Prospect Insider - 2011 Draft: Day 1

2011 Draft: Day 1

By Jason A. Churchill

By 06-06-2011

UPDATE: Why it was Hultzen ...

The day has finally come. It's Day 1 of the 2011 MLB Draft, otherwise known as the First-Year Players Draft or, more technically, the Rule 4 draft. The Pittsburgh Pirates and Seattle Mariners will get the events under way as they select the first two of 60 picks on the initial day.

To follow the day's rumors, buzz and other notes, subscribers can click here.

The latest draft notes through Sunday can be found here.

If you are not yet a subscriber, click here to join the rest of the insiders.

Starting at 12 Noon PT, ALL READERS can chat about the draft with each other all while keeping tabs on the draft via the Twitter accounts of myself, Keith Law and Chris Crawford of MLB Draft Insider.

To join the chat, which will also contain polls, links to news and radio hits and, of course, all of your thoughts and discussions, click here.

2011-draft:-day-1

Comments
The following 179 comment(s) for this article are shown below:

1. By: davidUW on 06-06-2011 04:26:52
Is there any chance that we get a post draft podcast?

2. By: mfdplus on 06-06-2011 08:10:20
Jonathon Mayo just reported that Cole will be Pittsburgh's pick. That comes from the never named "source".

3. By: docsmith on 06-06-2011 08:57:37
Exciting day! Actually, exciting couple of days. It has been fun to watch our farm system get rebuilt and this draft class hopefully puts us over the top into having a solid, productive, farm system....I was going to say again, but it has been a long time since we had a good farm system that I deleted it.

So, bring on a potential top talent in Rendon, Lindor, Starling, or Cole and let's get some sleepers and good talent in the later rounds.

4. By: shemberry on 06-06-2011 09:18:00
I am convinced Jack and Tom will get this right, even if I don't agree with the pick. They know a lot more about these guys than we do. That said, I am hoping to hear Starling, but will be happy with Lindor, Bundy and Rendon. Rendon because I believe that if they take him, it is because they know he will be okay.

5. By: bcsimons on 06-06-2011 09:19:14
Frankie Piliere Live chat

http://sbb.scout.com/2/1077197.html

6. By: shemberry on 06-06-2011 09:19:30
Might be wishful thinking on my part, but is there a reason Starling's picture is up on the site?

7. By: sportsguy on 06-06-2011 09:50:42
Frankie Piliere? WHO?

8. By: Slack on 06-06-2011 09:54:42
Its too bad I'll be on the road traveling most of today and tomorrow. When I check in this evening, I can't wait to see who the M"s selected! I hope its Lindor!

9. By: CrustyJuggler on 06-06-2011 10:11:32
KLaw still has us taking Rendon this morning. Lindor not in the top 10.

10. By: sexymarinersfan on 06-06-2011 10:34:51
I hear a lot of buzz about this SS Lindor kid. Is he really that good? I've seen his homerun derby video's and highlight reels but if Rendon were completely healthy would we even be considering this guy? Is he going to be a better baseball player than Bubba Starling is? I mean isn't Starling's ceiling supposed to be "Mickey Mantle"? I have no doubt Lindor's glove will be great in the bigs, but what's the worst case scenario that we're looking at as far as offensive production? What's this mean for Nick Franklin, Marcus Littlewood, Carlos Triunfel, and Brendan Ryan? Do they all become trade bait, or switch positions?

My picks,

Rendon
Starling
Lindor
Bundy
Bauer

11. By: docsmith on 06-06-2011 10:44:30
I would hope that between Lindor/Rendon (if that is who we select) and the list of Franklin et al (and maybe throw in Liddi and Seager) we would be able to find a SS and 3B. Also, the timeline may be different for each player. For example, Ryan is in the mix now and for the next couple of years. Then maybe Littlewood comes up as a replacement.

12. By: Ayala Faction on 06-06-2011 10:59:19
Jason or anyone for that matter,

Why are there authors still getting away with articles like this?

http://espn.go.com/blog/the-gms-office/post/_/id/219/rose-clemens-and-bonds-had-great-baseball-makeup

This has to be the worst article ever written. It's almost a joke, and it's on ESPN!

13. By: CyFelix on 06-06-2011 11:34:41
Whether I agree or not, I'm damn well excited, not only as a Mariners fan, but as a baseball fan in general. The event itself is the easiest of any of the major sports drafts, but there are issues that need to be worked out.

14. By: Edman on 06-06-2011 11:40:07
#10, if there were no concerns about Rendon's health, he would be the #2 pick, hands down. But, with a decline in his power numbers, never playing a game at third, and medical records filled with gray area, teams have to be concerned.

It's way to early to worry about what will happen with Nick Franklin, Marcus Littlewood, Carlos Triunfel, and Brendan Ryan. That will sort itself out in time. Likely, Brendan Ryan won't even be in the discussion by the time Lindor is ready.

I would like to know how Rendon's High School numbers compare to Lindor's. I've seen a lot of debate by the Rendon foamers, but if Rendon would have projected out to 15-20 HR power as a Junior (Since Lindor is more a junior, than a senior, by age), perhaps the argument about him not being a potential 5-tool player should end.

15. By: baseballman on 06-06-2011 11:42:22
RE 10: You don't not draft a player because of other players in your system. We didn't go get Tulowitzki because we had Betencourt, how'd that work out for us? What if none of those guys you mentioned can actually stick at SS (which almost seems likely)? It's a position where guys are constantly outgrowing it. Lindor seems to be a player that will not only not outgrow it, but play gold glove D also.

And ya I do think we would still consider Lindor even if Rendon wasn't hurt. Would we still take him over Rendon? Probably not, but consider him? Yes.

Jack and Tom have a great track record of getting premium talent in the drafts, especially early on. If we pass on Rendon and Starling for Lindor, that would lead me to believe that Lindor is the better player of the three. We shall see though because according to those "in the know" Starling seems to be the better player. I can't wait!

16. By: Edman on 06-06-2011 11:43:39
CyFelix, I wouldn't at all say that the baseball draft is the easiest of any sport. How many teams draft 50 players? That means they have to put a lot more effort into the lower rounds, if they hope to find a gem. And, unlike all the major sports drafts, they are not drafing someone who can come in and make the opening day roster. They are drafting for projection. That is no way easier.

17. By: CyFelix on 06-06-2011 11:47:51
Edman, I meant for the fans. There's no waiting as the picks are fairly quick, and unlike other drafts (at least from what I remember last year) cameras aren't on the players and the picks aren't spoiled by players shown on the phone. I enjoy the draft much more than the NBA and NFL drafts.

18. By: baseballman on 06-06-2011 11:49:38
That's a really good point Edman, about what Rendon's scouting was like at the age of 17. I think too many don't put much into the fact that Lindor is 17, which is huge. He's an entire year younger than all other HS players. And like Edman said, he's basically this advanced as a Jr. in HS. Imagine how good he would be in another year?

I won't say Player X is better than Player Y or that I want this player over that player. But I will say that Lindor being only 17 is a very, very big deal. I think it increases the chance of him being the best player in the this draft years down the road.

19. By: slamcactus on 06-06-2011 11:52:23
Rendon was off the map as a HS kid because teams knew he was unsignable. He was one of the top prospects in Texas, and likely would have been very high if he'd been promoting himself on the showcase circuit.

But I'm not really sure why it matters. He got to college and went apeshit for 2 years, showing both excellent performance against advanced pitching and excellent tools as well. Plenty of college guys weren't in the discussion for 1-1 (or even top half of first round) before becoming extremely good draft prospects.

20. By: Edman on 06-06-2011 12:03:51
CyFelix, I agree. The football draft is a joke. Threed days of listening to analyst blabber on is way too much for me. It's the latest "reality" show. The NFL should be embarrassed by what they've allowed the networks to turn the event into.

21. By: CyFelix on 06-06-2011 12:09:46
Yep, by day 3, the excitement is gone, and the analysts are just rambling on and most of the time they are talking about other crap football related.

22. By: Edman on 06-06-2011 12:11:16
It matters, slamcatus, because guys like you are questioning Lindor's probability of becoming a 5-tool player. And if you think nobody was scouting Rendon because he was going to college, you're crazy. Teams watch ever kid, that could be drafted.

And, since you say that he was one of the top prospects in Texas, then how does Lindor rate as one of the top prospect in the country, at the age of 17? How many high school players get that particular honor? Only one other hitter in this draft gets as much praise.....Bubba Starling.

And can we also kill the "Ackley was injured" argument too? The difference between Ackley and Rendon is that Ackley's offensive numbers got better. He showed more power.

Is it the affect of Rendon's shoulder injury, lack of hittable pitches, or the bat? I don't know. But, you can bet that Tom McNamara and the scouting department know.

23. By: slamcactus on 06-06-2011 12:20:44
This may sound crazy to you, Edman, but what happens between the ages of 18-21 actually matters. A great deal, in fact. Rendon establishing himself as the nation's best position prospect means zero about Lindor's ability to do the same over the next 3 years. It happens the opposite way all the time. Anyone remember Robert Stock? Or Tim Beckham?

Who brought up the Ackley injury? That's weird.

24. By: StandinPat on 06-06-2011 12:31:58
"I would like to know how Rendon's High School numbers compare to Lindor's. I've seen a lot of debate by the Rendon foamers, but if Rendon would have projected out to 15-20 HR power as a Junior (Since Lindor is more a junior, than a senior, by age), perhaps the argument about him not being a potential 5-tool player should end."

Slam beat me to it, but the comparison is irrelevant. You could compare thousands of players HS numbers and get thousands of different results down the road. Raw power doesn't always show up in the box score with younger players. Sometimes physical maturity and changes to one's swing are necessary to realize one's power potential.

Jeff Clement set the HS HR record, does that mean he had more power than a Stanton or a Heyward? Or just that at that age and at the level, his skills and swing allowed him to maximize his results.

"And can we also kill the "Ackley was injured" argument too? The difference between Ackley and Rendon is that Ackley's offensive numbers got better. He showed more power."

Another difference is that it was an elbow injury vs a shoulder injury. The point was simply that panicking about Rendon because he hasn't played his natural position all year, when we just drafted a guy in the exact same situation is a little bit hypocritical. Is his injury a concern? Sure. Is it by itself a reason not to draft Rendon? I don't believe so. Player's get injured, it's part of baseball, they can also recover from those injuries and be just as good and even better than before.

25. By: Jason A. Churchill on 06-06-2011 12:39:57
Probably no podcast, but who knows, maybe Crawford and I hop on the horn and do something. It depends on how tired I am. Right now, I'm exhausted.

26. By: baseballman on 06-06-2011 12:40:02
I don't think it's "panicking" Pat. If there is structural damage, how is it panicking to not select him? It's not hypocritical because you just said it yourself, it's a different injury than Ackley's and Rendon's is taking away his power, which is a big reason why to draft him. If the power is gone because of the shoulder, why should we take him?

If we do take him it would lead me to believe that there was structural damage to the shoulder though. But if we pass, then I think there is.

27. By: zackr on 06-06-2011 12:43:57
I'm putting my money on Starling or Lindor. If the team was 10 games under .500 and flailing again, I'd bet on Rendon - but I can see how the team's success so far this year would make Z and co. comfortable enough regarding job security to have a little longer time frame with their #2 pick.

28. By: rjfrik on 06-06-2011 13:00:37
#14. Exactly Edman!!!! Exactly!

Bottom line is you have to trust the Front Office, this isn't a Bavasi led regime. This is a front office with darn near pristine track record. They know their stuff. I think any of the three hitters will be solid ball players, but who ever they select means that player has something in their eyes that will separate them from the other two. Very exciting. After tomorrow we will have, most likely, 2-4 guys who will be in our top ten prospect rankings!!

Awesome.

29. By: rjfrik on 06-06-2011 13:04:59
#24 Good points as well Pat.

30. By: StandinPat on 06-06-2011 13:05:18
"If there is structural damage, how is it panicking to not select him?"

1) So you know for a fact there is structural damage? I'm a little bit offended you haven't shared Rendon's medicals with the rest of us.

2) When did I say they should ignore "structural damage?" I said panicking because he hadn't played his natural position all year, ie as Ackley did his final year.

"It's not hypocritical because you just said it yourself, it's a different injury than Ackley's and Rendon's is taking away his power, which is a big reason why to draft him. If the power is gone because of the shoulder, why should we take him?"

1) So Ackley showed enough power to be drafted as a 1B? Or did the M's draft a player who hasn't fully healthy because they believed strongly enough he would be, and the fully healthy version was one that projects out to be worthy of the #2 pick.

2) You know that it is gone? Again, you seem to acting as if you know something that know one else does. Shoulder injures can sap power, just like elbow injuries can sap arm strength, and leg injuries speed. Let's not act like no player who has suffered a shoulder, elbow or leg injury has ever come back at 100% because that's just simply not true.

BTW Justin Upton's ISO pre-shoulder injury, post shoulder injury, and one year recovered, .232, .170, .219. People can recover from injuries. Rendon's are a certainly a concern, but it's not like we can safely say this version of him is the version you'd be getting long-term.

31. By: Jason A. Churchill on 06-06-2011 13:12:05
Ackley was never a 1B looking forward. It was outfield, and then 2B.

32. By: Jerry on 06-06-2011 13:20:33
Jason,

Do you have any feeling about what may happen in the comp round? Think there may be a run on prep arms? Seems like there are a lot of talented prep pitchers who aren't showing up in the mock drafts.

I know that projecting specific names beyond the first round is pretty much a fools errand, but what to the tiers in this draft look like?

33. By: Edman on 06-06-2011 13:22:46
And to be fair, Pat, when did you conclude that it isn't? Your whole argument is based on opinion. Nobody but the doctors involved with each major league team, have the facts.

Would you concur that if the Mariners had concerns about Rendon's medical reports, then they would be making a wise decision not to select him? Or, would you rather argue, based on the media hyperboyle about his apparent "can't miss" value?

What Law thinks isn't gospell. He's a good talent evaluator, but I doubt that he has much inside information, as clubs don't want him scooping who they intend to draft.

34. By: Jason A. Churchill on 06-06-2011 13:35:30
Jerry,

The expectation is that several of the top 33 players -- as many as eight or 10 -- will fall into the comp round and be swooped up by clubs such as the Red Sox and Blue Jays.

But there is a really good chance that one of them gets to Seattle at 62. The 62nd best player is a good one.

35. By: sportsguy on 06-06-2011 13:36:46
Um, yea, Rendon tore up the Cy Young pitching in Conference USA! Conference USA?? .320 with 4 HR's...with a metal bat, not wood...what a beast! 0-3 in his last college game against a bad school's #4 pitcher. Wake up!

36. By: sportsguy on 06-06-2011 13:39:00
Drew Henson, Chris Weinke, Joe Borchard, Bubba Starling...unless we are looking for another Heisman or Natl Championship we know who the pick should be.

FRANCISCO LINDOR!

37. By: Edman on 06-06-2011 13:50:51
sportsguy, that about a mile over the top. I know you're a big fan of Lindor, but let's not make him super-human.

Rendon's a legitimate top pick. Lindor is as well. Five years from now, we'll have the answer. But to profess that any of us know at this moment is as big a "wake up" moment, as yours of assessing Rendon. Small sample size....and all the wrong reasons to use them in a debate.

38. By: sexymarinersfan on 06-06-2011 13:55:52
Can post 35 please be erased due to stupity! So because Henson, Weinke, and Borchard automatically means Starling will be a bust?! Look I think Lindor is a fantastic option for the M's but you can not base other players personal careers and profiles towards any other, no matter what trend you see developing. I'm done guessing and speculating cause it's making my head hurt. I'm just glad that our finalists are all people that I approve of and feel confident enough in Jack and Tom to select the right guy for our organization.

39. By: sexymarinersfan on 06-06-2011 13:56:41
I meant #36

40. By: Jason A. Churchill on 06-06-2011 14:01:40
And we are now chatting live -- http://prospectinsider.com/draftchat2011.php

41. By: docsmith on 06-06-2011 14:06:05
Read some of Tom's quotes regarding the draft. He didn't give anything away, but I love it quotes regarding Rendon. Basically that they've had eyes on him for years, including at 3B from before he was injured. He really gave the sense that this decision is not going to be based on a small data set or a trend of one season, more that Rendon is a very well known commondity.

If Seattle picks someone besides Rendon, I am sure they have done ample due diligence and it is for very good reason...either positive for that player or negative about Rendon.

Edman...agree completely. We are amassing high end talent at the #2. It will take a couple of years to see what that turns into.

I am excited that the 62nd best player should be a good one. Jason...and this is for more for tonight, after we've selected #2....but can you provide some details on how "deep" is the draft and where it is "deep?" Are projectably good players to be had through round 4? round 6? Are there Paxton's and Shiper's out there to be had?

42. By: sportsguy on 06-06-2011 14:07:50
Sexy, when you're going to call someone "stupid", make sure you spell "stupidity" correct...

43. By: The Great Pumpkin on 06-06-2011 14:20:50
He may have mis-spelled stupidity, but he was correct. Your posts are terrible...

44. By: Edman on 06-06-2011 14:28:33
Can we refrain from the personal attacks and stay on target? And please leave the grammer police at the door.

45. By: sexymarinersfan on 06-06-2011 14:35:57
It was not intended as a personal attack as much as it was towards the comment. I apologize if you took it me calling you stupid. However the statement was just completely absurd.

46. By: marinerseric on 06-06-2011 14:43:53
Keith Law keeps saying its Rendon, do we believe him, or do we not?

I think even though sources may say something, it can all go for knot if the pick changes at the last second.

47. By: baseballman on 06-06-2011 14:50:56
Wow pat do you know what the word "if" means? Obviously not with your post 30. Try re-reading the quote you took from me and then try to not take it out of context...

48. By: Edman on 06-06-2011 14:57:01
#46, Law most likely doesn't know anything. Jack and company are very tight lipped about gets said to the media. It's not likely that anyone inside Jack's inner circle would tell Law who they were going to select.

I'd have to believe if they were going to tell anyone, it would be Jason, before it would be Keith, since he has closer ties on an everyday basis.

49. By: marinerseric on 06-06-2011 15:00:41
I trust Jason as well. Thanks Edman.

50. By: marinermutt on 06-06-2011 15:11:16
Jason, since today is only 1 round and the comps, would you be willing to put up tonight some possible picks for round 2 or 3 of players you think might be good picks for the M's?

I know we can look at Law's list or BA list, but players that you have seen or heard about through scouts.

Thanks,

51. By: Marco on 06-06-2011 15:57:19
If the price on that player has been lowered that would mean there's something troubling or unclear at least.

52. By: skyway park on 06-06-2011 16:26:10
Does anyone know how Stanek the 3rd rounder who we didn't sign last year did this year in college?

53. By: CyFelix on 06-06-2011 16:31:52
Sky, he did pretty well. I'll get some stats.

54. By: CyFelix on 06-06-2011 16:36:52
64 IP 3.94 ERA 41/26 K-BB rate

Not as well as I thought, stat wise.

55. By: docsmith on 06-06-2011 17:04:23
I read a write up on him. It sounded like he would show flashes of brilliance/dominance and then suffer from inconsistent mechanics. Basic conclusion from the article was that the potential was still there.

56. By: ghill_3406 on 06-06-2011 17:11:11
Stanek was lights out in the SEC Tournament. Best pitching performance there. Fastball was 94-97 with power curveball. Tough one!

57. By: frzgg on 06-06-2011 17:38:58
Well Lindor is officially out.

58. By: baseballman on 06-06-2011 17:41:47
Crazy day

59. By: sexymarinersfan on 06-06-2011 17:46:01
RENDONNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

60. By: CyFelix on 06-06-2011 17:51:06
I'm with you SMF....I love everything Rendon brings to the table....Less Figgins hopefully.

61. By: sexymarinersfan on 06-06-2011 17:58:59
Gawd! I don't know if watching Figgins constantly creates that much more excitement about drafting Rendon! LOL! I'm pretty sure it does!

62. By: marinermutt on 06-06-2011 18:14:17
WOW!!!!!

63. By: baseballman on 06-06-2011 18:14:38
Um...what just happened?! lol

64. By: sexymarinersfan on 06-06-2011 18:14:48
OMG!!!!! I'M GONNA CRY!!!!!

65. By: formerstarQB16 on 06-06-2011 18:15:01
OMG... you have got to be kidding me

66. By: rocketdawg31 on 06-06-2011 18:15:54
Whoa. I'm...flabbergasted. For the second year in a row. I didn't have Hultzen anywhere NEAR #2.

67. By: rocketdawg31 on 06-06-2011 18:15:55
Whoa. I'm...flabbergasted. For the second year in a row. I didn't have Hultzen anywhere NEAR #2.

68. By: Jon O on 06-06-2011 18:16:01
Wow - shocked and disappointed. Was set on one of the top three bats - thinking we couldn't go wrong. Well Jackie Z sure can keep a secret.

69. By: rocketdawg31 on 06-06-2011 18:16:32

Did we just really, really mess up?

70. By: baseballman on 06-06-2011 18:17:18
rocket, no way you can say we messed up

71. By: Rudolf on 06-06-2011 18:17:35
Do we all feel like Hultzen looked?

72. By: formerstarQB16 on 06-06-2011 18:18:39
Is our Front Office that desperate to be competitive ASAP that we pass on the best available players in order to draft the fastest tracked player?

73. By: Marco on 06-06-2011 18:18:54
GMZ 1 - Everyother 0

74. By: rocketdawg31 on 06-06-2011 18:19:18

Well, we now have a potentially dynamic #3 starter, who's a lefty. It'll be a heckuva rotation, but I'm thinking we didn't maximize the value here. Gut impulse.

75. By: FWBrodie on 06-06-2011 18:19:40
WTF?

76. By: marinermutt on 06-06-2011 18:19:41
I hope this pick at least gives us the flexability to go after above slot players in future rounds.

77. By: rocketdawg31 on 06-06-2011 18:21:59

Baseballman, I did leave ground..I put it in the form of a question, not an outright statement.

78. By: Edman on 06-06-2011 18:22:33
LMAO.....I remember the same comments last year about who?.....Yes, some kid named Franklin. And we all know how wrong they were.

There were some very strong candidates in this draft.

Imagine in a couple of years, a rotation of King Felix, Pineda and Hultzen from the left side?

A great pick? Who knows. But not necessarily a bad one.

79. By: Boy9988 on 06-06-2011 18:22:46
Am I the only one that thinks this could be a good thing? In two years we could be looking at the most dominating starting 5 in major league history. The Phills won't be able to stack up against the M's future rotation.

80. By: davelee99 on 06-06-2011 18:22:48
Very disappointed

81. By: Bmoney1082 on 06-06-2011 18:23:57
WOW, all I have to say is that Jack must have not liked what he saw in the medical reports. How else do you pass on Rendon?

82. By: Edman on 06-06-2011 18:24:21
#72, you make a HUGE assumption.

83. By: baseballman on 06-06-2011 18:24:38
Yeah Edman, the reaction between Franklin, Walker and now Hultzen are eerily similar, lol.

84. By: John_S on 06-06-2011 18:28:46
Edman #72 is not that big of an assumption. There is a track record in the name of bavasi. You saw all of his moves due to the win now mentality that came from the top.

I would much have had the bat either rendon starling or lindor.

85. By: Marco on 06-06-2011 18:30:06
Felix, Pineda, Hultzen, Paxton, Walker. A home made 5-star rotation. Let the Yankees spend for their pitchers.

86. By: baseballman on 06-06-2011 18:30:45
John_S question for you. Would you much rather have the IDEA of an offensive player like Rendon, Starling, Lindor or those three actually players.

It's funny to me that fans every year, without any scouting of their own, make better decisions than those in charge...

87. By: marinermutt on 06-06-2011 18:31:06
It may note be a bad pick, it just has surprised everyone. No one had us on Hultzen. Medicals on Rendon must not be good as he seems to be slipping.

One thing can be said, Jack and his team keep their mouth shut.

88. By: junglist215 on 06-06-2011 18:31:53
I just gotta say I love this pick. A dominant lefty in Safeco? Yes please!

89. By: Blowgun7 on 06-06-2011 18:32:10
I suppose we can always deal one of Walker, Hultzen, Paxton for an impact bat a year down the road (if the three continue to reach their potential)...

Oh well, I loved the idea of Rendon, but we have no clue what the medicals looked like.. 5 teams have now passed on him

90. By: km4_1999 on 06-06-2011 18:32:51
No Rendon or Lindor in Top5 so Jack isn't only one passing on both.

91. By: baseballman on 06-06-2011 18:33:01
How far does Rendon fall?

92. By: rocketdawg31 on 06-06-2011 18:33:25

I'm starting to warm up to this move, actually. I'm starting to see it now. I sure as heck didn't see it BEFORE it happened, but this could be a tremendous move in the end.

Now Bedard can be flipped. Along with others, anyway. For a third base bat. Like a Michael Cuddyer level of talent. And you don't lose anything by inserting Hultzen in there fairly quickly. You could wind up replacing Bedard with six years of club-controlled same results.

93. By: formerstarQB16 on 06-06-2011 18:33:57
I know many on here will rush to Jack Z's defense, but if the general consensus of scouts is correct this pick is WAAAAY to safe. This is not the same as a comp pick situation, these guys at the top of the draft have been heavily scrutinized for years and nobody had Hultzen in the top 2.

Jack made the safe play and IMHO that was the wrong decision to make.

94. By: baseballman on 06-06-2011 18:35:29
Opposed to who formerstarqb?

95. By: davelee99 on 06-06-2011 18:35:34
It's a safe pick - although spending a number two pick on a pitcher with the lowest ceiling among the top ten available pitchers - at best a number 3 starter in the Seattle rotation seems like a waste. I doubt he'll score many runs for us.

96. By: formerstarQB16 on 06-06-2011 18:39:02
Davelee99 says it best...

We need a high ceiling STAR position player. If you don't like Rendon's medicals, you roll the dice on Starling or Lindor before you go with Hultzen.

97. By: Rudolf on 06-06-2011 18:40:51
I think many of the "experts" had Hultzen going top three. Safe isn't such a bad thing when it's good safe, right?

98. By: John_S on 06-06-2011 18:41:23
No one if those three is what I wanted. Im sorry I didn't make myself clear enough.

When you are drafting that high it would have been nice to take a potential impact bat.

This team has shown the ability with the park to make fringe pitchers excel like Vargas and Fister.

This team needs to be able to develop bats and not overspend in free agency on a bat.

99. By: baseballman on 06-06-2011 18:42:53
RE 96: rolling the dice and hoping is a horrid strategy.

Getting a contributor is extremely important and moreso than drafting based on need where's there's risk.

100. By: formerstarQB16 on 06-06-2011 18:44:00
I guess more than anything I'm tired of watching 2-1 games.

101. By: Edman on 06-06-2011 18:45:20
First off, John_S, you may not have been kept up-to-date on current events, but Bill Bavasi got canned a few years ago. To even mention his name in this draft is ridiculous.

And, formerstarQB....who gives a fluck what other scouts think? Seattle scouts their own players. Based on what little I've been able to read, Hultzen is described by many of those same scouts as the most consistent pitcher who has excelled in a tough conference.

It's not the "glamour" pick, but it doesn't make it wrong.

I wonder if formerstarQB is really Brock Huard?

102. By: Jon O on 06-06-2011 18:46:08
Though I'm very disappointed we didn't draft one of the top bats, it is hard to dislike pitching. The problem I have is that from what I've read, most scouts don't project Hultman to have #1 starter stuff. If you are going to draft a pitcher as high as #2, why not roll the dice on Dylan Bundy who has more upside?

103. By: baseballman on 06-06-2011 18:47:02
Exactly Rudolph. Hultzen isn't some giant/safe reach. He's a very good pitcher who has been discussed as one of the best pitchers in this class.

I'm not sure if people are shocked because his name hasn't been floated around Seattle at all (like myself) or that they don't believe he's "good enough" to warrant #2 overall or they just wanted a bat any bat.

104. By: ghill_3406 on 06-06-2011 18:47:35
Medical on Rendon was not good.

105. By: bhenken08 on 06-06-2011 18:47:47
I would of loved to pick a bat here. But its easier to trade for bat than it is to trade for pitching.

106. By: Edman on 06-06-2011 18:48:15
Hmmmm.....a starting pitcher who is lefthanded, and throws at 95 MPH with movement isn't a potential impact player?

107. By: John_S on 06-06-2011 18:49:33
No Edman reread the post from 72 and reread my response to you.

I am showing you that there is a history of the team being desperate to win now.

Quite being so condescending.

108. By: formerstarQB16 on 06-06-2011 18:50:57
Oh get off your pedestal baseballman...

1) Being risk adverse is neither right or wrong approach at life... it is a philosophy.

2) There's a hedge against a ceiling and a floor for any selection you make. My point is that we have plenty of "High Floor" guys... that's your hedge. Now was the time to roll the dice.

3) It's about time that this team had someone who actually makes an 10 year old want to buy a jersey. I'm sorry, but this organization has not been "fun" to watch since 2001.

109. By: shemberry on 06-06-2011 18:51:48
So, Hultzen is Cliff Lee. That has to be the hope, right?

110. By: Marco on 06-06-2011 18:52:15
104 & 105
Both great points.

111. By: Blowgun7 on 06-06-2011 18:52:44
I can see the argument for Hultzen.. He's going to be in the big leagues by 2013, and his floor is a #3.. his ceiling may only be a #2... but when you're talking about an arm like Bundy.. his upside may be a #1, but his floor may be that he never sees the big leagues cause he's a pup and probably has 3-4 yrs of minor league ball before he even touches the bigs..

Not saying I like the Hultzen pick.. I don't (it's too safe), but the guy is a safe bet to be a pretty dependable and above average starter for us, probably starting in 2013..

And keep in mind, it gives us added top end pitching depth to possibly pull off a big trade in the next yr or two for a legit mid order bat

112. By: Dmoseattle on 06-06-2011 18:53:20
Re:101

My thoughts exactly about Huard.

113. By: Galway on 06-06-2011 18:53:39
Congrats Danny, the M's got a player who has more upside than most realize. As a fan still would have liked to see Lindor but most people dont realize Danny has focussed more on pitching for a year or two, considers himself a ballplayer first, pitcher second.

114. By: baseballman on 06-06-2011 18:53:58
RE 108: what pedestal?

BA had Hultzen as the 4th best player in this draft...explain how he was a "safe reach" if you can...

115. By: formerstarQB16 on 06-06-2011 18:57:32
Let me ask you this... has anyone found a scout outside of our organization who believes Hultzen has #1 quailty stuff?

116. By: Edman on 06-06-2011 18:59:10
And, the MLB network had Hultzen as the #3 pick. So, if the medicals on Rendon were not convincing enough to select him #2 overall, then it wasn't really a reach.

117. By: formerstarQB16 on 06-06-2011 18:59:56
Re 114...

He was the 4th best player in the draft because of his floor. Much the same as Ackley is considered a top 10 prospect not because of his ceiling but because of his floor.

I'm not saying he is a bad player, I'm saying... all things considered (IMO) it was a bad selection.

118. By: cdiggins@whidbey.com on 06-06-2011 19:02:12
Hultzen has a low-90s fastball, a plus changeup and a slider. He's expected to move quickly after going 11-3 with a 1.57 ERA and a 148/17 K/BB ratio in 103 1/3 innings for Virginia this season.

In ACC he has been striking out half of the batters he faces, 3 strike outs every 2 innings. Has 3 pitches, I would imagine good mechanics or Z would not have drafted him.

If his upside is #2 and low side is #3. That is good enough for me.

119. By: ghill_3406 on 06-06-2011 19:02:26
#115: There are plenty.

120. By: formerstarQB16 on 06-06-2011 19:07:17
#119: Care to expand on that?

121. By: ghill_3406 on 06-06-2011 19:13:11
Plus fastball, plus changeup, plus command, plus control, above average to plus slider = #1 starter ceiling. Sounds like Cliff Lee type stuff. Did you want the undersized 3B that might not be healthy now, and hurt his shoulder stretching? 162 games is a grind.

122. By: Blowgun7 on 06-06-2011 19:16:32
If 162 is a grind, you should probably be worried that Hultzen lost velocity as the NCAA season progressed.

123. By: Jon O on 06-06-2011 19:19:02
I wonder how many people would have liked this pick last week - hence before the M's started getting offensive happy on this past homestand.

124. By: Blowgun7 on 06-06-2011 19:20:34
For us lowly nonsubscribers... does Jason's "why they picked Hultzen" update make you feel better, worse, or the same about the pick?

125. By: sexymarinersfan on 06-06-2011 19:20:57
I've heard and read scouting reports that plenty of scouts and farm directors saw and viewed Hultzen as an easy number 1 choice. It's called Google. Look it up.

126. By: ghill_3406 on 06-06-2011 19:21:15
#122: Did you see him pitch? Word is he was up to 95 last week.

127. By: formerstarQB16 on 06-06-2011 19:21:51
#121:

Low 90's fastball (although he does touch 95), plus changeup, and league average slider sounds like a #3 in terms of stuff. Now, his ability to locate pitches makes him a solid #2, but the vast majority of guys with stuff like that end up mid-rotation guys... not aces.

128. By: baseballman on 06-06-2011 19:22:27
blowgun, better. But then again, I didn't hate the pick like a lot on here. JAC points out why it makes sense for us to take him.

129. By: John_S on 06-06-2011 19:25:40
121. Cliff Lee didn't turn into a #1 starter until he turned 29 and after he was sent to the minors after a 6 era. To say that Cliff Lee is the comp you gotta know that there will be bumps in the road for him in the majors.

130. By: baseballman on 06-06-2011 19:27:05
formerqb, why so quick to dismiss the fact that hes a LHP?

131. By: Mackie on 06-06-2011 19:28:27
Jason, where do you think will Hultzen start off in the minors?

As far as Hultzen going #2, it seems that maybe the medicals weren't good on Rendon and maybe Starling was going to be difficult to sign. Lindor ended up going #8 to the Indians.

It doesn't look like the Mariners drafted for need, but rather that they went for a guy who looked healthy and signable and who also could be in the majors soon.

As far as 3B goes, I like to think Zduriencik will address it through a trade or through free agency if it continues to be a problem. I'd love to see just about anyone other than Figgins playing 3B for Seattle, and I'd like to see that happen sooner than it will probably take for Rendon to get to the majors.

132. By: sexymarinersfan on 06-06-2011 19:31:53
I think I remember seeing Jason say that Hultzen would probably start off in AA. I'd like to know who Hultzen's comp is? Ceiling/Floor? I sure as heck doubt it's Cliff Lee, but it'd be nice.

133. By: formerstarQB16 on 06-06-2011 19:34:22
#130: Not dismissive of it... just realistic about his ceiling.

We all have our opinions and mine is probably not as good as others... but Dave Cameron said it best. Jack and Mac put their reputations on the line with this pick. That's what happens when you swim against the current.

134. By: FelixElRey on 06-06-2011 19:34:25
As high as the attrition is for starting pitchers, I like the idea of a "safe" TOR-type pitcher. Perhaps we will trade some of our low minors arms while they're hot for a bat at the deadline or the offseason.

I'm more shocked than upset.

135. By: bhenken08 on 06-06-2011 19:35:10
Blowgun7 why don't you spend the little money that a subscription cost and support JAC's work. you wont be disappointed

136. By: FWBrodie on 06-06-2011 19:36:14
I think this was a big sign from the M's that they're serious about gearing up for a run the next few years.

137. By: ghill_3406 on 06-06-2011 19:36:33
#127:

Cole Hamels is a #2 starter with an above average fastball, below average curveball, plus changeup, above average control and above average command.

Cliff Lee has above average fastball (which is probably where Hultzen's will end up), above average curveball, plus changeup, plus command, plus control and he's a #1.

Hultzen's scouting report is more similar to Lee than Hamels.

Also something to remember, there are really only a handful of true #1 starters in the big leagues right now. So, if you can get a guy with future Cole Hamels type stuff (and Hultzen's is better), he's probably going to be a #1 for most teams (but not ours hahaha thanks to Felix).

138. By: Edman on 06-06-2011 19:45:24
I love the comment I read about Seattle having a hard time attracting free agent hitters. So, I guess it might get down to separating those hitters that are more interested in their personal statistics, or being in an organization with a lot of pitching and a good shot at the playoffs.

Seattle doesn't have to be better than Texas, they just have to be better than any of the wildcard contenders.

139. By: Edman on 06-06-2011 19:47:16
And, here's another thought. Both Jack and Tom have both gone on the record as having a preference for hitters in the first round, rather than pitchers. Which would indicate that they think he's a pretty damn good pitcher.

140. By: FelixElRey on 06-06-2011 19:47:36
Just as Jason does prospect rankings, I would love for him to do trade value rankings. Obviously, they would be different because "potential" can mean "unproven". I would also want this to include a big leaguers version of this feature.

141. By: John_S on 06-06-2011 19:58:57
Edman "We dont have to be better than the Rangers we just have to be better than any other wildcard contenders"? Is that what we're shooting for? Is that what the standard should be around here to be wildcard contenders not division contenders?

Also name a bat that we have not had to overpay for? I could only think of Beltre and Olerud.

142. By: FelixElRey on 06-06-2011 20:05:19
Without speaking for Edman, I took his comment to mean that in order for us to be good enough to warrant some immediate-impact decisions, we don't have to look up at the Rangers in awe because we can make the playoffs via the wild card.

143. By: Galway on 06-06-2011 20:08:09
Danny did touch 95 last week but is usually best around 93.
His trength is his command and how well he throws three pitches not a one trick poney. His lack of a weakness is a big strength. He can be an ace but that lack of a weakness makes his floor higher than others even though he is not per se a sexy pick who pops it at 98 or hits 40 dingers. He may get more out of the minors than some because he has not been as dedicated to pitching for as long as the top pitching canidates in the draft. His coaches had to wrestle him out of the field.

144. By: cdiggins@whidbey.com on 06-06-2011 20:10:49
see video of Hulzten: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DzfX-7doAw&feature=relmfu

In last 30 decisions he has won 28 at UVA

145. By: Galway on 06-06-2011 20:10:49
How this team gets offense into its lineup will be the interesting aspect.

146. By: Edman on 06-06-2011 20:15:04
Thanks, Felix, at least you got it. It's not the goal, but we also don't have to win the division to get to the playoffs. Strong pitching will make it easier to sell to a prospective free agent bat.

Wouldn't you consider that if you could help the offense, while the pitching stays strong, that you might want to consider signing with Seattle?

It's all in how you play your cards. There's no one way to play the game.

147. By: shemberry on 06-06-2011 20:16:14
#145-There are a few more rounds to go in this draft and there is a history of good players being taken later than round 1.

148. By: Galway on 06-06-2011 20:17:58
I agree and I think especially round 3 - 6 are the areas great talent evaluaters really distinguish themselves.

149. By: FelixElRey on 06-06-2011 20:20:13
Regarding his velocity, I always felt like with the professional coaches and a more intense workout regimen that I would expect comes with the transition from college to the pros, that every pitcher should add 2-3 mph to his fastball. This isn't likely always the case, but makes sense to me.

Touching 95 doesn't mean much, but if he could sit there regularly, then we're singing a different tune. It's still possible if my theory above is true for him.

150. By: JohnMcD on 06-06-2011 20:25:23
Are we picking again today or do they just do the 1st round and then the supplemental/

151. By: sexymarinersfan on 06-06-2011 20:41:13
NO. Just the 1st and supplemental. We have to wait to select another pitcher with our 2nd pick until tomorrow.

152. By: sexymarinersfan on 06-06-2011 21:02:17
UHHHHHH.....Go Greg Halman??? Wow!

153. By: baseballman on 06-06-2011 21:24:08
Re 151: that's kinds of an odd comment. So what if we do select a pitcher?

154. By: sexymarinersfan on 06-06-2011 21:25:24
Then he'll be the BPA won't he baseballman?

155. By: baseballman on 06-06-2011 21:33:17
Can you say for sure he won't be?

156. By: sexymarinersfan on 06-06-2011 21:35:55
Obviously sarcasm isn't your strong point. ;-) lol

157. By: baseballman on 06-06-2011 22:00:15
Obviously...

158. By: MoneyMike on 06-06-2011 22:08:03
"#145-There are a few more rounds to go in this draft and there is a history of good players being taken later than round 1."

Albert Pujols says hello.

159. By: Bmoney1082 on 06-06-2011 22:12:31
Well, there sure is a lot of good players still available, Bell, Purke, and Norris, to name a few. Im personally hoping for Bell, as he can add some pop to the OF.

160. By: docsmith on 06-06-2011 22:21:16
Ackley two years ago, Hultzen this year...any other conspiracy theorist out there thinking that the M's ACC area scout has compromising picture of Jack and Tom.

;)

161. By: sexymarinersfan on 06-06-2011 22:23:58
Bell would be a really hard sign, as would Norris. Purke hasn't been close to what he used to be. I like C Nick Delmonico at #62. I've been reading about him since last year and have heard a lot of nice things. He's also a switch-hitter.

162. By: Stoiz on 06-06-2011 22:37:11
I can't believe Susac is still out there. A lot of talent is left. We should get a good one at 62.

163. By: rocketdawg31 on 06-06-2011 23:06:02

It's only my own checklists, I know...but I can't imagine a better value we could get at #62 than Susac. He only has to get through one more team.

164. By: rocketdawg31 on 06-06-2011 23:11:41

But I should add that there are many, many names that wouldn't upset me at #62.

165. By: Adam T on 06-06-2011 23:22:10
Bell, Dillon Howard, Susac, - any thoughts on who the Mariners may be looking at?

166. By: sexymarinersfan on 06-06-2011 23:28:20
I've also had a man crush on Preson Tucker's power. Yes I know we have a 1st baseman, but damn he would be an awesome DH. I think there are probably better selections for us to make. It looks as if the M's are going to grab a really talented piece tomorrow morning.

167. By: vertigoman on 06-06-2011 23:50:02
"121. Cliff Lee didn't turn into a #1 starter until he turned 29 and after he was sent to the minors after a 6 era. To say that Cliff Lee is the comp you gotta know that there will be bumps in the road for him in the majors."

Good thing I read through the last third of this thread, this is almost verbatim what I was going to add.
Cliff Lee turned into "Cliff Lee". "Cliff Lee" is awesome but the Indians did not draft "Cliff Lee".
I guess in that sense, no one drafts a star. They draft someone that is (hopefully) best equipped to become a star through maturation trial and error.

168. By: Lailoken on 06-07-2011 00:16:06
In response to Edman, post 146: "Strong pitching will make it easier to sell to a prospective free agent bat.

Wouldn't you consider that if you could help the offense, while the pitching stays strong, that you might want to consider signing with Seattle?"

All this accumulated pitching may make a trade easier down the road too. Getting a bat or two to play LF, 3B, or DH to supplement the M's core should be easy enough. Thank goodness the Silva, Bradley, & Betancourt money comes off the books finally.

The improved product on the field (& US economy) could help the budget go up a bit. With so many bullpen pieces in place & four returning starters almost all the dispensary budget can go to those three holes. Pitching & other starting nine pieces in place to win & big money too--- an appealing proposition.

169. By: masonb on 06-07-2011 00:25:32
I really really really hope we get Norris. Adding him and Hultzen would put us on track to becoming like the Braves were in the 90s. Epic pitching year after year.

Bell would be really nice too, but like JAC has said, he's a LFer, and that coupled with being a really tough sign, probably more so than Norris, would deter me from picking him. Susac would be nice too, but there will probably be another catcher sitting in the 3rd round like Hedges, Gallagher, and maybe McCann and Kevin Cron.

I'm thinking that maybe Z and Mac knew they weren't gonna be able to come up with the coin to sign Starling and Rendon's medicals scared them off so it was between Hultzen and Lindor and if that was the pick, I'm more happy with Hultzen, as he provides more of a sure thing. Maybe they knew going in that alot of this talent would fall into the second and third rounds. There were alot of guys picked I've never heard of, and Tampa didn't exactly go BPA with some of their picks

170. By: sexymarinersfan on 06-07-2011 00:31:20
When trading, as Z is known to do well, you can trade players like Phillipe Aumont, and company for Cliff Lee, and get Justin Smoak, Blake Beaven, Josh Lueke, and company. You should always go BPA in the draft. A player like Rendon, who would've made a lot of sense to this team, might not quite add up to a piece like Hultzen in our scout's eyes. However, if the pitching lanes begin to get clogged up at the top, you can easily take a piece, like Bedard, Vargas, Fister, hell Hultzen in a couple of years, and dangle it out for a hitter or younger pitcher of equal value. Only this time you get to choose from 30 teams and have a much much wider selection. Good pitching will always beat good hitting!

171. By: dewey on 06-07-2011 00:45:10
I have concerns on how far across his body he throws .This isnt usually a fomrmula for success as a starter.Why not Starling? Position players our short all over baseball i dont like the pick for that reason.

172. By: sexymarinersfan on 06-07-2011 01:06:15
McNamara said that Hultzen was by far the best talent than anyone else available when we picked. I really wanted Starling, but didn't think it was realistic. So I was hoping to hear Rendon's name. I was also prepared to hear Francisco Lindor, just in case there might be a surprise. But when I heard him say "Danny", I swear I thought he misprounced "Anthony". He then finished the sentence by saying his last name "Hultzen". I was in so much shock after my mouth hit the floor, the name didn't even register in my brain. I was like, 'WHO THE FUCK IS DANNY HULTZEN"??? Lmao!!! A little bit of over reaction on my part. I just hope we made the right pick.

173. By: ghill_3406 on 06-07-2011 01:18:34
It won't be Norris or Bell. Both are "unsignable" in the M's eyes.

Norris wants 3.9 mill and Bell sent a letter to MLSB that he wants to go to U of Texas, which means one of two things. Either 1) he wants to go to U of Texas or 2) he has a predraft deal in the works with a team that is willing to pay him what he wants and the letter was to scare of all the other teams. i.e. Red Sox or Yankees who don't care about slot.

Also, I am tired of hearing this was the "safe pick". This was not a safe pick. This was the best pick!!!! He was the most talented pick on the board, and in fact was most likely the top guy on their board even before the draft started.

JZ and Tom probabaly personally saw all the guys they were considering with this pick multiple, multiple times. They probabaly had scouts at every single one of Hultzen's starts. Look this isn't the first time Jack and Mac have scouted. They have seen hundreds of thousands of players each over their long scouting careers. Just because it wasn't the pick that JAC predicted, or other experts for that matter, doesn't mean they made a bad pick. They actually did a great job of keeping this one close to the vest, like JZ knows how to do.

#171: Why not Starling? No one REALLY knows if the kid wants to play baseball right now or how much it will cost to get him to play. It could be 5 million, it could be 15 million. Once you use a #2 pick on a guy with all that leverage, he has you by the balls, because now he has ALL the leverage. The Royals only took him because he was the top player left on their board and who knows if they will even sign him. It's been rumored the Royals wanted the 4 guys that went 1,2,3 and 4.

174. By: felixrocks on 06-07-2011 01:25:32
For all of you still heated over our pick, check out this scouting report of Hultzen: http://scoutingthesally.com/2011-mlb-draft-prospect-danny-hultzen-sp-virginia/

Stop complaining about our guy. Be happy, Hultzen is here to stay.

175. By: Edman on 06-07-2011 01:31:01
... but Dave Cameron said it best. Jack and Mac put their reputations on the line with this pick. That's what happens when you swim against the current.

LMAO....Yes, this ONE pick is going to scar them for life. They put their reputations on the line with every draft....ask Bill Bavasi. It they were more concerned about pleasing posters on bulletin boards, they wouldn't be doing their jobs, now would they?

I'll take it one step further. If their draft picks don't pan out, they'll lose their jobs? How's that for overdramatic?

The level of defending personal choices get a bit ridiculous.

176. By: rjfrik on 06-07-2011 02:04:48
So lets talk about tomorrow.

My top three are

Bell
Susac
Hedges

I will be super happy with any of those three. I think they go with a bat here. There are some impact bats sitting there that I can't believe are there. I don' think they go Bell because of his demands to not sign him, but if they went way over slot you never know. My hope is Susac. That would be an awesome pick up. He would be one of our top 5 prospects. Go get em Z!!

177. By: sexymarinersfan on 06-07-2011 02:37:17
Delmonico!!!!!!!!!

178. By: jharrell3 on 06-07-2011 03:19:03
Bold pic for Ms front office...

-2011 M's lack offense and are being carried by starting pitching...
-Projected high ceiling offensive pics are readily available at #2
-industry and media expect m's to take a bat
-Hultzen is not a discount pick

It would have been easy to draft the top bat on their board to fill a major need and receive positive reviews. Instead the front office went against the grain and unexpectedly drafted a pitcher from a position of strength. If for whatever reason Hultzen flops, the Front Office realizes they open themselves to harsh criticism by whiffing on a percieved easy pic...valid or not. Especially if Rendon produces in the 2012/13 at the MLB level... and you know who is still floundering at 3rd.

Obviously, the Ms current front office is confident about their decision and have a proven track record. There is no way they think Hultzen has a limited ceiling... And a high floor is a good thing. The Front Office is creative and has been extremely successful in the trade market so they will address the offense one way or another... This FO sure knows how to make things interesting!

179. By: formerstarQB16 on 06-07-2011 17:14:23
Edman -

You do you realize you are and always have been (for as long as I've paid attention to this site) the neighborhood douche, right?

You're the typical "nuh uh" guy... get over yourself guy.

By the way... baseball is no different than any other sport. When you go against the grain on this high of a pick, you open yourself up to far more criticism than is normal for the job. See Stu Inman.

You are not currently logged in. If you'd like to comment on this report, please log in.
Haven't created a Prospect Insider account yet? Sign up!