Taking a Different Approach to the Draft

[Stotle]

I went through the exercise of selecting the pick that I would take at each of 1:3, 2:4, 3:4, 4:4 and 5:4 and took a much different approach.

1. Brian Matusz (SP) University of San Diego

2. Tim Melville (SP) Holt High School (Missouri)

3. Roger Kieschnick (OF) Texas Tech

4. Brandon Crawford (SS) UCLA

5. Brian Humphries (OF) Granite Hills High School (Calif.)

Of the five picks I made, I have seen two of the players in game action (Kieschnick and Crawford, each on film), I've watched a ton of tape on Matusz, and just the MLB scouting video on Melville and Humphries. The point being that the picks were made based on my opinions on what I saw, rather than what I've read on the kids (so the picks may turn out really poorly).

Anyway, with the money saved on payroll, and the rumors pre-season that Melville was not an impossible sign-away form North Carolina, I don't see how we don't take a shot at him. I won't bore you with the breakdown I had of each unless discussion heads that way, but I thought I'd throw out what I thought should have been the approach.

To be clear, I'm pretty happy with Baltimore's top 5 picks, I just would have done it a little differently. Anyway, thoughts?

[Duke2010]

I do agree that with the added payroll we should look to go over slot with a few picks, and even though we didn't select Melville we still have plenty over opportunity to use some extra cash. I would expect Melville to command late first round money at least, and if he signs I'd think his number would be anywhere from 1 million to 1.5 million. We can stay at slot with Avery and Hoes and instead of giving a ton to Melville we could spread that money around to guys with high upside like Bundy, Thomas, Beal, Landers, Martin, and maybe even a guy like Kevin Brady. Heck, I'd love to make a run at Art Charles and Xavier Lopez too. While Melville would give us another top prospect, I would take the chances of using his money to sign multiple guys rather than putting all our stock into one high school arm, and perhaps this draft style had some McPhail influence to it in that he would rather recieve more talent and sort it out later.

[Stotle]

I do agree that with the added payroll we should look to go over slot with a few picks, and even though we didn't select Melville we still have plenty over opportunity to use some extra cash. I would expect Melville to command late first round money at least, and if he signs I'd think his number would be anywhere from 1 million to 1.5 million. We can stay at slot with Avery and Hoes and instead of giving a ton to Melville we could spread that money around to guys with high upside like Bundy, Thomas, Beal, Landers, Martin, and maybe even a guy like Kevin Brady. Heck, I'd love to make a run at Art Charles and Xavier Lopez too. While Melville would give us another top prospect, I would take the chances of using his money to sign multiple guys rather than putting all our stock into one high school arm, and perhaps this draft style had some McPhail influence to it in that he would rather recieve more talent and sort it out later.

I agree, but we could essentially sign Matusz and Melville for the same price we signed Wieters last season. Then we still have pleanty left to go over slot later. At least, that's how it looks from where I sit.

[Duke2010]

I agree, but we could essentially sign Matusz and Melville for the same price we signed Wieters last season. Then we still have pleanty left to go over slot later. At least, that's how it looks from where I sit.

Yeah you're probably right, but signability most likely prevented us from taking Melville. He very well could have turned down whatever we offered and at that point it would have been a wasted pick. We'll see how interested in signing he is, because if he does sign then 29 other teams will be kicking themselves for passing on a top talent. Ultimately I think it comes down to the scouting department weighing the difference between a sure sign of LJ Hoes in the third round at 400-500K vs. a small chance that Melville signs at an amount that would most likely be triple that of Hoes. As you know, its very easy to look at the draft and wonder why we didn't take player X over player Y. There's a few guys I wished we nabbed like Dominguez, Danks, Crawford, etc., but we just don't know what contact Jordan had with each guy and how he truly felt about them.

I'm hoping that the O's are willing to spend 2 million on the second day of the draft because guys like the ones I mentioned earlier could give us a ton of young, high upside talent. Also, I'd think that Jordan would have discussed each players signing number, and maybe Melville's number was too outrageous or Melville himself said not to even bother....who really knows?

[Stotle]

Yeah you're probably right, but signability most likely prevented us from taking Melville. He very well could have turned down whatever we offered and at that point it would have been a wasted pick. We'll see how interested in signing he is, because if he does sign then 29 other teams will be kicking themselves for passing on a top talent. Ultimately I think it comes down to the scouting department weighing the difference between a sure sign of LJ Hoes in the third round at 400-500K vs. a small chance that Melville signs at an amount that would most likely be triple that of Hoes. As you know, its very easy to look at the draft and wonder why we didn't take player X over player Y. There's a few guys I wished we nabbed like Dominguez, Danks, Crawford, etc., but we just don't know what contact Jordan had with each guy and how he truly felt about them.

I'm hoping that the O's are willing to spend 2 million on the second day of the draft because guys like the ones I mentioned earlier could give us a ton of young, high upside talent. Also, I'd think that Jordan would have discussed each players signing number, and maybe Melville's number was too outrageous or Melville himself said not to even bother....who really knows?

I absolutely agree with you. Without being on the phone calls, I had to assume (for purposes of my picks) that money was the issue and I would pay whatever it took. You are absolutely right, though. You can't fault Baltimore for not taking the risk.

[Frobby]

I think the O's just didn't like Melville that much. I doubt money held them back.

[Stotle]

I think the O's just didn't like Melville that much. I doubt money held them back.

That would be a shame. The only thing I see as problematic is the fact that his knucklecurve isn't a lights out pitch yet. He still has room in his frame to add size and velocity and he already sits in the low-90s. Now, the odds are he never pans out (just like any HS pitcher) but that is a heck of a package not to like, especially in the third round.

[Duke2010]

Overall though, I really like this draft after taking a step back and looking at it. After the first day, I wasn't too pleased at all, and thought day 1 was a C- at best. However, while this draft still might not pan out, its got a ton of upside in it. We already have a "sure" thing in Matusz, and we still have a possibility to have many more players come up in contribute down the road. I'd say that if each draft gives you 2-3 solid MLB contributors then it was successful, and I bet this draft will produce that amount of major league guys.

If we can get this second day talent signed then this draft will hopefully be one that stacks our lower levels with high end players. We got a couple of big bodied pitchers in Beal and Landers, Bundy and Martin look like they can pitch (Especially Bundy), and Corey Thomas looks like he has potential with the bat. I like that considering that most of these guys could have easily been first day selections.

As for Melville, I think the team did the right thing because he's unlikely to sign, and we could use his money to spread to multiple guys in hopes that one of them develops like a Tim Melville might develop. Also, I think last year was the exception and not the rule, because I doubt we'll be spending 7 million on 2 players anytime soon, but rather we could spread the wealth around.

[Stotle]

Don't get me wrong, I agree with spreading money around. However, there is a reason that the bottom two-thirds of the first round generally gets between $1mio and $2mio while third rounders get closer to $250K. A first round talent is generally much more likely to contribute to the ML team than even a third rounder (which isn't much further down the draft table). Baseball is a business, and the economics of risk have placed the value of a 30th overall pick to be around four times that of a third-rounder. My view is that generally if Melville is a first round talent (which I believe him to be) than you are better off grabbing him at even $2mio than you are grabbing anything less than four third-round talents (regardless of round selected) for the same price. It's a little over-simplistic, but I think the money is better spent on the less-risky bet. Again, not a hardfast rule.

Good discussion...

[Stotle]

A multi part question here.

1. Do you think Melville will sign for 1st round money

2. If the answer is yes and Melville is a 1st round talent then .....

3. Why didn't any teams simply draft him in the first round and pay him the first round money?

1. Yes

2. Yes (he is a 1st round talent in my estimation)

3. I don't think teams are sold on him being a first round talent -- certainly not enough to pass on other players at their projected price (in other words, Melville at $1.7mio is not worth the risk of Avery at around $650K).

I think the fact that Kansas City drafted him in the 4th means he's open to signing (that is still a fairly high pick to go after someone who is dead set against it -- look at where Gray went, and Gray was higher on most draft boards than Melville).

He wasn't as impressive this HS season as he showed last summer. I think teams looked at him and were no longer convinced he was worth a multi-million dollar investment. I'm just disagreeing (and as I've said, I could be WAY off).

To contrast, Arrieta enjoyed success at a solid college program prior to his down junior season. Ditto the likes of Crawford, Adams, Jacob Thompson, etc. Melville, despite impressing scouts last summer, is still just a HS SP with a slightly disappointing senior year. I think his one breakout summer at the showcases wasn't enough to convince teams to give him 10-15 money in light of his season.

Personally, I think his season was a combination of weather, bad luck and some of his struggles getting into his head. Maybe that's a stretch -- I don't know. I'm just speaking from my own take on his mechanics, where he is now, and where I think he'll be after 3 years at UNC. As I've said before, I love tool sets, and Melville is a nice blend of ML frame, good poise and already solid mechanics (not to mention low-90s velocity). My personal opinion is I take the gamble that my farm system can take those bare assets and mold them into a productive professional pitcher. Again, I absolutely concede I could easily have egg on my face in three years....who knows?

[Duke2010]

Don't get me wrong, I agree with spreading money around. However, there is a reason that the bottom two-thirds of the first round generally gets between $1mio and $2mio while third rounders get closer to $250K. A first round talent is generally much more likely to contribute to the ML team than even a third rounder (which isn't much further down the draft table). Baseball is a business, and the economics of risk have placed the value of a 30th overall pick to be around four times that of a third-rounder. My view is that generally if Melville is a first round talent (which I believe him to be) than you are better off grabbing him at even $2mio than you are grabbing anything less than four third-round talents (regardless of round selected) for the same price. It's a little over-simplistic, but I think the money is better spent on the less-risky bet. Again, not a hardfast rule.

Good discussion...

I agree that Melville was probably a first round talent that deserves top dollar to sign him, but I think the O's draft as it panned out has a greater shot at having ML successes than if we selected Melville. Look at most of the college players drafted in round 1 this year. Many of them were either undrafted or fell considerably in the draft. Matusz was a 4th round pick, Alvarez was taken in the mid to late teens, GBeck was undrafted, Smoak was a 16th round selection etc...The guys we took like Landers and Bundy could very well become 1st rounders three years from now if they develop, so I like the idea of getting multiple talents that fall instead of targeting one guy and hoping he sticks. If we can lock these guys down and let them play for 3 years, we might have a few guys that are playing like 1st round talents already in our system. Never know...

[McNulty]

Its not like if they took a "gamble" on trying to sign Melville that it would cause grave damage. They'd get the pick back next year in the same spot if they didn't sign him.

I like your thinking here Stot. My personal preference would of been to grab Tim Murphy in round 3, after taking Smoak in round 1. Crawford is a great pick there.

[Stotle]

I agree that Melville was probably a first round talent that deserves top dollar to sign him, but I think the O's draft as it panned out has a greater shot at having ML successes than if we selected Melville. Look at most of the college players drafted in round 1 this year. Many of them were either undrafted or fell considerably in the draft. Matusz was a 4th round pick, Alvarez was taken in the mid to late teens, GBeck was undrafted, Smoak was a 16th round selection etc...The guys we took like Landers and Bundy could very well become 1st rounders three years from now if they develop, so I like the idea of getting multiple talents that fall instead of targeting one guy and hoping he sticks. If we can lock these guys down and let them play for 3 years, we might have a few guys that are playing like 1st round talents already in our system. Never know...

Absolutely, but almost everyone you list is being selected in those rounds because of the combination:

1. They need a decent amount of money to be bought out of their commitment, and

2. Their talent level doesn't yet merit top dollar consideration.

You'll note that I selected Humphries in the 5th because that's where I felt his current talent level sits. Boston took him in the 19th (because of the combo listed above).

The central issue is Melville is in my estimation a first round talent now. Paying him first round money from a risk standpoint would be the equivalent of signing four "late round" talents for the same amount -- and that is provided those late rounders are third-round worthy without signability taken into account, which may or may not be true.

Again, I like what Baltimore is doing with the style of player they are selecting. For my money, though I'd rather have the "surer" thing at this point.

Put it this way, if I only had $7mio to spend in the draft, and I could have any players, I'd be more likely to take Matusz, Smoak, Wallace and Havens than Matusz and bunch of kids that might one day turn into Wallace, Smoak and Havens. It's just a different approach (and yes those 4 may cost more than $7mio, it's the mindset I'm focusing on).

[Duke2010]

Its not like if they took a "gamble" on trying to sign Melville that it would cause grave damage. They'd get the pick back next year in the same spot if they didn't sign him.

I like your thinking here Stot. My personal preference would of been to grab Tim Murphy in round 3, after taking Smoak in round 1. Crawford is a great pick there.

Yeah I agree to an extent but if Jordan was really high on the signable talent that was there then I think you should take it rather then banking on the small chance that Melville signs. Yeah if Melville signs then it looks like the greatest thing in the world, but if he doesn't, then it sets us back a bit in adding talent to our organization, and as you know, we really need to add as much positional talent as possible.

[Duke2010]

Absolutely, but almost everyone you list is being selected in those rounds because of the combination:

1. They need a decent amount of money to be bought out of their commitment, and

2. Their talent level doesn't yet merit top dollar consideration.

You'll note that I selected Humphries in the 5th because that's where I felt his current talent level sits. Boston took him in the 19th (because of the combo listed above).

The central issue is Melville is in my estimation a first round talent now. Paying him first round money from a risk standpoint would be the equivalent of signing four "late round" talents for the same amount -- and that is provided those late rounders are third-round worthy without signability taken into account, which may or may not be true.

Again, I like what Baltimore is doing with the style of player they are selecting. For my money, though I'd rather have the "surer" thing at this point.

Put it this way, if I only had $7mio to spend in the draft, and I could have any players, I'd be more likely to take Matusz, Smoak, Wallace and Havens than Matusz and bunch of kids that might one day turn into Wallace, Smoak and Havens. It's just a different approach (and yes those 4 may cost more than $7mio, it's the mindset I'm focusing on).

I totally understand your point and it is very valid and legit in my mind. Don't get me wrong, I would have loved to select Melville, and throughout ESPN2's coverage and watching the rest of the first day on the computer I was really hoping to draft Melville. It just turned out that either they weren't very confident in being able to sign him or they weren't all that high on him or they had guys that they rated higher than Melville. There's so many things going on with the draft that I would have loved to be in the draft room listening to all the discussions.

And while Melville is the "surer" thing let's not forget that he is a high school pitcher so a lot could go wrong. Among high school eligible pitchers, say Melville were given an A-/B+ grade. Then say that given the talent we selected that these 4 or 5 arms have thirds round grades of B/B-/C+. I'd rather take the quantity and hope the they develop and fulfill their ceilings. Its a tough call though, because I really could go either way on the issue.

Oh and our talks about money are probably moot because if last years draft were any indication, we most likely would have the money to go over slot for guys like Melville, Bundy, and the rest of our later fallen talents.