Posted 17 May 2017 - 10:02 AM
It sounds to me like both Greene and McKay are better as hitters, McKay for sure if he's working sub 90. And with Greene, the projectability of a high school pitcher has to be about zero- even if you knew the outcome of Greene as a pitcher would be top of the rotation guy, if you also knew his outcome as hitter was slick fielding power hitting ss, you have to prefer the latter. Don't you have to compare the ceilings of these guys as pitchers and hitters, and then also consider their 'somewhere in the middles'? Obviously the floor is never reach the show at all. The calls to draft a pitcher based on organizational need seem misguided. As pitchers, the college guys are two years out at best, and Greene is four or five. The team will be significantly different in two years, and almost totally different in five. The way I see it, we have one sure thing: Miguel sano; we have two guys we hope will be sure things: buxton and berrios; we have the following guys we hope can be contributors and will be pleasantly surprised by anything approaching stardom: Kepler, Rosario, polanco, Vargas. Possibly gone in two years, for sure in four: dozier, mauer, Castro, Santana, Santiago, Hughes, the whole bullpen, the whole bench. My point is that you should always draft the best available player, especially when you are rebuilding (the player you think will be the best when he reaches the big leagues). If you think that in four years, Greene will be the next correa or lindor, you take that and forget about pitching. Polanco is playing great now, but is he firmly established for the next six years- no. Gordon is hitting for average at nooga, but hasn't demonstrated any other plus tools so far- it sounds like his ceiling is 'solid'- which would be great, but not something to bank on. If you think that in two years, McKay can replace mauer at first and put up kris Bryant ("best hitter in college baseball") numbers at first, I'd say that's also more valuable than whatever his ceiling as a pitcher is, greene's ceiling as a pitcher is, or wright's ceiling is. It seems to me that guys touted as 'best hitter in college baseball' especially in recent years are fairly reliable at transitioning their production to the big leagues.
All that being said, it does seem like the value of both Greene and McKay is possibly being inflated by their statuses as being both pitchers and hitters of quality. You have to figure out: is he a better pitcher than he is a hitter or the other way around, and whichever he is better at, that's what he is- no looking back. The idea that if he fails at one, he can try the other sounds like a recipe for a long drawn out minor league career (though I suppose in the case of McKay in particular, if he blows out his arm as a pitcher 1b seems like a more reasonable fallback). The idea that either of them can somehow do both is impossible, in my opinion.
My questions are: who is the best hitter right now in the draft and who has the highest ceiling as a hitter in the draft and who is the best pitcher right now in the draft (projecting ceiling for a pitcher seems pointless, esp when you're picking 1:1).
Seems to me like the talk is that the answers are: McKay is the best hitter right now (and might also have the highest ceiling) Greene has the highest ceiling as a hitter/position player (as a ss) and wright is the best pitcher.
I think McKay is the closest thing to a sure thing in the draft, but as a first baseman, and I would be happy if the twins took him (with dreams of kris Bryant in two years). I think Greene as a SS is the most interesting pick with the highest potential payoff and I would be happy if the twins took him, looking forward to watching his progress in the minors for the next four-six years. If they take wright or any of the other two as a pitcher, I will be gritting my teeth and crossing my fingers and hoping it somehow works out (thinking of kohl Stewart and Tyler jay).