Signablity vs. BPA

[JTrea81]

Supposedly signablitity is not going to be an issue with this draft according to MacPhail. However I keep hearing that we want Wheeler due to his signabilty, despite him possibly not being the BPA.

I really hope that we aren't returning to the days of DeMacio when we only went with easily signable picks passing over better talent.

If Wheeler is the the BPA I have no problem, but if a player like Matzek is available, and we don't take him soley due to signablity, I'd have to question the future direction of this organization, considering the frugal nature of all signings since MacPhail took over.

We've got money to spend, and the draft is a good place to spend it.

[JCK]

I usualy don't agree with you, but here I do. Of course if and when we draft Wheeler (or worse-Minor or Leake or Hobgood) we will claim that he was the highest person on our board. But seemingly everyone else agrees that Turner and Matzek are better than any of those players, so a knowledgable fan will know that we went for the signability.

It boggles the mind. Do you think the Tigers regret paying big for Porcello? The Mets for paying big for Kazmir (okay they probably regret trading him, but not drafting him). Do WE regret paying big for Wieters?

You take the BPA because if you don't, inevitably one of the guys you passed on will go on and make you regret it.

[Hank Scorpio]

http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/baseball/bal-sp.orioles09jun09,0,529170.story

As for the money, the Orioles won't shy from the top-dollar demands of some players, according to MacPhail.

In the past three years, they have doled out roughly $20.3 million in signing bonuses to draft-eligible amateurs, fifth highest in baseball behind the Kansas City Royals, Boston Red Sox, Tampa Bay Rays and San Francisco Giants.

With their international scouting program still fledgling, the amateur draft is even more essential to the Orioles' future success. So they'll open up the checkbook for the right players, whether that's in the form of hitters or pitchers, college or prep.

"It's an important avenue of talent for us," MacPhail said. "We pay attention to 'signability.' But at the end of the day, we know this is the most important entry of talent in our system.

"We know we can't buy three [major league] players for a half billion dollars. That's not in the cards for us, so this is an area that we are pretty aggressive."

[JCK]

http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/baseball/bal-sp.orioles09jun09,0,529170.story

They can say that all they want, and of course they would say it. Everyone seems to be saying though that we won't put our money where our mouth is. 7 hours and we'll know.

[Hank Scorpio]

They can say that all they want, and of course they would say it. Everyone seems to be saying though that we won't put our money where our mouth is. 7 hours and we'll know.

How will we know?

We won't know. Maybe our scouting department actually thinks the guy we select is the BPA.

[hoosiers]

I think you have to look at value. If you have several guys rated very close to each other and there is a tremendous $ disparity, then going with the cheaper guy who is not BPA might be okay.

As long as the team keeps spending total draft $ in line with the past few years, meaning that we are spending among the top 5 teams, meaning we sign several above slot guys, I am okay with focusing on some signability with the first rounder if the talent discrepancy is minimal (not a reach).

[LAOSfan]

They can say that all they want, and of course they would say it. Everyone seems to be saying though that we won't put our money where our mouth is. 7 hours and we'll know.

How could we still question them on this after we drafted Wieters and Matusz in the past two years and signed both of them?

[JTrea81]

How could we still question them on this after we drafted Wieters and Matusz in the past two years and signed both of them?

Matusz was actually considered an easy sign at the time. And while he signed for more than slot, it wasn't as much as Posey or Smoak took to sign.

[JCK]

Matusz was actually considered an easy sign at the time.

And Wieters wasn't drafted by AM. Signed yes, drafted no.

[hoosiers]

Matusz was actually considered an easy sign at the time. And while he signed for more than slot, it wasn't as much as Posey or Smoak took to sign.

Matusz held out longer and for more $ than his agent requested from the Os pre-draft.

[JCK]

How will we know?

We won't know. Maybe our scouting department actually thinks the guy we select is the BPA.

True, maybe our scouting department sees something that no other scouting department sees.

[mdterpsrule]

I usualy don't agree with you, but here I do. Of course if and when we draft Wheeler (or worse-Minor or Leake or Hobgood) we will claim that he was the highest person on our board. But seemingly everyone else agrees that Turner and Matzek are better than any of those players, so a knowledgable fan will know that we went for the signability.

I somewhat disagree with this. I agree that if someone like Strass (for arguments sake) slips to us, then not taking him due to money is incredibly stupid. But what they have Wheeler and Matzek rated near even? I could agree with taking the easier sign even if Matzek is rated slightly better.

It would be one thing if there was a huge difference. If we draft someone like Minor or Leake I will be severely disappointed. But when the comparison is close enough, it may be better to go with the signability pick and use the extra money in the draft. There are reports of Matzek wanted $7m. If we could get Wheeler for $4m and use the other $3m for some above slot picks I would be very happy with that.

Again, I only agree with this if Jordan has the players rated near even. Otherwise, I do agree you should always go BPA.

[JTrea81]

Matusz held out longer and for more $ than his agent requested from the Os pre-draft.

And the point is Matusz was supposed to be an easy sign, unlike Posey for example...

The fact that he held out doesn't change the fact that the Orioles went for an easily signable player moreso than the BPA.

There are so many things to analyze with the pick that Jordan will take, but signability was never a factor under Duquette and Flanagan in 2007 so it will be interesting to see if we are regressing in that regard since that watershed year.

[hoosiers]

If Wheeler is the the BPA I have no problem, but if a player like Matzek is available, and we don't take him soley due to signablity, I'd have to question the future direction of this organization, considering the frugal nature of all signings since MacPhail took over.

We've got money to spend, and the draft is a good place to spend it.

Would you stop with this stuff already?

Do you know how many teams passed on Porcello? We do not operate in a vacuum.

The Os do spend $ on the draft - plenty of it, and it has been increasing in recent years. The Os are doing exactly what you advocate, generally, so stop the incessant whining.

[Shopay]

They can say that all they want, and of course they would say it. Everyone seems to be saying though that we won't put our money where our mouth is. 7 hours and we'll know.

I hear what you are saying, but doesn't the fact that the O's have spent the 5th highest amount in MLB on signing bonuses the last three years support that we are not "penny pinching." My suspicions from AM's prior comments, including his statements about obtaining pitiching inventory, is that the Birds have a decent amount of $$$ set aside for signing draft picks, which will allow them to go over slot when they believe the player is worth it. However, in keeping with the obtaining inventory principle, they will not let one or two picks with outrageous demands (sans some exceptional circumstances) prevent them from obtaining that quality inventory. When you are picking in a spot like 5 this year, where there are several players that rank very closely, then I suspect AM will pick the easier player in terms of signability so he has more money to go over slot in the later rounds. Again, AM's principle, especially with pitchers, is get as many quality arms as you can because for every 10 or so quality arms you bring in only 3 or 4 will return ultimate dividends. I'm not saying this is the right or wrong way to go, but just how I believe AM operates.