MLB 2024 Draft

[Damage]

Interesting stat: Condon has 7 more home runs than Bazzana and is only .099 higher in Slugging.

 

[CDAV45]

Are we really going to hold Condon's 46 AB in the Cape over his head? I'm not even advocating they should pick Condon in this conversation, but seems awfully odd to put so much weight into such a small sample. We need to remember that development isn't linear with prospects. Most 6'6" 20 yr old young men are a little behind in their physical maturation. It will be interesting to see what they do.

 

[Criznit]

I think I like Bazzana more, but one thing I love about Condon is, even though he is tall and there is a lot going on with his swing his head doesn't really move. Up, down, back, forth, etc. I am reminded of a bird of prey, their eyes acquire the target and their whole body moves independently from their head. Locked in is the simple way to put it..

No up/down/bobbing etc. Next time you watch some clips, watch his head... Once he preloads, that thing ain't moving despite the arms, legs and torso doing their thing.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

I have a strong feeling the Guardians will pick Bazzana.
There's nothing wrong with that. I'm sure he will be a fine player. Maybe All-Star quality someday.
My pick wholeheartedly would be Condon. Why? He's RH, that's rare in this organization. He can play the OF. He possesses extremely RARE power.
But he had some unremarkable AB's with a wood bat a year ago. To me, that's old data and means absolutely nothing.
However, the deep thinkers in the Guardians will look at anything to nit-pick the 1-1 pick. There's nothing wrong with doing that if that's their process.

We will see what develops.

 

[CBBI]

Are we really going to hold Condon's 46 AB in the Cape over his head? I'm not even advocating they should pick Condon in this conversation, but seems awfully odd to put so much weight into such a small sample. We need to remember that development isn't linear with prospects. Most 6'6" 20 yr old young men are a little behind in their physical maturation. It will be interesting to see what they do.

I don't put as much stock into the Cape Cod League as the Guardians organization apparently does.

I just see Bazzana having the better batting eye, significantly more speed and base running ability, and more versatile/valuable defensive projection at the next level.

Bazzana also has 26 home runs this year for goodness sake. It's not like he's some slap hitter.

 

[Gson]

Are we really going to hold Condon's 46 AB in the Cape over his head? I'm not even advocating they should pick Condon in this conversation, but seems awfully odd to put so much weight into such a small sample. We need to remember that development isn't linear with prospects. Most 6'6" 20 yr old young men are a little behind in their physical maturation. It will be interesting to see what they do.

Yes

 

[BimboColesHair]

Are we really going to hold Condon's 46 AB in the Cape over his head? I'm not even advocating they should pick Condon in this conversation, but seems awfully odd to put so much weight into such a small sample. We need to remember that development isn't linear with prospects. Most 6'6" 20 yr old young men are a little behind in their physical maturation. It will be interesting to see what they do.

When the guys you are looking at are extremely comparable overall talents, yes, any crack in the armor is going to attract attention.

It's going to make evaluators ask why those 50 PAs did not go well and it's something they aren't asking about the other guy. All part of the process.

 

[daddywags]

I'm wondering whether scouts parse college numbers more closely than conference-nonconference play, difference in overall conference talent, etc. Do they look more closely at at bats against pitchers who more closely approximate big league (or higher minor league) pitching? I mean a guy can hit 50 home runs, but if he struggles against any pitcher likely to make past rookie ball is that something to look at? Or are there too few of the top pitchers to even try to go there?

 

[bob2the2nd]

I'm wondering whether scouts parse college numbers more closely than conference-nonconference play, difference in overall conference talent, etc. Do they look more closely at at bats against pitchers who more closely approximate big league (or higher minor league) pitching? I mean a guy can hit 50 home runs, but if he struggles against any pitcher likely to make past rookie ball is that something to look at? Or are there too few of the top pitchers to even try to go there?

Of course they do. I imagine it doesn't take that much effort to rank the pitchers these guys are hitting against compare numbers that way. Not only do they probably have overall weighted numbers, I imagine they also have category numbers. Against A level pitchers they hit so much, against B, against C, vs lefties , vs righties, etc. Etc

 

[CBBI]

Food for thought...

Final Season of NCAA Baseball
Langford: 64 G, 303 PA, 236 AB, 83 R, 88 H, 28 2B, 3 3B, 21 HR, 57 RBI, 9 SB, 56 BB, 44 K, .373 BA, .498 OBP, .784 SLG, 1.282 OPS
Crews: 71 G, 344 PA, 258 AB, 100 R, 110 H, 16 2B, 2 3B, 18 HR, 70 RBI, 6 SB, 71 BB, 46 K, .426 BA, .567 OBP, .713 SLG, 1.280 OPS

Condon: 47 G, 236 PA, 181 AB, 70 R, 83 H, 16 2B, 1 3B, 33 HR, 69 RBI, 3 SB, 41 BB, 35 K, .459 BA, .568 OBP, 1.105 SLG, 1.673 OPS
Bazzana: 47 G, 232 PA, 166 AB, 69 R, 71 H, 10 2B, 4 3B, 26 HR, 59 RBI, 12 SB, 61 BB, 25 K, .428 BA, .591 OBP, 1.006 SLG, 1.597 OPS

I would expect Condon and Bazzana's numbers to tick down slightly as they get into their respective conference tournaments and into the NCAA tournament and face higher end competition the rest of the way, but they've outproduced last year's top two hitters by a pretty significant margin thus far.

Langford and Crews were both top considered top 7 prospects in all of the baseball after just half a season of professional ball.

 

[CalBuckeyeRob]

How do the current college bats compare to the wood bats? I know they stopped using the old time aluminum bats because they were creating too much offense. But these bats still have a metallic sound at impact.

 

[Gson]

How do the current college bats compare to the wood bats? I know they stopped using the old time aluminum bats because they were creating too much offense. But these bats still have a metallic sound at impact.

aluminum and "other" baseball bats have been engineered to achieve a number of factors that closely follows a wood bat.. Wood bats, however, have varying degrees of "impact behavior" when a baseball hits the bat, squarely.. For this reason, exact recreation is only passing in frequency.. Coefficient of Restitution, C.O.R., is a measure that defines "some" of the physics.. not all of it..

At the end of the day.. it comes down to historically accepted norms & confidence that a wood and non-wood bat are able to perform equally.. The science already says they're darn close..

..and we all know how baseball loves to change..

 

[daddywags]

Of course they do. I imagine it doesn't take that much effort to rank the pitchers these guys are hitting against compare numbers that way. Not only do they probably have overall weighted numbers, I imagine they also have category numbers. Against A level pitchers they hit so much, against B, against C, vs lefties , vs righties, etc. Etc

That's what I would think, which makes comparative discussions of overall stats, well not useless but pretty far afield from the data being used to make the actual decision.

 

[smalls1129]

Uh, with me, probably not... When you grow up with a speech issue you make some weird tendencies lol I've always kind of done the aka when something I wanna say doesn't come out right and say it a different way. I add aka to represent the layman's terms in my head lol

Either way as Bimbo pointed out I guess draftees don't go to Cape Cod, which is a place he badly struggled at in 23...

Right on, meant no disrespect was just wondering

 

[CDAV45]

When the guys you are looking at are extremely comparable overall talents, yes, any crack in the armor is going to attract attention.

It's going to make evaluators ask why those 50 PAs did not go well and it's something they aren't asking about the other guy. All part of the process.

That's probably true, but there isn't much to go by and any of the top talents could have posted those numbers in such a small sample. I would think, and I'm probably wrong, there a numerous other things that have more influence. Size, speed, EV's, contact %, SO/BB and a few other metrics we typically look at have to have some influence.

How much projection goes into a pick?