Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine
The draft is eight days away.  Use this thread as a catch all for draft discussion.

There are two main sources for the draft, Jim Callis at Baseball America and Keith Law at ESPN.

Callis does have a mock draft up but I don't agree with his logic.  His logic goes as follows: the Jays have money to spend; Austin Wilson is looking for big money; therefore the Jays will take an expensive player like Wilson.  Others think Wilson isn't even worth a number 10 pick.  Callis, like many other "experts" see the Jays as liking Michael Choice but he might be gone when the Jays pick.

Here is what Keith Law has to say to support his selection of high school pitcher Dylan Covey for the Jays:

The Blue Jays are suddenly open for business in the high school arm market, and they're in on Whitson, Covey and Aaron Sanchez, but I think Choice may trump them all if he reaches here.

Keith, in his blog, also notes that this years draft has a lot of very equal talent so that the higher pickers don't want to pay what it will take for what in their eyes is mediocre talent.

Like we wrote last week, this year's first round is going to be nuts. We're going to see a lot of players drop out of the first round as clubs punt on this year's class or value the chance at a quicker return more than a risky, upside play. Our comedian impressionist put his own skin back on to opine on the scenarios that could play out:

"I just think everyone is under the gun so much more now," he said. "If we screw up more than once, we're probably out of a job, and our boss (the scouting director) is probably on thin ice, too. We're in a 'can't-miss' era right now, especially when the upside with some of these players isn't as high as it has been, and the risk may be even greater.

"I understand the philosophy on the other side of it, but most organizations can't afford to keep taking big chances and not getting anything out of it. I think the bigger market teams will take those chances and that's about it.

"I'm hearing that an inordinate amount of clubs are considering going slot only in the first round so they can bulk up the later rounds where the value may be."

That last sentence could be key to this year's draft. If first-round talents are passed on, the value will be in the compensatory and second rounds, without a doubt.

"I definitely see that happening. It's not a good year for players to ask for big money. They aren't going to get it, and will slide down in the draft and still not get it."

 

Plase post any updates in this thread.

2010 Draft - May 31 | 78 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
metafour - Sunday, May 30 2010 @ 11:29 PM EDT (#215822) #
Callis does have a mock draft up but I don't agree with his logic.  His logic goes as follows: the Jays have money to spend; Austin Wilson is looking for big money; therefore the Jays will take an expensive player like Wilson.

There is a lot more to it than that.  Before Callis ever had that last mock up; former scout Frankie Piliere tweeted that we were in on Wilson big-time and were looking into his signability.  Wilson has also taken part in a private workout in front of Anthopolous and has been scouted several times by us.  Going further than that; Wilson makes perfect sense given what we have said we would do (target high-upside players)...he also resembles Jake Marisnick a lot; and Marisnick is a kid we spent 1st round money on when most people felt he was probably too raw for that grade.
ayjackson - Sunday, May 30 2010 @ 11:58 PM EDT (#215823) #
BA has an article up today that Covey is slipping as recent outings have been mediocre.  He's lost some velocity too.  I like AJ Cole as a prep arm that's really projectable now, but I think that there'll be some interesting college and prep arms available in the supplemental round where we have three picks.  I'm liking bats a little more at 11 and Cox, Castellanos, Sale and Choice lead the way for me.
92-93 - Monday, May 31 2010 @ 12:27 AM EDT (#215825) #

If Ranaudo makes it to the Blue Jays 2nd pick at #34 I think he'd be a great selection.

metafour - Monday, May 31 2010 @ 12:33 AM EDT (#215827) #
If Ranaudo makes it to the Blue Jays 2nd pick at #34 I think he'd be a great selection.

Wont make it out of the 1st; but either way he is a Boras client and wont be an option (IMO) for us after the first round because he's not going to sign unless he gets big money.  He is going to be one of those guys that will end up playing in an independent league if he doesn't get $2.5-$3.0 million.
TamRa - Monday, May 31 2010 @ 12:34 AM EDT (#215828) #
Here's my case for Wilson, and I covet Wilson based on the reports I've seen about his tools and makeup - I accept no responsibility if those reports are wrong but what I'm hearing is sort of like Alex rios, except with the make-up to match the tools.

(don't ask me what reports I read, I've lost track)

I make the following case pre-supposing that Choice is off the board by then, since I concede he's safer and more advanced and quite skilled himself apparently.

Premise one - Wilson has as good a set of raw tools as anyone in the draft, and he has a very well regarded make-up to help him maximize them

Premise two - He will be a very difficult sign and will cost well over slot

Premise three - while the Jays are reportedly considering several high school pitchers, there's not so big a gap between the three of four in question, nor is there that much of a gap between them and those the Jays might find with later picks

Premise four - while drafting to need is a bad idea, using that consideration as a tie-breaker is, IMO, logical. the Jays have a deep vein of potential starting pitchers and a much shallower pool of potential top-shelf outfielders

Premise five - this is said to be a relatively mediocre talent pool with a considerably better class coming in 2011

The scenario then, in my mind, is this - take a gamble on the really high upside guy who's a tough sign, knowing that you have the scouts to find good pitchers with other multiple choices; if he signs, it's a big win, if he doesn't sign, you still have eight highly placed draft picks, plus you just picked up the #11 pick in a more talented draft next year.

All that said, more and more I'm intrigued by that 3B who's name I can't spell...Castellanos or some such...



92-93 - Monday, May 31 2010 @ 12:48 AM EDT (#215829) #
Give Ranaudo the $ he wants - they wouldn't hesitate over that amount if he was an international FA, and Rogers has at least 40m "saved" up from the last 2 years when they reduced payroll instead of raising it, as promised. The Jays have enough picks that they can make him a reasonable overslot offer and not have to worry about the selection comprimising their draft if he chooses to spend a year in Indy ball instead. I certainly wouldn't want them to pass on a guy who many considered the top college arm a few months ago just because Scott Boras is his agent.
Mylegacy - Monday, May 31 2010 @ 01:04 AM EDT (#215830) #
I've been following various draft sites for a few months now and I'd like to see either Michael Choice, a multi-tooled University OFer who I've read might be an Adam Lind but with more power and better defense or Stetson Allie a HS, RHP who is alleged to have #1 starter stuff and is coming on strong.

There's a guy named Andy Seiler who follows this stuff religiously and for $9.99 (US) you can order an e-mail report of his on over 750 prospects for the Draft. I've done so. The first 100 should be coming soon with the rest the week before the Draft. Have a look if you're interested. His website is: mlbbonusbaby.com .

metafour - Monday, May 31 2010 @ 01:07 AM EDT (#215831) #
Give Ranaudo the $ he wants - they wouldn't hesitate over that amount if he was an international FA, and Rogers has at least 40m "saved" up from the last 2 years when they reduced payroll instead of raising it, as promised. The Jays have enough picks that they can make him a reasonable overslot offer and not have to worry about the selection comprimising their draft if he chooses to spend a year in Indy ball instead. I certainly wouldn't want them to pass on a guy who many considered the top college arm a few months ago just because Scott Boras is his agent.

The issue I'm seeing here is that you are essentially asking them to spend $5-7 million on two picks; when we still have another 5 more before the 2nd round ends which are going to need to get their own fairly-large bonuses.  I'm probably even underestimating Renaudo's asking price; it is likely $3.5 - $4 million.  I have no doubt they'll go over slot to get their guy at #11; but when you start talking about drafting another guy who's going to want Top 5 type money you are approaching an overall draft budget that would blow out the slightly-over $11 million record that Washington set last year.  Unless you want us to punt several of our other high picks; I dont see us being able to draft a high priced kid at #11 and then taking an even more expensive player with our very next pick.

The IFA comparison simply isn't valid.  Apples to oranges, and the two really dont mix that well.  Oakland spent $4 million on a 16 year old pitcher yet they are currently looking at a slot-pick at #10.

Either way; its a non issue like I said because I dont see Renaudo getting past the Red Sox/Yanks at the bottom of the first.
 
92-93 - Monday, May 31 2010 @ 01:17 AM EDT (#215832) #

Elliot reported there's a 16m draft budget so it shouldn't be so far fetched, and you can say it's apples n oranges but the bottom line is the organization was willing to spend around 25m on Chapman (and it appears it would have been a really nice investment) and has a reduced payroll so I really hope money isn't a guiding factor in their selections.

Where do the mocks have Ranaudo going?

TJ Caino - Monday, May 31 2010 @ 01:22 AM EDT (#215833) #
If they felt next years pick would be substantially more valuable, I am not against the diabolical notion of drafting a guy whom they might then fail to reach an agreement with.
metafour - Monday, May 31 2010 @ 01:29 AM EDT (#215834) #
Elliot reported there's a 16m draft budget so it shouldn't be so far fetched

C'mon man; that was barely a report.  It came months ago (at the winter meetings IIRC?) and didn't even come from anyone affiliated with the Blue Jays in any way.  The $16m number came from an opposing scouting director who had heard we "could spend $16 million"...Elliot's report even included a second scout/director who basically said something along the lines of "no way, that number has to include international free agents as well".  In a case like you this  suggested $16 million budget you have to look at past trends and then apply some common sense.  The current record spent is a little over $11 million (Washington).  The previous record (Royals) was only a few hundred thousand less than what the Nats spent.  Do you really believe we are going to blow that number out the water by $5 full million (when every other rise up has been incremental)? $5 million is more than what some teams spend on their entire draft! That is just too big a jump for me to believe.  That $16 million number was debunked a while ago.

Again; the IFA and Chapman thing means very little.  There were several teams who were looking at around $20 million for Chapman.  None of those teams are going to come even close to spending anywhere near that much on the draft.  The yankees were in on Chapman and even they aren't likely to spend more than $7-10 million on the draft.
sam - Monday, May 31 2010 @ 01:41 AM EDT (#215835) #
I wouldn't scoff at the $16 million rumor. The Jays have a lot of picks so who knows. Something around $12 would probably be more likely if they sign and draft the guys they've been linked to. If the Jays were to draft Ranuado he would certainly be on the 40 man roster so that's something to consider. I'm imagine his bonus demands would be close to $3 million and Wilson's between $4 and $5. I think they'd settle around 2.5 for Ranuado and just over $4 for Wilson. I think with our unprotected compensation pick we should go after Gary Brown or Seth Blair. Guys who'd sign at slot and bring at least one plus tool.
sam - Monday, May 31 2010 @ 01:46 AM EDT (#215836) #
I'd doubt the Yankees would draft Ranuado after the hit and miss they've had with Brackman.

Also, with our last supplemental, if he's around although I doubt he will be, we should draft the Canadian catcher Kellin Deglan.
metafour - Monday, May 31 2010 @ 02:27 AM EDT (#215837) #
I think they'd settle around 2.5 for Ranuado and just over $4 for Wilson

1) I dont see a Boras client who was once a Top 5 lock settling for $2.5 million.  Look for Renaudo to follow what a guy like Crow did.

2) $4 million or more for Wilson is ridiculous.  The problem with Wilson is that he's just not good enough to garner that type of money.  Callis said yesterday I believe that in his opinion he is a late first/supplemental round talent regardless of his asking price or college commitment.  I'm not a scout; but I wouldn't spend $4 million on Wilson.  The kid is extremely raw; you'd have to have some absolute balls of steel confidence in your coaching ability to pay that much for Wilson.
metafour - Monday, May 31 2010 @ 02:31 AM EDT (#215838) #
I'd doubt the Yankees would draft Ranuado after the hit and miss they've had with Brackman.

One failed prospect and they're going to pass on a top pitching talent? C'mon now; thats not how scouting works.  The Yankees can afford to gamble; and Brackman failing wont mean a thing.
scottt - Monday, May 31 2010 @ 07:04 AM EDT (#215843) #
It's in the Yankees interest to throw away big money every year so that draft prospects keep refusing to sign in hope of bigger bonus.

Just think of the 46 millions wasted on Kei Igawa, who is never getting out of AAA because he's off the 40 man roster--and the luxury tax.



85bluejay - Monday, May 31 2010 @ 09:31 AM EDT (#215848) #

I support the idea of spending (overspending?) whatever is necessary on the draft to take the BPA -regardless of

need - even if it means going overbudget and taking some money away from the Ml team - That's why I wanted the

Jays to after Porcello etc. and if necessary not sign Burnett/Ryan etc. 

Regarding drafting for needs - while I agree with Willrain about using it as a tiebreaker - I just want that high

ceiling (necessary in AL east) BPA - if  for instance you develop 3 great players at 1 position you will find a market

for them - I think too many clubs reach for positions (esp. catchers/ss) and end up with a suspect.

i.e I still cannot believe that the Jays with so many needs and playing in the toughest div. would use their 1st

pick in 2008 to take a player with no defensive value and ltd. power ( even if he develops into his potential I

still consider it a poor selection)

So, I am hoping that AA drafts the BPA in his scouts opinion and pay what's necessary - cut the ML budget if necessary.

ramone - Monday, May 31 2010 @ 09:59 AM EDT (#215852) #

For what it's worth Fanhouse has done it's latest mock draft and have the Jays taking Colon:

  • 11. Blue Jays - Christian Colon (SS) | Cal State Fullerton
    "This spot is a very complex one with a lot of different scenarios. Austin Wilson and his signability are going to play a key role. Like the Phillies, the Jays have had high-ranking officials visit with Wilson, so if they think they can get him signed he'll go here. But Wilson and his family have been very unclear about demands, and if Toronto can't get a feel for his situation, I expect them to go with Colon, who they've been on all spring. O'Conner, Kaleb Cowart, Whitson and Josh Sale are in play here as well. They covet Choice but he should be gone already."
  • mlb.fanhouse.com/2010/05/31/mo...t-round-update/
  • Again the Jays strong interest in Choice and Wilson is mentioned which I have read from several different sources lately.  This is the first time I've read that the Jays have been in on Colon since the spring though. Colon seems to me like the ideal pick of the early version of the JP years.
  • Mike Green - Monday, May 31 2010 @ 10:17 AM EDT (#215855) #
    I'm liking bats a little more at 11 and Cox, Castellanos, Sale and Choice lead the way for me.

    I checked out the scouting video on Sale. Nice swing, and does not look out of place in the outfield.  My order would be Cox, Grandal, Sale, Choice, Castellanos.  I might take one of the pitchers before Choice or Castellanos, depending on a whole series of factors. 
    92-93 - Monday, May 31 2010 @ 11:55 AM EDT (#215869) #

    Do you really believe we are going to blow that number out the water by $5 full million (when every other rise up has been incremental)? $5 million is more than what some teams spend on their entire draft! That is just too big a jump for me to believe. 

    Somewhere along the way metafour you got confused; I wasn't saying what WILL happen, I was trying to have a discussion about what I think SHOULD happen. And with 4 picks in the top 41 and 9 in the top 113 I will be pretty disappointed if they don't blow 5m out of the water - their first 4 picks alone at slot should cost them that.

    Mylegacy - Monday, May 31 2010 @ 12:33 PM EDT (#215873) #
    Earlier in this thread I mentioned that I've signed up at Andy Seiler's site for his 750 player reports for this years draft. The first 100 have just arrived in my e-mail box and - WOW - they are excellent work!

    Seriously - this is well worth the $10 bucks it cost.

    Forkball - Monday, May 31 2010 @ 12:37 PM EDT (#215874) #

    Jonathan Mayo / MLB do a decent job with coverage, particularly with the profiles & video.  And it's free.

    http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100526&content_id=10448720&vkey=draftcentral2010&fext=.jsp

    Mayo had the Jays taking Choice in his last mock draft, but it sounds like he's going higher than that.

    metafour - Monday, May 31 2010 @ 01:55 PM EDT (#215884) #

    Somewhere along the way metafour you got confused; I wasn't saying what WILL happen, I was trying to have a discussion about what I think SHOULD happen. And with 4 picks in the top 41 and 9 in the top 113 I will be pretty disappointed if they don't blow 5m out of the water - their first 4 picks alone at slot should cost them that.

    Actually, I think you're a bit confused ;)

    I was comparing the "$16 million budget" you brought up to the current record spent: the slightly-over $11 million the Nats spent last year.  The $5 million I'm referring to would be the amount we'd break the current record by.  My argument is that a $5 million jump is simply far too great for me to take that $16 million number as a serious budget.  I have a hard time believing the MLB would be happy with us absolutely destroying the current record spent like that, seeing as how the MLB doesn't want the draft to become an even bigger spending spree than it already is.  My statement about $5 million being more than what some teams spend total was to illustrate just how BIG a $5 million jump would be -- that is essentially taking the current record spent and then adding a mid-market team's entire draft budget onto it.  Its not realistic.

    John Northey - Monday, May 31 2010 @ 02:10 PM EDT (#215888) #
    Ah, but bonus records are very misleading.

    Stasburg had a bonus of $7.5 million but a total package worth just over $15.1 million. Which figure is more relevant?

    The Jays play around with bonus vs salary a lot. Wells is making $20 million this year but around 1/2 is via a bonus payment he got at the start of the season with the rest via payroll. What is he really making? Depends how you amortize the bonus, but no matter how you cut it Rogers is paying out $20 million to Wells.

    Sign a guy to a 3 year deal, agree to pay him money in 10 years so he has a fall back, lots of ways to be creative and shift cash from 2010's budget to 2011 or even further out. That is a big advantage with Beeston here - he is known to be creative with contracts when needed.

    Basically, this year for the first time in a long time I feel the Jays can sign anyone they want as long as they really want to. The only way cash gets in the way is if they feel the guy is asking for more than he is worth, not because they don't have the budget.
    MatO - Monday, May 31 2010 @ 02:21 PM EDT (#215891) #
    I'm always amused to read about high-upside guys, whatever that means.  The only reason Travis Snider dropped to the Jays was because he wasn't 6'2" and didn't run like the wind.  For HS pitchersI think the criteria is to be tall and throw at least 95.  Which got me to thinking.  If Roy Halladay was college pitcher eligible to be drafted in a week, how high would he go?  And I mean today's finished version of Halladay.  The guy that sits at 90-91.  I'm sure he'd have put up some gaudy numbers in college though his cutter wouldn't break any metal bats and his pitch-to-contact might not work as well against metal bats and college level fielders.  Personally, I think he'd be looked at as a sort of Jered Weaver.  Tremendous college numbers but a middle of the rotation upside due to that velocity. 
    metafour - Monday, May 31 2010 @ 02:29 PM EDT (#215892) #
    John; that doesn't make a lot of sense.

    That ONLY applies to kids that sign major league deals.  Strasburg signed a major-league contract.  The amount of kids that will sign ML deals is very small; rightfully it is not something you want to do unless you are talking about an absolute top talent who doesn't need a lot of developmental time.  I'm not an expert on contractual rules and options, but I believe that major-league deals push you to get those kids (ie: Strasburg, Porcello, Crow) up to the majors quickly because they dont have the same options as a kid who just signs a minor-league contract with a signing bonus.  Due to this, it is not a strategy you want to employ where you just hand out major-league contracts left and right and defer paying outright big bonuses.

    Renaudo could be a guy you give a major-league contract to; but again, he's not getting out of the 1st so I'm not going to discus ifs and buts about a prospect who wont be there with our #34 pick.

    bpoz - Monday, May 31 2010 @ 02:39 PM EDT (#215893) #
    IMO each team has to "know" who they are. The Jays are not the Yankees. Each team gets a 25 man ML roster and will maybe use about 35 players each season. NYY has a huge budget to pay for their stacked lineup. This stacking starts in the off season and then is tweaked with trades etc during the season. NYY has no room for patience with struggling kids. IMO the Steinbrenners want WS rings, maybe more than other owners due to IMO ego. Also NY is a "special city" there are enough BIG$ citizens to spend big$ on showoff stuff like NYY tickets so the Steinbrenner's baseball asset got more valuable even with irresponsible spending. IMO other teams like Hamilton Ticats & Pittsburg Steelers cannot do this. A lower NYY draft budget makes sense "not to control spending" but because all those FAs cost high picks so they cannot select the picks to pay them. JP & Godfeey got to decide what the Jays would do, now it is AA and Beeston. Both groups had/have a budget. JP went cheap in the draft but expensive with FAs. $55 mil for AJ or pay 3 picks $11/yr=15 picks over 5 yrs. If the draft is a crap shoot and FAs are better then do that. If HS is more risky then go college. Do you think/know what JP did for international FAs $wise? How about AA & NYY? How about Bos Matsuzaka? Anyhow IMO AA will pay big for scouting, player development and draft picks because he knows that he cannot spend with the NYY but HE has the EDGE in draft picks. IMO he will also add farm teams or/and have a HUGE number of players in extended Duneden. Lastly, did he bluff with arbitration? How will he handle Boras? Now speaking of draft picks JP was awesome with those "not so high" college pitchers like Marcum,Jansen,Mills,Zep,Bush etc... I loved looking for those guys on our draft list and their development in the minors. I still look for J Banks & B McGee. We still have 6 or so coming up like R Boone & C Huggins. I hope AA can do the same (picking low round successful college pitchers). And how will we develop a great closer? The Jays has Henke & Ward from other organizations but the Expos never had a good closer.
    92-93 - Monday, May 31 2010 @ 02:43 PM EDT (#215894) #

    The $5 million I'm referring to would be the amount we'd break the current record by.  My argument is that a $5 million jump is simply far too great for me to take that $16 million number as a serious budget.  I have a hard time believing the MLB would be happy with us absolutely destroying the current record spent like that, seeing as how the MLB doesn't want the draft to become an even bigger spending spree than it already is.

    I couln't care any less about what MLB wants, and would hope that Toronto doesn't either. I don't know how you ignore the fact that Toronto has 3 unsigned picks from last year as well as 3 FA compensation picks - there's no sense in talking about historical draft budgets if you don't factor in the fact that Toronto didn't really use their 2009 budget. Has any team ever come anywhere close to this many picks in the top 115?

    Mike Green - Monday, May 31 2010 @ 02:51 PM EDT (#215895) #
    MatO, "high-upside" is easiest to define by what it isn't.  Players who control the strike zone well, don't have noticeable power, tremendous speed, 30-30 potential or a 95 mph fastball, and might play an important position.  Shaun Marcum and Dustin Pedroia would be the poster boys.  You definitely wouldn't want to get stuck with one of them for six prime years.:)
    Mike Green - Monday, May 31 2010 @ 04:10 PM EDT (#215909) #
    This little study supports my general preference for bats in the first round. Obviously, there are exceptions.
    Brian W - Monday, May 31 2010 @ 04:18 PM EDT (#215910) #
    Has any team ever come anywhere close to this many picks in the top 115?

    First one that comes to mind is the A's Moneyball draft (2002).  7 picks in the top 40, 9 in the top 100.  Only 2 of those picks have a positive WAR (Swisher and Blanton).
    ayjackson - Monday, May 31 2010 @ 04:19 PM EDT (#215911) #
    Thank you, Mylegacy.  You should call up Seiler and demand your commission - single shot, single malt?
    John Northey - Monday, May 31 2010 @ 04:39 PM EDT (#215920) #
    Actually it does. If we are talking about the Jays shooting for high end talent with lower picks then odds are good these guys will not be pure bonus babies. The $11 million record has little to nothing to do with anything as Washington spent more than $11 million on one guy last year but accounting shifted it so it wasn't a bonus.

    Also check out the bonus record up to 2001 which shows Joe Borchard setting it in 2000 with a $5.3 million bonus. Think about that - 10 years ago a guy got $5 million who was far from a lock (65 OPS+ in the OF lifetime, never a top 10 prospect in MLB by Baseball America). Teixeira signed for a $4.5 bonus and total contract of $9.5 mil, Prior for a $4 bonus total contract of $10.5 mil.

    Those above figures are 10 years old. Think about that. 10 years and people are still going on an $11 million record for total bonus payout as a limit. A decade ago one pick almost had that much in his contract. Baseball inflation has been significant since then, so the owners have done an amazing job keeping those figures down but still to go into the draft thinking that teams won't shatter that level if it gives them a couple of high end players for 6+ years each seems like wishful thinking (for owners).

    Now, looking at that 10 year old data you can see how stars can be had, but so can flops. But if a guy is an all-star then each AS season is worth about $10-20 million (or more) and just one of those is more than the amount Washington spent last year for all bonus' (not counting the extra payments). Yes, you still pay the guy but for 2-3 years you pay league minimum (roughly) and for the next 3-4 you pay arbitration rates which are lower than actual value. Plus you get first dibs on signing a long term deal which can be good (Wells first deal, maybe Hill & Lind) or bad (Rios & Wells) depending on how things go.

    Basically, what I'm saying is if the Jays limit themselves to spending $10-12 million on the draft then they are throwing away potential profit for little to no gain. Now, it wouldn't be a first for that to happen, but signing a guy to more than expected can be very, very useful and the Jays have done it before.
    metafour - Monday, May 31 2010 @ 07:13 PM EDT (#215933) #
    John; I'm not exactly sure I understand what you are suggesting.

    The Strasburg type deals are special cases.  As far as I know only 4 players signed major league deals last year (ie: what you are referring to in terms of paying a bonus plus an actual yearly contract).  Those players were Strasburg (#1 overall), Ackley (#2 overall), Turner (#9 overall), and Crow (#12 overall).  What you see here is that those deals are reserved to the absolute elite of the elite: Strasburg and Ackley were the two top players in the draft and both polished college prospects, Turner was arguably Top 5 but slipped some because of his demands, and Crow was a polished re-draft.

    No one past those guys ended up signing major league contracts, as far as I can tell off the top of my head.  Again, the issue here is that signing a kid to a ML deal means that you have to IMMEDIATELY  place them on the 40-man roster.  They thus have less options and you are put in a situation where you are rushed into bringing them up to the big-leagues because you cant wait for them to develop in the minors.

    I may be completely misinterpreting what you are saying; but it sounds to me like you are suggesting that we use picks like our #34 pick (for example) to draft kids and then simply have them sign to major-league deals like the ones I mentioned above.  That just doesn't happen, period.  You're not going to find a top-end developed player like Strasburg that needs very little developmental time at that point in this draft; and because of the option and eligibility rules you obviously cant sign a HS kid and have him sit on your 40-man roster.  The Tigers are risking a lot by giving a HS pitcher a major league contract.  Look at Porcello; they pretty much had to rush him to the majors when he realistically needed more time in the minors.  You cant give these things out like its no big deal; and subsequently NO ONE who will be available at #34 or lower will be good enough to sign to a major league contract.

    Spifficus - Monday, May 31 2010 @ 08:12 PM EDT (#215935) #
    Porcello is one of the elite talent sorts, and wasn't rushed because of options. He was going to get 4 option years, and still has 2 options left (I'm assuming they optioned him down in 2007, even though he didn't make a minor league appearance. I don't know how else they would have freed up the roster spot otherwise). I think his case was more a lack of disincentive to calling him up (since he was already on the 40-man) as opposed to the need to rush him.

    That said, a great way to mis-manage a high-schooler (or young international signing) is to give them a major league contract. The Wily Mo Penas and Delmon Youngs need time to develop. I hadn't noticed Turner got a major league deal, and I'm with you in thinking the Tigers are tempting fate.
    ayjackson - Tuesday, June 01 2010 @ 12:10 AM EDT (#215956) #

    Law has the Jays taking HS righthander Karsten Whitson in his v2.0 Mock Draft.  In the comments he says the following:

    I heard after I filed this that Toronto is leaning away from taking a prep pitcher at 11, and is more likely to take those guys in later rounds.

    I hope he didn't hear it from me.

    sam - Tuesday, June 01 2010 @ 12:39 AM EDT (#215957) #
    Interesting. I guess the Jays don't see a major difference between likes of Covey, Cole, and Whitson and the guys who are in the second group of high school arms. Correct me if I'm wrong, but this would seem to insinuate that the Jays will likely go over slot in the later rounds, considering high school arms generally demand a higher bonus.
    jgadfly - Tuesday, June 01 2010 @ 01:32 AM EDT (#215961) #

               Law has the Jays taking HS righthander Karsten Whitson in his v2.0 Mock Draft ...   Here's a video of Karsten Whitson pitching in last year's Armour AllAmerica  highschool game at Wrigley Field in August  '09 ...

       http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rkdtex_EkaM    Now, if you were a scout, who would you be taking ?  The kid with the great fastball or the kid with the pitch recognition problem ?

     

    China fan - Tuesday, June 01 2010 @ 05:35 AM EDT (#215965) #

    Interesting article in the Globe & Mail about Kellin Deglan, a catcher from BC who is called the best-ever Canadian catching prospect.  Keith Law ranks him as the 31st-best prospect in the draft.   Yes, the Jays have a lot of minor-league depth at catcher, but he could still fall to the Jays If they are serious about not drafting on the basis of positional need.

    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/baseball/canadian-catching-on/article1587462/

    ayjackson - Tuesday, June 01 2010 @ 11:42 AM EDT (#215973) #

    Now, if you were a scout, who would you be taking ?  The kid with the great fastball or the kid with the pitch recognition problem ?

    Is the kid with the pitch recognition problem the same kid being compared to Ryan Howard and Adam Dunn?

    jgadfly - Tuesday, June 01 2010 @ 01:54 PM EDT (#215986) #
    "the same kid being compared to Ryan Howard and Adam Dunn?"  ... AY ...  if he's the same kid of the '5 tools' rep and the plus defense, the plus arm, and the plus speed, the plus work ethic and the plus 3.whatever grade average who's biggest problem is figuring out how much $$$ is required for him to forego a university education ?  ...  then 'yes'  .   The only negatives with this kid that I have seen (reading the reports) is his 'pitch recognition problems' (he apparently doesn't have a problem recognizing fast balls) and the cost to sign him away from university .    He seems to be the guy with the 'most upside' ... even including Harper by my reading .
    metafour - Tuesday, June 01 2010 @ 02:21 PM EDT (#215990) #
      He seems to be the guy with the 'most upside' ... even including Harper by my reading .


    LMAO; c'mon man...Wilson isn't anywhere near that good.  You are clearly reading the wrong things.

    He does not have plus speed; it is about average speed for a power hitting RF.

    He profiles as a power hitting RF with a plus arm.  Pitch recognition is a serious concern because that is what is going to determine whether he will even hit or not.  If he cant hit the ball then it doesn't matter what type of power he has.  There are also mechanical problems with his swing that will need to be corrected.
    ayjackson - Tuesday, June 01 2010 @ 04:40 PM EDT (#215995) #
    jgad, i thought you were talking choice....my mistake
    jgadfly - Tuesday, June 01 2010 @ 05:54 PM EDT (#216006) #

    AY ... I'd prefer Choice as well but from what I've been reading he won't be available .

     

    Meta4 ... the proverbial 'some' are now saying that the Nats are thinking of putting Harper in the outfield to extend his career so if that is the case then how do they (Harper/Wilson) match up as outfielders ?  Harper has massive power but he loses some value moving off of catcher.  Outfield defense, speed and arm comparisons would then  favour  Wilson would they not ?    The video shows the pitch recognition concern with Wilson.   It also shows him regonizing the next pitch and laying off of it.  The following pitch he recognizes quite well as you can plainly see .   One pitch doesn't make for upside just as one pitch from Whitson shouldn't be taken as down side, but if given the 'choice' between Whitson (as per K Law's forecast) and Wilson I'd be going with Wilson ... 

    metafour - Tuesday, June 01 2010 @ 06:16 PM EDT (#216007) #
    Should point out that that Whitson/Wilson matchup is quite old.  This is important because Whitson wasn't seen as an elite prospect at that time (notice how the announcers aren't saying a thing about Whitson) - his stuff really took off his SR season.
    metafour - Tuesday, June 01 2010 @ 06:25 PM EDT (#216008) #
    Harper has massive power but he loses some value moving off of catcher.  Outfield defense, speed and arm comparisons would then  favour  Wilson would they not

    Harper's bat is so good that it really doesn't matter what position he plays.  Sure; if he could stick at catcher that would increase his value, but a move to the outfield was pretty much always in line.  Wilson should be a better defender and is more athletic, but Harper has a strong arm as well (so I wouldn't say Wilson has a big advantage if any there).  The big thing you have to consider is that RF is still on offensive position.  The fact that Wilson should be a better defender means very little if he doesn't hit.  Even if he does hit; he's not likely to hit as well as Harper, so the defensive upgrade still doesn't offset the batting difference.  Wilson has big power upside...Harper's is even better (we're talking scary power upside with Harper).  Harper has some holes in his swing but even still he is a much more advanced hitter than Wilson despite being younger.  Comparing them right now as hitters is purely ridiculous...one guy is almost all projection (Wilson) while the other is currently flashing ridiculous ability with a wood bat against guys 2 years older than him.
    Spifficus - Tuesday, June 01 2010 @ 09:07 PM EDT (#216015) #
    Harper has universally accepted 80-power (scouting scale 20-80). That's storied-level power, or "I remember when" power. A few have given Wilson 80, but I think most scores I've seen for power are 70. Add in the fact that he's a better pure hitter than Wilson, and his better power will have more opportunity to shine. Put another way, if they were both DHs, Harper's better. And he's in a wood bat league... a year younger... and hitting against JuCo pitchers. And he has potential to be a plus defensive catcher, and has an 80 arm. I know everyone knows all this, but it's kinda scary to think about that every now and again. Wilson's a talented athlete, but Harper's a generational talent.

    From what I've read, I'd still rather have Castellanos than Wilson. He's not quite the athlete, but is still a good one, has a plus bat, plus power and looks like he should be at least average at 3b. I find it weird I haven't heard the Jays connected to him at all.
    Forkball - Wednesday, June 02 2010 @ 08:43 AM EDT (#216037) #
    A few have given Wilson 80, but I think most scores I've seen for power are 70

    If a few is at least three and then most are more than three, you've implied that you've seen at least 7 grades for Wilson.  Where are you reading all of these?
    Spifficus - Wednesday, June 02 2010 @ 12:29 PM EDT (#216052) #
    I was probably a bit generous with using 'few', and reviewing some of the spots, it looks like it was fewer than I remember (side note - I generally make it a point to not trust my memory... not sure what happened here). I thought I had seen a half-dozen numerical reports over the past month or two, but so far have only re-found 3. baseballbeginnings.com has him at 80. KLaw has him at 60, PnRscouting.com has him at 70. Everything else I've found today has been verbal, using language like Plus or Excellent. Annoying. I know there are more out there; it sucks that I can't find them again.
    jgadfly - Wednesday, June 02 2010 @ 04:00 PM EDT (#216066) #

    RE: Austin Wilson

     Here is a scouting report by Nick James of PNR scouting  ...  http://pnrscouting.com/scoutingreports_2010_wilsonau.html

     Here is an interesting interview with Kevin Levine- Flantrup of the Yankee's PinstripesPlus.com  ...  http://yankees.scout.com/2/969666.html

    Mike Green - Wednesday, June 02 2010 @ 04:15 PM EDT (#216067) #
    The Jays apparently worked out a middle infielder out of high school, Tony Wolters, some time ago in contravention of California rules (as a result of which Wolters is sitting out).  Wolters is in the Pedroia/Pastornicky mold, short guy, does a bunch of little things well.  Needless to say, I like him.
    Gerry - Wednesday, June 02 2010 @ 05:02 PM EDT (#216070) #
    Jonathan Mayo at mlb has a new mock draft up and he has the Jays selecting Josh Sale, HS OF from Washington, the home of Travis Snider.
    damos - Wednesday, June 02 2010 @ 05:19 PM EDT (#216073) #
    Frank Piliere @ MLB Fanhouse mentioned today that the Jays are also looking at Kaleb Cowart (RHP / 3B), Josh Sale (OF) & Asher Wojciechowski (RHP). 

    Andy Seiler from mlbbonusbaby.com put up a new mock this afternoon that had Toronto selecting Whitson.  He also mentions Wilson, Sale & Colon. 

    ayjackson - Wednesday, June 02 2010 @ 05:33 PM EDT (#216074) #

    John Manual at BA chatted today that he thinks Cowart is unsignable.  He rates him between Casey Kelley and Ethan Martin as two way prepsters that will likely pitch from the 2008 draft.

    I'm thinking Cox and Choice would be preferred but gone.  I'd lean toward Whitson, Sale and Castellanos at that point.  The Citadel pitcher could be a supplementary round option as he could go anywhere from 15 to 35.

    Gerry - Wednesday, June 02 2010 @ 09:11 PM EDT (#216082) #
    Jordan Bastian has an interview with Andrew Tinnish about the upcoming draft.  No prospect names are mentioned, of course.
    ayjackson - Thursday, June 03 2010 @ 11:23 AM EDT (#216116) #

    Latest rumours are that the Red Sox and Jays are hot and heavy on Mel Rojas Jr in the supplemental round.

    I wonder if Mel Rojas Sr is available for our bullpen.

    TJ Caino - Thursday, June 03 2010 @ 11:37 AM EDT (#216119) #
    Latest rumours are that the Red Sox and Jays are hot and heavy on Mel Rojas Jr in the supplemental round.

    Jays: 34, 38 and 41

    Sox: 36 and 39

    Jays get the first 'second shot' at him. Will be interesting to see how the Jays play the board in the supplemental round. It would be interesting to be a fly on the wall for that; but it would be interesting to be a fly on the wall for all their draft discussion.
    Forkball - Thursday, June 03 2010 @ 04:23 PM EDT (#216149) #
    While they'll say they'll line up the board and pick, you'd have to think they'll have some conversations about what the Sox will do in the supplemental round with that many picks in close proximity to one another.
    Gerry - Thursday, June 03 2010 @ 04:25 PM EDT (#216150) #

    Jordan Bastian has a draft related interview with Alex Anthopoulos today.

    Anthopoulos has let it be known that finding a long-term solution for shortstop was one of his goals when he took over as the Jays general manager. Anthopoulos hopes to have found his man in Cuban shortstop Adeiny Hechavarria, who signed a four-year contract with Toronto earlier this season.

    That does not mean the Blue Jays will necessarily pass on any shortstops early on in the Draft. Anthopoulos said he and his staff do not plan on making picks based on any perceived organizational needs at the Major League or Minor League levels.

    "You can never have enough," Anthopoulos said. "We're not going to be impacted by what positions we have at the big league level. We're not going to be impacted by what positions we have at the Minor League level. At the end of the day, the best player available is the best player available."

    "Some of our better prospects are at certain spots, but we won't shy away from a player because we have someone at that spot. Things change too quickly."

     

    Mike Green - Thursday, June 03 2010 @ 05:59 PM EDT (#216155) #
    Deglan and DeShields Jr. both look like hitters to me.  Rojas Jr. also looks OK. 

    It drives me crazy that you still get no sense from the scouting reports whether a hitter has some reasonable control of the strike zone.  If a pitcher has these issues, it'll be there.

    sam - Thursday, June 03 2010 @ 06:56 PM EDT (#216157) #
    From that interview I really get the impression that the real change in drafting strategy won't necessarily be with our first couple of picks but with our later round selections.
    Chris DH - Thursday, June 03 2010 @ 09:19 PM EDT (#216162) #

    Cant wait for Monday!

    Mel Rojas Jr.  The scouting reports at BA and ESPN pretty much state he has good bat speed but only drew 4 walks - the fewest of any player on the team.

    Looks like Whitson would be a great pick at #9.  ESPN has him ranked at #5, PNR Scouting at #3(!), MLB Bonus Baby at #9 and Baseball America at #15. 

    Appears Choice or Wilson would be considered a slight overdraft at #11? Baseball America has Choice ranked at #11 but the other three dont have him ranked higher than 16th.  PNR has Wilson ranked the highest at #17.  And before anybody jumps all over me, yes, there may not be much difference between pick #10 to pick #20 or something like that.

    Kevin Goldstein has his mock draft up this evening.  He also has the Jays projected to take OF Josh Sale.

    C. 

    mendocino - Friday, June 04 2010 @ 09:16 AM EDT (#216171) #

    http://canadianbaseballnetwork.com/node/14200

    ALLAN SIMPSON -- Perfect Game's top 50 detailed reports, 5 Canucks in 100 ... No. 2 Jameson Taillon (The Woodlands, Tex.), No. 29 C Kellin Deglan (Langley, BC), No. 31 LHP James Paxton (Ladner, BC), No. 50 OF Marcus Knecht (North York, Ont.), No. 80 LHP Evan Rutckyj (Windsor, Ont.), No. 96 2B Chris Bission (Orleans, Ont.) and No. 186 LHP Evan Grills (Whitby, Ont.).

     

    Perfect Game USA, based in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, is the world's largest independent baseball scouting service. PG's draft coverage is coordinated by Allan Simpson, a Canadian who pioneered coverage of the baseball draft as the founder of Baseball America. For more draft coverage, please go to Perfect Game.

    By Allan Simpson

     

     

    sam - Friday, June 04 2010 @ 10:45 AM EDT (#216178) #
    Jameson Taillon?  I think his parents are Canadian, but he wasn't born in Canada.  It's a bit of a stretch to say he's a Canuck.
    Mike Green - Friday, June 04 2010 @ 11:30 AM EDT (#216180) #
    Bryan Smith has a good rundown today in Fangraphs on third basemen available in the draft.  Josh Sale isn't likely to be a third baseman, from what I saw, but I agree with Smith that the comparisons with Travis Snider are lazy.  Rob Segedin interests me.  Nice swing, and looks like he will be able to stay at the position. 
    mendocino - Friday, June 04 2010 @ 12:48 PM EDT (#216182) #

    http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Columnists/Elliott/2010/06/03/14237046.html

    Again, work with AIG took the family south and Jamo was born in Lakeland, Fla., while the Taillon’s lived in nearby Winter Haven.

    “My son has Canadian citizenship, all our children do,” Mike said. “For Christie and I, that’s their history. My dad is in Cornwall, both our families are in Canada.

    “We still love Canada. It’s where we were born and raised. We wanted to give all our children the option when they became adults to consider Canada home.”

     

    John Northey - Friday, June 04 2010 @ 01:03 PM EDT (#216185) #
    Things to remember about the draft...

    Each year there are around 1-3 future HOF'ers to be had. Each year there are about 150 future major leaguers to be had, most of whom will have cup of coffee careers. That works out to 1 HOF per 10 teams, 5 ML'ers per team.

    Going through old Jay drafts the peak was 3 guys with WAR over 10 (1997 - Wells, Young, Hudson). 1989 was the best with Olerud & Kent & Hammonds (didn't sign, 9.9 WAR). 1982 is also a great one with Key & David Wells and unsigned Mike Henneman also over 10 WAR while 1978 had Stieb & Moseby. 1980 was the only complete flop with 0 making the majors.

    What does this tell us? That finding 3 stars is extremely rare, even counting guys who didn't sign. Finding 2 superstars is also extremely rare and needs luck (Kent, David Wells, and Stieb were not expected to be close to what they were).

    So remember, of all the guys we see the Jays draft getting 5 major leaguers and 1 or 2 stars is all we can hope for realistically.
    Moe - Friday, June 04 2010 @ 02:53 PM EDT (#216192) #
    I posted that in another threat before I found out that this one is still active:

    Law has a new mock draft up: he has the Jays taking Colon.
    His take: "Could be Choice if he gets here or O'Conner. I'm hearing it's unlikely they do a prep arm here. It's pretty funny that Oakland and Toronto are on the same three guys. Just like old times!"

    Some more info for non-insiders:
    He has J. Sale, Whitson, and Choice go in that order right before the Jays.

    I found his comment on Whitson interesting: He thinks if Whitson doesn't go at 9, he will fall a lot. I'd find that disappointing. I really hope the Jays would take him over O'Conner.
    92-93 - Friday, June 04 2010 @ 04:54 PM EDT (#216207) #

    Jameson Taillon?  I think his parents are Canadian, but he wasn't born in Canada.  It's a bit of a stretch to say he's a Canuck.

    I suspect there's quite a few Canadians, like myself, with American parents who would strongly disagree with the notion we aren't American. Or Canadian.

    92-93 - Friday, June 04 2010 @ 05:10 PM EDT (#216211) #

    If there's a way to keep bumping this thread to the top at least until draft day I'd suggest it, so the thread doesn't get lost at the bottom of the page.

    ayjackson - Friday, June 04 2010 @ 05:28 PM EDT (#216213) #
    I imagine the roster is planning another draft post this weekend.  It's been really good reading - thanks to all.  I would just like to take this moment to lament at the disappearance of Pistol.  He posted great draft material.  I think he must have been consumed by his Ricciardi hatred in the end and committed to an internet-free assylum.
    sam - Friday, June 04 2010 @ 05:36 PM EDT (#216214) #
    I stand corrected. I'm sorry if I offended anyone out there. My comment was in regards to the list. Taillon was born in the US, grew up in the US, and played all his amateur ball in the US. I just thought that putting him on that list might be a bit crude. Once again, I'm sorry if I offended anyone.

    But say Taillon were to slip for some reason, maybe he'd give us a "hometown discount"
    Sano - Friday, June 04 2010 @ 05:57 PM EDT (#216218) #
    Just like Paxton?  I understand Taillon's a different story being from ON at least.  Just saying we shouldn't put any eggs in that basket.

    I just want Monday to roll around.  Tired of all these prognostications, just want to see how AA will handle his first draft.
    TJ Caino - Friday, June 04 2010 @ 05:57 PM EDT (#216219) #
    I would just like to take this moment to lament at the disappearance of Pistol.  He posted great draft material.

    I second that.
    sam - Friday, June 04 2010 @ 06:46 PM EDT (#216223) #
    I was joking about the "hometown discount"
    ayjackson - Friday, June 04 2010 @ 06:46 PM EDT (#216224) #
    Callis has us taking Delino Deshields at #11.  Though he has the Astros taking Delino Deshields Jr. at #18.  I'm not sure what to make of that.
    TJ Caino - Saturday, June 05 2010 @ 09:18 PM EDT (#216310) #
    I was joking about the "hometown discount"

    I'm not sure if he would be offended about the Canadian/American thing, but his agent would likely take exception to the "hometown discount" quip.
    Pistol - Sunday, June 06 2010 @ 01:54 PM EDT (#216349) #
    I would just like to take this moment to lament at the disappearance of Pistol.  He posted great draft material.  I think he must have been consumed by his Ricciardi hatred in the end and committed to an internet-free asylum.

    I'm still around, but for the most part I just lurk.  I've been checking in this post daily and it's nice to see everyone keeping tabs on what's getting posted in other areas.  This should be an interesting draft for a couple reasons.  One, the Jays have a bunch of picks, and two, they have new people at the helm with a different philosophy.  I think I've seen at least 10 different names in mock drafts for the first pick; sounds like it could be just about anyone (barring surprise drops, I kind of like
    Nick Castellanos).  I'll definitely be tuned  in on Monday, but beyond pick 11 I have no clue.

    While I did dislike Ricciardi, that didn't play any part of my 'retirement'.  Basically it was a combination of having less time and less desire to do what I did. 

    But I appreciate the comment.  It was fun while it lasted.  I've always enjoyed drafts (in any major sport) and was inspired by Moneyball to really follow baseball's draft.  I ended up doing a pinch hit prior to the Aaron Hill (03) draft and just kept doing it for 5-6 drafts.  Back then you really had to go digging for information and wasn't always complete or updated.  These days, particularly with Boyd's World, it's pretty easy to find stats, and there's so many more sources of scouting reports today than there was then that the draft is much easier to follow.
    2010 Draft - May 31 | 78 comments | Create New Account
    The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.