2009 Draft

Anything and everything about the 162

2009 Draft

Joined: 10 Dec 2006, 01:35

09 Jun 2009, 02:59 #1

I haven't seen anything on who our FO is targeting, but the Nats have the number one pick and the number one pick (presumed) is, big surprise, a Borass client.

link

If I were running the Nats, I'd find the best pick not owned by Boras.

This is not going to end well.
""Baseball, it is said, is only a game. True. And the Grand Canyon is only a hole in Arizona." widely attributed.
Reply
Like

Joined: 14 Dec 2006, 03:00

09 Jun 2009, 03:47 #2

Offbase @ Jun 8 2009, 09:59 PM wrote: I haven't seen anything on who our FO is targeting, but the Nats have the number one pick and the number one pick (presumed) is, big surprise, a Borass client.

link

If I were running the Nats, I'd find the best pick not owned by Boras.

This is not going to end well.
I think baseball needs a pre-defined salary structure for the draft, regardless of the talent. Otherwise they should allow teams to trade draft rights. Draft position is the only measure in place to foster parity. But the notion that a cellar-dweller should pay more money to its first draft pick, who is unlikely to ever appear in an all-star game, than it does to its highest paid player, is a joke.

Look at the #1 picks since 1965

3 first ballot hall of famers (Griffey, A-Rod and Chipper Jones)
7-8 All Star players (Jeff Burroughs, Harold Baines, Strawberry, Josh Hamilton, Adrien Gonzalez, Joe Mauer...)
Lots of major league "regulars"
7-8 disappointments
5 total busts (Matt Bush, Brien Taylor, Shawn Abner, Steve Chilcott, Al Chambers)

There is no way the top picks are worth more than $2-3M per year until they hit the bigs.
“Did you bring your glasses for the laser show?”
Reply
Like

Joined: 08 Mar 2007, 02:01

09 Jun 2009, 05:39 #3

soxfaninnyc @ Jun 8 2009, 09:47 PM wrote:
Offbase @ Jun 8 2009, 09:59 PM wrote: I haven't seen anything on who our FO is targeting, but the Nats have the number one pick and the number one pick (presumed) is, big surprise, a Borass client.

link

If I were running the Nats, I'd find the best pick not owned by Boras.

This is not going to end well.
I think baseball needs a pre-defined salary structure for the draft, regardless of the talent. Otherwise they should allow teams to trade draft rights. Draft position is the only measure in place to foster parity. But the notion that a cellar-dweller should pay more money to its first draft pick, who is unlikely to ever appear in an all-star game, than it does to its highest paid player, is a joke.

Look at the #1 picks since 1965

3 first ballot hall of famers (Griffey, A-Rod and Chipper Jones)
7-8 All Star players (Jeff Burroughs, Harold Baines, Strawberry, Josh Hamilton, Adrien Gonzalez, Joe Mauer...)
Lots of major league "regulars"
7-8 disappointments
5 total busts (Matt Bush, Brien Taylor, Shawn Abner, Steve Chilcott, Al Chambers)

There is no way the top picks are worth more than $2-3M per year until they hit the bigs.
And I agree with your analysis in toto.

I don't follow the minors as well as many great posters here, but there's no question that top MLB draft picks have a far-lower average potential value than either the NBA or the NFL and therefore should be capped/stratified by salary max.

I don't want an MLB salary cap (because I'm a Red Sox fan) but I don't want small-market teams being squeezed out by large smart markets despite being smart yet poor in the amateur draft.
Ready for a winning streak...
Reply
Like

Joined: 12 Dec 2006, 07:05

09 Jun 2009, 22:35 #4

BC's Tony Sanchez went to the Pirates.
"I think I was just saving all my postseason wins for the Red Sox.”-David Price
Reply
Like

Joined: 08 Mar 2007, 02:01

09 Jun 2009, 22:47 #5

ThinMan @ Jun 9 2009, 04:35 PM wrote: BC's Tony Sanchez went to the Pirates.
Red Sox pick 28th of course, and they're on pick #8 (Reds) right now.
Ready for a winning streak...
Reply
Like

Joined: 12 Dec 2006, 07:05

09 Jun 2009, 23:10 #6

Rockies are apparently in a mood to spend money, choosing Matzek.
"I think I was just saving all my postseason wins for the Red Sox.”-David Price
Reply
Like

Joined: 27 Feb 2008, 05:28

09 Jun 2009, 23:13 #7

soxfaninnyc @ Jun 8 2009, 10:47 PM wrote:
Offbase @ Jun 8 2009, 09:59 PM wrote: I haven't seen anything on who our FO is targeting, but the Nats have the number one pick and the number one pick (presumed) is, big surprise, a Borass client.

link

If I were running the Nats, I'd find the best pick not owned by Boras.

This is not going to end well.
I think baseball needs a pre-defined salary structure for the draft, regardless of the talent. Otherwise they should allow teams to trade draft rights. Draft position is the only measure in place to foster parity. But the notion that a cellar-dweller should pay more money to its first draft pick, who is unlikely to ever appear in an all-star game, than it does to its highest paid player, is a joke.

Look at the #1 picks since 1965

3 first ballot hall of famers (Griffey, A-Rod and Chipper Jones)
7-8 All Star players (Jeff Burroughs, Harold Baines, Strawberry, Josh Hamilton, Adrien Gonzalez, Joe Mauer...)
Lots of major league "regulars"
7-8 disappointments
5 total busts (Matt Bush, Brien Taylor, Shawn Abner, Steve Chilcott, Al Chambers)

There is no way the top picks are worth more than $2-3M per year until they hit the bigs.
It's generally not $2-3m per year, it's usually a signing bonus. You'll all be happy to know that the MFY are cutting back on their draft budget this year but that the Sox aren't. It's not always the big market teams that spend on draft day. Last year, for example, the Royals broke a record for draft signings. It's more a case of team philosophy.


Reply
Like

Joined: 27 Feb 2008, 05:28

09 Jun 2009, 23:14 #8

So far Crow & Turner are two guys I had hopes might drop to the Sox.


Reply
Like

Joined: 27 Feb 2008, 05:28

09 Jun 2009, 23:18 #9

Sheppers and Gibson are two remaining players who have some likelyhood to drop to the Sox. Last few picks were signability guys which is a surprise.


Reply
Like

Joined: 27 Feb 2008, 05:28

09 Jun 2009, 23:19 #10

Purke another $$ (signability) guy


Reply
Like