Orioles Sign Heston Kjerstad

[BohKnowsBmore]

Considering that we still haven't seen the Servidio numbers and a lot of these numbers are being quoted as $X.XM, I'm leaning towards @weams's idea that there could be some rounding or slight inaccuracies that makes the final number less than $300K

[jerios55]

18 minutes ago, Frobby said:

So here’s a question: assuming that we could have afforded to sign Nick Gonzalez and still signed the other players we drafted, would you rather have had Gonzalez than Kjerstad?     It appears he only cost an extra $200 k or so and that we may have more than that to spare after signing Servideo.

He signed for slot, so I wonder if he would have agreed to 5.4mill if taken at #2.

Idk enough to answer your actual question :)

[Roll Tide]

32 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

It doesn’t say Meyer got overslot.  He got slot.

I would have taken him over any other pitcher as well.

Really? Most places had Lacy as the best available pitcher and Meyer ranked around the  around 10 with Kjerstad

[Roll Tide]

32 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

I think it's more about how you're presenting things, hombre. 

Noted

[Roll Tide]

2 hours ago, makoman said:

Peter looked pretty good at first too with hiring Gillick and Davey, Camden Yards full, and a consistent top 5 payroll. Then he decided he was the smartest man in the room. The direction so far is positive but time will tell.

Yeah ... The early years were exciting until he decided he knew better than the baseball people

[Morgan423]

20 hours ago, weams said:

I'd have paid him.

He or his agent insisted that he be signed for 1k over slot value, when we're talking approximately 8.4 million dollars?

Weird flex, but okay, whatever.   

[weams]

12 minutes ago, makoman said:

So who then? 

...they simply preferred Haskin plus another overslot chance later.

 

I've heard the word LOVE used. 

[Sports Guy]

48 minutes ago, Frobby said:

So here’s a question: assuming that we could have afforded to sign Nick Gonzalez and still signed the other players we drafted, would you rather have had Gonzalez than Kjerstad?     It appears he only cost an extra $200 k or so and that we may have more than that to spare after signing Servideo.

Tough call.  Gonzalez had a big boost in his numbers from the thin air..but he did show well outside of that too.

I have seen him comped to Huira. 
 

I probably slightly lean Kjerstad but would need to know more about Gonzalez’s defense.

[Sports Guy]

35 minutes ago, makoman said:

So who then? 

Westburg signed for slot $2.365M. Who should they have taken instead that cost more?

Loftin was 2 picks later for $3M. Fangraphs had them ranked back to back with Westburg higher, so we can't really say they took a lesser guy to be cheap.

Wilcox, Kelley, and Ginn signed for $3.3M, $3M, and $2.9M. That's a lot more, and our extra couple 100k wouldn't get there. Kyle Harrison signed for $2.5M, but was rated far lower than Westburg by everybody. That's it who signed above and was drafted after Westburg so far, that I saw. I haven't seen Fulton reported but he's supposed to be over slot--I can see this org shying away from an injured guy though.

Anyway, if they wanted any of those guys they could have had them and still not spent all the money, by simply taking them instead of Haskin for $1.9 and not signing Baumler or Mayo. Neither of those guys were a sure thing when they drafted Haskin, it would have been reasonable to just use that extra money set aside for Baumler right then and there if they loved Wilcox. Or take Wilcox instead of Servideo and then just forget about Mayo and Baumler. A lot of fans would have been thrilled with Wilcox instead of Haskin plus a senior sign in the 5th. Apparently they didn't love Wilcox, or they simply preferred Haskin plus another overslot chance later.

Maybe they should have taken Casey Martin instead of Servideo. I can buy that, though he did strike out over 30% of the time this year and some think he'll leave short for CF, but it's impossible to say without knowing their board. They must have seen a lot of Martin in scouting Kjerstad. But anyway, they clearly decided that for some people the small sample size was projectable and Servideo had a hell of a good small sample size, it's reasonable to say they just liked him.

I can understand being wary based on this org's history, but it's hard to critique without a reason behind it. To do so is just making stuff up, just like I made some stuff up above about their preferences. It's also hard to critique not going over slot when they did go over slot, twice.

I would have gone Kelley or Wilcox and just not gone slot value on either pick 30 or 39 or maybe just punted the Servideo pick or something like that.

I would rather have the premium talent.

[Sports Guy]

30 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:

Really? Most places had Lacy as the best available pitcher and Meyer ranked around the  around 10 with Kjerstad

Yes, most places had Meyer as the third pitcher..I preferred his profile though.

 

[Ruzious]

58 minutes ago, Frobby said:

So here’s a question: assuming that we could have afforded to sign Nick Gonzalez and still signed the other players we drafted, would you rather have had Gonzalez than Kjerstad?     It appears he only cost an extra $200 k or so and that we may have more than that to spare after signing Servideo.

Tbh, I think a case can be made that Gonzales is a better prospect than Martin.  He had better stats in college, he certainly seems to have more power, and he's a decent 2nd baseman.  I'm not sure Martin's played enough at any position to say he's better defensively.  I gotta wonder - is Gonzales being 5'10 the biggest reason Martin's rated higher?

[Ruzious]

13 hours ago, Beef Supreme said:

True, Torkleson was already chosen.

Lol, I was hoping nobody would notice.  It's tough not being able to edit.  

[makoman]

2 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

I would have gone Kelley or Wilcox and just not gone slot value on either pick 30 or 39 or maybe just punted the Servideo pick or something like that.

I would rather have the premium talent.

That's fair. In baseball especially so many guys fail you are often going to do better with the premium guys. Say, two firsts may have better outcomes than a first and three seconds. One could argue having more chances is better, but who knows, that's philosophical.

One reason I've been willing to defend these guys is I'm not knowledgable enough to have any real opinion on prospects, but I think they are smart and doing something different, and that means their board is probably vastly different than the public boards. We're at a huge disadvantage in our division and aren't going to catch up just by doing what everyone else is doing, so I like that we are trying something. I want to give that a chance, although I recognize that's nothing more than some blind faith and hopefulness. I guess we'll know more in a few years.

[BohKnowsBmore]

20 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

I would have gone Kelley or Wilcox and just not gone slot value on either pick 30 or 39 or maybe just punted the Servideo pick or something like that.

I would rather have the premium talent.

Servideo may actually be one of the picks I'm most excited about. He had an 18% BB rate in college, plays good defense up the middle by all accounts, and looks like he might have the tools to be a 20 HR-20 SB guy

[weams]

25 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

 

I probably slightly lean Kjerstad but would need to know more about Gonzalez’s defense.

Because of Body Type and maintainable strength? This kid lifted water bottles all day since he was eight!