It was mildly surprising that the Astros took pitcher Mark Appel as the number one pick. Appel was the consensus number one last season, but he wanted more than first position slot money to sign. So he slid down to the Pirates, who could not sign him. Before the draft, his agent Scott Boras was making noise about the leverage the senior still had if he slid down the board. Last year, Houston drafted a high school player below slot and used that extra money to overpay later picks who were perceived to have had signability issues (i.e. money demands). But the choice of Appel does make some marketing sense to the Astros, since Appel is from Houston. It is clear that the Astros had to have agreed on a bonus number with Appel before the pick was announced in order to save face.
That left the Cubs with a choice between college pitcher Jonathan Gray or power third baseman Kris Bryant. Many pundits thought the Cubs would pick Gray (even over Appel). Most pundits thought the Cubs would pick the best available pitcher. Gray's 2013 season stats were very good:
2013 Stats: GS: 16, W-L: 10-2, ERA: 1.59, IP: 119.0, ER: 21, BB: 22, K: 138, AVG: .188
But Bryant's offense numbers were far superior to anyone else in college baseball:
2013 Stats: G: 58, R: 78, H: 73, 2B: 13, HR: 31, RBI: 62, AVG: .340, OBP: .500, SLG: .860
The debate comes down to a philosophical and empirical question. How can you compare a top line pitching prospect to a top line hitting prospect. If you go backward to the basic element of the game itself, a top line pitcher is expected to pitch 210 innings per season, or be responsible for 630 outs. That is 14.4% of a team's total season out number. A top line batter is expected to drive in 100 runs per season. The world champion Giants scored 718 runs in 2012. That would equate to about 13.9% of total runs scored. In 2012, the Cubs only scored 613 runs. Adding a run producer would get the team closer to the Giants' run total.
So it comes down to a fairly even analysis. An top line pitcher is expected to get around 14% of the outs while a top line hitter is expected to generate approximately 14% of the total team runs.
Then there is debate on who is more valuable. A top line pitcher who averages 7 IP per quality start can keep a team's bullpen fresh, stop losing streaks and dominate short series. However, he only gets the ball 30-33 games per season. A starter fielder could be expected to play 150-160 games per year, or five times the amount of actual on field time as a starter.
There is a philosophical principle that some scouts have that pitching wins championships. It is said that good pitching will eliminate good hitting. On the other hand, in order to win a team needs to generate enough offense to score runs, even against good pitching.
The final review is that it is easier to project field position players than with pitchers. Position players have a larger body of work to look at; their fielding and batting mechanics are easily understood. Pitchers are harder to project because of the hidden wear and tear on their arm and shoulder mechanics. Pitchers are more suspect to injury during development.
In the end, I tend to fall on the side of picking a position player (especially one at an organizational need) over a projected "star" pitching candidate.
The Cubs were in the almost the same position during the Mark Prior selection. Prior was the "can't miss" kid, the "most major league ready" prospect in the draft. Prior was expected to be the No. 1 pick, but the Twins instead selected Joe Mauer. Prior "fell" to the Cubs. This year, it seems that vibe has been reversed in that the Cubs took a prized hitting prospect over a stud pitcher.
But the story is not over quite yet. Bryant was the best selection for the Cubs. Now the Cubs organization needs not to screw it up. Jason McLeod told the media that Bryant projects as a third baseman and that is the position he will play. That needs to remain true. A player's comfort and routine helps with the transition to professional ball. Too many teams are moving players from position to position early in their development, which in many ways hinders the player who does not know what the organization wants of him. If the Cubs sign Bryant quickly, they should assign him to Double A Tennessee for the rest of the summer to get his feet wet. They should not mess with his swing mechanics. They should let him continue to play ball like he has done at San Diego.
