Is this team bad enough for the number 1 pick?

[LTO's]

17 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

You are never going to get a can't miss prospect at #5.

But I'd rather have the guy on my board at 5 over the guy at 10 and the guy at 196.

What if you have a 60 FV grade on the top two, a 55 on Davis and then a 50+ on everyone else in the top 10. That could be a very likely scenario this year especially if you aren't thrilled with the Vandy boys throwing 130 pitches a game and not dominating. They have 4 picks in the top 75 and could get an impact prospect going overslot with any of those. Also, Elias has personally scouted the top prep HS SS, specifically House, on multiple occasions. Those guys have no reason to take a big cut. If it was a foregone conclusions that he was going to go way low, then I don't see any reason why he would even bother making those trips. 

[Moose Milligan]

Diamondbacks won last night, so did the Orioles.  

I'm assuming as the summer wears on that this will be a thread where we take note of who's in first place for the #1 pick.

Being in the division with the Yankees, Sox, Rays and Jays and given how bad our pitching is, I think we have a really good shot.

[Can_of_corn]

37 minutes ago, LTO's said:

What if you have a 60 FV grade on the top two, a 55 on Davis and then a 50+ on everyone else in the top 10. That could be a very likely scenario this year especially if you aren't thrilled with the Vandy boys throwing 130 pitches a game and not dominating. They have 4 picks in the top 75 and could get an impact prospect going overslot with any of those. Also, Elias has personally scouted the top prep HS SS, specifically House, on multiple occasions. Those guys have no reason to take a big cut. If it was a foregone conclusions that he was going to go way low, then I don't see any reason why he would even bother making those trips. 

I think that you have one guy 5th and one guy 9th (for instance) for a reason even if they have the same FV grade (that is a very vague grading system).  I think the difference between those two is likely to be greater than whatever value you can get out of paying third round money to some guy in the sixth round that no team, yourself included, thought was a good value in the actual third round.

[foxfield]

2 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

You mean he paid the highest to date.  Torkelson got more last year.

I find it funny that folks keep wanting to mention how much Elias gave AR.  The pool number for 1-1 keeps going up, in a general sense it shouldn't be surprising that the signing bonus also keeps increasing.

Fair...but of course it's higher every year.  But it's still true that he has used the maximum amount as well as negotiated down.  IF it is being done to maximize dollars it seems perfectly fine.  IF it is being done because you dont want to pay, that would be a problem.  People want to use one to make their point.  I think a fairer point is to take the position I listed above.  It seems Elias has the flexibility to do what he wants and until he demonstrates otherwise "branding" his style is back fitting to personal opinions and seems to me to be unfair.

 

Put it this way.  We go early this year and obviously we will go pretty early next year.  IF Elias shows in 4 drafts that he isn't allowed to spend top dollar, then the case will be enhanced by evidence.  I think it would appear much more driven by where we land in the draft and who is available.  But I will join glenn_davis above in saying what has occurred over 2 years does not demonstrate anything and you of course are free to find it funny when others point out the obvious counterexample to your point.

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, foxfield said:

Fair...but of course it's higher every year.  But it's still true that he has used the maximum amount as well as negotiated down.  IF it is being done to maximize dollars it seems perfectly fine.  IF it is being done because you dont want to pay, that would be a problem.  People want to use one to make their point.  I think a fairer point is to take the position I listed above.  It seems Elias has the flexibility to do what he wants and until he demonstrates otherwise "branding" his style is back fitting to personal opinions and seems to me to be unfair.

 

Put it this way.  We go early this year and obviously we will go pretty early next year.  IF Elias shows in 4 drafts that he isn't allowed to spend top dollar, then the case will be enhanced by evidence.  I think it would appear much more driven by where we land in the draft and who is available.  But I will join glenn_davis above in saying what has occurred over 2 years does not demonstrate anything and you of course are free to find it funny when others point out the obvious counterexample to your point.

I want to make something clear.  I don't think he is going underslot in order to not spend money.  I think you can go slot, or near slot, in round one and still leave money unspent if that is your goal.

I think he has a mindset that he is smarter than everyone else at this sort of thing and he can get extra value out of going underslot.  I don't think this is a good strategy most years. For instance, I think that if Mayo and Baumler were a good value at the 1.5-1.75M range that a team would have picked them in the second round.

 

[LTO's]

1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:

I think that you have one guy 5th and one guy 9th (for instance) for a reason even if they have the same FV grade (that is a very vague grading system).  I think the difference between those two is likely to be greater than whatever value you can get out of paying third round money to some guy in the sixth round that no team, yourself included, thought was a good value in the actual third round.

 You are speaking generally which is not how this works. Maybe in previous drafts there was a big difference between pick 5 and 9 but this year, by all accounts, that is not true. You have no true impact college bats outside of Davis who has positional/swing question marks and may not be there at 5. The Vandy pitchers have serious warts and concerns about their usage that need to be considered. With those concerns, it's fair to balk at giving the full bonus there (which they will certainly demand). That leaves a handful of HS players who are all in the same tier. If you're looking at the 6th round as the round they will use their savings that's one thing. But as I mentioned, they could use their first round savings on any of their top 75 overall picks which would probably net them a prospect with higher than a 3rd round grade. That difference may well be worth it. 

[Can_of_corn]

3 minutes ago, LTO's said:

 You are speaking generally which is not how this works. Maybe in previous drafts there was a big difference between pick 5 and 9 but this year, by all accounts, that is not true. You have no true impact college bats outside of Davis who has positional/swing question marks and may not be there at 5. The Vandy pitchers have serious warts and concerns about their usage that need to be considered. With those concerns, it's fair to balk at giving the full bonus there (which they will certainly demand). That leaves a handful of HS players who are all in the same tier. If you're looking at the 6th round as the round they will use their savings that's one thing. But as I mentioned, they could use their first round savings on any of their top 75 overall picks which would probably net them a prospect with higher than a 3rd round grade. That difference may well be worth it. 

I don't recall if you were hanging out in the draft threads last year or not but I remember folks at the time were pretty sure Elias was targeting Nick Bitsko with those underslot saving and he didn't make it back to the O's.  It is a significant gamble that any or these guys you are targeting are going to be there.  You kinda have to have the mindset that you are more informed than your competitors to even try this.  

When you use this strategy you are saying that you are willing to pay someone outside of the first round more than anyone else was willing to pay them.  If you take a guy at 70 and pay him 60 money you have to stop and ask...why didn't the team picking 60 pick him and give him 60 money?

It's an ego move and trust me, I know ego moves. 

 

[foxfield]

20 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I want to make something clear.  I don't think he is going underslot in order to not spend money.  I think you can go slot, or near slot, in round one and still leave money unspent if that is your goal.

I think he has a mindset that he is smarter than everyone else at this sort of thing and he can get extra value out of going underslot.  I don't think this is a good strategy most years. For instance, I think that if Mayo and Baumler were a good value at the 1.5-1.75M range that a team would have picked them in the second round.

 

Ok, now I think your point is clear.  You think based on what he did last year he did it to outsmart everyone and this cannot work as a good strategy most years.  

Given the sample size, would it not appear that Elias' actions fall within the boundries of your point?  I think the straw man is that he is arrogant to believe he is smarter than everyone else.  I don't see evidence of that but I would agree that he does have an actual rocket scientist as an assistant.  

I would hope that if they thought could exploit value they would...have they?  I don't know.  I agree that it would not make sense as a consistent draft philosophy...but as a Covid  impaired,  5 round, 2020 strategy, at the very least it seems plausible in hindsight.

But again, there is zero evidence that this is a permanent philosophy for all drafting.  And Elias did not invent the idea of overslot drafting.  Ego works both ways....the ego of the drafted kid says..."I was drafted 3rd round but got second round money."  

Over time, drafts are all judged the same.  How much talent did you add.  Right now it would be hard to say 2020 worked, but Im not sure any draft should be valued in less than 12 months.  Nor should the "trend" from one draft be imposed forward onto others especially if the only other draft to compare it to did not follow the same "trend".

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, foxfield said:

Ok, now I think your point is clear.  You think based on what he did last year he did it to outsmart everyone and this cannot work as a good strategy most years.  

Given the sample size, would it not appear that Elias' actions fall within the boundries of your point?  I think the straw man is that he is arrogant to believe he is smarter than everyone else.  I don't see evidence of that but I would agree that he does have an actual rocket scientist as an assistant.  

I would hope that if they thought could exploit value they would...have they?  I don't know.  I agree that it would not make sense as a consistent draft philosophy...but as a Covid  impaired,  5 round, 2020 strategy, at the very least it seems plausible in hindsight.

But again, there is zero evidence that this is a permanent philosophy for all drafting.  And Elias did not invent the idea of overslot drafting.  Ego works both ways....the ego of the drafted kid says..."I was drafted 3rd round but got second round money."  

Over time, drafts are all judged the same.  How much talent did you add.  Right now it would be hard to say 2020 worked, but Im not sure any draft should be valued in less than 12 months.  Nor should the "trend" from one draft be imposed forward onto others especially if the only other draft to compare it to did not follow the same "trend".

Not exactly.

I think he thinks he is smarter than everyone else so that he can do this and get extract extra value.  That might be what you are trying to convey but your wording doesn't quite fit with what I am trying to say.

I'm not saying, at this point that it is a permanent philosophy for all drafting.  I'm saying that I don't think it is a solid strategy most years and that it is most likely to be successful in a year such as 2020, a year in which the O's had the largest pool.  In comparison 2019 would have been a poor year to try such a move given the draft situation that Arizona was in. 

I think that underslotting in 2021 in a draft in which the O's pick fifth and only have one first round pick is probably a poor decision.

[Sports Guy]

2 hours ago, Moose Milligan said:

Diamondbacks won last night, so did the Orioles.  

I'm assuming as the summer wears on that this will be a thread where we take note of who's in first place for the #1 pick.

Being in the division with the Yankees, Sox, Rays and Jays and given how bad our pitching is, I think we have a really good shot.

DBacks have some really good teams as well.

I don’t think the Os will be in contention for the first pick.  

[foxfield]

11 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Not exactly.

I think he thinks he is smarter than everyone else so that he can do this and get extract extra value.  That might be what you are trying to convey but your wording doesn't quite fit with what I am trying to say.

I'm not saying, at this point that it is a permanent philosophy for all drafting.  I'm saying that I don't think it is a solid strategy most years and that it is most likely to be successful in a year such as 2020, a year in which the O's had the largest pool.  In comparison 2019 would have been a poor year to try such a move given the draft situation that Arizona was in. 

I think that underslotting in 2021 in a draft in which the O's pick fifth and only have one first round pick is probably a poor decision.

I think Elias tried to extract extra value.  I don't know if that makes him smart and I don't believe he thinks he is smarter than everyone else.

I completely agree with the rest of the above...esp the bolded parts.  If Elias is as smart as you think he thinks he is, he will agree.  

[Moose Milligan]

3 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

DBacks have some really good teams as well.

I don’t think the Os will be in contention for the first pick.  

I'm assuming we'll be in the running come September and then screw it up.

[Can_of_corn]

3 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

DBacks have some really good teams as well.

I don’t think the Os will be in contention for the first pick.  

Pulled from Reddit.

Quote

The Giants, Padres, and Dodgers are 77-40 against teams not named the Giants, Padres, and Dodgers.

 

[osravensfan78]

I check the Rockies, Pirates and Rockies every night to see if they lost/won. I usually don’t cheer for us to lose to get the top pick, but everything that I’m reading about Green, it seems like it would Atleast be a nice consolation prize. I like where we pick at 5 this year (love Davis and hope he’s there), but I want to be number 1 next season because I think Green will be that good. 

[NelsonCruuuuuz]

I honestly have no confidence that Elias would even take Green with the number 1 pick. Elias really stunk up that last draft and he’s clearly scared to take a pitcher in the first because of his two busted picks with the Astros. In fact, I don’t think he took a pitcher until pretty late last draft. Not a good long term strategy and being “Gun-shy” results in bad decision making.