2009 MLB Draft Thread [Archive] - Front Office Football Central

DeToxRox

06-09-2009, 10:42 AM

C'mon, some people here are obviously pumped about it.

Strasburg is obviously going #1, and I assume Ackley is going #2, but then the fun starts with San Diego at 3.

I personally hope the Tigs gamble on being able to sign Jacob Turner at 9 if he is there. Not the prospect Porcello was, but he fits the bill of a Tigs pick. He's 6'5, throws 98 mph and has a sharp slider. Would love to get this kid.

So what say you? It's on the MLB Network tonight, which sadly I do not have for some god forsaken reason but I assume mlb.com will stream. And if they don't, some site will I hope.

Mizzou B-ball fan

06-09-2009, 10:47 AM

I can't even remember the last time the Royals picked outside of the top 10. How disappointing. :D

DaddyTorgo

06-09-2009, 10:49 AM

Ronnie Dobbs2

06-09-2009, 10:50 AM

I'm just thankful that the Sox are ahead of the Yankees. If a bonus baby is falling, we'll at least get a chance to pass before they take him.

Mizzou B-ball fan

06-09-2009, 10:50 AM

way too many picks and way too long of a lead-time for them to get to the majors for me to invest in the MLB Draft. Talk to me when the kids actually get to AA or AAA and then maybe I'll start getting excited about them.

Well, that happens quicker for most teams than it does for your team, hence the reason for the interest. :)

JPhillips

06-09-2009, 10:51 AM

way too many picks and way too long of a lead-time for them to get to the majors for me to invest in the MLB Draft. Talk to me when the kids actually get to AA or AAA and then maybe I'll start getting excited about them.

You're missing out on the sheer joy of following Devin Mesoraco's rookie league debut.

Logan

06-09-2009, 11:06 AM

Something I've wondered...let's say behind the first couple of picks there's a player who wants more money than a team is willing to pay, so they pass on him and take a less-skilled player who will sign for slot money. Let's then say they've saved maybe $3 million by doing this. If you really believe the kid you have passed on is a much better player, would it not be more advantageous for the team to take the more talented kid, give him his money, wait out the year and then trade him off?

Seems like using that $3 million to basically help you acquire a better, established player (even if still a young kid) would be a good use of resources, especially when most of these guys don't amount to much anyway and so much hype surrounds new "top prospects."

Mizzou B-ball fan

06-09-2009, 11:15 AM

Something I've wondered...let's say behind the first couple of picks there's a player who wants more money than a team is willing to pay, so they pass on him and take a less-skilled player who will sign for slot money. Let's then say they've saved maybe $3 million by doing this. If you really believe the kid you have passed on is a much better player, would it not be more advantageous for the team to take the more talented kid, give him his money, wait out the year and then trade him off?

The Royals picked the cheaper option for several years. They finally figured out that they were better off picking a talented player and bucking up.

JPhillips

06-09-2009, 11:19 AM

The problem is that the failure rate on big money guys is no better. Spending that 3 mil on a guy that seems lost in A ball or blows out his shoulder just leaves you with 3 mil less to spend next year.

I think, though, with the compensation system in place that there will be fewer teams passing on above slot players. If they don't sign the team will just get the same pick next year. A lot of guys after big money won't want to take the risk of playing for a year in the Cape Cod league ala Crow.

Logan

06-09-2009, 11:24 AM

I just think if you're confident enough in your scouting which has rated one player above another, it's a waste of all those resources (the scouting cost plus the cost of signing the second player) to not get the guy you feel is better. This is assuming there's enough of a difference between the two guys of course...I'm obviously not advocating spending more just to spend more.

And if you're not confident in your scouting...well, that's the real issue.

DaddyTorgo

06-09-2009, 11:29 AM

Well, that happens quicker for most teams than it does for your team, hence the reason for the interest. :)

lol

its true of hockey too though. football and bball because the players go right on the active roster i think fans just care more

lungs

06-09-2009, 12:09 PM

First draft for the Brewers without Jack Z(current mariners GM, never could spell his last name) running the show. First draft for the Brewers in a long, long time without picking in the top 20. But they've also got like 7 in the top 100 I believe.

I always enjoy the MLB draft. These aren't guys that disappear after the draft only to emerge years later to me anyway, as I follow Brew Crew prospects through the minors.

Butter

06-09-2009, 12:25 PM

You're missing out on the sheer joy of following Devin Mesoraco's rookie league debut.

Joy, you say?

I plan on getting in on the sheer joy of his 3rd straight year in A ball next season. Maybe he can hit higher than .208 one of these years.

samifan24

06-09-2009, 01:03 PM

FYI, apparently you can watch the 1st round on MLB.com in addition to MLB Network since I know not many people get MLB Network. I guess MLB Network is readily available in most areas but the cable providers make it difficult to get the channel. Supposedly it's available in our area here in CT but I don't know anyone that actually gets the channel.

Logan

06-09-2009, 01:06 PM

MLBN is the one friggin good thing about Time Warner.

Watching most of the NHL playoffs in SD because our VersusHD feed just doesn't come in...not a good thing.

lordscarlet

06-09-2009, 01:58 PM

Samdari

06-09-2009, 02:08 PM

It's a long-term thing, but I am very interested in seeing if the Nationals succeed with at least one of their top 10 picks. Hopefully we'll go with a more likely success at the #10 spot (in other words, not a pitcher).

Their plans are reportedly to take a pitcher. It makes sense in this draft, with exactly one highly regarded hitter, and lots of high school guys, to take the best player.

Ronnie Dobbs2

06-09-2009, 02:11 PM

I kind of hope the Natinals draft Crow at 10.

Samdari

06-09-2009, 02:34 PM

I kind of hope the Natinals draft Crow at 10.

I would find that deliciously funny. Offer him half what they did last year, and include a promise to draft him again next year if he does not sign that.

Karlifornia

06-09-2009, 02:52 PM

No chance Crow makes it to 10

Here's my mock top 10:

1.Nats- Steven Strasburg
2.Mariners- Dustin Ackley
3.Padres- Alex White
4.Pirates- Zack Wheeler
5.Orioles- Aaron Crow
6.Giants- Tyler Matzek
7.Braves- Mike Minor
8.Reds- Tanner Scheppers
9.Tigers- Matthew Purke
10.Nationals- Grant Green

Ronnie Dobbs2

06-09-2009, 02:55 PM

You don't think Scheppers drops with his injury?

Mr. Sparkle

06-09-2009, 02:57 PM

Actually, there's a possibility Crow could fall. Apparently his agent was trying to find a buyer for him in the Top 10 and wasn't having much luck. I'd love for the Giants to take him, though. Crow or Matzek would be ideal.

As for the Natinals taking Crow again, can't happen. Players have to sign a waiver allowing them to be re-drafted by the team that picked them the previous year. Crow didn't sign the paperwork as of yesterday. Don't believe Scheppers did, either, so the Pirates can't draft him again.

Mr. Sparkle

06-09-2009, 02:59 PM

Samdari

06-09-2009, 03:00 PM

Keith Law on ESPNInsider:

"Right now, I don't have Aaron Crow or Tanner Scheppers going in the first round. Teams in the top 10 are telling me that neither is a top choice for them, with a few teams pointing to medical concerns about Scheppers, and everyone pointing to their belief that neither player will sign for less than what he turned down last year. Of course, either player could go later in the round or even afterward and still get a seven-figure bonus, but more than one scouting director or general manager has told me in the past few days that he doesn't want to risk a first-round pick on a player who might not sign. "

On talent, neither makes it outside the top 10. On ridiculous contract demands, sure they could drop.

Mr. Sparkle

06-09-2009, 03:03 PM

Yeah, both those guys should give Matt Harrington a call and see how that worked out for him.

Ronnie Dobbs2

06-09-2009, 03:03 PM

Also, word is the Pirates are going to take C Tony Sanchez from BC, which would be another overdraft for them. Rumor has it they want to save money and put it towards an international player by the name of Miguel Angel Sano. Somewhere Daniel Moskos is cringing.

Yeah Law has confirmed a predraft deal. Poor Pirates fans. They better sign all the IFAs.

stevew

06-09-2009, 03:04 PM

Also, word is the Pirates are going to take C Tony Sanchez from BC, which would be another overdraft for them. Rumor has it they want to save money and put it towards an international player by the name of Miguel Angel Sano. Somewhere Daniel Moskos is cringing.

yeah, that would be horrible.

I guess if they go overslot on thier 2 second rounders I could live with it. But I actually think they have 3 pretty solid catchers, with a couple having 5-6 years left of club control.

Karlifornia

06-09-2009, 03:12 PM

I'm really hoping Ackley has ridiculous demands and falls to the Giants. I have this pipe dream every year, though....in the past there was Pedro Alvarez, Matt Wieters, and the like.

Karlifornia

06-09-2009, 03:14 PM

You don't think Scheppers drops with his injury?

Alright...swap out Scheppers with Donavon Tate or the pitcher from Stanford.

Atocep

06-09-2009, 03:20 PM

The Pirates really seem to like Sanchez so I'm not sure if its 100% a signability issue. It's a weak draft after Strasburg so taking a guy like him this year isn't as bad as it would have been last year when the first round was a bit deeper in talent.

Sano, though, is the top international player and his comparisons are to Longoria. The Pirates definitely aren't going cheap here because his bonus is expected to pass Inoa's deal from last year. Everyone seems to think he's their's to lose as well so the Pirates may actually be building something resembling a farm system.

Karlifornia

06-09-2009, 03:25 PM

Yeah, it looks like Sanchez and the Pirates have reached a pre-draft deal.

1.Strasburg
2.Ackley
3.Tate
4.Sanchez
5.White
6.Matzek
7.Wheeler
8.Minor
9.Crow
10.Green

Bad-example

06-09-2009, 03:34 PM

With their recent history of scouting and developing pitchers, I wouldn't be at all surprised if the Giants took a pitcher at 6. Actually wondering if they might consider Crow.

No MLBN here on ATT Uverse. :(

DeToxRox

06-09-2009, 04:18 PM

Matzek could fall to Detroit at 9. If he does lets hope the Tigs pull the trigger but apparently they might try and avoid huge bonuses this year.

lordscarlet

06-09-2009, 04:59 PM

Their plans are reportedly to take a pitcher. It makes sense in this draft, with exactly one highly regarded hitter, and lots of high school guys, to take the best player.

Yeah, it makes sense. And with 2, perhaps one pans out. But with the largely discussed lack of success with early pitchers, it would seem nice to have something a little more guaranteed.

I kind of hope the Natinals draft Crow at 10.

I would find that deliciously funny. Offer him half what they did last year, and include a promise to draft him again next year if he does not sign that.

It would be amusing for sure. But as mentioned later, right now it's not possible for them to draft him.

No chance Crow makes it to 10

Here's my mock top 10:

1.Nats- Steven Strasburg
2.Mariners- Dustin Ackley
3.Padres- Alex White
4.Pirates- Zack Wheeler
5.Orioles- Aaron Crow
6.Giants- Tyler Matzek
7.Braves- Mike Minor
8.Reds- Tanner Scheppers
9.Tigers- Matthew Purke
10.Nationals- Grant Green

mlb.com projects Storen for #10 and Crow out of the top 10.

I will be very amused if Crow drops out of the top 10 or the first round. At a minimum I would love for him to get less than the Nationals offered him last year. I don't want to go so far as to wish him to not perform well in his career, but if you want to take a stupid risk like this, you deserve getting a lower contract than last year.

Atocep

06-09-2009, 05:08 PM

I will be very amused if Crow drops out of the top 10 or the first round. At a minimum I would love for him to get less than the Nationals offered him last year. I don't want to go so far as to wish him to not perform well in his career, but if you want to take a stupid risk like this, you deserve getting a lower contract than last year.

What's funny is I've read that some teams actually see him as a somewhat safe signability pick this year because he has zero leverage now that he's already sat out a year.

DeToxRox

06-09-2009, 05:09 PM

I'm going to be devastated if Matzek falls and the Tigs don't spring on it.

Logan

06-09-2009, 05:25 PM

Watching on MLB Network now...good lord does this set remind me of "Baseketball."

DeToxRox

06-09-2009, 05:43 PM

I lied, I still would be fine with Turner or Matzek and we'll have a crack at at least one of them.

Mr. Sparkle

06-09-2009, 05:45 PM

You get your pick of the litter DeTox. Heard that Turner to Tigers was pretty much a foregone conclusion...wonder if Matzek being there changes things.

Atocep

06-09-2009, 05:46 PM

Pretty clear that MLB Network isn't going to criticize any of the picks. Its like Bug Selig gave them a script to follow and a list of words and phrases they're not allowed to say.

JonInMiddleGA

06-09-2009, 05:49 PM

I kind of like the detailed scouting report (not just the short summary) that goes with the profiles of draftees on mlb.com. Way more detail than you usually get for free on something like that.

That, of course, assuming they're accurate.

Ronnie Dobbs2

06-09-2009, 05:51 PM

Everyone is shitting on the Braves.

DeToxRox

06-09-2009, 05:52 PM

You get your pick of the litter DeTox. Heard that Turner to Tigers was pretty much a foregone conclusion...wonder if Matzek being there changes things.

We'll see. A Tigs insider says they liked Turner more then Matzek before signability issues with Matzek. We'll see though what they decide to do. There is no guarantee they'll over spend with the state of things in Detroit but I am hopeful.

DeToxRox

06-09-2009, 05:53 PM

Dola, I could see CF Raymond Fuentes too here. His name is sky rocketing lately and it's been attached to Detroit. We need bats in the system but not at the expense of another potential stud pitcher.

Mr. Sparkle

06-09-2009, 05:55 PM

Would be awesome if the Natinals took Matzek...talk about stocking up on starting pitching.

DeToxRox

06-09-2009, 05:56 PM

Happy with the Turner pick. Touches 98 with the FB and has a good off speed pitch. Not getting my hopes up but the potential is there to be a dominant guy in the rotation down the road.

Schmidty

06-09-2009, 05:58 PM

Happy with the Turner pick. Touches 98 with the FB and has a good off speed pitch. Not getting my hopes up but the potential is there to be a dominant guy in the rotation down the road.

Reading the scouting report on mlb.com, it says he tops out at 92 or so.

DeToxRox

06-09-2009, 05:59 PM

Reading the scouting report on mlb.com, it says he tops out at 92 or so.

He'll throw that I am sure but he can rev it up when he needs it. He's like Porcello. Porcello hit high 90's but doesn't throw it a lot because he doesn't need it.

Young Drachma

06-09-2009, 06:02 PM

They need to sign Strasburg tomorrow and get him in a uniform and playing now.

Mr. Sparkle

06-09-2009, 06:08 PM

Nice pick, Kansas City. Well done.

Bad-example

06-09-2009, 06:14 PM

Nice pick at 6 for the Giants. Weaver sounds like a strong talent and signable as well.

Big Fo

06-09-2009, 06:17 PM

Everyone is shitting on the Braves.

I don't follow amateur baseball much at all, what is wrong with Minor?

Atocep

06-09-2009, 06:23 PM

I don't follow amateur baseball much at all, what is wrong with Minor?

The criticism I've seen is his ceiling is #4 starter.

Mr. Sparkle

06-09-2009, 06:29 PM

Big Fo

06-09-2009, 06:34 PM

The criticism I've seen is his ceiling is #4 starter.

Sounds bad.

mlb.com said the kid throws 92 and might be maxed out.

stevew

06-09-2009, 06:39 PM

Kansas Shitty took Crow. This should be a fun story to follow.

Butter

06-09-2009, 07:21 PM

Butter

06-09-2009, 07:33 PM

Will be interesting to see if anyone opts for Scheppers in the supplemental portion of the 1st round.

Karlifornia

06-09-2009, 07:35 PM

Karlifornia

06-09-2009, 07:36 PM

Will be interesting to see if anyone opts for Scheppers in the supplemental portion of the 1st round.

I'd have to imagine someone will bite.

bhlloy

06-09-2009, 07:40 PM

Sounds like Colorado will be having a #12 pick again next year

I'm torn on the compensation picks at the same position the next year. On one hand, the draftees do have the teams over a barrel (especially with Boras seemingly representing everyone in the top 15) at least until some kind of slotting is put in.

On the other hand, how freaking hard is it to figure out whether or not a kid is going to sign with you or not? Clearly this guy was never going to sign, why should Colorado be "rewarded" next year in a draft that might be deeper and with a much better pick?

stevew

06-09-2009, 07:46 PM

How good was Danny Goodwin to go number 1 twice? He must have been a beast. His pro career wasn't that great IIRC.

JPhillips

06-09-2009, 07:54 PM

Cautiously pleased with the Reds pick of Leake from Ariz. State. Solid player, not a tremendous upside, but also already pretty polished and could move fast through the minors. Hopefully not another Ryan Wagner.

3 pitches. Plus command. Wanted both out of HS and now by the As.

Seems like pretty good potential for the #3 behind Cueto and Voltron.

INDalltheway

06-09-2009, 08:26 PM

2 teammates from North/South All-Star game have been picked in the first 38 picks.. So weird. (Josh Phegley and Kyle Gibson)

DaddyTorgo

06-09-2009, 08:30 PM

TONY SANCHEZ FROM BC GOES #4 TO THE PIRATES!!!

BOOYA!!!! HOW BOUT THAT BITCHES!!!!!

DaddyTorgo

06-09-2009, 08:31 PM

Also, word is the Pirates are going to take C Tony Sanchez from BC, which would be another overdraft for them. Rumor has it they want to save money and put it towards an international player by the name of Miguel Angel Sano. Somewhere Daniel Moskos is cringing.

overdraft?

sanchez's hitting is coming on quite well (he hit like .370 this year), and defensively and as a batterymate he's apparently already MLB-ready.

Logan

06-09-2009, 08:33 PM

DaddyTorgo

06-09-2009, 08:34 PM

Logan

06-09-2009, 08:35 PM

I'm waiting to see if there is a documented reason before fully jumping to a conclusion like that.

Mr. Sparkle

06-09-2009, 08:39 PM

He wasn't drafted because he was fat and out of shape, basically. Fastball ran in the mid to high 80s.

BishopMVP

06-09-2009, 08:41 PM

roids?Taco Bell. (He weighed 270, couldn't run a single wind sprint and topped out low-90's.)

Sox pick Fuentes from PR. Johnny Damon-ceiling. Not great, but after the signability picks other than Scheppers did not fall, not a bad choice. Hopefully we get Stassi 2nd round. And Sanchez was an overdraft.

Mr. Sparkle

06-09-2009, 08:45 PM

overdraft?

sanchez's hitting is coming on quite well (he hit like .370 this year), and defensively and as a batterymate he's apparently already MLB-ready.

Yeah, overdraft. He was a late first/supplemental round talent by just about everyone's estimation. He was drafted because he was going to be a quick/cheap sign.

Logan

06-09-2009, 08:54 PM

I've never heard "overdraft" outside of banking.

Schmidty

06-09-2009, 08:59 PM

From what I'm reading, I really like the Tigers 2nd round pick - Andrew Oliver.

Thomkal

06-09-2009, 09:09 PM

well watched through the Cards 1st round pick on the MLB channel and its pretty clear baseball doesn't get the excitement the draft can bring to its fans. A pretty cheezy small studio setting where everyone in the room can hear the analysts, and until some fans started clapping (poliitely) after a pick was announced, I didn't even know there were any fans in the studio. Plus Bud Selig just needs to retire right now and get someone young in there to rejuvenate things. The whole setup just seemed awkward to me.

Was disappointed my Cards took a high school pitcher, they certainly need pitching help, but I was hoping they would go with a more polished ready to go college guy. Anybody know anything about the guy they drafted outside of what they said during the coverage?

Swaggs

06-09-2009, 10:19 PM

Not too much you can do with the draft. Almost all of the players are several years away from playing in the major leagues and most will never make it past AAA. The players just do not have the immediate impact on the franchise like they do in the NBA or NFL (or even the NHL).

Tekneek

06-09-2009, 10:21 PM

LOL. They just interviewed Tyler Matzek on MLB Network and asked him if he was going to miss hitting. He says, "well Oregon is going to give me the chance to compete at 1B when I'm not pitching. We'll see what Colorado has to say about that."

The studio guys didn't say one word about that. Looks like Colorado just wasted a pick. Rather, I forgot about the compensatory pick rule...they just traded a pick for next year's draft. Might be a good strategy.

Tekneek

06-09-2009, 10:26 PM

The people who get into the draft are the ones that are really into player/organizational development. There are many out there who are really into observing that aspect of the sport. That is something that baseball offers that the other major sports do not (hockey comes closest in terms of player development, but very few players climb from the bottom of the minors to the top and have a major impact).

Atocep

06-09-2009, 10:38 PM

Tekneek

06-09-2009, 10:42 PM

MLB network really didn't impress with their broadcast. The studio was set up to where the team reps could hear the analysts, which pretty much assured there would be no criticizing the picks. Listening to how great each pick is gets really old after awhile.

They need to either allow their product to be analyzed or just go back to not showing it at all.

Did the NFL Network cover their draft? It has been a while since I had the channel, so I don't remember what all of their coverage at the actual draft was like. I like to see people react with things like, "That was totally off the board." Not calling any scouts/GMs out as idiots, but reflecting at least that nobody expected that player to go that high.

At least they did talk about "signability" as a reason for some of the picks, which may be getting close to the line for some.

Atocep

06-09-2009, 10:48 PM

Did the NFL Network cover their draft? It has been a while since I had the channel, so I don't remember what all of their coverage at the actual draft was like. I like to see people react with things like, "That was totally off the board." Not calling any scouts/GMs out as idiots, but reflecting at least that nobody expected that player to go that high.

At least they did talk about "signability" as a reason for some of the picks, which may be getting close to the line for some.

Yes, the NFL Network covered their draft and their analysis was top notch.

As conservative as MLB is and with the ridiculousness of the unofficial slotting system that Selig has in place there's little chance that they'll actually let the analysts criticize anything a team does. Selig would rather see the Pirates draft a guy because he's signable than take a guy that's going to ask for more than Bud thinks the #4 pick should get.

stevew

06-09-2009, 11:13 PM

I think the Nats will get something done. But it is probably going to boggle the mind. At least 15 to 20 guaranteed with a potential 6 year value in the 40M range at the minimum. It also wouldn't suprise me to see less overall money but some sort of escape clause where the Nationals end up not being able to tender arbitration after his 3rd season. Basically if he's good he will be hitting FA and a real deal very quickly.

stevew

06-09-2009, 11:18 PM

Pirates management was adamant that Sanchez was the third player on their board. If their opinion was that many of the guys were similar enough and it didn't make sense to throw a ton more at another player I can see it. But I'm really reserving judgement on it.

I can live with a scouting influenced financial decision moreso than merely a money one.

Young Drachma

06-09-2009, 11:18 PM

Given how many sabermetric geeks + fans who have blogs that focus on their team's every move...there's no way you couldn't make the draft more interesting.

It ought to be like EPL FanZone, only without the screaming and inaudible rantings.

There are people out there who know these prospects and who have scouted/seen them, all the way through the random rounds. It's just MLB Network is unlikely to be the source. No trades coupled with a draft that goes on for 50 rounds (I sure do miss the draft that never ends...) means that they've done about as much as they can do with it, with that regime they have now.

I don't want to see the players have to come to New York or anything. I think just more opp. research on the guys would be good, coupled with the ability to actually trade. This whole "I won't sign, screw you because you won't pay me enough," thing is strange.

sterlingice

06-09-2009, 11:27 PM

LOL. They just interviewed Tyler Matzek on MLB Network and asked him if he was going to miss hitting. He says, "well Oregon is going to give me the chance to compete at 1B when I'm not pitching. We'll see what Colorado has to say about that."

My post on the draft thread at Royals Review: "Matzek seems like a smug, coached prick. Must be a Boras client."

SI

sterlingice

06-09-2009, 11:33 PM

Nice pick, Kansas City. Well done.

My snap thought on that: " Why do I have this Hochevar feel all over again…"

(elaboration "He's not bad but it’s a lot of extra baggage we could have escaped from. He’s old, smacks a little of signability, and he just spent the last year in a substandard development phase" plus when Billy Beane takes who everyone else wanted right after you, it really just feels like we took Hochevar over Andrew Miller again)

SI

sterlingice

06-09-2009, 11:35 PM

I love what we did in the 3rd round, getting Will Myers. There were whispers of us taking him at 12 but he fell due to signability so we took a shot in 3, similar to the Melville pick last year. BA has him the #31 talent and BP the #34. It's one market inefficiency Moore has made work for him.

SI

Crapshoot

06-09-2009, 11:38 PM

I wanted Matzek over Wheeler, but if there's a pitcher than the Giants scouts and the Braves scouts are going ga-ga over, I'm going to trust them given the track record (now hitters, are somewhat different). :D

Crapshoot

06-09-2009, 11:38 PM

My post on the draft thread at Royals Review: "Matzek seems like a smug, coached prick. Must be a Boras client."

SI

Once again, why the hell should he say otherwise? He has a price, and if they aren't willing to pay him, they shouldn't take him.

Crapshoot

06-09-2009, 11:39 PM

Cautiously pleased with the Reds pick of Leake from Ariz. State. Solid player, not a tremendous upside, but also already pretty polished and could move fast through the minors. Hopefully not another Ryan Wagner.

The antithesis actually - I think Leake will not be a star, but his numbers are pretty damn amazing. He's a short-righthander and while not everyone of those is Tim Lincecum, I think Leake will be a solid #3 type for the Reds. In my mind, one of the safest bets around.

Crapshoot

06-09-2009, 11:42 PM

So I didn't realize that Strasburg wasn't even drafted coming out of HS. Does that concern anyone? Was he from a town that couldn't field a team? What was his fastball clocked at before he got to SDSU?

Its actually weird, because I think baseball is the most "talent" level sport, and the least "athletic" in skills required, so good talent can take a while to develop. Out of high school, Stratsburg was about 50-60 lbs heavier, and was throwing only in the hgh 80's, touching 90. Also keep in mind, if you're a high school who's considered a strong commit (aka a Stanford or a Vanderbilt), you're going to be ignored in the draft ;they know that unless they're giving you top 2-3 rounds money, you're better of going to college.

Mr. Sparkle

06-10-2009, 12:28 AM

My snap thought on that: " Why do I have this Hochevar feel all over again…"

(elaboration "He's not bad but it’s a lot of extra baggage we could have escaped from. He’s old, smacks a little of signability, and he just spent the last year in a substandard development phase" plus when Billy Beane takes who everyone else wanted right after you, it really just feels like we took Hochevar over Andrew Miller again)

SI

I'd rather have Crow than Green, personally. Crow's stuff is NASTY, he's a local product, should move very quickly. Green's production tailed off this year, and scouts are torn on whether or not he will be able to stay at SS. If he has to move to third, he'll lose a fair amount of his value since he isn't a power guy.

gstelmack

06-10-2009, 11:14 AM

DeToxRox

06-10-2009, 11:25 AM

Crow is a good pick for KC. He has no leverage so if he doesn't sign, he's an idiot. The biggest concern with him is his delivery screams of elbow problems eventually.

Atocep

06-10-2009, 05:16 PM

The Angels take Jake Locker in the 10th round and are expected to push hard for him to give up football.

Schmidty

06-10-2009, 05:44 PM

FOFC has a new favorite baseball player whose career absolutely needs to be tracked with his own thread each season:

25. Los Angeles Angels -- Mike Trout (http://insider.espn.go.com/mlbdraft/player?id=18819&draftyear=2009), CF, Millville (N.J.) HS

I'm embarrassed to admit this since I've been here so long, but I can't quite remember who started the trout thing. Was it satchmo? That's what comes to mind, but I can't be sure.

Tekneek

06-10-2009, 05:52 PM

Anybody here know anything about Forrest Garrett, LHP, out of Norcross HS? I thought he was considered a decent enough prospect to have gone in the draft by now, but looks like he hasn't. They had a video of him throwing at MLB.com prior to the draft.

The best I can figure is that he is definitely intending to attend LSU, and nobody has been willing to take a flier on him yet.

Izulde

06-11-2009, 01:01 AM

I'm excited about the White Sox draft through the first few rounds. Jared Mitchell's speed is going to be very, -very- welcome. :)

DeToxRox

07-15-2009, 08:18 PM

Ronnie Dobbs2

07-15-2009, 08:37 PM

Their strategy might be to offer a lot at the last minute, to not allow Boras to play the negotiating game.

Edit: That's what the Red Sox did with Dice-K, and you could argue Boras got a lot less than he wanted. You could also argue that the Red Sox had a lot more leverage than the Natinals do.

sterlingice

07-15-2009, 08:41 PM

MLB trade rumors was talking last week that it was because of their GM situation

SI

Atocep

07-15-2009, 09:05 PM

Swaggs

07-15-2009, 09:26 PM

Agreed.

Just shortens the window that allows Boras to play the Nationals and the media. I think the Nationals are playing it pretty well. They can use the GM excuse and it serves the purpose of not engaging Boras for as long a period of time.

stevew

07-15-2009, 10:19 PM

Old point about Strasburg not being drafted.

I noticed Burrell was barely drafted out of HS(45th round IIRC). So it has come close to happening before.

The Pirates have signed many of their picks. And Sanchez was ripping up low A the last time I checked.

This waiting til close to the deadline so you can go overslot stuff is stupid.

lordscarlet

07-16-2009, 10:43 AM

So Strasburg is saying the Nats have not offered him a deal yet beyond the standard Minor League deal all teams must offer. I know the Nats have a month or so left, but how can this franchise already wait over a month without offering a deal? Just seems incompetent.

Agreed.

Just shortens the window that allows Boras to play the Nationals and the media. I think the Nationals are playing it pretty well. They can use the GM excuse and it serves the purpose of not engaging Boras for as long a period of time.

Two things here. First, everyone here is right. You need to remember this is Boras. For one, even if the Nationals have made an offer (which they actually say they have), who is to say he would have told Strasburg about it? Second, in that same interview, Strasburg seemed annoyed that the Nationals have not talked to him directly. Did he bother to read up on his agent before hiring him? Boras REFUSES to let a team talking directly to any of his agents. In addition, he normally pulls the "I won't deal with anyone but the owner" stunt (even though he won't let the team deal directly with the talent).

If indeed the Nationals HAVE made an offer to Boras and he hasn't made a stink about it in the media, that tells me they are handling the situation very well.

Ronnie Dobbs2

07-16-2009, 10:51 AM

The way I'm seeing it work out, is right before the deadline the Natinals come to Boras with an offer much bigger than anyone else has signed (but much smaller than Boras wants) and say take it or go to the independent league.

I doubt Strasburg will turn it down.

DeToxRox

07-16-2009, 10:55 AM

It's a deadly game to play for the Nats. This team has been one PR blunder after another and do you really want to get caught with your head in the sand considering how terrible the team already is?

Washington is barely off the 119 game loss pace the Tigs had in 03. If I were a player it'd sure make me think twice about signing with a team like that, considering how poor they've played, how boneheaded management has been and the fact they already let their #1 pick from last year go elsewhere.

I don't see them having the leverage others do I guess, because they need him more then he needs them.

sterlingice

07-16-2009, 12:11 PM

Yeah, but if you think you're getting sick money that isn't there every year (i.e. the Nats pony up, say, $20M), then going to independent league isn't that good of leverage since if he doesn't sign this year, he's going to be "damaged goods".

SI

lordscarlet

07-16-2009, 12:31 PM

Not signing is only beneficial to Boras. There is nothing but risk for Strasburg. Do the independent league thing and come back next year? Do the Japan thing and gamble that a lot of court battles will take you out of the draft pool (Selig has already said he would still be subject to the draft if he went to Japan). Risk injury doing either of those things? It doesn't seem smart for Strasburg. Let's assume the Nationals will go for a $20m contract. Is that not enough? Is that worth risking an injury in Japan or the independent league? I know people have done it, but they don't (to my knowledge) get more money the next year.

Logan

07-16-2009, 05:11 PM

I know people have done it, but they don't (to my knowledge) get more money the next year.

Well, if the Mets keep sucking...

lordscarlet

07-16-2009, 05:28 PM

Well, if the Mets keep sucking...

That's a LONG hill to slide down. Not so much in where the Mets are at, but what a head start the Nats have. :)

Logan

07-16-2009, 05:29 PM

Think the Nats would take him again at #1/#2 next year?

INDalltheway

07-16-2009, 05:30 PM

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/eticket/story?page=090423/harrington

This right here is the reason I sign when the money is there..

lordscarlet

07-16-2009, 05:57 PM

Think the Nats would take him again at #1/#2 next year?

He has to give them permission to draft him. The Nationals' first round pick LAST year, Aaron Crow, chose not to give them that option. I see no reason Strasburg would either.

BishopMVP

07-17-2009, 01:37 PM

Old point about Strasburg not being drafted.

I noticed Burrell was barely drafted out of HS(45th round IIRC). So it has come close to happening before.

This waiting til close to the deadline so you can go overslot stuff is stupid.It happened fairly frequently, but that's where "1st/2nd-round talent" guys with perceived strong college commitments like Burrell (who was going to Miami) slid down well past their talent level. After about the 10th-15th round (mostly big-market) teams start taking fliers on these players in the slim hopes that seeing $1 million on a piece of paper changes their mind. The Red Sox always seem to have 2-3 ex-draftees reappear in the top couple rounds, including your Pedro Alvarez who they picked 14th round and offered 800k out of HS. They offered a guy from the 17th round last year $2.5-$3 million but he went to Kentucky instead. Strasburg is a fairly unique case where he wasn't even regarded as a pro prospect coming out of HS and barely got a college scholarship offer. Albert Pujols is the closest case of late-bloomer I can think of, but still slightly different in that nobody knew him coming out of HS/CC when the Cards picked him 13th round, but he was 4th in MVP voting 2 seasons later.

Blame Selig for the silly wait until August 15th charade. The RS almost certainly have deals with 3-4 players overslot that they're just waiting until that day to announce.