What is your draft philosophy?

[hoosiers]

YES!

It is way too simplistic to judge a draftee's talent based on the bonus they received. You have to elevate the bonuses to buy them out of college commitments. It certainly is not an obvious indication of their value.

It's directionally correct. No one is paying $1M to kids worth $250k or $400k.

[Stotle]

It's directionally correct. No one is paying $1M to kids worth $250k or $400k.

Debatable. Were this true, you're saying Ohlman and Coffey are guaranteed to be off the board in Round 3 if not for the strength of their college commitment. I find that analysis to be dubious.

[rhall]

I find the argument of Matzek = Hobgood + Coffey + Berry to be faulty. It assumes that the bonus given to players is proportionate to their talent and potential. That simply isn't true, particularly with high school players.

I agree... and to further complicate things you could point out that the choice shouldn't be Hobgood, Coffey & Berry OR Matzek, but rather Hobgood, Coffey & Berry OR Matzek & two or more talents closer to slot.

[hoosiers]

So signing quality prospects is wasting money? If Jordan feels that there are players who are worth the bonus's given, then he should have the ability to land them. We agree that no one wants to throw money at kids who aren't worth it.

Well, I never posted or advocated that signing quality prospect is wasting $. I'd be interested in what I've posted in this thread could lead you in that direction.

We're just going in circles, so I'll just summarize my opinion as follows:

First, if everyone lifted their draft spend as advocated, everyone would believe they received more prospects, but they are really just chasing the same talent with more $. The BoSox and NYY have been spending above slot for talent for years and what happened .... they picked up good talent (Lars Anderson, Austin Jackson, etc) ... and they were then copied by other organizations like the Os who ramped up the draft spend to get better prospects for themselves (as well as, indirectly, leaving fewer of these prospects later in the draft to the BoSox and NYY). If the Os decide to elevate the draft spend even more, other teams will surely follow just as we followed the BoSox and NYY. It's totally outside the realm of possibility to believe the Os should ramp up the draft spend to $15M and not expect between at least five and perhaps as many as 15 teams to follow. At some point, and we are getting there soon, the return diminishes significantly as the prospect pools are certainly not noticeably better (there are only so many Coffeys and Ohlmanns out there) and all we would be doing is spending more $ on the same prospects.

Second, we live in the real world. Budgets exist for everyone. It's why my wife doesn't spend all of our $ on every new dress she likes and why I don't spend all of my $ on baseball cards every time I see "value" in what I might purchase. The easy idea is to want to spend more, the people who get ahead in life are the ones who make efforts and succeed in drafting better/smarter.

The league is simply not going to sit back and watch the Os spend $4M in the first round, $2M in the second and $1M until the 10th round. The league will adapt (and adapt very quickly) - just as it has adapted to watching the BoSox and NYY go overslot. And soon, the entire league will just be spending significantly more $ on the same number of prospects - though perhaps drafting them in a more realistic order.

[Robbie]

Well, I never posted or advocated that signing quality prospect is wasting $. I'd be interested in what I've posted in this thread could lead you in that direction.

We're just going in circles, so I'll just summarize my opinion as follows:

First, if everyone lifted their draft spend as advocated, everyone would believe they received more prospects, but they are really just chasing the same talent with more $. The BoSox and NYY have been spending above slot for talent for years and what happened .... they picked up good talent (Lars Anderson, Austin Jackson, etc) ... and they were then copied by other organizations like the Os who ramped up the draft spend to get better prospects for themselves (as well as, indirectly, leaving fewer of these prospects later in the draft to the BoSox and NYY). If the Os decide to elevate the draft spend even more, other teams will surely follow just as we followed the BoSox and NYY. It's totally outside the realm of possibility to believe the Os should ramp up the draft spend to $15M and not expect between at least five and perhaps as many as 15 teams to follow. At some point, and we are getting there soon, the return diminishes significantly as the prospect pools are certainly not noticeably better (there are only so many Coffeys and Ohlmanns out there) and all we would be doing is spending more $ on the same prospects.

Second, we live in the real world. Budgets exist for everyone. It's why my wife doesn't spend all of our $ on every new dress she likes and why I don't spend all of my $ on baseball cards every time I see "value" in what I might purchase. The easy idea is to want to spend more, the people who get ahead in life are the ones who make efforts and succeed in drafting better/smarter.

The league is simply not going to sit back and watch the Os spend $4M in the first round, $2M in the second and $1M until the 10th round. The league will adapt (and adapt very quickly) - just as it has adapted to watching the BoSox and NYY go overslot. And soon, the entire league will just be spending significantly more $ on the same number of prospects - though perhaps drafting them in a more realistic order.

You need to be the first to spend the money! The draft is way the Orioles can have a better chance of competing. Teams will adapt to what works. It would give us an advantage for several years and then we would have an equal opportunity once other teams start to do the same thing. Its like Billy Beane. If he went "I'm not going to pay more for obp because then everyone else would do it," he would not of had the years of success. Then everyone copied him and the price of a good OBP hitter went up. Do you think he regrets going after high OBP guys because other teams started doing the same thing?

[clarence]

I believe that a team should set a budget for all rounds other than the first. You should take the best available talent in round one and get it signed, especially with a top 5 pick. Too few chances to land this type of talent.

I am very disappointed in the direction the O's have gone in the last two second rounds. I don't think we are at the point as a franchise where big gambles in the second round should be made. Someone would be hard pressed to tell me we couldn't have gotten comparable talent to Avery and Givens in the 5th or 6th round, maybe not athletically, but baseball skill wise with decent ceilings. I'd like to see rounds 2-3 used to take the top available college talent. Easier to determine ceiling and further along in the developmental process.

I then think you focus on as much pitching as you can acquire and grab position players that have fallen due to signability issues. A player like Ohlman is a perfect example.

The O's should make sure they are never outspent in the draft by any teams in their division. It is one area where we can compete with the yanks and bosox financially.