Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine
The 2012 first year player draft is tomorrow and Toronto picks 17th and 22nd overall. The Jays have five picks in the first 60.

Stanford right-hander Mark Appel and high-school outfielder Byron Buxton, who has the highest upside of any player in the draft, head this year’s draft class. However, there is a lot of intrigue in the draft, as usual, as high-school right-hander Lucas Giolito, who was strongly considered to be the favourite to be the first overall pick is injured and is a wildcard and it’s uncertain where he’ll be drafted. Behind Appel and Buxton, some of the most noticeable names include Puerto Rican shortstop Carlos Correa, LSU right-hander Kevin Gausman, shortstop Deven Marrero, high-school lefty Max Fried and University of Florida catcher Mike Zunino. It is expected all those names, save maybe Giolito, will be off the board before Toronto’s first pick.

This is the thread for draft discussion, predictions and wishes in the lead-up to the first draft under the new CBA rules.

Draft Discussion | 56 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
greenfrog - Sunday, June 03 2012 @ 04:24 PM EDT (#257629) #
I would be interested to know where SS/3B Corey Seager falls on the Jays' draft board. He seems like a possible solid draft choice at #17 or 22 (HS player, bloodlines, good size / athleticism, good defensive ability, etc). Signability might be an issue but if the Jays really want him and he's within reach they might be able to redistribute the necessary funds by via their multiple early-round picks.
robertdudek - Sunday, June 03 2012 @ 04:35 PM EDT (#257630) #
I believe it is Kevin Gausman.
Thomas - Sunday, June 03 2012 @ 04:41 PM EDT (#257631) #
It is. Thanks. Correction made.
Richard S.S. - Sunday, June 03 2012 @ 05:04 PM EDT (#257636) #
As this is the last time Toronto has so many early picks, I'd like to see A.A. go after as many high-upside picks as possible. Even at the risk of losing two first round picks in subsequent drafts. It's possible most high school prospects might not get picked early. Be nice to see A.A. take a risk sometime.
greenfrog - Sunday, June 03 2012 @ 05:21 PM EDT (#257637) #
Speaking of the draft, I wonder whether the Jays are in on the newly-available Soler on the IFA market. You can never have enough premium prospects (if indeed he qualifies as a premium prospect).
SJE - Sunday, June 03 2012 @ 06:32 PM EDT (#257647) #
All reports I have read states that Soler is a premium talent. With the restriction on International spending in the new CBA this maybe the last time the Jays can flex the muscle by out bidding their competition. Although I would like to see the Jays be aggressive in the draft. this does not seem to be the year to lose draft picks for next year, when next years draft seems much stronger.
brent - Sunday, June 03 2012 @ 06:39 PM EDT (#257648) #
This may not be that bad of draft because the Jays aren't picking that high anyway. It's the teams in the top 5 that are really hurting instead. The Jays and Cards could pull out a better draft than some of the teams with the top picks.
Thomas - Sunday, June 03 2012 @ 07:47 PM EDT (#257655) #
Brent, I agree. I love everything I hear about Buxton, but he would probably have gone fifth or sixth last year. Some of the other names are intriguing, but if you were picking fourth it doesn't look like there's anyone comparable to Dylan Bundy.
finch - Sunday, June 03 2012 @ 08:00 PM EDT (#257659) #
My ideal draft for the Blue Jays...

17. Lance McCullers, RHP, Jesuit HS (FL)

22. David Dahl, OF, Oak Mountain HS (AL)

50. Nick Williams, OF, Ball HS (TX)

58. Keon Barnum, 1B, King HS (FL)

60. Mitchell Traver, Houston Christian HS (TX)

MuCullers is an absolutely beast on the mound. There’s some signability issues with him as he’s represented by Boras. Dahl is Trout comps while Williams has a high ceiling and is compared to Ken Griffey, though those are lofty comps. Barnum has some serious power potential and Traver is a hard throwing 6’7” pitcher.

This draft will be interesting to keep track of with all the rules. One thing I’m confident in is that AA and his scouts will be best prepared.
smcs - Sunday, June 03 2012 @ 09:17 PM EDT (#257662) #
The pick at 22 is probably going to be a college guy who will sign for cheap. The combination of it not being protected for next year and high slot number just make it too risky to take someone who might not sign.
hypobole - Sunday, June 03 2012 @ 09:41 PM EDT (#257663) #
Doesn't the new CBA provide an extra year of protection for unsigned draft picks?
greenfrog - Sunday, June 03 2012 @ 09:42 PM EDT (#257664) #
smcs, I think the #22 pick is protected for an extra year as a result of the new CBA. I don't think the Jays have any unprotected picks this year.
Jdog - Sunday, June 03 2012 @ 09:55 PM EDT (#257665) #
Actually under the new CBA pick 22 is protected for 1 more year. And even if it wasn't I don't think AA and Tinnish would take a take a signability pick, they would just do their homework and take a guy they like.

You have to think with the new rules in place that agents are going to quit throwing out these big bonus demands, the fact of the matter is now the higher your drafted the more your going to get paid so it doesn't do you any good to throw out a huge demand, its basically player/agents saying if I'm not drafted 1st round I'm going to school.
hypobole - Sunday, June 03 2012 @ 11:56 PM EDT (#257666) #
"I don't think AA and Tinnish would take a take a signability pick"

Who does make the final decision on Blue Jays 1st round picks? I know in most orgs it's the GM, although I have heard of at least one where it was the scouting director. Has anyone heard this mentioned by AA in the past?
92-93 - Monday, June 04 2012 @ 02:13 AM EDT (#257670) #
If Giolito is on the board when the Jays pick at 17 I really hope they select him.
greenfrog - Monday, June 04 2012 @ 09:14 AM EDT (#257671) #
Giolito seems unlikely unless the Jays are satisfied with his medicals and have a strong sense that he'll sign for around $2-3M ($2M slot plus maybe $500K-1M reallocated from another pick). Signing Giolito may mean having to effectively punt another early-round pick to free up money.

Of course, Giolito would also have to fall to them first. Various teams that pick before the Jays (like Pittsburg at 8 or Oakland at 11) are well positioned to spend a similar amount.
AWeb - Monday, June 04 2012 @ 09:44 AM EDT (#257673) #

It should be an interesting few years to see how the money spent on picks pans out. Players/agents have lost their main bargaining chip, which was an essentially unlimited source of funds for a particular pick. Teams would be crazy to blow a large % of their money on a single draft pick given how often baseball picks work out, but there are always crazy teams out there, I guess. I agree with JDog above – I think players are going to have to give up a lot of ground. Now you have to appear to be not only a top player to get a big bonus, but I would think you’d have to be almost MLB ready at draft time (so a few college players, and a rare HS hitter like Harper?).  But I’m not sure player demand changes will happen this year, both sides will be seeking out a new equilibrium.

Punting on an early draft choice to save a lot of money would require picking a player completely out of draft position – not just a “safe” choice, but a “this first rounder would be happy with 10th round money” type choice. It will be pretty explicit too, if teams do this, since the money will end up being way below typical. It’s two problems – the player is constantly referred to as being “not really a first rounder” and ends up with a weird combination of expectation and expectation of failure, and the league looks awful if it happens a lot. I don’t think anything that similar happens in any other drafts. Baseball already had this happen way too often at the top of the draft (where else would a #1 overall pick fall on signability concerns like it has occasionally in MLB?)

Brent S - Monday, June 04 2012 @ 10:44 AM EDT (#257676) #
The possibility of Giolito is very enticing.

In my eye, it boils down to the following: would you trade two mid-1st round picks for a top 5 pick after factoring in the injury and prospect attrition risks? In my opinion, it is worth it. Getting truly elite talent is now more costly than ever, and this is the situation to roll the dice.

That is, if Giolito falls to 17.

MatO - Monday, June 04 2012 @ 10:59 AM EDT (#257677) #
Unless you're talking about a hitter going first or second in the draft I would never put my eggs in one basket.  Certainly not with a pitcher.  I would take volume every day.  I think Sanchez, Syndergaard and Nicolino signed for something like $2M total.
John Northey - Monday, June 04 2012 @ 11:01 AM EDT (#257678) #
A good question is how the lost draft pick works too. If a team is really good they'd lose a lower pick than a really bad team would thus an incentive if a quality player drops for a high revenue team (aka the Yankees) to sign him and write off 2 first rounders as odds are those guys would be lower end first rounders. I suspect a lot of (smarter) teams will be doing cost-benefit analysis of what it would take to accept losing those picks. Ideally you'd go nuts across the board one year and live with it - IE: draft a batch of guys who should be 1st round, blow $20+ mil in bonuses, then accept that you don't have a first round pick for a couple of years.
greenfrog - Monday, June 04 2012 @ 11:01 AM EDT (#257679) #
If Giolito wants, say, $3.5M, the Jays could choose him at #17 and then punt two of their supplemental round picks (e.g., by choosing low-cost college seniors) for the extra $1.5M. That way they could still be aggressive and go BPA with their #22 pick. If Giolito wants $4M+, things would get more complicated.

Kevin Goldstein's latest mock draft has the Mets picking Giolito at #12, with the Jays selecting McCullers at #17.
Gerry - Monday, June 04 2012 @ 11:23 AM EDT (#257680) #
I have heard Giolito's family is well-off and so it won't be forced into a payday decision.  There has been endless speculation about what Giolito's price will be.  The teams may know but we sure don't.
Maldoff - Monday, June 04 2012 @ 11:31 AM EDT (#257681) #
I don't know much about the current crop of draft prospects, but looking at the Jays system, I think one thing that is missing is a legitimate power threat, preferrably either at 1B or 3B. We have a good amount of pitching, a few "toolsy" guys who have some power, but no one that appears to be developing into a 30 homer-type guy. Just my two cents.
MatO - Monday, June 04 2012 @ 11:40 AM EDT (#257682) #
Finding guys like Syndergaard and Musgrove, who were willing to accept below slot money, will be super important if the Jays want to go over slot on some other picks.  Going after college seniors to compensate is normally a really bad idea (unless you luck out on a Youkilis).
bpoz - Monday, June 04 2012 @ 11:53 AM EDT (#257683) #
With the picks from round 1 & 2 protected it would not bother me if none of them signed, except for the criticism, name calling & insults hurled my way. It would probably be hard for my family to deal with.

However losing the unprotected picks for round 3+ would bother me because I lose the player & the budget. So I would give a little extra for those picks & play hardball with the protected picks. So Boras or anyone not signing means I forward my pick & budget to next year ie no gamble or risk for me. But the player & agent (a)may not have as good an opportunity next year due to performance or injury or (b) the player gets a lot better and so may get as good or better offer. Too many missed opportunities would hurt the agents reputation IMO.

Other than Strasburg & B Harper, IMO just about every player has a fair amount of risk. IMO Baltimore has picked very talented players with their top pick over the years, which was very high but it has not worked out often enough. Now I risk influencing/blowing this years draft by overpaying on a pick as good as a Baltimore pick without the budget and then losing 2 future picks ie 2 dice rolls.
85bluejay - Monday, June 04 2012 @ 11:55 AM EDT (#257685) #

Even with the last 2 very good drafts, I was disappointed with the top pick each year - Travis Snider is the only top pick in this century that I really liked, so I'm thinking I will probably be disappointed again with the jays 1st pick.

with a young mlb team & a very good farm system, the jays are in an excellent position to be aggressive & if that results in some of the picks not signing and punting that pick to next years draft, I don't mind that at all especially with a weak draft.

Here's what would make me happy (I don't expect the jays to get any)

17 - Lucas Giolito - it's worth the gamble for a potential top of the rotation guy - if he doesn't sign or the injury is worse than suspected then I'm okay with punting the pick to next year. I would make him a good offer but not go overboard like I've read in some postings. 

22. David Dahl - he seems to be everybody's 2nd choice amongst the high ceiling high school outfielders & apparently the Jays like him

50. Matt Smoral (Hunter Vibrant) - hopefully injury concerns drop him & the system could use a upside lefty

58. Nick Williams - I know he's had a down year but he was great last year & teams have done well gambling on players who had down draft years

60. Kevin Barnum - the power bat @ 1b 

Gerry - Monday, June 04 2012 @ 12:02 PM EDT (#257686) #

If we assume that teams stick to the slotting system there is very little incentive for a player selected in the first round not to sign.  Let's think of the player the Jays select at #17.  If the player elects not to sign, his hope for a better payday assumes he will be selected higher than #17 in two or three years time.  That is a low probability event.  Also, a player signing at age 18 starts the clock on his minor league service time earlier and, if he is a top tier player, he should reach the major leagues at a younger age further increasing his total compensation.

Many non signed players in previous years did not sign over arbitrary dollar amounts of what the pick should be worth versus what the team was offering.  That arbitrary debate has been significantly removed this year.  I doubt we will see many picks punted to pay another player more.  You can end up making yourself worse off by doing that.  Many of the Jays current top prospects were taken in the supplementary round or in rounds 2 or 3.  If you punt that pick to give more money to a first rounder, you could end up with less total value.

greenfrog - Monday, June 04 2012 @ 12:15 PM EDT (#257687) #
Also, if you start punting picks or reallocating significant funds now, then you may be setting a bad precedent, as future draftees and their "advisers" may start demanding over-slot compensation. Might be better to establish your reputation as a team that pays the going rate, i.e., that doesn't go over slot.
Forkball - Monday, June 04 2012 @ 12:22 PM EDT (#257688) #

BA Mock:

And bonus slots:

There's no trading of picks in baseball, but if you think Giolito is a top 5 player, would you (effectively) use the bonus money from picks 17 and 22 to draft and sign him for $4 million?  I think the instinct is to say yes, but something like WAR would show that it's better to have those two picks.

I wonder if there's players out there who would offer themselves at a discount to their slot to be selected higher?  Say you're the 30th ranked player, but are willing to sign at a $250,000 discount (from slot) if selected in the top 20.  The player would end up with more money even with the discount, and the team would have more money freed up to use in other places.  Seems like a win-win.

With the caps in place I think we'll see a lot of agreed upon deals today.  Pick #17 will probably reveal the Jays strategy quickly.

Forkball - Monday, June 04 2012 @ 12:26 PM EDT (#257689) #

as future draftees and their "advisers" may start demanding over-slot compensation

Players can demand all they want but a team has to agree to it.  The Jays have shown they have a dollar amount in mind and you either take it or you don't.  Plus, teams have the benefit of pick protection if a player doesn't sign.

If you think going over on 1 player and under on a 2nd is the best way to use two picks that's what you have to do, because you can bet some team will if you don't.

ayjackson - Monday, June 04 2012 @ 12:48 PM EDT (#257690) #
I'm not sure what "punting" exactly means in quality of player drafted, but I don't think the Jays will crounge up more than $400-500k in underslot signings to give to Giolito, if available.  I completely believe they'd draft him though, offer him the modest overslot contract, and let him take it or leave it.  It's a weak draft overall, and next year's is much stronger, so I fully expect a pick or two in the first 5 to go unsigned.
MatO - Monday, June 04 2012 @ 01:02 PM EDT (#257691) #

Individual draft picks are massively overrated by the average fan.  We all know what kind of player Aaron Hill is but did you know that based on WAR he's the 6th best player to date that was drafted 13th overall since the start of the draft in 1965.  The Baseball Reference draft website is a great reality check for the uninitiated:


Beyonder - Monday, June 04 2012 @ 01:04 PM EDT (#257692) #
Forkball. I think the scenario of overdrafting cheap players is one of those strategies that sounds like a win-win going into the draft, but will not work very well in practice.

Say we draft Gioliti with the 17th, and then overdraft a college senior at 22. The second player's agent has two things going for him: 1) He can point to the hard(er) slot value, which should serve as a much stronger benchmark that last years' soft slot reccomendations, and 2) he knows that the team will lose the cap space entirely if they fail to sign.

This second point gives agents an enormous bargaining chip, particularly in a situation where you think a team has already overspent on its first pick.

If the Jays pick Giolito, I expect they'll simply resign themselves to paying the penalty (up to 5% of teh overage). They'll bargain as hard as they can of course, but I expect it is going to be very hard to move players off the slot either way.

Giolito is a hell of a risk. Not sure I would take it.
Forkball - Monday, June 04 2012 @ 01:23 PM EDT (#257693) #

I can't imagine they would take Giolito and then blindly hope to save money elsewhere for the very reason you point out, Beyonder.

If the Jays take Giolito, or any other player that will be an 'above slot' player, any player they take subsequent to that to 'save' money I would imagine will be pre-arranged prior to the selection.  (And for that matter, I think the Jays have done alright recently with players under slot; Syndergaard was one IIRC).

Pre-arranged deals were pretty common in the old format; I think they'll increase significantly this year, particularly since it's considered a weak draft.  One of the biggest keys to a draft these days will be accurately gauging how much players will sign for.

Thomas - Monday, June 04 2012 @ 01:36 PM EDT (#257696) #
Giolito is a hell of a risk. Not sure I would take it.

I think Giolito will be available and the Jays will pass.

Beyonder - Monday, June 04 2012 @ 01:52 PM EDT (#257697) #
It's a strange situation with Giolito. Last year, with a guy like Daniel Norris, the further down in the draft he fell, the more he became a bargain. With Giolito it is the opposite. If you assume he has a set signing price in mind (say $4 million), as he falls he becomes less of a bargain, since his slot value drops.

It is very possible that he falls out of the first round entirely. If he does, the spread between his 'ask' and the slot value may grow so wide that he doesn't get drafted at all.
Ishai - Monday, June 04 2012 @ 01:55 PM EDT (#257698) #
If I understand this new system correctly, it appears to be in a team's interest to punt picks in order to receive a greater spending allocation in future years. Because teams that do not sign picks in the first round are compensated with future first round picks, they are also compensated with a larger future draft budget.

For example, if the Blue Jays punt the 17th pick and spend their entire first round budget on the 22nd pick, then next year they will have the 18th and one other pick that could be punted to spend over slot on the 18th, and so on and so forth.

This is an obvious abuse of the system that screws over the players who are picked with no intention of being signed, but it seems to be in a team's best interest to essentially double the budgetary value of a pick by delaying it for a year, especially in weak drafts.

Am I missing something, or is this the new exploit?

ayjackson - Monday, June 04 2012 @ 02:00 PM EDT (#257699) #
For example, if the Blue Jays punt the 17th pick and spend their entire first round budget on the 22nd pick, then next year they will have the 18th and one other pick that could be punted to spend over slot on the 18th, and so on and so forth.

This is incorrect.  If you don't sign a player in this draft, you don't get the $$$ for that pick in this draft.  Punting means taking a underslot player who you can sign cheaply and reallocate the savings to another pick.
Beyonder - Monday, June 04 2012 @ 02:07 PM EDT (#257701) #

Ishai. From what I hear you are right about next years' draft being deeper. Don't know if I agree about the 'punting' strategy though.

For one, all things being equal, a player today is worth more than a player tomorrow #like a dollar today is worth more than a dollar tomorrow#. Especially when your fan base criticizes you mercilessly when you fail to sign your first round pick.

Second, yes, your draft budget may get larger next year, but so likely would the cost of signing the player with the replacement pick. No real advantage there.

Lastly, if the Jays punt their 17th pick by not signing whoever they draft, that slot value dissappears from the Jays $8,830,000 budget. If they don't sing the player they can't use his slot on another player.

85bluejay - Monday, June 04 2012 @ 02:14 PM EDT (#257702) #
To keep in mind on this draft day - just 2 years ago, many were raving at the steal that Pirates got in the 2nd round with Stetson Allie - paid him like 2.2 mil - now he is going to try 3rd base as he can't seem to find the strike zone as a pitcher - Poor Pirates, seem to strike out whether they go cheap or spend the money 
John Northey - Monday, June 04 2012 @ 02:17 PM EDT (#257703) #
A very good point MatO.

Using WAR (not exact, but useful for stuff like this)...
Jays best ...
1st round: Halladay, Carpenter, Green, Moseby, Vernon Wells, Stewart are 20+'s, Rios, Hill, Romero and Karsay are the others at 10+. So out of 58 first rounders, 6 reached the 'star' level, and 10 total were successes (10+ WAR) to the level it would take to make them worth a big bonus - 17% or less than 1 out of 5.

2nd round?: David Wells (49), Derek Bell (11) and all others are under 4. Wow.

3rd: Olerud (53), Key (49), Marcum (13) with just 3 more over 5 (Weathers, Stynes, Myers)

4th: None above Janssen at 4

5th: Stieb (53), Hentgen (30), Michael Young (24), Timlin (17) then no one over 2.

The point? Round one has a 1 in 5 shot at a guy who could be an all-star, after that it is dumb luck. 9 total in rounds 2 through 5 all-time for the Jays. Even worse than I remembered.

Now, some good players can be worth less than 10 (JPA, Felipe Lopez, John Cerutti, Billy Koch, Ed Sprague are a few 1st round examples) but when drafting you have to be hoping for a 10+ player as you can normally find 1/2 decent guys around via trade. It is the stars that are hard to get.

So, given that, if the Jays had a shot at a real star level talent (ie: top 5 pick) then why not blow the budget and lose 2 future picks?
jgadfly - Monday, June 04 2012 @ 02:19 PM EDT (#257704) #

    Would the Jays take two difficult signs with their first two picks, oversign the best bargain, thus maintaining one of their first round picks for next year while forfeiting their 2013 1st rounder ?

     Does anybody know whether the unsigned carryover pick maintains the same selection slot if there are subsequent lottery picks slotted ahead of them ?


Beyonder - Monday, June 04 2012 @ 02:28 PM EDT (#257706) #
"Pre-arranged deals were pretty common in the old format; I think they'll increase significantly this year, particularly since it's considered a weak draft."

I wonder. I think one of the main reasons for the high volume of pre-arranged deals in years past was because of the softer slot recommendations that existed under the uncapped regime. The changes to the draft portion of the CBA were intended to get players drafted according to talent level rather than on the basis of signability. If the system is succesful it strikes me there will be far less room for pre-arranged deals.
greenfrog - Monday, June 04 2012 @ 02:35 PM EDT (#257707) #
Beyonder, good point, but would you rather have had:

1. Deck McGuire (#11 overall selection in the 2010 draft)


2. A compensatory #12 pick in the loaded 2011 draft? The Jays could have drafted, for example, Jose Fernandez (#14), Jed Bradley (#15), Chris Reed (#16) or Matt Barnes (#19), among others. Of course, that was a loaded draft, but I can see the argument for holding off for a year in some cases.
Ishai - Monday, June 04 2012 @ 02:40 PM EDT (#257708) #
If you don't sign a player in this draft, you don't get the $$$ for that pick in this draft. 

Ah thank you. That clarifies things. This does mean that a team will have to be quite certain that a player taken with a 'punted' pick will sign for underslot. Otherwise a team could find its budget shrink and be over forced to reduce offers to players taken with the expectation of signing overslot.

Beyonder - Monday, June 04 2012 @ 02:51 PM EDT (#257709) #
Agree with the principle greenfrog, but from what I recall going into it, 2010 was not considered a weak draft insofar as pitching was concerned.
John Northey - Monday, June 04 2012 @ 02:55 PM EDT (#257710) #
Just for kicks... WAR of 50+ (HOF)/20-49 (star)/10-19 (solid)
47 picks overall at each level.

1st overall
3/13/8 = 24 great picks
2/7/10 = 19 great picks
2/5/6 = 13 great picks
3/7/4 = 14 great picks
1/6/1 = 8 great picks

So all time for top 5 picks...
HOF level: 11
Star: 38
Solid: 29
78 picks that were worth top 5 money vs total of 235 drafted. Remove top 5 from past 5 years (without checking if any of those 78 were part of that group) and you have 78 of 210 or 37%. So if you spend $6 million on a top 5 quality pick you have a 1 in 3 odds of it being worth it.

Now, what about picks from 16-20 (where the Jays tend to be)? Hmmm...
1/3/3 (Halladay)
2/2/1 (Clemens & Grich)
2/3/4 (Mussina & Sabathia)

so for those it is...
5/12/16 = 33 or less than 50% of the level of the top 5.

What does this mean? If you are drafting for star level quality then giving up 2 16th-20th round picks is a good trade for a top 5 pick. Of course, you really would be giving up 3 picks as you have to factor in the pick you could've made instead of the star, at which point it moves into the 'not so good' unless it is a top 3 level where the quality skyrockets.
85bluejay - Monday, June 04 2012 @ 02:57 PM EDT (#257711) #
but if the jays had drafted Chris Sale in 2010 as many posters here wanted, I like him better than any of those you mentioned greenfrog 
greenfrog - Monday, June 04 2012 @ 03:30 PM EDT (#257717) #
Chris Sale would look amazing right now in a Jays uni, no question (several of the teams selecting in the top 12 probably wish they had selected him at #13).
Forkball - Monday, June 04 2012 @ 03:48 PM EDT (#257721) #

I think one of the main reasons for the high volume of pre-arranged deals in years past was because of the softer slot recommendations that existed under the uncapped regime.

I think it's just the opposite.  Before you could pay anyone anything you wanted with no penalty.  Now with penalties, that come quickly, you have to be more creative and have more certainty about what you're doing.

For example, with Giolito, if the Jays take him, they almost have to know who they can get at a discount with their later picks to make up; you can't chance it and hope someone signs at a discount or you might lose all of that allocation.

All the new system is doing is suppressing the total amounts of bonuses that are handed out.  The real result of that is probably pushing 2nd tier HS players to college.

But we'll probably know by the end of the 2nd tomorrow, if not tonight.

Beyonder - Monday, June 04 2012 @ 04:18 PM EDT (#257728) #
To be clear: I'm just spitballing, so I shouldn't pretend to have any special insight into what will happen. And I think you're right Forkball, to point out there is an even greater incentive to come up with creative deals and obtain certainty. But I also think that in a capped system with hard(er) slot reccomendations, there is less room for creativity. I will be surprised if there aren't far fewer below-slot deals this year.

Think about what you would have to do to sign Giolito to a 3 million dollar deal (rumored to be what he wants). If you sign him at 17, that puts you a million dollars over slot (If you sign him at 22, you are 1.2 million over slot). Who are the guys you are going to draft over the next few rounds who are going to help you make up that kind of shortfall? Do you draft a fourth round talent at 22? Are you willing to jeopardize the remainder of the draft to get that single, high-ceiling guy?
85bluejay - Monday, June 04 2012 @ 04:27 PM EDT (#257731) #
Last year, Norris was said to want $4 mil, the Jays got him for 2M - If Giolito is there @ 22, I'd take him, but my guess is that the Jays will pass.
Beyonder - Monday, June 04 2012 @ 04:33 PM EDT (#257732) #
Well last year there was an incentive to float high demands. This year if you scare teams off with high demands that aren't real, you run the risk of not being drafted at all.
John Northey - Monday, June 04 2012 @ 04:50 PM EDT (#257735) #
Scouts will be vital this time. If a guy wants to play in the majors more than anything then he will likely sign out of high school knowing that his bonus won't be any higher if he waits. If he looks at the situation and figures a college education is worth more than the potential bonus and sees just how poor the odds are of a ML career for guys outside the top handful of picks then he won't sign unless paid millions.

A top scout should be able to build enough of a relationship with a player and his coaches/etc. to know if he is likely to want the ML career so badly that he'll jump. The Jays seem to have done well that way lately, getting guys for lower than expected bonuses so lets hope they keep it up.
hypobole - Monday, June 04 2012 @ 08:05 PM EDT (#257747) #
On the subject of scaring teams off with high demands, looks like Appel/Boras managed to do just that, dropping from a possible first overall to the Pirates at #8.
TamRa - Monday, June 04 2012 @ 09:28 PM EDT (#257760) #
without repeating previously made arguments, I just want to be on record: if Giolito is on the board when my pick comes, if i'm the jays, I take him. Without hesitation.
Draft Discussion | 56 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.