Keith Law on the Orioles draft

[Hank Scorpio]

5 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

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.  

 

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.

I've never been in negotiations with college seniors, but it occurs to me that they don't have a hell of a lot of leverage. If you're paying them overslot, you'll probably garner a few giggles. 

[forphase1]

Except this year they DO have some very small leverage.  It's my understanding that due to Covid seniors could still return to school for another season.  That's not much leverage, as they are still getting older and need to get started professionally, etc, but that may mean we just can't slap 10k at all of them and say take it and like it!  

 

[Frobby]

52 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).

 

Some of the issues come down to whether the player has some leverage.   For example, I heard that Rhodes was very highly regarded coming into this year, had a bad season, and might want to go back to school to regain a higher status.   If the O’s believe in him, they might be willing to pay him overslot to convince him not to do that, regardless of what BA’s rankings say.   

There’s no point wasting too much energy arguing about this, since all will be revealed over the next 12 days.  
 

[7Mo]

2 hours 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

 

Your post got me curious so I checked 2 teams on the MLB rankings

Tampa Bay

picked 28    ranked 41

picked 34   ranked 84

picked 63   ranked 81

picked 100   ranked 196

picked 130   ranked 190

picked 161   unranked

Yankees

picked 20   ranked 55

picked 55   ranked 99

picked 92   ranked 131

picked 122   ranked 171

picked 153   ranked 194

None of it means much today and won't for 2-3 years when we see who pans out and who doesn't. Those incompetent Rays didn't take a pitcher in the first 5 rounds and took a first baseman in the second round. 

Thanks for your post. 

[cnmilton]

For accuracy sake, I believe the Os drafted 21 players in 20 rounds.

 

Also, according to the posted rankings from BA, Higgins was drafted by the Os at 257 but was the 230th ranked prospect entering the draft. So, Higgins was drafted later than he was ranked. 

[7Mo]

Looking further at draft rankings:

In Round 1, 21 of 30 picks were ranked above their draft slot, meaning pick 1 took ranked 5, etc.

In CB-A, it was 6 of 8.

In Round 2, it was 15 of 27.

In CB-B, it was 6 of 8.

In Round 3, it was 24 of 30.

In Round 4, it was 26 of 30.

In Round 5, it was 26 of 30.

Add those up and 122 picks out of 161 were ranked higher than their draft slot, 75.77%.

[waroriole]

We’re not alone…..

[Sports Guy]

10 hours ago, waroriole said:

We’re not alone…..

But the Padres aren’t losing on purpose to gain the one advantage you receive because you are tanking.

[DirtyBird]

59 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

But the Padres aren’t losing on purpose to gain the one advantage you receive because you are tanking.

I would say pumping money into Latin American operations instead of paying $50 or so million to win 10 more games is also an advantage.

Your continued crying about taking Cowser over Lawler is pretty pathetic.

[LTO's]

1 hour ago, Sports Guy said:

But the Padres aren’t losing on purpose to gain the one advantage you receive because you are tanking.

The advantage you get from tanking is having a somewhat justifiable excuse to clear money from your books and not overspend on useless stopgaps when it's obvious the team won't be good.  Keith Law in one of his most recent chats said that there isn't a single team in baseball tanking for draft positioning. An added perk is you usually get a top ten pick but to say that's the main reason the Orioles are tanking is 100% wrong.  

[LookinUp]

16 hours ago, 7Mo said:

Your post got me curious so I checked 2 teams on the MLB rankings...

This was a devastatingly awesome post. The smartest teams in baseball tend not to align perfectly with unhired and/or previously fired baseball draft experts. 

That doesn't mean Elias is correct, but damn, consider the source you're relying on. This dude might not be likable for some folks (I do), but if there's one thing he's done it is build the minors to a better level. If Kjerstad didn't have the worst luck in the world and was setting the world on fire, would be hemming and hawing about Elias' strategy? I say no. Instead, the kid gets myocarditis of all things. Absolutely not baseball related, so now it's a stupid draft pick and it calls into question all of the rest of Elias' strategy? That's just crazy talk in my opinion.

[LTO's]

Re: Lawlar. I said before, picking him at 5 was my nightmare scenario. He could still be good but his ceiling at the plate is low. 

 

[Sports Guy]

49 minutes ago, DirtyBird said:

I would say pumping money into Latin American operations instead of paying $50 or so million to win 10 more games is also an advantage.

Your continued crying about taking Cowser over Lawler is pretty pathetic.

What does spending in Latin America have anything to do with losing on purpose?  You can win 100+ games and still spend on Latin America.

The two are unrelated and this is an awful point to make.

[Moose Milligan]

2 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

What does spending in Latin America have anything to do with losing on purpose?  You can win 100+ games and still spend on Latin America.

The two are unrelated and this is an awful point to make.

His points aren't great, but you've been routinely blasting the team for taking forever in the rebuild.  I understand that you like a guy like Lawlar who has big upside potential but why are you mad at the Orioles for taking a guy who can get to the majors quicker?  You've said that you want this rebuild to happen faster, the Orioles took a guy who can help make it happen faster.  I don't see the downside there.  

[Sports Guy]

30 minutes ago, LTO's said:

The advantage you get from tanking is having a somewhat justifiable excuse to clear money from your books and not overspend on useless stopgaps when it's obvious the team won't be good.  Keith Law in one of his most recent chats said that there isn't a single team in baseball tanking for draft positioning. 

Your first point here is off base.  You don’t need to lose 100 games to justify not pissing away money.  
 

Secondly, Law is wrong.  The ONLY advantage in MLB you gain by tanking is draft position and draft pool money.

Now, for the first year or 2, being able to get the payroll down (short and long term) and obtain assets by trading pieces is a great thing although, again, you don’t have to lose games on purpose to do that.  You can do that at any point..see Tampa as a perfect example.  However, I agree it makes easier which is why I’m in favor of tanking for a year or 2.

After that, it’s only the draft.  Teams that win 100 games every year do exactly the stuff everyone here talks  about doing and what they want the Os to do.

Draft and develop well, spend wisely, spending internationally, etc…all of that is done by teams that suck and teams that are good.  The difference is the Os have never operated properly and now that they appear to be, people are acting like this is some rare thing to do and something that can only be done in a rebuild.  That’s bs.