Last year, I live-blogged the first day of the amateur draft for eight hours or so. I won’t be doing that this year for two reasons:

(1) the Mets don’t pick until the second round, and it’s a weak draft, so I expect interest to be tepid, and

(2) baseball has altered the timing of the draft, so the first two rounds take place on June 9, the rest over the next two days.

But I will certainly give my take on who the Mets do wind up drafting, and I’ll hopefully provide my own shadow draft choices. And speaking of my shadow draft, I thought this would be a good time to go back and check up on how the Mets’ draft compares to my own.

Round 1, Pick 1 (#18 Overall)

Who the Mets took: Ike Davis, 1B, Arizona State University
Who I took: Christian Friedrich, LHP, Eastern Kentucky University

With their first of three first-round picks of 2008, the Mets took Ike Davis, doing much to set the tone for the remainder of their draft. The pick looks terrible right now, and it wouldn’t have been the pick I’d have made, but it was and still is defensible. The Mets seemed to have their minds set to take the best college hitter available, and, with Yonder Alonso, Justin Smoak, Brett Wallace, and David Cooper off the board, that was either Davis or Wake Forest first baseman Allan Dykstra. A lot of people had Wallace, Davis, Cooper, and Dykstra all grouped together—great collegiate hitters who weren’t as good as Smoak and Alonso and who appeared stuck at first base. Of the four, Davis was probably the best athlete, Cooper the best fielding first baseman, and Wallace the best hitter. Here’s how the quartet have performed so far in 2009:

Player        LG    AVE    OBA    SLG
Cooper        AA   .240   .319   .337
Davis         A+   .283   .367   .461
Dykstra        A   .200   .390   .339
Wallace       AA   .281   .403   .438
Wallace      AAA   .242   .353   .393

If you were to show me those four stat lines, and told me to draft them again, I’d take Wallace first and Davis second, with Cooper and Dykstra lagging behind, which is exactly how I had them a year ago. Yes, Davis has been a little disappointing, but he’s playing in a tough hitting environment, and you could argue that each of the others have been just as disappointing.

Right now, I’d still rather have my first pick, Friedrich. Friedrich, a finesse lefty with a solid-average fastball, a plus breaking ball, and two other average or better pitches, wound up being drafted 25th overall by the Rockies. His command wasn’t perfect in college, and he would occasionally leave a straight heater up in the zone, so there were some worries about how well he’d perform at higher levels. But right now, he’s been great. He started in the Class-A Sally League, where he went 3-3 with a 2.18 ERA and 66 strikeouts and 15 walks over 45.1 innings. That earned him a promotion to the California league, where he’s posted a 2.77 ERA and a 14/4 strikeout-to-walk ratio.

Round 1, Pick 2 (#22 Overall)

Who the Mets took: Reese Havens, SS, University of South Carolina
Who I took: Zach Collier, OF, Chino Hills, H.S. (CA)

With the 22nd overall pick, the Mets grabbed Reese Havens, a pick I really liked. While scouts weren’t sure if he’d make it as a shortstop, his line drive bat, good batting eye, and gap power still projected well at second base. Placed in the Florida State League, Havens has shown more homerun power than expected—he’s already hit seven, with eight doubles and a triple—and the batting eye is just fine—27 walks, 30 strikeouts in 198 plate appearances—but he’s hitting only .228 right now after an incredible slump. Still, with the other numbers looking impressive, there’s still plenty to be excited about.

While I loved the Havens pick (he might have been my second choice with the 22), I still went with Collier, a toolsy outfielder who I had rated about the others. Unlike a lot of similar high school outfielders, Collier’s swing isn’t a mess, and the ball explodes off his bat. While the power will certainly take time, he is a very strong kid with a good-sized frame; I’d expect to see more as he progresses. The Phils wound up taking Collier in the 34, and I thought they got a steal. Unfortunately, Collier hasn’t done much so far, hitting just .225/.279/.324 over 161 at bats in the South Atlantic League. The lack of power doesn’t really surprise me, but the low batting does; his bat speed suggests it should be higher. On the plus side, he does have 11 steals in 15 attempts.

Despite Collier being more of a long-term strategy than Havens, I’ll certainly go with the Mets’ pick on this one.

Supplemental Round 1 (#33 Overall)

Who the Mets took: Bradley Holt, RHP, University of North Carolina
Who I took: Tim Melville, RHP, Holt H.S. (MO)

Like Havens, I really liked Brad Holt. Both players didn’t have the track record of performance other collegiate prospects had, but both dominated in their junior years, entering the draft with lots of helium. Holt threw hard, had the makings of a plus breaking pitch with solid mechanics and a great arm with lots of strength—he frequently threw harder in the seventh than he did in the first. He struggled his first two years, but mechanical refinements enabled him to add velocity and improve his command. Holt was outstanding in his debut last season and was recently promoted to Binghamton.

As for my guy, Melville was arguably the best prep pitcher in the draft class. Signability concerns pushed him to the fourth round, where the Royals gobbled him up and managed to sign him. That said, I don’t blame teams for passing—his demands were high, his velocity was all over the place, mechanics are an issue—but I took one of several gambles on the day. Melville’s barely pitched, making only four starts.

Looking back, I’d rather have Brad Holt right now.

Round 2 (#68 Overall)

Who the Mets took: Javier Rodriguez, OF, Puerto Rico Baseball Academy (PR)
Who I took: Roger Kieschnick, OF, Texas Tech University

These two picks are about as different as two outfield picks can be.

Javier Rodriguez was the only high schooler the Mets selected in their first eight picks, and I wasn’t enamored with the pick. He’s got a nice frame, has some pull-side raw power, and a lot of athleticism, but he doesn’t provide good defense yet, and his swing is a complete mess—he looks flat-out awkward at the plate, and even when he puts together a decent swing it’s long. It’s not that he can’t get better, it’s just that I’d rather use a second rounder on a guy who has some baseball skills, something concrete. Rodriguez has been stuck in extended spring training all season long—expect to see him in either the Gulf Coast League or Brooklyn later this summer—but he hit only .193 in limited playing time in the GCL last year.

As for Kieschnick, it was a panic pick on my part. I desperately wanted Dennis Raben and thought I had him, but he went just two picks earlier. Forced to readjust, I took Kieschnick (who wound up going #82 overall, to the Giants), probably the most similar player to Raben remaining. In retrospect, there are others I wish I’d taken instead. Kieschnick has a longer swing than Raben, and plate discipline will always be a problem, but he’s big, athletic, and has tons of power. So far, Kieschnick’s hitting well in the California League, batting .305/.347/.471. I’m a little worried about discipline, but he can hit. One year in, I’d rather have Kieschnick.

Round 3 (#100 Overall)

Who the Mets took: Kirk Nieuwenhuis, OF, Azusa Pacific University
Who I took: Aaron Weatherford, RHP, Mississippi State University

The Mets took Nieuwenhuis, an NAIA player with athleticism and a history of hitting well with wooden bats. While I certainly didn’t disagree with the philosophy, I questioned whether he would have been available later on. After watching him at Brooklyn last year, I liked his frame and readily apparent athleticism, but wasn’t as impressed with his swing, which has a huge hole in it. He’s hit pretty well at St. Lucie this year (.261/.350/.457), showing discipline and some pop, but I don’t think he’s a true center fielder, and his contact skills are still rough (47 strikeouts in 188 at-bats).

Weatherford, who went three picks later, was my target in the third round all the way. Putting up huge numbers as a junior at Mississippi State, Weatherford throws a 92 to 94 mile-per-hour fastball with lots of sink to it, also possessing a nice curve and split. He has no chance at starting, but as a reliever I think he’s got some closer potential and should at least be a nice set-up man. In the Sally, he had a 4.76 ERA over 11.1 innings, and fine peripherals before going down with a “minor injury.” Is that technical jargon?

Right now, I’ll stick with my guy Weatherford, but, speaking objectively, this one might be a draw one season in. What do you guys think?

Tune in tomorrow, when I compare the rest of our selections and relay some lessons learned.