Hunter Dozier

Posted by: yoda

Hunter Dozier - 06/11/13 01:42 AM

Baseball America's No. 39 rated prospect

Austin Meadows is No. 5
Posted by: yoda

Re: Hunter Dozier - 06/11/13 01:43 AM

At this point, I feel like KC barely deserves a MLB baseball team
Posted by: PHOGUSHER

Re: Hunter Dozier - 06/11/13 09:55 AM

Yes, its the good people of KC thats been loyal fans for years thats to blame for their draft choices....geeeshh.
Posted by: JFish26

Re: Hunter Dozier - 06/11/13 10:05 AM

Originally Posted By: yoda
Baseball America's No. 39 rated prospect

Austin Meadows is No. 5


Good grief. You don't understand the MLB draft. That's fine I guess.

As intriguing as Meadows is, he's four or five years away. That matters, too.
Posted by: tyler

Re: Hunter Dozier - 06/11/13 12:39 PM

Give it a damn rest dude. You're acting like Meadows has already come up to the league and finished top-3 in MVP voting. You can't use a prospect ranking system to statistically back up your one track mindset.
Posted by: yoda

Re: Hunter Dozier - 06/11/13 08:15 PM

Fish I get it — you're the undisputed king of 'armchair GMs.'

I was curious how many other teams utilized the Royals strategy of letting their 2nd round pick and beyond dictate their 1st round pick?

I'm also curious as to why the Pirates drafted the consensus best premium talent on the board, Austin Meadows No. 9, and why they didn't use the Royals strategy of letting their 2nd round pick and beyond dictate their 1st round pick?

Further, I'm curious as to why GM Moore cited excellent saber-metrics as a primary reason for drafting Dozier? He played at Stephen F. Austin. Are you freaking kidding me? Sorry, but using saber-metrics to evaluate a player from Stephen F. Austin is beyond absurd.

— Austin Meadows —
Posted by: yoda

Re: Hunter Dozier - 06/11/13 08:17 PM

Originally Posted By: tyler
Give it a damn rest dude. You're acting like Meadows has already come up to the league and finished top-3 in MVP voting. You can't use a prospect ranking system to statistically back up your one track mindset.



One track mind? The topic is Hunter Dozier and why the [censored] he was selected as the Royals 1st round pick. This is what we are discussing Tyler
Posted by: yoda

Re: Hunter Dozier - 06/11/13 09:39 PM

Originally Posted By: PHOGUSHER
Yes, its the good people of KC thats been loyal fans for years thats to blame for their draft choices....geeeshh.



I didn't blame the fans. The only person who has even brought the fans up — was you gusher. Reading comprehension is something you need to brush up on. Hopefully before your next comment
Posted by: tyler

Re: Hunter Dozier - 06/11/13 09:40 PM

You are comical at this point. And it is truly embarrassing to yourself to feel the need to talk down to me when it comes to baseball. You have one thought on your mind and you feel the burning need to take up three threads to let us know what that thought is. We should have drafted Meadows. I get it. Now stop being a little condescending prick and littering the baseball boards with your constant babbling over how much smarter you are than Dayton Moore.

Smart you are not yoda.
Posted by: yoda

Re: Hunter Dozier - 06/11/13 09:49 PM

Originally Posted By: tyler
You are comical at this point. And it is truly embarrassing to yourself to feel the need to talk down to me when it comes to baseball. You have one thought on your mind and you feel the burning need to take up three threads to let us know what that thought is. We should have drafted Meadows



And you are 'smart' when it comes to baseball?

I mean, I played growing up. Not sure if you did, but I am sure that I know more than you about baseball. I have yet to see you contribute anything to any of the baseball discussions. You just drop in to call me names when you get mad. But if that's your thing, than whatever.

I mean first of all, you're not a mod. So who the [censored] are you to tell me what I can or cannot comment on? Hope the name-calling made you feel better. Sour grapes much? To be perfectly honest, it's not just Meadows. Even if the Royals passed on Meadows (which they did) their was still other premium talent on the board which other teams quickly scooped up.

Premium talent Hunter Dozier is not.

Which is kind of funny, since the Royals haven't made the playoffs since what, the early 90s? A team like the Royals needs the best talent they can get. Any other strategy is not the right strategy.

There is always an excuse for Moore. Last year, he was pressured by the locals to take Starling. The year before, he just got a free pass on that debacle of a pick. Mous and Hosmer are close to being busts. Free pass after free pass. One of these years he might luck into a superstar. But then he would probably trade him for a 31-year old pitcher.

And Tyler, why is that you have to lie to make your point? I looked, and their is two threads relating to Meadows/Dozier, not three as you suggested
Posted by: tyler

Re: Hunter Dozier - 06/11/13 10:47 PM

Originally Posted By: yoda

An Tyler, why is that you have to lie to make your point? I looked, and their is two threads relating to Meadows/Dozier, not three as you suggested




I'm not even going to waste my time with the marathon of rubbish you posted prior to this statement because you are off (once again.) You did post in favor of Meadows in not two, but three separate threads. The initial draft thread. Moore thinks he found a Trout like talent. Hunter Dozier. That's three, you're out.
Posted by: yoda

Re: Hunter Dozier - 06/11/13 10:56 PM

Originally Posted By: tyler
Originally Posted By: yoda

An Tyler, why is that you have to lie to make your point? I looked, and their is two threads relating to Meadows/Dozier, not three as you suggested




I'm not even going to waste my time with the marathon of rubbish you posted prior to this statement because you are off (once again.) You did post in favor of Meadows in not two, but three separate threads. The initial draft thread. Moore thinks he found a Trout like talent. Hunter Dozier. That's three, you're out.



Posted in, or started three different threads? Big difference. You're not 'wasting your time' because you don't have anything valuable to contribute to this baseball discussion. You called me names, that's the best you could do.

If I agreed with you or Amrchair GM — Fish, regarding this discussion — would it make you happy? Because I feel like it would. I never had a problem with you before. Not sure why you are going into attack-mode on me
Posted by: KUSPORTSFAN93

Re: Hunter Dozier - 06/11/13 10:56 PM

We understand your point, yoda. We get that you want Austin Meadows on this team and we get that you hate the selection of Hunter Dozier, no matter how it's looked at or reasoned. My question is this: why must you continue to go on about it? I respect your opinion. I don't even think it's entirely wrong. You could be spot on. It's just the tone, the pretentiousness that I can't handle. And I don't think I'm unique in that regard.

There is still a season going on, other draft picks to discuss, etc., etc.
Posted by: CrimsonNBlue

Re: Hunter Dozier - 06/11/13 11:07 PM

Absolutely no one is giving a free pass to Moore. That's absurd.

Every Royals fan was completely puzzled by the Dozier pick, until the Manaea pick. And now, while we no one says it will work, we get it.

Meadows and Manaea can't both be signed by the Royals. That's just fact, and the 5-10 round picks just further reiterate that point.
Posted by: yoda

Re: Hunter Dozier - 06/11/13 11:20 PM

You are right that I don't like the selection of Dozier. But it has more to do with where he was selected, not his overall talent- level.

Even with the strategy used, I just don't get how you could let a talent like Meadows slip away after he is basically 'gifted' to you. Meadows projected to have the biggest impact of any player available
Posted by: tyler

Re: Hunter Dozier - 06/11/13 11:29 PM

Originally Posted By: yoda
Originally Posted By: tyler
Originally Posted By: yoda

An Tyler, why is that you have to lie to make your point? I looked, and their is two threads relating to Meadows/Dozier, not three as you suggested




I'm not even going to waste my time with the marathon of rubbish you posted prior to this statement because you are off (once again.) You did post in favor of Meadows in not two, but three separate threads. The initial draft thread. Moore thinks he found a Trout like talent. Hunter Dozier. That's three, you're out.



Posted in, or started three different threads? Big difference. You're not 'wasting your time' because you don't have anything valuable to contribute to this baseball discussion. You called me names, that's the best you could do.

If I agreed with you or Amrchair GM — Fish, regarding this discussion — would it make you happy? Because I feel like it would. I never had a problem with you before. Not sure why you are going into attack-mode on me


No, it wouldn't make me happy because its not what you're saying that has me agitated. It's how you are going about it. You have the "smartest person in the room" persona going on right now and I'm pretty sure that I'm not the only person here that isn't appreciating it.

You want me to bring something to this discussion, well here ya go. The 2008 MLB Draft was 5 years ago. That is roughly the timetable given to Austin Meadows to get to the Majors. What is Timothy Beckham up to these days? Yeah, I don't know either. He was a HS shortstop with ample amounts of talent that nobody was second guessing as the #1 pick. The Rays took him at #1, while a catcher from Florida State named Buster Posey fell to #5 and the Giants. We know how that one has panned out.

So what I am getting at is that this whole thing is a crapshoot. That same draft has only had 2 All-Stars so far and one of those is Aaron Crow. So, the draft 5 years ago has so far produced only one elite player out of the first 30 picks. This is all playing the lottery with 20 year old kids. It just has become under the microscope because the MLBN has started broadcasting the event.
Posted by: yoda

Re: Hunter Dozier - 06/12/13 12:42 AM

I honestly don't care about Timothy Beckham. Players are making it to the Majors quicker now than ever before. You can't just apply a five-year timetable to Meadows because he was drafted out of HS like Beckham.

So based off that assessment we have to assume either a) Meadows will be a bust? or b) it will take him five-years to reach the Majors? I think Meadows is a different type of talent, one you need to select if available. And he was available
Posted by: yoda

Re: Hunter Dozier - 06/12/13 12:49 AM

I feel like Moore is acting like the coolest kid on the block. Kind of like how Tony La Russa would often times place his pitcher 8th in the batting order.

I don't get the impression Moore was actually smarter than everybody else by utilizing this strategy — I think he may have badly whiffed
Posted by: tyler

Re: Hunter Dozier - 06/12/13 02:11 AM

Originally Posted By: yoda
I honestly don't care about Timothy Beckham.


My point exactly. You don't care about this guy because he hasn't panned out, but yet at the time he was drafted he was touted as this great ballplayer. A "cant miss" type. And he was touted this way by the very same scouts that you are basing your assessment of Meadows on. High school guys are a different breed and there are so many factors that go into their careers before you can just slot them in to the lineup day in and day out at the major league level.
Posted by: NotAPuke

Re: Hunter Dozier - 06/12/13 12:17 PM

Can we agree that at best, despite ranking services, the baseball draft is a real crapshoot?
Posted by: pwhittemore

Re: Hunter Dozier - 06/12/13 12:32 PM

Originally Posted By: CrimsonNBlue

Meadows and Manaea can't both be signed by the Royals. That's just fact, and the 5-10 round picks just further reiterate that point.


With the current payroll which is around 80 mill right?
Posted by: tyler

Re: Hunter Dozier - 07/25/13 02:27 PM

http://www.baseball-reference.com/minors...www.typepad.com

20 of his 37 hits have gone for extra bases and he has walked more than he has struck out in his first 151 plate appearances.
Posted by: KUSPORTSFAN93

Re: Hunter Dozier - 07/25/13 02:34 PM

Dozier has been very solid since starting getting his career started. Granted, it has been at a very low level. But you have to start somewhere.
Posted by: christgs80

Re: Hunter Dozier - 07/25/13 02:38 PM

Very solid start, but honestly, he was probably facing better competition in college than what you see in the rookie league.

Still though, it's encouraging.
Posted by: KUSPORTSFAN93

Re: Hunter Dozier - 07/25/13 02:43 PM

Meadows has also started out comparatively poorly in rookie ball. I think he is the better prospect, no doubt. But that doesn't always mean the better player. If I were to bet on it, I'd say Meadows ends up better than Dozier. But the Pirates also didn't get a Sean Manaea thirty picks later.
Posted by: rockchalker5

Re: Hunter Dozier - 07/25/13 03:58 PM

Originally Posted By: CrimsonNBlue


Meadows and Manaea can't both be signed by the Royals. That's just fact, and the 5-10 round picks just further reiterate that point.


Yoda....its really just as simple as this ^^^^^^^

The draft is as much about signability as anything.
Posted by: rockchalker5

Re: Hunter Dozier - 07/25/13 04:02 PM

Originally Posted By: yoda
Baseball America's No. 39 rated prospect

Austin Meadows is No. 5


Its fine to be critical of the Dozier pick. But how do you give zero credit to DM for the Manaea pick? Who happens to be top 10 on the list you have provided.
Posted by: jammahawk

Re: Hunter Dozier - 07/28/13 05:25 PM

Originally Posted By: christgs80
Very solid start, but honestly, he was probably facing better competition in college than what you see in the rookie league.

Still though, it's encouraging.


I don't claim to know anything about the quality of competition of the rookie league, but logic is telling me that the rookie league is full of guys that were good enough to get drafted, and college team rosters probably have more guys on it that never get drafted and will never play beyond college.
Posted by: outlawhawk79

Re: Hunter Dozier - 07/31/13 11:48 PM

Originally Posted By: rockchalker5
Originally Posted By: yoda
Baseball America's No. 39 rated prospect

Austin Meadows is No. 5


Its fine to be critical of the Dozier pick. But how do you give zero credit to DM for the Manaea pick? Who happens to be top 10 on the list you have provided.



Why should I give Moore credit? Manaea was injured pre-draft, which is one of the reasons he slipped. Meadows has future All-Star written all over him. Honestly, I feel like KC need the best premium talent available, and that would have been Meadows, clearly.

Look at it this way, if Mike Trout was on the board and available at the No. 9 pick, but KC passed on him so they could sign two lesser talents, would that make sense to anyone besides Jfish?
Posted by: KUSPORTSFAN93

Re: Hunter Dozier - 08/01/13 12:34 AM

Originally Posted By: outlawhawk79
Originally Posted By: rockchalker5
Originally Posted By: yoda
Baseball America's No. 39 rated prospect

Austin Meadows is No. 5


Its fine to be critical of the Dozier pick. But how do you give zero credit to DM for the Manaea pick? Who happens to be top 10 on the list you have provided.



Why should I give Moore credit? Manaea was injured pre-draft, which is one of the reasons he slipped. Meadows has future All-Star written all over him. Honestly, I feel like KC need the best premium talent available, and that would have been Meadows, clearly.

Look at it this way, if Mike Trout was on the board and available at the No. 9 pick, but KC passed on him so they could sign two lesser talents, would that make sense to anyone besides Jfish?


That would be a sound argument if Meadows was a better talent than Sean Manaea. But that is not the case. Manaea's ceiling is #1 starter. And he could be a pretty damn good one. If his injury had never happened, he likely could have gone #1 overall. I'll take that risk at pick #34. Hunter Dozier could also be a serviceable player at some point, which is nothing to be ashamed of. You can't convince me that Meadows looks like a definite all-star at this point. The kid is in rookie ball. I usually reserve that sort of judgment until I've seen a prospect succeed at several levels of minor league ball. Sometimes longer.

(Hint: Austin Meadows should not ever be compared to Mike Trout)
Posted by: outlawhawk79

Re: Hunter Dozier - 08/01/13 01:00 AM

I never actually compared Austin Meadows skill-set to Mike Trout's. I just used a hypothetical scenario to make my point relating to draft positions and best available talent. And actually, I think Trout went 25th overall when he was drafted. I've always bought into the Mike Trout as the next Mickey Mantle comparisons. And so far, Trout is living up to that hype.

Additionally, I have never read anywhere, that at any point in time Manaea was projected to actually go No. 1 overall. Top 10 yes, Top 5 perhaps, No. 1 overall, no. I don't think KC will ever be able to compete for a World Series if they don't start selecting, developing, and KEEPING the best available talent, period, end of story
Posted by: KUSPORTSFAN93

Re: Hunter Dozier - 08/01/13 01:24 AM

Originally Posted By: outlawhawk79
I never actually compared Austin Meadows skill-set to Mike Trout's. I just used a hypothetical scenario to make my point relating to draft positions and best available talent. And actually, I think Trout went 25th overall when he was drafted. I've always bought into the Mike Trout as the next Mickey Mantle comparisons. And so far, Trout is living up to that hype.

Additionally, I have never read anywhere, that at any point in time Manaea was projected to actually go No. 1 overall. Top 10 yes, Top 5 perhaps, No. 1 overall, no. I don't think KC will ever be able to compete for a World Series if they don't start selecting, developing, and KEEPING the best available talent, period, end of story


That's fair. But mentioning a talented kid in rookie ball in the same breath as a potential 1st ballot HOFer gives me pause.

I said that he likely COULD have gone #1 overall, if not for his injury. I'm not claiming to know the draft boards of the 30 organizations. But Manaea was/is certainly a Top-5+ talent. In any case, I would argue that he's every bit as talented as Meadows. They both have great potential.

Let me pose this scenario to you: Kansas City selects Austin Meadows in the first round. They go on to select Sean Manaea 30 picks later. You can't sign both of them. That's a fact. They could not have signed both. So then you have one and nothing else. You go the route that DM went, and you have one kid who, barring disastrous post-injury effects, is a potential big-time major league talent. And you also have one very good prospect who could, at some point, be a decent big leaguer. I'll take that.

You also got a discount (still expensive) for what Manaea is.
Posted by: outlawhawk79

Re: Hunter Dozier - 08/01/13 01:32 AM

I was listening to either cbs or espn radio today, and they had a beat writer on who covers the NY Yankees. He said most teams these days attempt to stockpile pitching talent, and hope that the majority of them don't fall victim to TJ surgery or some other career-altering injury. Just look at Danny Duffy for example.

The fact that Manaea already had an injury pre-draft, gives me pause. KC has a major need for a corner OFer and you could even argue they have a need in CF.

I find it funny that the only people backing Moore on this, are locals, mainly on message boards. Virtually every other 'expert' has said they should have selected Meadows. And I agree
Posted by: KUSPORTSFAN93

Re: Hunter Dozier - 08/01/13 02:28 PM

We're never going to agree on this--that's clear--but I also want to make clear that it is no bias in favor of Moore than gives me this opinion. Moore's handling of the deadline this year was enough to make me think it's time for him to go. I'm not shouting it from the rooftops. But if he's out the door at the end of the year, you won't hear me complaining. That doesn't matter though. He will get 2014.