Mock Five

[Stotle]

Even over Strasburg?

Oh, no. I just tuned out of him because he's clearly a couple levels above everyone else in the draft.

[Greg Pappas]

A kid I've had my eye on for some time is Bishop Verot HS (FL) 3B'man Bobby Borchering.

He currently has 12 HR's and 30 RBI through his first 82 AB's.

Borchering is a powerful 6'4-200 switch-hitter with shaky defensive skills and -as with most kids 17- a hole or two in his swing. His defensive position is yet to be determined, but 1B or LF are possibilities. I'd read a lot about him, and while it's unlikely he'll be there at pick #2 (54), I'd be interested in him should he fall that far. He's projected at the back end of round one, but despite the Billy Rowell comps that we O's fans may heap on him, Borchering should be an interesting kid to monitor.

[Oriole Baseball]

I know it's not likely but look at the teams picking ahead of us. Only Seattle has any money to burn. With Boras representing Strasburg he could slip to the Orioles like Wieters did a few years ago. I think it will be Ackley or Strasburg if the other teams are scared of the money. Peter will spend money in this draft. ummmmmm.......Strasburg! I don't think the Nationals will gamble big money on a ptcher. Seattle? Maybe......San Diego? No, Pittsburgh? No Chance.......Baltimore? Yes!! The Odds are Good!

There is absolutely no way Strasburg falls past 3. First of all, Washington will take him or they risk alienating the 4 people who follow the team. Seattle would love to get him, and San Diego has already said they would take the hometown kid and they have a new owner so that settles their financial situation.

[JTrea81]

There is absolutely no way Strasburg falls past 3. First of all, Washington will take him or they risk alienating the 4 people who follow the team. Seattle would love to get him, and San Diego has already said they would take the hometown kid and they have a new owner so that settles their financial situation.

Strasburg falling is one of the worst things that can happen to the O's as in that interview with Churchill, it was made clear that it would completely blow up the Orioles' draft board.

[Big Mac]

Strasburg falling is one of the worst things that can happen to the O's as in that interview with Churchill, it was made clear that it would completely blow up the Orioles' draft board.

Having the best player available would screw up our draft board?

Strasburg falling to us would be great, it's never going to happen though.

[JTrea81]

Having the best player available would screw up our draft board?

Strasburg falling to us would be great, it's never going to happen though.

No, him falling to another team and not getting to us, because as the previous poster mentioned and I agree, if he falls it won't be to us....

That could mean a player that we had slotted at #5 would be taken earlier.

[Flosman]

No, him falling to another team and not getting to us, because as the previous poster mentioned and I agree, if he falls it won't be to us....

That could mean a player that we had slotted at #5 would be taken earlier.

Do you really think that AM with the way he is does not have atleast the top 600 players slotted by draft day???? I bet no matter who the four picks are in front of the O's they will know who they are taking.

[JTrea81]

Do you really think that AM with the way he is does not have atleast the top 600 players slotted by draft day???? I bet no matter who the four picks are in front of the O's they will know who they are taking.

I'm just paraphrasing what the scout said. If Strasburg falls to the 3rd or 4th pick, it is going to be a "mess."

[Stotle]

You guys aren't looking at the larger picture. Draft strategy is formed way prior to the draft (e.g. I want to get out of Day 1 with a power bat, two legit starters, a middle infielder and a catcher that is at least a potential back-up). This includes noting which players are likely to be over-slot, which are easy signs, etc. The organization will likely have some idea as to how much they want to spend, and where that will be distributed in order to meet the goals of the draft (let's say, the parenthetical example I gave).

So, let's say BAL wants to spend aroun $11mios on the draft and plans on grabbing one of three players at 1:5 that would sign for $3 - 4.5mios, the rest of the loose "targets" are selected on a $6.5 - 8mios budget. Strasburg falls to BAL and they have to select him. Now, your budget is $2mios to achieve the rest of your draft goals. Chances are you've spent time reaching out to the players you've loosely targeted, and now you need to go to a completely different group of kids with whom you may not have the same relationship.

I think the point is generally that such a big curveball (one that would alter your budgeting and player targets in later rounds so greatly) would have really big ripples. It would be great to have him, but it's a tough pragmatic adjustment to make at the last second. Were BAL drafting 1:1, they would have all of these months to plan for a successful draft knowing they will be spending an arm and a leg on an ML-ready pitcher.

[JTrea81]

This is the way I think it will shake out:

1. Washington - Strasburg

2. Seattle - Ackley

3. San Diego - Matzek

4. Pittsburgh - Gibson

5. Baltimore - Purke

[hoosiers]

Well, let's see what the Nat's spend over the rest of their draft after SS.

In the situation in the OP, I would be looking at the best among White, Gibson and Crowe. All year I've believed it would be hard to pass on White if he were there - though I like all three.

I will say that JT's desire for Poythress is not unreasonable. I remember when Prince Fielder was considered a late first round talent - if you think the guy can hit and you have the fifth pick, you take him. The Brewers had similar success when everyone thought they overdrafted LaPorta.

[jamesenoch]

You guys aren't looking at the larger picture. Draft strategy is formed way prior to the draft (e.g. I want to get out of Day 1 with a power bat, two legit starters, a middle infielder and a catcher that is at least a potential back-up). This includes noting which players are likely to be over-slot, which are easy signs, etc. The organization will likely have some idea as to how much they want to spend, and where that will be distributed in order to meet the goals of the draft (let's say, the parenthetical example I gave).

So, let's say BAL wants to spend aroun $11mios on the draft and plans on grabbing one of three players at 1:5 that would sign for $3 - 4.5mios, the rest of the loose "targets" are selected on a $6.5 - 8mios budget. Strasburg falls to BAL and they have to select him. Now, your budget is $2mios to achieve the rest of your draft goals. Chances are you've spent time reaching out to the players you've loosely targeted, and now you need to go to a completely different group of kids with whom you may not have the same relationship.

I think the point is generally that such a big curveball (one that would alter your budgeting and player targets in later rounds so greatly) would have really big ripples. It would be great to have him, but it's a tough pragmatic adjustment to make at the last second. Were BAL drafting 1:1, they would have all of these months to plan for a successful draft knowing they will be spending an arm and a leg on an ML-ready pitcher.

I wonder if this happened in 2007 when Wieters fell in their laps.

[Ruzious]

You have to consider Slade Heathcott and Colton Cain just for their name value - names right out of Harlequin romance novels... not that I read those things...

[JTrea81]

Well, let's see what the Nat's spend over the rest of their draft after SS.

Considering the Nats were going to pay Tex $180 million, I think they'll use some of that money for Strasburg. For him, you basically have to treat him like a FA...

[JTrea81]

I wonder if this happened in 2007 when Wieters fell in their laps.

Duquette negotiated with Boras before the 2007 draft. The Orioles knew what it was going to take to get Wieters...