A Change in Philosophy?

[sportsfan8703]

Lots of HS kids early this year.  The MLB draft is always a waiting game.  You could read into this and say that we're playing the "long game" here.  Not reaching for NCAA SP's to hope to find a 4th/5th SP in two years.  Is DD on the way out?  Was Gary Rasich given more free reign?  

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, sportsfan8703 said:

Lots of HS kids early this year.  The MLB draft is always a waiting game.  You could read into this and say that we're playing the "long game" here.  Not reaching for NCAA SP's to hope to find a 4th/5th SP in two years.  Is DD on the way out?  Was Gary Rasich given more free reign?  

I've not heard that he was previously under limits beyond the slotting money.

[sportsfan8703]

We've played it pretty safe the last two years with Sedlock and Stewart.  Then switching and going with a bunch of HS guys early this year.  It looks like the 2013 draft, and I hope it turns out that well.  

[sportsfan8703]

Last year we drafted 10 HS guys the entire draft and only signed 4.  This year we've already drafted 10 in the first 25 rounds.  

[scarey1999]

I live in the DFW area. For comparison purposes, here's what the Texas Rangers draft consisted of. For those complaining about how many college players the O's took in the first 10 rounds, the Rangers, who many view as ultra aggressive when it comes to taking HS players, took college players with 7 of their first 10 picks. 

I thought this might give some perspective when it comes to praising (or complaining...depending on your viewpoint) about who the FO decided to draft.

The Rangers selected 41 players overall in this year’s draft. The 41 players include 29 pitchers (21 right-handed, 8 left-handed), 4 outfielders, 6 infielders, and 2 catchers. Texas selected 22 college players and made 19 high school picks.

 

[scarey1999]

3 hours ago, scarey1999 said:

I live in the DFW area. For comparison purposes, here's what the Texas Rangers draft consisted of. For those complaining about how many college players the O's took in the first 10 rounds, the Rangers, who many view as ultra aggressive when it comes to taking HS players, took college players with 7 of their first 10 picks. 

I thought this might give some perspective when it comes to praising (or complaining...depending on your viewpoint) about who the FO decided to draft.

The Rangers selected 41 players overall in this year’s draft. The 41 players include 29 pitchers (21 right-handed, 8 left-handed), 4 outfielders, 6 infielders, and 2 catchers. Texas selected 22 college players and made 19 high school picks.

 

Should have noted, 7 of the O's first 10 picks were college guys too, just like Texas.  12 RHP and 9 LHP in total.  So 21 of our 40 picks were pitchers. 

[Pheasants]

I haven't counted but it seems several of the high school kids are listed as older than normal.  I don't trust their numbers, and I don't think we've had good success with them in the past--but the name of that one idiot escapes me.  They were playing against younger opponents all the time

[hoosiers]

2 hours ago, Pheasants said:

I haven't counted but it seems several of the high school kids are listed as older than normal.  I don't trust their numbers, and I don't think we've had good success with them in the past--but the name of that one idiot escapes me.  They were playing against younger opponents all the time

I believe Brian Bass and Corey Shafer were old for their age as HS seniors.  Shafer might be the worst second round pick in Os history - the guy never hit for OPS over 656 at Aberdeen even several years after being drafted as a 19 year old who turned 20 about six months after the draft.  The older HS hitters are a major red flag to me.  The older HS pitchers are much less of a risk IMO.

[hoosiers]

Regarding a change in philosophy, it is nice to see the HSers.  I am very interested, as usual, in the finances here.  It seems we did not expect our first rounder to be there and it may have altered our targets and the number of senior signs.  I must say that if this is what the draft has evolved into - I don't like it.  By that I mean, I really don't like the idea of getting five or six legit prospects in the top half of our top 10 and then the last five picks of that top 10 going to senior signs.  It seems like a really bizarre way to distribute the talent pool. 

Also, with the finances, in the DD era, the Os have not played much hardball with their overslot signings - starting with Gausman.  You see often with other teams that kids who slid in the draft end up signing for slot at the position drafted.  Relative to other teams, you rarely see the Os with much extra $ to go after decent HS talent after round 10.

Our first round pick was listed as high as 13th on some services - the bonus for that pick is near $3.9M.  The Os pick has a slot of $2.9M.  If we settled in the middle and offered our first pick $ from around the 17th/18th pick, that would be about $3.3M - which would be made up from a couple of senior signs.  However, if the Os told our first round pick that $2.9M is a lot of $ and to take it or leave it, then we might have some $ freed up for picks after the first 10 rounds. 

[scarey1999]

20 minutes ago, hoosiers said:

Regarding a change in philosophy, it is nice to see the HSers.  I am very interested, as usual, in the finances here.  It seems we did not expect our first rounder to be there and it may have altered our targets and the number of senior signs.  I must say that if this is what the draft has evolved into - I don't like it.  By that I mean, I really don't like the idea of getting five or six legit prospects in the top half of our top 10 and then the last five picks of that top 10 going to senior signs.  It seems like a really bizarre way to distribute the talent pool. 

Also, with the finances, in the DD era, the Os have not played much hardball with their overslot signings - starting with Gausman.  You see often with other teams that kids who slid in the draft end up signing for slot at the position drafted.  Relative to other teams, you rarely see the Os with much extra $ to go after decent HS talent after round 10.

Our first round pick was listed as high as 13th on some services - the bonus for that pick is near $3.9M.  The Os pick has a slot of $2.9M.  If we settled in the middle and offered our first pick $ from around the 17th/18th pick, that would be about $3.3M - which would be made up from a couple of senior signs.  However, if the Os told our first round pick that $2.9M is a lot of $ and to take it or leave it, then we might have some $ freed up for picks after the first 10 rounds. 

I agree 100% with this sentiment.  However, what other ways could you limit the big spenders like the Dodgers, Yanks and Cubbies from drafting and paying for about whoever they wanted like it used to be in the wild wild west ways of doing things?  I'm not smart enough to think of a better way to go about it.  It does help protect the small fry from the big bully and puts that much more emphasis on having a skilled FO and a superior scouting staff that can identify and draft the right kids.

[Luke-OH]

I will try once I know who all they get signed. 

 

It's hard enough to grade a draft immediately and impossible until you know who is signable.

 

If they can sign, Greg Jones, Logan Allen, Jason Willow and their top 10, I'd give them an A+.

 

If DL Hall kills their draft budget it makes this a risky draft where you have the success of the draft pretty much resting on the two Halls. In that case I'd give them a C- because another DL Hall was a nice get, there was a lot of college pitching talent that they missed out on because of having to go with so many senior signs to save money.

Edit: DL Hall said in an article he's still trying to decide whether to sign or go to college, I'm guessing he was told to say that by his agent and that he will sign. It does make it look like he'll need overslot to sign and that because the Os didn't expect him to be there they may not of had a great idea of what it would take to get him.

[hoosiers]

I doubt we cratered our draft to get something like $4M to Hall.  I think we will be pretty pleased with our draft haul relative to our draft position and available bonus pool when it is all said and done.   

[sportsfan8703]

7 hours ago, birdwatcher55 said:

Could someone, anyone, provide an intelligent analysis and grade on our draft??? thanks.

It's going to take like 5 years to evaluate this draft.  Hopefully.  The sooner, the worse it is.  

[Otter]

16 hours ago, phillyOs119 said:

I will try once I know who all they get signed. 

 

It's hard enough to grade a draft immediately and impossible until you know who is signable.

 

If they can sign, Greg Jones, Logan Allen, Jason Willow and their top 10, I'd give them an A+.

 

If DL Hall kills their draft budget it makes this a risky draft where you have the success of the draft pretty much resting on the two Halls. In that case I'd give them a C- because another DL Hall was a nice get, there was a lot of college pitching talent that they missed out on because of having to go with so many senior signs to save money.

Edit: DL Hall said in an article he's still trying to decide whether to sign or go to college, I'm guessing he was told to say that by his agent and that he will sign. It does make it look like he'll need overslot to sign and that because the Os didn't expect him to be there they may not of had a great idea of what it would take to get him.

Agreed.  If we sign both Halls and at least one of the HS overslots, this will potentially be a very good draft with a much needed infusion of high upside talent in our system.  On the other hand, if we blow all our underslot savings on Hall or worse yet, can't sign him...then I'd have to give this give the draft a much lower grade.  I really hope Gary did his homework on DL's signability, because his comments make it clear he didn't even consider that he would be available at #21.  Also, with DL being represented by Boras maybe his signability is the reason he slipped.  And probably the reason Gary went with the unusual plan of drafting five college seniors in a row.

Personally, with the state of our farm system I would have preferred more quantity of pitching prospects than quality (DL).  You never know how an amateur pitcher's arm will respond to the increased stress of longer seasons and shorter rest in pro ball, so the more legit pitching prospects you draft the better chances you get some to develop into major league starters.

[Frobby]

In my mind, just about any kid would be nuts to turn down $2.9 mm to take his chances of improving on that in three years of college.    There's way more downside than upside in gambling how you'll do in college, plus you're probably delaying the date by which you'll reach the majors.     So, I think Boras will play a game of chicken with the O's and then Hall will sign.

As to the overall philosophy of drafting more high school kids, if that's getting us more guys with high upside, then I'm for it.