Keith Law on the Orioles draft

[Just Regular]

Of course it is mathematical obfuscation when Ciolek gives a quote like "high percentage".   To any given casual fan, it the Orioles spent, drumroll please, 96% of their pool that might sound great.

When all that really matters is 30 outcomes ranging from say 103% on down to ~96%, where a 99% spend is negotiating skill/rounding errors and maybe 95% or less is tar and feather stuff.

The other 29 outcomes we'll know also in less than two weeks will also give us an industry-wide covid context.

[webbrick2010]

10 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

If they sign all 20 players, I don't care what they leave on the table.

LOL, you may be the GM that the Angelos brothers are looking for.

[LookinUp]

27 minutes ago, forphase1 said:

Good question.  Just looking at our division from the draft in 2020 (yes I know it was a weird draft but the numbers were easy to find)

Yankees - 3.52M allotted,  3.687M spent

Jays - 9.7M allotted, 10.2M spent

Rays - 7.474M allotted, 7.474 spent

Red Sox - 5.129M allotted, 5.25M spent

In our division every other team spent their full allotment, and all but 1 exceeded that allotment.  We were the only team in our division to NOT spend it all.  A quick glance does show that the Pirates, Padres, Mariners, Indians, Brewers and possibly others did NOT spend their total allotment.  

I'm kind of with CoC here, which I hate to say, but for a team that isn't spending on free agents, you want them absolutely maximizing their talent influx through the draft and international period. 

Leaving a few hundred k on the table is excusable, but only if you realize that the ceiling isn't a hard ceiling in the first place. To me, it seems like the difference between the O's approach and the yankees/sox is essentially one moderately over slot player. We should be getting that type of talent every chance possible, but we're not.

I really don't blame Elias for this and I'm generally happy with him, but a change of ownership will be so freaking welcomed when it finally happens.

[Moose Milligan]

14 minutes ago, webbrick2010 said:

LOL, you may be the GM that the Angelos brothers are looking for.

Hilarious!  

You tell me what the issue is with signing all 20 players and leaving money on the table.  What do you care if money's left on the table if all 20 players are signed and in the system?

[jabba72]

Its a miss on Lawlar but maybe Elias thinks Cowser and Norby will accumulate more WAR than a Lawlar and whatever 2nd pick would have been made? Im not expecting much else from this draft because the lack of underslot picks made. 

[webbrick2010]

13 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

Hilarious!  

You tell me what the issue is with signing all 20 players and leaving money on the table.  What do you care if money's left on the table if all 20 players are signed and in the system?

I care that they get the 20 best players available, leaving over 1 million on the table, picking almost all guys under slot is not getting the 20 best players, but it does save the Angelos brothers 1 Million dollars, which I believe is the priority. 

[Hank Scorpio]

38 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

Hilarious!  

You tell me what the issue is with signing all 20 players and leaving money on the table.  What do you care if money's left on the table if all 20 players are signed and in the system?

The obvious answer is they took guys who were less than to save money. Now that's malpractice... and not necessarily my perspective, but I'm pretty sure that's the contention. 

For me it all boils down to Cowser and whether or not you believe Elias. When you start things off at #5 with a guy most of the talking heads had outside of their top 10 and then you pay him $1MM underslot, there are justifiable questions. Especially when you look at the remainder of their picks. Not a whole lot of bonus baby opportunities. 

[7Mo]

35 minutes ago, webbrick2010 said:

I care that they get the 20 best players available, leaving over 1 million on the table, picking almost all guys under slot is not getting the 20 best players, but it does save the Angelos brothers 1 Million dollars, which I believe is the priority. 

So you're confident that they picked "almost all guys under slot"?

[Yossarian]

That was a really depressing draft summary for an O's fan to read.

[7Mo]

3 minutes ago, Yossarian said:

That was a really depressing draft summary for an O's fan to read.

I've read his summaries on the other divisions and they're pretty similar. He ain't exactly a ray of sunshine.

[waynebug]

They went for the best and youngest talent available on Jan 15 international signees, right ?

Why the change in philosophy now in July ? 

Draft older and cheaper.  Leave the younger and overslot candidates to an organization that is stronger on player development ?

[Frobby]

2 hours ago, OrioleDog said:

Of course it is mathematical obfuscation when Ciolek gives a quote like "high percentage".   To any given casual fan, it the Orioles spent, drumroll please, 96% of their pool that might sound great.

When all that really matters is 30 outcomes ranging from say 103% on down to ~96%, where a 99% spend is negotiating skill/rounding errors and maybe 95% or less is tar and feather stuff.

The other 29 outcomes we'll know also in less than two weeks will also give us an industry-wide covid context.

I believe Can_of_corn reported that the O’s underspent their allotment by the most of any team last year.   But even if so, it was a drop in the bucket.  This year could be a little different, but we’ll see.

What I mostly care about is whether the players we sign turn out to be good major leaguers.   That’s how I’ll be judging their draft 5-10 years from now.   

[webbrick2010]

1 hour ago, 7Mo said:

So you're confident that they picked "almost all guys under slot"?

Yes, according to multiple draft ranking boards, none of the O's top 5 picks were ranked at above the position the O's took them.

According to BA

Cowser picked 5, ranked 10

Norby picked 41, ranked 58

Reed picked 65, ranked 148

Rhodes picked 76, ranked 135

Higgins picked 257, ranked 230

No one else ranked

People can defend the O's and claim the Elias is smarter than everyone else and got 20 great picks for less than he would have had to pay for 20 highly regarded prospects.... but it's the O's / Angelos and they have been trimming costs all year (Covid, getting ready to sell, need more cash flow with failing law firm, who knows).

 

[Moose Milligan]

2 hours ago, webbrick2010 said:

I care that they get the 20 best players available, leaving over 1 million on the table, picking almost all guys under slot is not getting the 20 best players, but it does save the Angelos brothers 1 Million dollars, which I believe is the priority. 

Too late, they picked 20 players.  Whether they were the best players available is a matter of opinion.  I don't think every player taken was the BPA but this isn't the NFL draft and the BPA after the first few rounds isn't always easily identifiable.  If they sign all 20, I'm happy.

Contrary to what you may think, I don't think the Angelos brothers are worried about 1 million, even though it's a layup to constantly bag on them not wanting to spend money.  Their dad is worth 2 billion.  1 million to the Angelos brothers is a rounding error, like it or not.  

 

1 hour ago, Hank Scorpio said:

The obvious answer is they took guys who were less than to save money. Now that's malpractice... and not necessarily my perspective, but I'm pretty sure that's the contention. 

For me it all boils down to Cowser and whether or not you believe Elias. When you start things off at #5 with a guy most of the talking heads had outside of their top 10 and then you pay him $1MM underslot, there are justifiable questions. Especially when you look at the remainder of their picks. Not a whole lot of bonus baby opportunities. 

Fair enough, but I don't think anyone here really knows who was picked and what they'll sign for and what they'll end up spending.  Sure, we could tell off the bat that Cowser was under slot.  The rest?  No one knows for sure.

Seriously, the only draft analysis I've read about these players is along the lines of "He's not a high schooler so he must be under slot."  I agree that there are some senior signs that'll probably be cheap but seriously...no one here knows for sure who's under slot and who's over slot.  

I'll wait until the signing period is over and the financials are released before claiming who's over slot and who was under slot and that Elias did a good job or a bad job.

[7Mo]

5 minutes ago, webbrick2010 said:

Yes, according to multiple draft ranking boards, none of the O's top 5 picks were ranked at above the position the O's took them.

According to BA

Cowser picked 5, ranked 10

Norby picked 41, ranked 58

Reed picked 65, ranked 148

Rhodes picked 76, ranked 135

Higgins picked 257, ranked 230

No one else ranked

People can defend the O's and claim the Elias is smarter than everyone else and got 20 great picks for less than he would have had to pay for 20 highly regarded prospects.... but it's the O's / Angelos and they have been trimming costs all year (Covid, getting ready to sell, need more cash flow with failing law firm, who knows).

 

I don't think Elias is "smarter than everyone else" but I do think he's a competent GM and doing a lot of good things. And I think he walked into a miserable situation where he had little talent to trade, couldn't get rid of one monster salary, did not have an International pipeline or even a set of connections or presence in that area.

Do you think the brothers are telling Elias what to do? Or are you saying Elias doesn't have the money to do otherwise?