Originally Posted by Codered (Post 9493312)

I don't know if this was posted ... Can this be true!?!?!

http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/blog/ey...var-to-bullpen

Royals move Luke Hochevar to bullpen

Former prized prospect Luke Hochevar will no longer be a member of the Kansas City Royals starting rotation. Royals manager Ned Yost told reporters Wednesday morning that Hochevar will be moved to the bullpen (kansascity.com).

The decision leaves Luis Mendoza and Bruce Chen in competition for the fifth starter job behind James Shields, Jeremy Guthrie, Ervin Santana and Wade Davis. None of those four already in the rotation were with the Royals at this time last year.

Hochevar's demotion is most notable due to the fact that he was the top overall draft pick in 2006 out of the University of Tennessee. He was once viewed as a future ace of the Royals' staff, but has gone 38-59 with a 5.73 ERA and 1.40 ERA in 771 career innings. He led the majors in earned runs allowed last season and is now 29 years old. So, yes, unfortunately the word "bust" can be bandied about here.

Some names that were drafted in the first round after Hochevar in 2006: Evan Longoria, Brandon Morrow, Clayton Kershaw, Tim Lincecum, Max Scherzer, Ian Kennedy.

Then again, in fairness to Hochevar and the Royals, here are some others from that first round: Greg Reynolds (second overall), Billy Rowell, Kasey Kiker, Colten Willems, Maxwell Sapp, Cody Johnson and Jason Place.

Originally Posted by duncan_idaho (Post 9493407)

Man, that draft sucked.

Evan Longoria was the only guy who was projected as a sure major league type.

Kershaw was a LH high school pitcher, and no LH high school pitcher has ever made it to the majors after being selected No. 1 overall.

Lincecum is a tiny, unconventional guy. His body lasted 2-4 more years than most expected, but it appears to be breaking down now.

Morrow, Scherzer, Hochevar and Kennedy were very similar (though I don't remember Kennedy being in discussion for No. 1)

They should have just taken Evan Longoria and dealt with the rest, positions be damned.

Originally Posted by Saul Good (Post 9493512)

No pitcher drafted #1 had ever been very good before David Price.

Originally Posted by DeezNutz (Post 9493852)

I'm not taking a pitcher at 1/1 in the MLB draft, pretty much no matter the talent level of the pitcher.

There HAS to be a stud position player in the draft, and the organization MUST find him. Pitchers are too fragile (given the unnatural act of throwing a baseball) and often too psychologically pussy to justify that type of investment.

No thanks.

Originally Posted by duncan_idaho (Post 9493878)

I'm willing to make exceptions.

Maybe not for Gerrit Cole, but if a Strasburg or David Price is sitting there? I'll take a swing. I think the likelihood of GREAT college pitchers becoming more common in the MLB draft is going to go up with the new CBA. More guys will go to college rather than accept a late-round, over-slot deal.

If you're playing the percentages, college hitter is the least likely to bust. Followed closely by HS hitter and college pitcher (which are very close). HS pitcher has, by far, the WORST success rate.

Originally Posted by DeezNutz (Post 9493925)

Strasburg is the exact reason why I'm not particularly interested in the position. Highly projectible, insanely talented, relatively "safe," and he still loses a year to Tommy Johns.

The counter-argument for my stance, however, is that the first round in '09 was a complete bag of shit for position players not named Trout.

Originally Posted by duncan_idaho (Post 9493878)

If you're playing the percentages, college hitter is the least likely to bust. Followed closely by HS hitter and college pitcher (which are very close). HS pitcher has, by far, the WORST success rate.

Originally Posted by duncan_idaho (Post 9493966)

I understand. It's a stance similar to Dayton Moore's, supposedly (though it has become clear the Hochevar pick was one of HIS picks).

I figure the 3-4 great years you get from a guy like Stras are worth it, even if he falls apart physically (a la Mark Prior).

Originally Posted by Zeke (Post 9493989)

Unfortunately, Our run on selecting pitching in the first round lasted a long, long time.

Starting in 1992 we selected James Pittsley in the 1st, followed by Jeff Granger in 1993.. '97, (two in) '98, (two again in) '99, '00, '01, '02, '04, and '06.

That's a lot of pitching at the top of the draft, and probably why we're still stuck with the curse of the Balboni.

Originally Posted by duncan_idaho (Post 9494209)

Herk Robinson was epic bad at the MLB draft. And the Royals were CHEAP with a lot of those selections, too. Hard to draft great talent when you're not willing to pay it.