Future Redbirds

Tired of hearing about the draft yet? I’m not! I feel like a veritable Mel Kiper Jr. relaying all this draft mania every few hours, only I’m not a member of the press, I don’t have any real inside info, and I come minus the frightening hair-do. Baseball Prospectus’s Kevin Goldstein lists his Top 50 talents of the draft, I thought I’d share the blurbs regarding some of the names connected with the Cardinals. You need a subscription to view the entire article, just pay for it already, you know you’ve been putting it off for too long now.

4. Matt Wieters, C, Georgia Tech
Pros: Big switch-hitting catcher with plus power from both sides; professional approach at the plate; outstanding arm strength.
Cons: Performance this year has simply been good, not lights-out as some expected; most scouting directors think he can stay at catcher, but not all do; play seems lackadaisical at times.

13. Matt Harvey, RHP, Fitch HS (CT)
Pros: Classic frame, mid-90s fastball, and a curve that rates among the best in the high school class; very good changeup for teenager.
Cons: Has not lived up to expectations this year, with fluctuating velocities and control issues.

18. Michael Main, RHP, DeLand HS (FL)
Pros: Outstanding athlete who has 2nd-3rd round talent as a center fielder; excellent command of low 90s fastball that touches 95, and backs it up with a solid curve.
Cons: Little feel for changeup; struggled down the stretch both on the mound and at the plate.

19. Madison Bumgarner, LHP, South Caldwell HS (NC)
Pros: Top prep lefty has gotten into the mid-90s this spring; at 6-foot-5, his well-built frame creates no concerns about stamina. Excellent athlete.
Cons: Three-quarters arm slot prevent him from taking advantage of height; breaking ball is sweepy and slurvy.

23. Casey Weathers, RHP, Vanderbilt
Pros: Top college closer in draft can dominate in short spurts with classic fastball/slider combination; has touched triple-digits on occasion and slider is just as effective with late, heavy break.
Cons: Has only been pitching for three years; lacks polish, clean mechanics, and plus command.

28. Kyle Russell, OF, Texas
Pros: Top of the scale power rates a pure 80 on 20-80 scouting scale; he set a new Texas home run mark with 28 in 223 at-bats, eclipsing the previous mark of 20; power isn’t his only tool–also a decent runner with a solid arm.
Cons: Prone to strikeouts in bunches, as his swing is not one with natural loft, with more of a pure loopy uppercut; some scouts point to several home runs that were a product of aluminum bats.

30. Andrew Brackman, RHP, North Carolina State
Pros: The six-foot-11 righthander has touched 99 mph in the past, and arguably has a higher ceiling than any player in the draft; curveball flashes as plus at times; mechanics are surprisingly refined for a player with his size and lack of experience.
Cons: Rarely pitched as freshman or sophomore because of a basketball commitment, then was practically shut down after 78 innings due to a tired arm; before the shutdown, he became less and less effective as season wore on.

32. Jack McGeary, LHP, Roxbury Latin HS (MA)
Pros: Highly advanced prep lefty; 88-90 mph fastball play up because of movement and command; curveball features strong break; excellent feel for changeup; excellent makeup.
Cons: Below-average velocity; uneven senior year–looking like a surefire first-round pick one day, and a player who needs three years of college the next.

35. Mitch Canham, C, Oregon State
Pros: Offensive-minded catcher has excellent contact skills and a good approach; plus arm; athletic and agile behind the plate.
Cons: Fairly new to catching, so he has understandably raw receiving skills; his power is a potential subject of debate.

36. Todd Frazier, SS, Rutgers
Pros: Another 20-20 performer with 22 blasts and 25 swipes in 61 games; fundamentally sound defender; grinder mentality.
Cons: Lacks the athleticism to play shortstop at the next level, profiling as more of a third baseman or corner outfielder; swing has many moving parts, leading to an above-average strikeout rate.

41. Brett Cecil, LHP, Maryland
Pros: Electric fastball/slider combination, using low-90s heater to set up the breaking ball, which rates as a better pitch.
Cons: Has struggled in second half of the season, especially with command.

I included Canham because the Cardinals drafted him in the 43rd round, apparently just for the heck of it as Canham was most certainly going back to school. Now he’s a 2nd rounder at worst. He’s no Wieters, so if Wieters doesn’t do the predicted Boras plummet, Canham might make for a nice sandwich-round pick. Outside of Anderson, this team seriously lacks depth at the catcher position. If Canham doesn’t cut it behind the plate he could be shuffled to 3rd or an outfield corner.