I just drafted a guy in round 4 of the amateur draft. My scouts apparently classify him as a catcher, but his ratings are clearly not those of a C. In fact, he'd actually make a decent 2B if he hits his projections. Has anyone else noticed a scout's take on a player being so far off (this isn't calling a 1B a LF).

Defensively, his current ratings are 69 (range), 64 (glove), 51 (arm strength), 43 (arm accuracy), and 27 (pitch calling). My crazy crappy scouts see his projections as 85 (range), 83 (glove), 63 (arm strength), 62 (arm accuracy), 44 (pitch calling). As you can see, he's pretty clearly more well-suited to 2B/CF as opposed to catcher.

I've seen SS who had the glove, the arm and the accuracy but with a mid 60 range. But that's about it.

I've seen catchers that were or could play a different position but not 2B.

I saw a catcher once who looked like a SS with 50 PC.

Yes, I've noticed it a few times.

I've seen plenty of "DHs" in the draft that can be fine minor league catchers ... don't overlook those guys

point being, you should pretty much ignore the position listings and look at the ratings

FWIW, every oddity I've seen was catcher-related.

Guys with the "higher" PC and acceptabe arms get listed at C and the guys with the low range/glove but good PC get listed at DH.

This is probably why, when you run out of bodies, SIMMY will put a C at SS instead of your weak-armed 2B.

You may have just drafted Craig Biggio.

I have a 3B with PC 41 who lists as a Catcher: Ross Lowell.

It's nice to have the versatility. It's also nice that he'll list as a Type A FA by virtue of that PC number.

I've seen an 85/75/60/60 (ballparking) listed as a LF. Think he was a righty too. Didn't make much sense.

Most players qualifying positions will change as he develops. As has been stated, much of the time the position a player is drafted at is not where he ends up being most effective.