I’m trying to understand the picking someone to pay under slot for saving money for later rounds strategy

[higgybaby]

Is the idea to have money to sign guys in later rounds who your scouting department believes may be future first rounders?

[Can_of_corn]

The overall idea is that you can extract more value out of the pool and the picks by taking some of the pool from early in the draft and spending it on players later in the draft.

 

[7Mo]

12 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

The overall idea is that you can extract more value out of the pool and the picks by taking some of the pool from early in the draft and spending it on players later in the draft.

 

I applaud your restraint. I know you could have said a whole lot more than you did. Congrats.

[Sports Guy]

I don’t really mind this strategy if (big if) you value other high picks very similarly and therefore, go with a cheaper option to spend more later.

This is as close to trading picks as you can get in the MLB draft since trading draft picks isn’t allowed for some stupid reason.

The problem with the strategy, at least for me, is if you take a definite inferior talent and/or if you target a certain guy with the expectation he will be there, aka Blitsko last year.  I don’t like that.  You have to know that you love the depth of the draft and that a lot of guys will be there that you want to pay for.

Ultimately, that first pick, especially the ones that are very high, are players you want to hit on.  Take your best player unless everyone is graded the same and then I think it’s fine to take your cheapest option for money later.

If Lawlar is there and we pass on him this year, you can not convince me that they took BpA.  I think Kjerstad could have been their BPA last year.  If they pass on Lawlar, it’s because of this strategy and that will be dumb.

[Frobby]

3 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

I don’t really mind this strategy if (big if) you value other high picks very similarly and therefore, go with a cheaper option to spend more later.

This is as close to trading picks as you can get in the MLB draft since trading draft picks isn’t allowed for some stupid reason.

The problem with the strategy, at least for me, is if you take a definite inferior talent and/or if you target a certain guy with the expectation he will be there, aka Blitsko last year.  I don’t like that.  You have to know that you love the depth of the draft and that a lot of guys will be there that you want to pay for.

Ultimately, that first pick, especially the ones that are very high, are players you want to hit on.  Take your best player unless everyone is graded the same and then I think it’s fine to take your cheapest option for money later.

If Lawlar is there and we pass on him this year, you can not convince me that they took BpA.  I think Kjerstad could have been their BPA last year.  If they pass on Lawlar, it’s because of this strategy and that will be dumb.

What if Lawler is demanding 1-1 money? The O’s draft pool allocation is about $2.5 mm less than the Pirates, and 1st round slot is about $2.2 mm less.   So if you take him, it’s going to cost pretty dearly in terms of who gets selected in subsequent rounds.   For perspective, our second round slot is $1.8 mm and our second round supplemental is $1 mm.

[Sports Guy]

31 minutes ago, Frobby said:

What if Lawler is demanding 1-1 money? The O’s draft pool allocation is about $2.5 mm less than the Pirates, and 1st round slot is about $2.2 mm less.   So if you take him, it’s going to cost pretty dearly in terms of who gets selected in subsequent rounds.   For perspective, our second round slot is $1.8 mm and our second round supplemental is $1 mm.

You pay him.  If he is the best talent in the draft, as a lot of people think, you draft him and sign him.  I would rather have elite talent than a few good guys.

Besides, he can demand what he wants but when push to comes to shove, my bet is he doesn’t walk away from 6.5-7M.(which is lower than 1st pick money but higher than 5th pick money)

[Frobby]

2 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

You pay him.  If he is the best talent in the draft, as a lot of people think, you draft him and sign him.  I would rather have elite talent than a few good guys.

Besides, he can demand what he wants but when push to comes to shove, my bet is he doesn’t walk away from 6.5-7M.(which is lower than 1st pick money but higher than 5th pick money)

Well, I intentionally don’t follow the various draft rankings and pundit evaluations very closely.   I have no idea if Lawler is the best talent in the draft, how much better he is than the next guy we might pick, or what his demands are compared to other players’.   I do know that a lot of highly touted players don’t pan out, so I do think there’s risk in putting all your eggs in one basket and taking the guy you like best at the expense of essentially punting on a second round pick.   But it all boils down to evaluations.   

[Sports Guy]

33 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Well, I intentionally don’t follow the various draft rankings and pundit evaluations very closely.   I have no idea if Lawler is the best talent in the draft, how much better he is than the next guy we might pick, or what his demands are compared to other players’.   I do know that a lot of highly touted players don’t pan out, so I do think there’s risk in putting all your eggs in one basket and taking the guy you like best at the expense of essentially punting on a second round pick.   But it all boils down to evaluations.   

Well, you aren’t putting all your eggs in his basket.  They could pay him #1 money and still be able to draft a lot of players they like.

[Chuck A]

"They" are saying the 4 HS SS, college C and 2 college P's all are every bit a top 5 pick.  By my math that's 7 players.  Also am hearing a lot of there is a far drop off in talent after those guys.  So if we were to go underslot with someone in the 10-15 range it sounds like it would be a bad move.  Of course i'm no expert but if Watson is there at 5, he needs to be in black and orange.

 

[baltimoreO's22]

3 hours ago, Frobby said:

What if Lawler is demanding 1-1 money? The O’s draft pool allocation is about $2.5 mm less than the Pirates, and 1st round slot is about $2.2 mm less.   So if you take him, it’s going to cost pretty dearly in terms of who gets selected in subsequent rounds.   For perspective, our second round slot is $1.8 mm and our second round supplemental is $1 mm.

Of course at this point in time Lawlar is going to ask for as much money as possible, but if offered 7M, that would be hard to turn down. Sure, he could go to college and come out in 3 years and be 1.1 and maybe sign for 9M, but there's also the possibility that he fizzles out or gets injured and never makes that 7M again. I won't pretend to know his family's financial situation, but for most families and individuals 7M would be tough to pass up.