Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Monday, June 04, 2012

Draft Day begins with no clear-cut top pick

Draft Day!  The one day out of the year that I think about amateur baseball!

One question everyone is pondering in every Draft room is an annual query: Who is going where?

It’s often hard to ascertain what each team is going to do when it’s time to make their first selection, but this year it seems more difficult than most. That starts at the top of the Draft, where a day before the first round began, it was still unknown who the Houston Astros would be taking No. 1 overall.  While the Astros officially put the candidate count at five, many in the industry felt it was down to two possibilities Sunday: Stanford University right-hander Mark Appel or toolsy Georgia high school outfielder Byron Buxton. Buxton and Appel were ranked first and second, respectively, in MLB.com’s Top 100 Draft rankings, a list based on talent, not their projected place in the Draft.

“There is no unanimous or consensus guy,” one scouting director said. “Buxton is probably the best position player prospect, but he is a high school guy, which makes for risk. Last year was unclear because there were six or seven guys who were worthy. This year is unclear because there are no true 1-1 caliber talents.”

There does seem to be a general consensus of the names, if not the order, of the other likely top 10 selections. Joining Appel and Buxton on that list are high schoolers Carlos Correa, Albert Almora, Max Fried and Courtney Hawkins. The college set being discussed at the top of the round are Kevin Gausman, Kyle Zimmer, Mike Zunino and Andrew Heaney, with certain teams discussing Deven Marrero and Chris Stratton as well.

Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: June 04, 2012 at 07:44 AM | 399 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: astros, draft, minor leagues

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 1 of 4 pages  1 2 3 4 > 
   1. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: June 04, 2012 at 07:50 AM (#4147427)
Recent mock drafts:

Jim Callis at BA, Jonathan Mayo at MLB.com, Keith Law at ESPN.com (paywalled)

The best explanation I've seen of the new (very strict) draft slotting rules came from (excellent) Red Sox beat writer Alex Speier. Speier on the 2012 draft rules, "Exploring the New World Order":
The new Collective Bargaining Agreement defines a bonus pool for a team’s selections in the first 10 rounds. Beyond the 10th round, teams can give players bonuses of up to $100,000; however, any bonus figure that exceeds $100,000 will count against a team’s bonus pool from the first 10 rounds.

The penalties for exceeding the bonus pool from the first 10 rounds are severe:

Exceed pool by 0-5 percent: 75 percent tax on the overage
Exceed pool by 5-10 percent: 75 percent tax on the overage and loss of subsequent season’s first-round pick
Exceed pool by 10-15 percent: 100 percent tax on the overage and loss of 1st and 2nd round pick in next year’s draft
Exceed pool by more than 15 percent: 100 percent tax on the overage and loss of a team’s next two first-round picks
Let’s say that an elite talent in the draft falls to the Red Sox with their first pick this year at No. 24. Couldn’t the team simply give its entire bonus pool of $6.884 million to that player in an attempt to sign him?

Simple answer is no. If a team doesn’t sign a pick in the top 10 rounds, it “forfeits” that slot in its bonus pool. So, if the Red Sox do not sign their second first-round pick (No. 31 overall), their pool would be diminished by the $1.575 million slot for that pick.

As such, figuring out a draftee’s signability will prove more important than ever. Teams won’t have the option of simply reallocating money that had been earmarked for one player and giving it to another if they fail to find middle ground with him.
   2. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: June 04, 2012 at 07:52 AM (#4147428)
Also, the draft begins at 7 pm tonight.
   3. Bourbon Samurai in Asia Posted: June 04, 2012 at 08:05 AM (#4147430)
Also, the draft begins at 7 pm tonight.

it does? oh, hey, it does. I like the baseball draft. I wish there was a little bit more hype so I knew more about the players, although not to NFL levels
   4. JJ1986 Posted: June 04, 2012 at 08:09 AM (#4147432)
Are there any teams who seem interested in Giolito in the first? The new rules will probably make it impossible to sign him after that.
   5. Greasy Neale Heaton (Dan Lee) Posted: June 04, 2012 at 08:16 AM (#4147435)
Couldn’t the team simply give its entire bonus pool of $6.884 million to that player in an attempt to sign him?

Simple answer is no. If a team doesn’t sign a pick in the top 10 rounds, it “forfeits” that slot in its bonus pool.
Could a team give its entire bonus pool, minus $1000 or so, to one player and then draft and sign a bunch of the GM's college buddies for $100 each?

Not that anyone would do that, and not that it would be a good idea, but is that an option?
   6. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: June 04, 2012 at 08:20 AM (#4147438)
My understanding is that Giolito still hasn't thrown for scouts since his elbow injury, and he's demanding a top-5 bonus. That probably means he isn't being drafted.
   7. Edmundo got dem ol' Kozma blues again mama Posted: June 04, 2012 at 08:21 AM (#4147439)
I predict that the Phils will pick Toolsy McAthlete with their first pick.
   8. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: June 04, 2012 at 08:21 AM (#4147441)
Could a team give its entire bonus pool, minus $1000 or so, to one player and then draft and sign a bunch of the GM's college buddies for $100 each?

Not that anyone would do that, and not that it would be a good idea, but is that an option?
As I understand it, yes.

The problem, of course, is that then you absolutely must sign the guy, or you have no draft at all. It's a huge, crazy risk.
   9. Greasy Neale Heaton (Dan Lee) Posted: June 04, 2012 at 08:24 AM (#4147443)
I predict that the Phils will pick Toolsy McAthlete with their first pick.
Cleveland's having a tough time deciding between Slappy McFourthOutfielder and Soft Tossy O'Southpaw.
   10. Greasy Neale Heaton (Dan Lee) Posted: June 04, 2012 at 08:29 AM (#4147444)
The problem, of course, is that then you absolutely must sign the guy, or you have no draft at all. It's a huge, crazy risk.
Concur. Some variation of that might be worthwhile, though - if you see talent you love slipping through the cracks as a result of the bonus rules, draft 7 or 8 of those guys, plunk down your entire bonus pool on them, and fill out the rest of your draft with beer league guys who can't play but would sign for $50.

Probably would never happen, but I'm not sure anyone has any idea how the new bonus system is going to change things.
   11. charityslave is thinking about baseball Posted: June 04, 2012 at 08:32 AM (#4147445)
I wish there was a little bit more hype so I knew more about the players, although not to NFL levels


The NFL draft hysteria is crazy. What a media hype driven circle jerk. Just once I'd like to see them review their grades from 3 years ago to see how all their predictions panned out.
   12. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: June 04, 2012 at 08:36 AM (#4147448)
I figure you wouldn't go with literal beer league guys, but instead take all your favorite 10th-20th round picks ($50-100k each) in the early rounds, and pick maybe two or three signability guys with the hopes of getting two.

There would be quite a bit of due diligence involved to make sure that those guys really would sign for late-round bonuses. These cheap picks would have a lot of leverage themselves - they would know that you need them to sign in order to leverage their projected slot bonus for other signings, and they could force you to spend more than you planned.
   13. Greasy Neale Heaton (Dan Lee) Posted: June 04, 2012 at 08:38 AM (#4147449)
Just once I'd like to see them review their grades from 3 years ago to see how all their predictions panned out.
Yeah, I love the clip of Mel Kiper blasting the Colts for drafting Trev Alberts instead of Trent Dilfer with the fifth overall pick in '94. Meanwhile, Jeff Garcia and Kurt Warner were undrafted, Dorsey Levens and Rodney Harrison went in the fifth round, and Dan Wilkinson and Heath Shuler both went in the first three picks.

The only thing in football that reeks of more BS than "draft experts" is the never-ending and exponentially growing legion of "recruiting experts". If these guys were right, Clemson would be a Top 15 program every year and Oregon would be lucky to earn an occasional trip to the Sun Bowl.
   14. Eric in Madison Posted: June 04, 2012 at 08:38 AM (#4147450)
Some variation of that might be worthwhile, though - if you see talent you love slipping through the cracks as a result of the bonus rules, draft 7 or 8 of those guys, plunk down your entire bonus pool on them, and fill out the rest of your draft with beer league guys who can't play but would sign for $50.


The article addresses this. Apparently, some teams tried to register their interns for the draft. MLB said no.
   15. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: June 04, 2012 at 08:55 AM (#4147460)
The Jays and Nats have been linked to Giolito since they have extra picks and can afford a gamble. I don't see him getting out of the first round.
   16. Bourbon Samurai in Asia Posted: June 04, 2012 at 09:07 AM (#4147466)
The article addresses this. Apparently, some teams tried to register their interns for the draft. MLB said no.


I would be all for that as long as they had to let the intern play at least a season of rookie ball if they wanted.
   17. Harold Reynolds Number Posted: June 04, 2012 at 09:13 AM (#4147468)
Does the bonus pool apply to domestic undrafted free agents as well? If someone like Giolito made it all the way through the draft without being picked on signability, could a team write him a fat check without draft consequences? I poked around the CBA a bit and didn't see anything on the subject.
   18. Der-K thinks the Essex Green were a good band. Posted: June 04, 2012 at 09:17 AM (#4147469)
in 2003, the Royals drafted college seniors with their 5th-9th round picks and offered them 1K bonuses, take it or leave it. Two of them made the bigs, the other Ryan Braun and Mike Aviles.

17: Yes, it does.

I'm very curious as to how teams will try to play this and don't have a feeling one way or the other yet as to what they'll do.
   19. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: June 04, 2012 at 10:03 AM (#4147488)
Interesting, I didn't know that (about UDFA's). Thanks Der. I'll be fascinated to see what happens to Giolito and how teams deal with this new pool. I wonder if anyone blatantly tries to game the system somehow.

Are we getting a draft open thread up later today or is this it? I know the article says there is no clear #1, but Appel seems like it to me. He may be one of the weaker #1s in recent history, but he's a head above the rest this year IMO.

I like Buxton and Correa a lot and either may end up being a lot better than Appel, but Appel seems like a pretty decent bet to be a mid-rotation starter in the big leagues at the least, while Buxton and Correa may never get out of AA if they don't bulk up a bit.
   20. JJ1986 Posted: June 04, 2012 at 10:14 AM (#4147499)
Sickels had Appel down in the teens. That really surprised me.
   21. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: June 04, 2012 at 10:24 AM (#4147504)
Law has Appel as his #6 prospect, Goldstein had him #4. It seems like there are some concerns about his college workload, and Goldstein's description of his secondary stuff kind of screams "stay away" given his projected draft position and bonus.
[Appel's] breaking ball is a bit of a hybrid, but is effective and misses plenty of bats, and his changeup is average. He's excellent, but for some, he lacks the wow factor of a potential 1-1 pick. One scout commented, “The parts are greater than the sum,” as he can be surprisingly hittable at times.
   22. Dan Posted: June 04, 2012 at 10:24 AM (#4147505)
I thought Appel was pretty much a sure thing to Houston as #1. Guess that could be wrong though. But no way he falls to the teens.
   23. JJ1986 Posted: June 04, 2012 at 10:27 AM (#4147510)
I thought Appel was pretty much a sure thing to Houston as #1. Guess that could be wrong though. But no way he falls to the teens.


That was his draft board, not the mock draft.
   24. booond Posted: June 04, 2012 at 10:30 AM (#4147512)
I thought Appel was pretty much a sure thing to Houston as #1. Guess that could be wrong though. But no way he falls to the teens.


There is a difference between where a player is drafted and where a prognosticator believes they fall as to talent level.

Sickels had Appel as #4 but everyone, including Sickels has him going #1.

Correa is likely the best talent but he's 4-5 years off whereas Appel starts in AA next year.
   25. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: June 04, 2012 at 10:33 AM (#4147518)
Also, Sickels' Draft Board has Appel #4. The mid-teens ranking was by another blogger on Sickels' site.
   26. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: June 04, 2012 at 10:41 AM (#4147525)
It seems like there are some concerns about his college workload,


What college pitcher doesn't have a huge workload though? People are making a big deal about Appel's 149 pitch outing, but did he regularly go well over 100? I really don't know. He's got a good frame and a nice easy delivery so I wouldn't be all that concerned. Tim Lincecum had a very heavy workload in college with a smaller frame and he's avoided injury thus far. Pitchers get hurt, I'm not sure we can project injuries for 21 year old kids (Mark Prior has a flawless delivery! He'll never get hurt!)
   27. Eddo Posted: June 04, 2012 at 10:44 AM (#4147526)
The NFL draft hysteria is crazy. What a media hype driven circle jerk. Just once I'd like to see them review their grades from 3 years ago to see how all their predictions panned out.

The 2006 Draft: Six Years Later

At the end of the article, there are links to previous years' versions.
   28. Dangerous Dean Posted: June 04, 2012 at 10:48 AM (#4147528)
I just hope Stryker Trahan makes it as the next Buster Posey (and yes, I know that Posey was a superstar as a junior in college and Trahan is a HS senior). We need a guy named Stryker Trahan in the All-Star game.

The Lovely Bride is past the easy child-bearing years. But we agree that if we produce another son his name will be Stryker. That name just drips testosterone, doesn't it?
   29. DL from MN Posted: June 04, 2012 at 10:56 AM (#4147534)
If Giolito slips out of the 1st round the Twins will jump on him in the supplemental round. They have the cash to grab him and go cheap on the 2nd supp pick.
   30. Greg K Posted: June 04, 2012 at 10:57 AM (#4147536)
Other names to keep an eye on

Keon Barnum
Douglas Baxendale (I want to add, "The Third").
Skye Bolt
Ty Buttrey
Kenneth Diekroeger
Zachary Eflin
Max Fried
Jeffrey Gelalich
Patrick Light
Brett Mooneyham
Stephen Piscotty
Cody Poteet
Tanner Rahier
Alec Rash
Almon Roache
Clate Schmidt
Matthew Smoral "of the story"
Hunter Virant
Walker Weickel
Patrick Wisdom

I wish them all well. The last thing baseball needs is another Billy Williams.
   31. Joe Kehoskie Posted: June 04, 2012 at 10:57 AM (#4147537)
I'm curious to see where Cuban LHP Onelki Garcia gets taken. He was a big-time talent in Cuba before running into all sorts of immigration and MLB problems after defecting. According to the rumor mill, his reps are demanding that Garcia be drafted in the first round and paid a $7 million bonus, which seems like an odd strategy under the new rules.

If this draft is as weak as claimed and assuming Garcia hasn't gotten injured, he shouldn't make it past the No. 10 or No. 15 pick. But I haven't seen Garcia's name on a BA mock draft, while Sickels just threw him at No. 100 with a "hard to rank" comment.
   32. Der-K thinks the Essex Green were a good band. Posted: June 04, 2012 at 11:04 AM (#4147543)
My note on UFA bonuses counting against the pool stems from a Jim Callis comment back in December (he was told they would), as opposed to seeing contract language. (Well that and the clear intent to close loopholes on the MLB side.)

31: Me too, Joe. When I heard of Garcia's supposed demands I was flabbergasted. That ship (giant bonus) has sailed...
This is very likely ignorant on my part, but one of my first thoughts when I saw that was 'do Onelki and company have people to pay off (for getting him out of Cuba)? Not saying I actually believe that, but the thought was there.

BA ranked him as, what, the #81 talent in the draft? (EDIT: #83) Not where he'll get picked, but how good he is.
   33. tshipman Posted: June 04, 2012 at 11:10 AM (#4147549)
I'm curious to see where Cuban LHP Onelki Garcia gets taken. He was a big-time talent in Cuba before running into all sorts of immigration and MLB problems after defecting. According to the rumor mill, his reps are demanding that Garcia be drafted in the first round and paid a $7 million bonus, which seems like an odd strategy under the new rules.


So, what's the deal with Cuban defectors now? Are they included in the Draft? If Onelki goes undrafted (unlikely I suppose), he can sign with whomever he likes, right?


BA ranked him as, what, the #81 talent in the draft? (EDIT: #83) Not where he'll get picked, but how good he is.


Isn't this ranking mostly meaningless, though? No one really has a clue about him. Where would they have ranked Cespedes in last year's draft?
   34. JJ1986 Posted: June 04, 2012 at 11:16 AM (#4147554)
So, what's the deal with Cuban defectors now? Are they included in the Draft? If Onelki goes undrafted (unlikely I suppose), he can sign with whomever he likes, right?


Most Cubans gain residency in a country (I thought it was usually the DR) where players aren't draft eligible. I don't know what happened to Garcia, but apparently his Nicaraguan residency was falsified.
   35. Joe Kehoskie Posted: June 04, 2012 at 11:18 AM (#4147558)
This is very likely ignorant on my part, but one of my first thoughts when I saw that was 'do Onelki and company have people to pay off (for getting him out of Cuba)? Not saying I actually believe that, but the thought was there.

No doubt. Garcia has been out of Cuba for about two years, so he's easily six figures in debt to various agents, smugglers, etc. He's on his second or third agent, and his first agent told the Miami New Times* in April that he'll be suing Garcia as soon as Garcia signs an MLB contract. (*That was a wild article; not sure if it was ever posted here.)

BA ranked him as, what, the #81 talent in the draft?

I didn't see this. I wonder if it was based on recent reports or if it was more of a "we gotta put him somewhere" type of thing. But barring injury or a 50-pound weight gain (neither of which would be surprising after all the downtime), there's no way that there are 80 better players than Garcia in this draft.
   36. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: June 04, 2012 at 11:19 AM (#4147560)
Isn't this ranking mostly meaningless, though? No one really has a clue about him. Where would they have ranked Cespedes in last year's draft?


How is it meaningless? You're just ranking him based on scouting reports against draftees. I think people said Cespedes would have been a top five pick. People are saying Soler would be a top five pick. People are obviously not saying Garcia would be a top five pick. There's not as much to go on, but scouts have seen him.
   37. Der-K thinks the Essex Green were a good band. Posted: June 04, 2012 at 11:27 AM (#4147569)
I had read that article (@35) but had forgotten about it - thanks! (It's good, folks.)

I'd guess that Garcia's a bit more exposed to scouts than Cespedes was, by virtue of playing competitively outside of Cuba (not that either was totally unknown or as well vetted as domestic talents). Here's part of the Garcia BA bio (available to subscribers):
Garcia pitched in the Puerto Rican League last winter as well with some success, and in Puerto Rico and in the spring adult league he plays in, he has shown two plus pitches. Garcia's fastball sits at 90-93 mph, and his curveball, while somewhat inconsistent, is a true power pitch at its best. Garcia hasn't shown much of a changeup. Garcia has a physical 6-foot-2, 220-pound frame that needs no projection. At 22, he could move through a minor league system quickly as long as he comes out of the gate throwing strikes.


I'm agnostic on the dude, personally - never seen him play.
   38. Joe Kehoskie Posted: June 04, 2012 at 11:30 AM (#4147574)
People are saying Soler would be a top five pick. People are obviously not saying Garcia would be a top five pick. There's not as much to go on, but scouts have seen him.

Garcia was arguably better than Soler at the junior level, and he has a lot more game experience. I'd take Soler over Garcia because of age, position, etc., but there's no way there's a 75-slot separation between the two.

Unless it's been happening under the radar, I haven't heard anything about Garcia throwing for scouts during the run-up to the draft. I would have thought the strategy would be to try to get drafted as high as possible, but that doesn't seem to be the case. All I can guess is that Garcia's reps didn't fully understand the new rules when the $7M demand was floated, or they have a side deal in place and are trying to slide Garcia to that team.
   39. Der-K thinks the Essex Green were a good band. Posted: June 04, 2012 at 11:46 AM (#4147591)
BA mock draft.
I don't see Stroman lasting to #24, though I know a number of mocks having him going around that point.
   40. Cabbage Posted: June 04, 2012 at 11:54 AM (#4147599)
My own fearless prediction for the new CBA rules is that it'll take a few years of spectacular negotiation flame-outs, Matt Harrington-style lost bonuses, and parent/agent feuds before the zero-sum negotiating nihilism is worked out of the agent pool. More than a few agents are going to demand that teams sacrifice the better parts of their drafts to sign first and second round picks.

Second fearless prediction: this helps large-market teams over the long run.
   41. Joe Kehoskie Posted: June 04, 2012 at 12:11 PM (#4147628)
My own fearless prediction for the new CBA rules is that it'll take a few years of spectacular negotiation flame-outs, Matt Harrington-style lost bonuses, and parent/agent feuds before the zero-sum negotiating nihilism is worked out of the agent pool. More than a few agents are going to demand that teams sacrifice the better parts of their drafts to sign first and second round picks.

I doubt there will be many negotiating flameouts. For all the bluster about signability and whatnot, the overwhelming majority of high draft picks end up signing contracts. The money is just too big now. Players and agents talk tough before the draft, but it's a rare player who marches off to college because he was "only" offered $1.85M instead of the $2M he wanted.

Giolito might end up being the latest example. In the span of two weeks, he's gone from being definitely college-bound to apparently open to turning pro, if not wanting to turn pro.

Second fearless prediction: this helps large-market teams over the long run.

A lot of people believe this, but I disagree. These new rules make it very difficult for large-market teams (or at least winning large-market teams) to snag premium players late in R1 or in the comp round.
   42. Der-K thinks the Essex Green were a good band. Posted: June 04, 2012 at 12:17 PM (#4147636)
Helping large market: In aggregate, I think that's true - but I don't think that it's a large market v. small market effect so much as - which teams will be helped/hurt... now compare that to their market size. Boston, for instance, will clearly be hurt. So is Pittsburgh. The Mets will be helped. (etc...)
   43. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: June 04, 2012 at 12:23 PM (#4147646)
Most of those stupid sandwich picks are gone too, which seemed to primarily help larger market clubs that acquired players mid-season. There will still be some, and those will still be largely large-market clubs (seeing as smaller market clubs won't risk the large tender contract they must offer), but there will be fewer of them, which allows the losing clubs to draft better players in the second round.

I think the overall effect will be rather neutral in regards to large market v. small market.
   44. Pasta-diving Jeter (jmac66) Posted: June 04, 2012 at 12:25 PM (#4147650)
Cody Poteet looks like he should never be allowed out of the house without a note from his mother
   45. Randy Jones Posted: June 04, 2012 at 12:26 PM (#4147651)
I think the overall effect will be rather neutral in regards to large market v. small market.


This. The real effect will be to take money away from drafted players and soon international FA's and put that money into the owners' pockets.
   46. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: June 04, 2012 at 12:32 PM (#4147659)
If the Braves draft Tanner Rahier, as most boards seem to be predicting, I'm going to call him Chuck.
   47. Pasta-diving Jeter (jmac66) Posted: June 04, 2012 at 12:34 PM (#4147663)
Chuck Rahier? I don't get it
   48. Der-K thinks the Essex Green were a good band. Posted: June 04, 2012 at 12:37 PM (#4147667)
I wasn't thinking about the sandwich picks, that's true. Ugh - don't like those things.
Anyway, I think we'd all agree that this is about ownership keeping not spending money on amateur talent.

If the Braves draft Tanner Rahier, as most boards seem to be predicting, I'm going to call him Chuck.
Did you pet the puppy on your way in?
   49. Johnny Slick Posted: June 04, 2012 at 01:03 PM (#4147701)
A lot of people believe this, but I disagree. These new rules make it very difficult for large-market teams (or at least winning large-market teams) to snag premium players late in R1 or in the comp round.


I disagree. If a smaller-market team decides to go way over its cap one year (and by "way over" I mean 5 whole percent over"), it doesn't get a 1st round pick at all the next year. If this becomes a regular thing - and I think it very well could for the teams who pick 1 and 2 and maybe even a little further back - that #15 pick that, let's say, a Yankees team coming off of an off year had becomes a #11 or 12. If an equal number of teams are avoiding top talent because they value the next year's draft too much, you could conceivably get a #8 talent with that pick.

On the flip side, a larger market team with a bunch of picks may well decide to just scotch the next year's draft anyway, go way over their cap and "lose" picks that they weren't going to have anyway because they plan on signing FAs the next season.

College and HS ball still produce prospects which are much more raw compared to the NFL due to the differences in the games, of course, and so it wouldn't be nearly as big a deal as if football did this, but for clubs like Kansas City and Pittsburgh, who really ought to be going hog-wild on the draft, snapping up as many guys that they can get pre-FA value from as possible, this is still, I think, going to have a deleterious effect on them, particularly when viewed in conjunction with the new international players' cap.
   50. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: June 04, 2012 at 01:18 PM (#4147727)
Chuck Rahier? I don't get it


<gods>
   51. Spahn Insane Posted: June 04, 2012 at 01:21 PM (#4147732)
Did you pet the puppy on your way in?

No. I was too busy being charmed by Willie Starfellow.
   52. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: June 04, 2012 at 01:23 PM (#4147735)
If a smaller-market team decides to go way over its cap one year (and by "way over" I mean 5 whole percent over"), it doesn't get a 1st round pick at all the next year.


I don't see this ever happening. Only a few small market teams were spending big before the caps were in place, why would they forfeit picks in order to spend big now?

a larger market team with a bunch of picks may well decide to just scotch the next year's draft anyway, go way over their cap and "lose" picks that they weren't going to have anyway because they plan on signing FAs the next season.


I think those "lost picks" carry over into the next year then. I could be wrong. Der probably knows.
   53. Pasta-diving Jeter (jmac66) Posted: June 04, 2012 at 01:33 PM (#4147750)
Chuck Rahier? I don't get it

<gods>


until 2001, there were no first-name Tanners ever in OB, now there are 22
   54. Cabbage Posted: June 04, 2012 at 01:55 PM (#4147775)
Keep in mind, this part of the CBA is economic collusion between the owners and the players union. It's legal collusion, but collusion nonetheless. The owners have the union's blessing to screw over the undrafted. That will leave more money in the owner's pockets, and market forces should lead to a long term raise in the major league payroll because one expense has been reduced. Since the market between players and owners is closed and hardly efficient, competition between clubs wont be enough to make the owners put all the cash into payroll. Owners profits will go up, but at the same time there is some competition (see rising payrolls over the last 20 years generally) so we can expect average payrolls to be higher than they would be under the old CBA.

This is a similar sort of arrangement to when the terms of a collective bargaining agreement restricts new workers from becoming full union members. Some of the auto unions are entering into a structured deal like this now. It's the entrenched parties agreeing to screw over the newcomers.
   55. Edmundo got dem ol' Kozma blues again mama Posted: June 04, 2012 at 02:06 PM (#4147793)
until 2001, there were no first-name Tanners ever in OB, now there are 22

Not true, Joey Meyer's real name was Tanner Joe Meyer. :)

I've heard of Billy Joes, Bobby Joes but never Tanner Joe.

EDIT: Added smiley cuz I sounded snarky.
   56. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: June 04, 2012 at 02:10 PM (#4147801)
I disagree. If a smaller-market team decides to go way over its cap one year (and by "way over" I mean 5 whole percent over"), it doesn't get a 1st round pick at all the next year. If this becomes a regular thing - and I think it very well could for the teams who pick 1 and 2 and maybe even a little further back
I expect this will absolutely never happen. Maybe once, at most. Top draft picks are ludicrously valuable, and amateur players have very little leverage to wield in these negotiations. I don't think there's a single major league team dumb enough to cost themselves a draft pick in order to pay more money to a player who has no recourse for present day money other than taking the contract he's offered.
   57. Devin has a deep burning passion for fuzzy socks Posted: June 04, 2012 at 02:31 PM (#4147825)
On the flip side, a larger market team with a bunch of picks may well decide to just scotch the next year's draft anyway, go way over their cap and "lose" picks that they weren't going to have anyway because they plan on signing FAs the next season.


I would assume that if someone tries this, they'll change the rules so that the lost picks carryover to the next year. (If it doesn't already say that.) Of course, that's probably illegal, but Bud will growl at them and whoever it is will go along with it.
   58. bfan Posted: June 04, 2012 at 02:33 PM (#4147826)
I don't think there's a single major league team dumb enough to cost themselves a draft pick in order to pay more money to a player who has no recourse for present day money other than taking the contract he's offered.


While this is true in its limited way, it presents too narrow a universe, doesn't it? Of course, there is no alternative for present day money, but there are plenty of college baseball experiences and degree opportunities that an owner must compete with, right? Maybe with choices 1-15 or so, 3 years of college experience and progress toward a degree isn't enough of a lure, but what about someone drafted fairly high who believes that they can enhance their draft position substantially with 3 years of college and another shot at the draft?
   59. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: June 04, 2012 at 02:34 PM (#4147827)
   60. Matthew E Posted: June 04, 2012 at 02:45 PM (#4147833)
Law has Appel as his #6 prospect, Goldstein had him #4. It seems like there are some concerns about his college workload, and Goldstein's description of his secondary stuff kind of screams "stay away" given his projected draft position and bonus.


Yes, but one bad Appel don't spoil the whole bunch.
   61. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: June 04, 2012 at 02:46 PM (#4147837)
Chuck Tanner, people! CHUCK TANNER! Are you all children with no memories of days past?!
   62. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: June 04, 2012 at 02:48 PM (#4147838)
Maybe with choices 1-15 or so, 3 years of college experience and progress toward a degree isn't enough of a lure, but what about someone drafted fairly high who believes that they can enhance their draft position substantially with 3 years of college and another shot at the draft?
No high schooler in the last decade has turned down a top 10 bonus in order to go to college, and Wade Townsend is the only college junior to turn down a top 10 offer in a decade (from the Orioles at #8 in 2004). This is an issue later in the first round, and teams will have to be highly vigilant about the signability of high schoolers in the range of picks 20-40. The discussion here was about the top ten picks or so, and it's really not an issue there. A top 5 bonus is the best money an amateur baseball player can realistically expect to get.

There's significantly less reason, now, for high schoolers to turn down big money, because there's a practical cap on bonuses. At least when Wade Townsend turned down the offer in 2004, he could imagine a club busting out $10M and a major league contract. Now that simply won't happen.
   63. Crispix reaches boiling point with lackluster play Posted: June 04, 2012 at 02:56 PM (#4147846)
Chuck Tanner, people! CHUCK TANNER! Are you all children with no memories of days past?!

Oh, that's what it was.
   64. Pops Freshenmeyer Posted: June 04, 2012 at 02:56 PM (#4147847)
On the other hand, this might hurt with multiple sport stars. The Bubba Starlings will probably choose baseball careers but the Jeff Samardzijas will not.

I might be misremembering but wasn't Jameis Winston once believed to be a guy who would choose baseball but now it's assumed he will play college football instead?
   65. Pasta-diving Jeter (jmac66) Posted: June 04, 2012 at 03:01 PM (#4147854)
Chuck Tanner, people! CHUCK TANNER! Are you all children with no memories of days past?!

you need to retune your sarcasm meter, Sam
   66. Pasta-diving Jeter (jmac66) Posted: June 04, 2012 at 03:02 PM (#4147856)
I might be misremembering but wasn't Jameis Winston once believed to be a guy who would choose baseball but now it's assumed he will play college football instead?

he could always pull a Brandon Weeden
   67. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: June 04, 2012 at 03:14 PM (#4147872)
you need to retune your sarcasm meter, Sam


Sorry. Been ears deep in the Jim's Lab Notes thread. I'm a bit woozy.
   68. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: June 04, 2012 at 03:56 PM (#4147933)
What's a Chuck Tanner?
   69. BWV 1129 Posted: June 04, 2012 at 04:15 PM (#4147964)
My understanding is that Giolito still hasn't thrown for scouts since his elbow injury, and he's demanding a top-5 bonus. That probably means he isn't being drafted.

Some recent video of him working out and throwing has hit the web. I haven't watched it, but allegedly he looks good.

I figure any team that signs him should probably just go ahead and try to schedule a pre-emptive Tommy John surgery. I'm hoping he and Fried price themselves out and don't sign.
   70. rlc Posted: June 04, 2012 at 04:30 PM (#4147982)
What's a Chuck Tanner?


Kitchen appliance for those who can't afford a Sirloin Browner.
   71. Justin T., Director of Somethin Posted: June 04, 2012 at 04:32 PM (#4147987)
While this is true in its limited way, it presents too narrow a universe, doesn't it? Of course, there is no alternative for present day money, but there are plenty of college baseball experiences and degree opportunities that an owner must compete with, right?

I forget the specifics, but something was posted here a few weeks ago regarding some initiative of MLB's to promote college baseball. Could well be that they want college to compete with them more, and be where most players go through. Let them cost the schools money to run through their programs rather than the teams via the minor leagues.
   72. Der-K thinks the Essex Green were a good band. Posted: June 04, 2012 at 05:24 PM (#4148078)
71 - i think that's true... but as a by product of lowering signing costs. wouldn't be surprised if a layer of short season ball eventually goes away, but that's not anytime too, too soon.
52/lost picks: don't know, sorry.
   73. DL from MN Posted: June 04, 2012 at 05:44 PM (#4148104)
I've seen multiple comments that clubs are focused on their top 10 round picks. I think they're fine with a system that sends low pick high school players to college and fills out rosters with college seniors cheaply.
   74. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: June 04, 2012 at 06:33 PM (#4148150)
Since this seems to be the defacto open thread for the draft

[] Bud Selig praising the new CBA and labor peace
[] Tommy Lasorda sighting
[] Awkward retired ballplayer representing his team that doesn't quite seem to know what he's supposed to do
[] Harold Reynolds calls a player a "gamer" or "winner" because he doesn't know anything about him
[] Mitch Williams refers to when he was drafted or played baseball
[] Scott Boras reference
[] Awkward interview with 18 year old potential draftee

   75. DA Baracus Posted: June 04, 2012 at 07:08 PM (#4148178)
The shots of the alumni that teams have is... interesting. Ron Karkovice for instance.
   76. fra paolo Posted: June 04, 2012 at 07:09 PM (#4148180)
I would be grateful if anyone could post a link to an audio-only stream of the draft.
   77. Willie Mayspedes Posted: June 04, 2012 at 07:10 PM (#4148181)
Selig-cula!
   78. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: June 04, 2012 at 07:11 PM (#4148185)
Bid Selig may have zero stage presence but there is something endearing about that. I like tht he's not too slick.
   79. DA Baracus Posted: June 04, 2012 at 07:13 PM (#4148188)
Bid Selig may have zero stage presence


Selig has negative stage presence.
   80. DA Baracus Posted: June 04, 2012 at 07:15 PM (#4148190)
My favorite Selig-ism is that he'll repeat the city and state of a college that has the city and state in it. Like he'll say "Steve Stephenson, pitcher, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill; Chapel Hill, North Carolina." Vital info.
   81. Flynn Posted: June 04, 2012 at 07:16 PM (#4148191)
Didn't see that one coming.
   82. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: June 04, 2012 at 07:17 PM (#4148192)
And the Astros make Mayo and friends look bad right out of the gate
   83. DA Baracus Posted: June 04, 2012 at 07:17 PM (#4148193)
See, there you go. "A short stop from Puerto Rico Baseball Acadmey, Puerto Rico." Thanks Bud, I thought it was in Oregon.
   84. Der-K thinks the Essex Green were a good band. Posted: June 04, 2012 at 07:17 PM (#4148194)
Hahahahahahaha ... everybody was wrong - awesome!
(Carlos Correa, a shortstop from PR picked first. BA had him #7 w/ SD)
   85. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: June 04, 2012 at 07:18 PM (#4148195)
THIS JUST GOT INTERESTING

Local media will skewer the Astros if local boy Appel does good, but I gotta say, Correa has the much higher upside. Ballsy pick from Luhnow.
   86. Pleasant Nate (Upgraded from 'Nate') Posted: June 04, 2012 at 07:18 PM (#4148197)
I think he's the best player in the draft. Surprised, but nicely done, me thinks.
   87. andrewberg Posted: June 04, 2012 at 07:19 PM (#4148198)
Is that strictly a money pick? I could see it being talent motivated (I like Correa), but given the rumblings on Appel and the presence of Boras, it is hard not to think of that.
   88. BWV 1129 Posted: June 04, 2012 at 07:19 PM (#4148200)
John Sickels also had Correa as his #1 player in the draft.
   89. DA Baracus Posted: June 04, 2012 at 07:20 PM (#4148201)
At the start of the broadcast they said that he was a possible #1 pick. Of course, it helps to be tipped off.
   90. Flynn Posted: June 04, 2012 at 07:20 PM (#4148202)
It's kinda cool that he's the first Puerto Rican ever to go No. 1.
   91. Flynn Posted: June 04, 2012 at 07:24 PM (#4148205)
You know what I love about this draft over the NFL draft?

It phrucking moves. Just when we've said what needs to be said about Correa, the Twins have picked Buxton.
   92. JJ1986 Posted: June 04, 2012 at 07:26 PM (#4148206)
I wonder why he's being compared to BJ and Justin Upton.
   93. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: June 04, 2012 at 07:26 PM (#4148207)

You know what I love about this draft over the NFL draft?


No Mel Kiper Jr or Chris Berman?

I wonder why he's being compared to BJ and Justin Upton.


If you're saying its because of race, that's absurd. Some compare him to Eric Davis as well.
   94. DA Baracus Posted: June 04, 2012 at 07:27 PM (#4148208)
You know what I love about this draft over the NFL draft?

It phrucking moves. Just when we've said what needs to be said about Correa, the Twins have picked Buxton.


I have the complete opposite reaction and disagree with you on the speed. There is no need for all this time between picks since they can't be traded, and in this year's NFL draft the picks were coming in faster than the analysts could talk about them. A few years ago this was literally a conference call that went lightning fast. Now it's a dragged out TV event.
   95. BWV 1129 Posted: June 04, 2012 at 07:28 PM (#4148210)
I thought the CBA allowed only the Braves to draft toolsy high schoolers from Georgia.
   96. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: June 04, 2012 at 07:29 PM (#4148212)
Now it's a dragged out TV event.


You got somewhere to be? I don't mind learning a bit about players I know little about. It would help if they did, you know, give us information on these players rather than cliches.
   97. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: June 04, 2012 at 07:29 PM (#4148213)
No Mel Kiper Jr or Chris Berman?


YES YES YES.

Also, let me say that I approve of Correa for the Astros. Strange to see them doing smart things...
   98. Brian C Posted: June 04, 2012 at 07:30 PM (#4148214)
If you're saying its because of race, that's absurd. Some compare him to Eric Davis as well.

And Torii Hunter. And Reynolds just dropped an Adam Jones, too.
   99. Pleasant Nate (Upgraded from 'Nate') Posted: June 04, 2012 at 07:30 PM (#4148215)
Harold Reynolds is really annoying. He may be worse than Berman.
   100. Flynn Posted: June 04, 2012 at 07:30 PM (#4148216)
I understand it was a conference call (I used to listen to them on MLB.com) but as somebody who doesn't follow the draft to a greater extent than what Klaw says on Baseball Today (which still probably puts me in the top 10% for baseball fans), having some highlights and analysis is not a bad thing.

I don't watch the NFL draft anymore since I live overseas (I wouldn't be watching tonight's draft if it wasn't a holiday tomorrow) but from the past years I was under the impression that most teams took up the whole 15 minutes. If they're actually making more than four picks an hour then that's great.

Also, Zunino?
Page 1 of 4 pages  1 2 3 4 > 

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Randy Jones
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

Newsblog7-25-14 OMNICHATTER
(55 - 3:14am, Jul 26)
Last: bobm

Newsblog5 for Friday: Leo Mazzone, pitching coach to the HOFers
(26 - 2:41am, Jul 26)
Last: bjhanke

NewsblogOTP - July 2014: Republicans Lose To Democrats For Sixth Straight Year In Congressional Baseball Game
(3205 - 2:40am, Jul 26)
Last: robinred

NewsblogRe/code: Major League Baseball Cries Foul on Net Neutrality Proposal
(7 - 2:17am, Jul 26)
Last: Bhaakon

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread- July 2014
(944 - 2:14am, Jul 26)
Last: RollingWave

NewsblogBA Report: MLBPA Files Grievance Against Astros Over Aiken, Nix, Marshall
(11 - 2:08am, Jul 26)
Last: Bhaakon

NewsblogHurdles remain in Mets-Rockies deal for Tulowitzki, Gonzalez
(34 - 1:04am, Jul 26)
Last: Der-K thinks the Essex Green were a good band.

NewsblogWisch: Cooperstown Shouldn’t Close Out Lee Smith
(23 - 12:50am, Jul 26)
Last: bobm

NewsblogSurprising Sports Stars – Guided by Voices’ Robert Pollard
(16 - 9:52pm, Jul 25)
Last: eddieot

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread July, 2014
(414 - 8:38pm, Jul 25)
Last: J. Sosa

NewsblogThe Inventor of the High Five
(30 - 8:32pm, Jul 25)
Last: Willie Mayspedes

NewsblogSoE: AN IDIOT IN EXILE
(4 - 8:24pm, Jul 25)
Last: The Yankee Clapper

NewsblogNoble: Tom Seaver expects Derek Jeter to become first unanimous Hall of Fame inductee
(88 - 7:50pm, Jul 25)
Last: Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick.

NewsblogESPN : GM Offers To Get Prostate Exam During Game
(17 - 7:48pm, Jul 25)
Last: mos def panel

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 7-25-2014
(8 - 7:27pm, Jul 25)
Last: Eric J can SABER all he wants to

Page rendered in 0.9289 seconds
52 querie(s) executed