2016 MLB Draft Thread.

[A Red Sox fan named Hugh]

In general I shy away from starting threads but it is almost draft day and prospects are my favorite subject. Here is some relevant information leading up, feel free to add some analysts, articles, mock drafts, conversation, and hopes and desires.

http://www.baseballamerica.com/draft...kJm2qygLr0l.97

http://www.minorleagueball.com/2016/...all-mock-draft

http://www.halosheaven.com/2016/6/3/...s-rankings-2-0

http://m.mlb.com/news/article/181759...ewis-are-top-3

http://espn.go.com/blog/mlb-draft/insider/post?id=2754


From what I've gathered this is a generally strong draft compared to recent years yet it seems to be lacking a lot strong college pitching at the top and seems to be flush with a lot of high upside high school arms at the top. Of course, the last week leading up to the draft there are usually a few names that come flying up the draft boards and some college players get pushed to the top.

[Emp9]

Sweet. Thanks Hugh. I was actually looking for this thread earlier this morning and contemplated starting one. Glad i didn't. Was ill prepared. Only thing i can add at the moment is the usual: Draft the best player, can't draft based on need necessarily.

[Spudboy]

Sweet. Thanks Hugh. I was actually looking for this thread earlier this morning and contemplated starting one. Glad i didn't. Was ill prepared. Only thing i can add at the moment is the usual: Draft the best player, can't draft based on need necessarily.

This, of course, makes all the sense in the world. Especially since so many draftees will be high school kids.

But, what if, say, the Sox put an emphasis on pitching and draft a disproportionate number of arms?

I realize these will still be 4-5 years away from being MLB ready if ever at all so there would be no immediate benefit to the Sox current or near term.

But what if they selected 4-5 pitchers?

[A Red Sox fan named Hugh]

This, of course, makes all the sense in the world. Especially since so many draftees will be high school kids.

But, what if, say, the Sox put an emphasis on pitching and draft a disproportionate number of arms?

I realize these will still be 4-5 years away from being MLB ready if ever at all so there would be no immediate benefit to the Sox current or near term.

But what if they selected 4-5 pitchers?

I don't think draft the best player available and focus on pitching need to necessarily be mutually exclusive. I think the further you move past the #1 pick the more fluidity there is between players and teams probably have draft boards that are tiered. Also, remember pitchers are generally 1/2 of the players that are going to be drafted and on your roster. The Sox will easily take 18-20 arms this weekend.

[Spudboy]

I don't think draft the best player available and focus on pitching need to necessarily be mutually exclusive. I think the further you move past the #1 pick the more fluidity there is between players and teams probably have draft boards that are tiered. Also, remember pitchers are generally 1/2 of the players that are going to be drafted and on your roster. The Sox will easily take 18-20 arms this weekend.

Wow. I wasn't thinking about it that way.

[Slasher9]

as with every year...i look forward to your post draft analysis Hugh. you are without a doubt the minor league "expert" in my world.....

[A Red Sox fan named Hugh]

Oh no, I'm no expert guys. I just love following the soxprospects and read soxprospects.com and baseball america all the time. I'd like to consider myself a well informed fan of the minor leagues.

[Slasher9]

hopefully there are a couple aces in that mix!!!

[Jack Flap]

Thanks for the links, Hugh. I'll definitely have this page open Thursday night.

[A Red Sox fan named Hugh]

Can't forget Soxprospects, they have excellent draft coverage.

http://news.soxprospects.com/2016/06...t-preview.html

And I would highly recommend their draft preview podcast that I just finished as well.

http://news.soxprospects.com/2016/06...view-with.html

It's an easier listen if you download it on stitcher or itunes.

[mvp 78]

Spud, even if they spent the first 10 rounds only drafting arms, how many of them would actually pan out? The Sox have a poor history of developing pitchers. It seems like they are more adept at developing positional players. I'd say keep drafting the best players and use them as trade bait for pitching...

[Spudboy]

Spud, even if they spent the first 10 rounds only drafting arms, how many of them would actually pan out? The Sox have a poor history of developing pitchers. It seems like they are more adept at developing positional players. I'd say keep drafting the best players and use them as trade bait for pitching...

I was not advocating for drafting only pitchers. I was just thinking aloud.

[mvp 78]

I was not advocating for drafting only pitchers. I was just thinking aloud.

I'm not saying you were. I was just saying even if they were allocate more picks towards pitching, the recent track record leads me to believe that they'd probably struggle to develop those guys.

[User Name?]

That's what the Cubs have done. Focus on their org strength (developing position players) and find other avenues for pitching (4/5ths of their rotation are trade/FA guys).

[mvp 78]

That's what the Cubs have done. Focus on their org strength (developing position players) and find other avenues for pitching (4/5ths of their rotation are trade/FA guys).

Fuck the Cubs.