Video: Matt and Ted talk Mets Draft
The following video of me and Ted Berg from SNY.tv discussing Ike Davis and Reese Havens, who the Mets selected in the first round of yesterday’s draft.
To watch the video, click play below:
By the way, in case people are interested, you can watch Ike Davis play for Arizona St. in the NCAA Super Regional this Sunday at 10 pm on ESPN 2.
…thanks to Len F for the information…
…added to by Ted Berg …
…here’s a transcription of the video, in case you can’t watch at work or wherever…
Matt: The Mets made three major picks in the first round. What was your impression of the strategy?
Ted: I think you have to like what they did. They didn’t get a chance to go above the slot and get a guy who fell, because most teams aren’t letting these guys fall anymore. With the positions that the Mets had — at least with the first two picks — you have to be happy.
Matt: Absolutely. The first guy they took, Ike Davis, sounds like he can play first or outfield. He is described as an athlete in the sense that he’ll be good at both positions. He has a pretty good bat, a left-handed bat. It would be nice to see him play first base; I suspect there will be a void there in the next year or so. But if he happens to be a corner outfielder that would be fine, too. I’m excited, if for no other reason than when he does get there, the crowd will be full of I Like Ike buttons and shirts, which I think is pretty cool.
Ted: You’re enjoying that on the blog. The second guy they picked, with the 22nd pick is a shortstop, Reese Havens, who is playing in
Matt: Which is good. At least he isn’t an opera singer or a golfer.
Ted: That’s true, but I think what he means by that is he is a polished player. I like that pick, and I have to credit Michael Salfino who writes a column for SNY.tv for calling this out. The Mets often take guys who are athletes and who project real well, like an Alex Escobar type, who is a physical specimen who may not have the baseball tools, while this kid Havens is a disciplined hitter a polished player that could play all over the infield. Peter Gammons suggested teams might put him at catcher, which is out of the box thinking that I would like to see the Mets try.
Matt: More than anything, I’m glad this guy was someone that a lot of teams liked. The Red Sox were looking heavily at him, which is a good sign. Teams were disappointed when he went to the Mets, which is always nice to hear. So far so good. They approached the draft, it seems, in a good way; they went for the best players available. They were looking for some bats that are going to be ready sooner rather than later and they seem to have gotten that. So hopefully we will all know how it turns out in a couple of years.
Ted: Well the jury is still out on this third guy, Holt, but we will see. Right now it seems he is a one-pitch pitcher, which depends on how you look at it. Mike Pelfrey is that, too, and if you see Mike Pelfrey as a good pickup, then maybe Holt is a good pickup. If you’re worried about Mike Pelfrey then maybe not so much.
