maggsmaggs Posted June 7, 2004 Share Posted June 7, 2004 I know that I would, can you imagine, getting the consensus #1 and #2 players in the draft at 18. The Sox paid Borchard $5.3, why not Drew who would want that much. But how bout Weaver, if the Yankees get him it totally defeats the purpose of the draft. I think that we will take one of them if available. What do you guys think? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted June 7, 2004 Share Posted June 7, 2004 No we won't, we've got 5 picks in the top 65, and we want to sign them all. Expect us to go college pitching a lot because they are easier to sign. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xero Posted June 7, 2004 Share Posted June 7, 2004 Just what we need is more "God-Like Prospects" Have you looked around at out Draft History. We don't need to pay these guys millions to not even be a succsesful player in the Majors. Just my opinion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlliniKrush Posted June 7, 2004 Share Posted June 7, 2004 Well, while the Yankees getting Weaver defeats the whole purpose of the draft, that's not our fault and doesn't mean we should take him so the draft has "meaning." But it hits on a great point. MLB has to step in and do something. I know that may be easier said than done, but if the worst teams can't get the best players in the draft, the competitive balance of the league gets destroyed. I mean, it's such a simple concept. When lesser teams can't sign DRAFT PICKS because of money, you have a problem on your hands. How bizarre does this statement sound: "While Player A is the consensus best player in the draft, Team 1 cannot draft him because they cannot afford to sign him (or take the risk)." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsideirish Posted June 7, 2004 Share Posted June 7, 2004 ESPN Insider has us taking 3B Josh Fields while Drew goes 17 to St Louis and Weaver goes 23 to the Yanks. Then we take Jasn Vargas LHP from Long Beach St and catcher Jason Jaramillo number 38. That is according to ESPN Insider. Jaramillo #28 college prospect according to Baseball America. #27 by TeamOneBaseball. 3rd team preseason All-American by BA. Considered one of the top defensive players in all of college baseball. Shows good footwork, a strong arm and the ability to call a good game. Also shows promise at the plate with a good swing from both sides of the plate and decent gap power. Could be a solid all around catcher at the big league level, and should be a 2nd-3rd rounder come June. I would rather have BJ Szymanski from Princeton than Jaramillo Szymanksi #11 midseason college prospect according to Baseball America. Fastest rising positional prospect available for the 2004 draft. Extremely athletic player that also is an All-Ivy League wide receiver for the Princeton Tigers football team. Has great size at 6'5", and a fluid body. He runs extremely well, and covers a lot of ground defensively in CF. Szymanski is a switch-hitter, and has a good, level swing from both sides of the plate and good power potential. He makes good contact and has a decent eye at the plate. He is somewhat raw since he didn't play baseball during his freshman season at Princeton, but you don't find these kinds of 5-tool players at the college level very often. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted June 7, 2004 Share Posted June 7, 2004 Well, while the Yankees getting Weaver defeats the whole purpose of the draft, that's not our fault and doesn't mean we should take him so the draft has "meaning." But it hits on a great point. MLB has to step in and do something. I know that may be easier said than done, but if the worst teams can't get the best players in the draft, the competitive balance of the league gets destroyed. I mean, it's such a simple concept. When lesser teams can't sign DRAFT PICKS because of money, you have a problem on your hands. How bizarre does this statement sound: "While Player A is the consensus best player in the draft, Team 1 cannot draft him because they cannot afford to sign him (or take the risk)." This from a Scott Boras ESPN Chat a few years ago, Frank: Many GMs now believe that high-level draft picks are significantly overpaid in relation to the risk involved. What is your opinion on this based on the high failure rate of baseball draft picks? Scott Boras: When you look at the draft on the whole, you're talking about a risk venture. Yes, not all first-rounders will make the majors and only a few of them will turn into stars. But I can only speak for the players we've represented and our success rate is very high. The average major league career lasts less than three seasons but 90 percent of our first-rounders have played at least three years and our average is over six years. Going back to guys like Kevin Brown, Andy Benes, Tim Belcher, Steve Avery and Kurt Stillwell -- some of our early clients -- we've produced many quality major leaguers. And spending money on players like them is going to be a more efficient business move than signing a free agent. Rumi547: Will this be the first year that signing bonuses actually fall? Is that due to a lack of talent, or is that due to concerted effort by the teams to do so? Scott Boras: In Rick Ankiel's draft a couple years ago, this subject was brought up. At that time, we asked for a premium bonus for Rick because we thought he was a premium player -- and he eventually got it from the Cardinals. If teams let premium talent drift to clubs willing to pay the money, then some other club will take advantage of that. It's not any secret that Rick Ankiel and J.D. Drew are a reason St. Louis is in first place and they got those players because other teams didn't want to pay the price. Teams may not want to pay for amateur players, but they would have to pay MORE for free agents at the level of an Ankiel or Drew. Essentially, it's an inefficient practice to turn away from good talent like Ankiel's. Reddog47: What do you think of possible "collusion" to hold down draft bonuses? Scott Boras: If teams are talking among themselves, that is allowed because there is no collective bargaining agreement at the amateur level. I contend that if teams do that, however, they will suffer. Remember, GMs have 3- or 4-year contracts. The owner wants to win now. So, people have to make decisions that help the team now -- and that means taking calculated risks. The draft is part of that, but good teams take calculated risks based on good assessment and smart analysis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted June 7, 2004 Share Posted June 7, 2004 ESPN Insider has us taking 3B Josh Fields while Drew goes 17 to St Louis and Weaver goes 23 to the Yanks. Then we take Jasn Vargas LHP from Long Beach St and catcher Jason Jaramillo number 38. That is according to ESPN Insider. Damn I forgot the Yanks got a 1st rounder from the Astros for Andy Pettite. Still I dunno if Weaver will want to go to the Yanks afta what happened with his brother. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsideirish Posted June 7, 2004 Share Posted June 7, 2004 I would really like Fields. He could be a really good 3B. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.