arm) of "20" and Cleveland drafted him (Knapczyk, power grade of 20).
I cannot really comment on the quality of their remaining draftees. Recent history would tell us that there were probably some real prospects that Cleveland drafted in this group but in 2022, rounds 9 and 11-20 have looked, this year, like organizational players, even though some of them were playing at low A when they were college guys. Also, the Guardians had signed all of their draft picks for the past 3 years but this year, in rounds 11-20, they drafted 4 HS pitchers and it would be surprising, though not impossible, if they signed them all and kept the streak alive of signing all of their draft picks.
When you add this to the 2022 draft that is looking like a failure, there is a chance that these last two drafts could seriously hurt our prospect pipeline (in depth and high end prospects who can make a significant impact on the ML team) for at least the next 5 years.
Now we have to wait to see how many of these guys they sign and what bonuses they pay them and how much of their bonus pools they have left or overspend. That will add to the ability to make an assessment on the quality of this draft which, right now, is looking almost comically bad in terms of the approach they took and the quality of players they obtained.
No comments:
Post a Comment