2020 MLB Draft Thread

OCD SS

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I can't believe we've come to draft day with nary a thread. The Sox have the 17th pick in a draft with Covid-19 altered rules that promises to have teams trying different strategies (or just going super conservative & trying to save money) in response.

If you're looking to catch up, here's a link to Fangraph's Eric Longenhagen draft primer. His latest mock has the Sox winding up with Garret Crochet (LHP) from TN, who sounds a lot like Jay Groome.

ESPN also has a bunch of coverage, and all 3 of their gurus have the Sox taking Mick Abel (RHP) from OR.
 

burstnbloom

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2005
1,878
The second round pick lost for absolutely nothing really hurts in a 5 round draft. I agree that they need to nail the first round pick. The health of the system is getting a lot better in the lower levels but lacks any real top tier players. Nailing pick 17 would go a really long way.
 

Lose Remerswaal

Missing an “R”
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
The second round pick lost for absolutely nothing really hurts in a 5 round draft. I agree that they need to nail the first round pick. The health of the system is getting a lot better in the lower levels but lacks any real top tier players. Nailing pick 17 would go a really long way.
I've been trying to figure out if losing a 2nd this year is worse than any other year and I can't come to a conclusion. Can you help me with your logic so at least maybe I can discuss this logically?
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
40,433
The second round pick lost for absolutely nothing really hurts in a 5 round draft. I agree that they need to nail the first round pick.
Why is it different in 5 round draft versus longer draft?

EDIT: What Lose said. Maybe it is, but I can't figure out why.

In some ways it's better isn't it? If there was a 30 round draft and we lost a #2, the player that is now not drafted that would have been is a "31st round talent" available as a FA. Now it's a "6th round talent" available as a FA that we could potentially sign.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
49,272
In some ways it's better isn't it? If there was a 30 round draft and we lost a #2, the player that is now not drafted that would have been is a "31st round talent" available as a FA. Now it's a "6th round talent" available as a FA that we could potentially sign.
Yeah, I agree with this, but the thing is that since undrafted players can inexplicably only be offered a max of $20K, everyone will be trying to add a bunch of the top undrafted players and it's unclear what will get players to choose one team over another.
 

burstnbloom

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2005
1,878
I've been trying to figure out if losing a 2nd this year is worse than any other year and I can't come to a conclusion. Can you help me with your logic so at least maybe I can discuss this logically?
Well, it essentially erases 20% of their total picks, for one. More importantly, they have the 5th lowest draft pool in MLB and lost $1.338 in bonus money by losing that pick (a little more than 20% of their pool). Also given the short draft and limits on post draft signing bonuses, there is no way to get creative to make up the difference. So they lose 1/5 of their picks, 1/5 of their bonus and the nature of the draft takes away any real opportunity to get creative (senior signs, banking bonus etc).
 

The Gray Eagle

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2001
13,519
Please, no high school pitcher with the first round pick.

A decade or more ago, you could draft a high school pitcher in the first round and reasonably dream you might pluck an ace who stays off the operating table: Zach Greinke, Clayton Kershaw, Cole Hanels, Madison Bumgarner, Rick Porcello, et al.

Now the numbers are so bad when it comes to drafting high school pitchers that after four to seven years, your fireballing No. 1 pick is almost as likely to be out of affiliated baseball as he is to be in your rotation.

From 2011-14 major league teams took 47 high school pitchers in the first round of the draft. Here are the ugly numbers with how those picks have turned out:

• 51% never reached the big leagues (24).

• 40% had elbow or shoulder surgery (19).

• 17% are pitching in the majors with their original team (8).

• 13% are no longer pitching in affiliated baseball (6).
Keith Law:

The truth of the matter seems pretty clear: high school pitchers selected in the first round have a higher failure rate than other categories (high school position players, college pitchers, or college position players), and do not offer higher upside. That’s not to say that it is always wrong to take a high school pitcher in the first round, but that such players should be pushed down on draft boards to reflect the greater risk of them failing to reach the majors or produce first-round value once they get there. If you have two choices for your next draft pick in front of you, one a high school pitcher and one any other type of player, and you believe their value is about equal, you should take the other guy.
This year most of all, we can't take on the extra risk with our first round pick. Take one in a later round, or better yet sign a bunch of undrafted ones as lottery tickets, sure. Just don't take a high school pitcher with that crucial first rounder this year.
 

OurF'ingCity

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Apr 22, 2016
4,127
New York City
This year most of all, we can't take on the extra risk with our first round pick. Take one in a later round, or better yet sign a bunch of undrafted ones as lottery tickets, sure. Just don't take a high school pitcher with that crucial first rounder this year.
I completely agree that they should be going for the surest possible MLBers with their actual draft picks, even if those guys have a somewhat lower ceiling (someone who projects as a steady major-league starter vs. someone who might be an All-Star but might also flame out). I'd like to see them focus on college players with their picks as well, all else being equal, because they will need less seasoning in the minors and at this point we just need major-league/high-minor bodies.

Then, in the undrafted player free-for-all, the Sox can try to sign more raw, higher-upside talent with the pitch being that the farm system is pretty barren so agreeing to play in the Sox' system means a player may be able to move quicker through the minors/get more opportunities than if they go to a team with a stacked farm.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
12,061
Maine
I'd like to see them focus on college players with their picks as well, all else being equal, because they will need less seasoning in the minors and at this point we just need major-league/high-minor bodies.
I'd say it's even less about how much "seasoning" the players might need when it comes to preferring college players to high schoolers, particularly this year. There's just more data available on the college kids than the high school kids. No one played this spring so there was no scouting to be done. There have been no games, no practices, no workouts to watch. Do they really want to draft an 18 year old based on his HS junior year stats? Isn't it more likely that 2-3 years worth of video and stats from a college kid is going to give them more reliable information?

They've got 4 picks. I would think they'd want to go with the surest bets they can with those four picks, not take fliers on relative unknowns, even if they've got potential.
 

Scoops Bolling

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 19, 2007
4,151
I've been trying to figure out if losing a 2nd this year is worse than any other year and I can't come to a conclusion. Can you help me with your logic so at least maybe I can discuss this logically?
I think it's much less damaging this year than any other. Teams haven't been able to evaluate nearly as well this year, so teams' boards are going to be all over the place, and reports are going to be much worse/incomplete than normal. The draft is usually shooting in the dark, but this is adding a blindfold and a hand tied behind your back.

Please, no high school pitcher with the first round pick.



Keith Law:



This year most of all, we can't take on the extra risk with our first round pick. Take one in a later round, or better yet sign a bunch of undrafted ones as lottery tickets, sure. Just don't take a high school pitcher with that crucial first rounder this year.
I feel like Victor Wang or someone did a bunch of research on this as well, and the basic outcome was something along the order of if all else is equal, a high school bat (but never a catcher) has your highest expected outcome, then a college bat, then a college pitcher, then a high school pitcher. The bust rate on high school pitchers has always been huge.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
49,272
Aura and Mystique??
Not sure how this will affect NY, on one hand they are one of the top few teams right now at developing players once they get into the system but on the other hand they have a ton of talent already in the system with more cuts coming once they figure out exactly which and how many minor league teams will be eliminated going forward, so there might be better opportunities elsewhere.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,779
The wrong side of the bridge....
Aren't Casas, Downs, and even Wong pretty nice prospects?
Seems like if Wong is going to make a contribution the organization has to figure out how to handle his type of player. Specifically, they need to be open to carrying three guys capable of catching at least in a pinch, so that they don't get locked into a "he's either a catcher or he's something else, but not both" mindset. I realize that dilemma is still a ways away from needing to be resolved, but just reading his SP profile I'm having traumatic Blake Swihart flashbacks.
 

Minneapolis Millers

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
2,135
Twin Cities
Not sure how this will affect NY, on one hand they are one of the top few teams right now at developing players once they get into the system but on the other hand they have a ton of talent already in the system with more cuts coming once they figure out exactly which and how many minor league teams will be eliminated going forward, so there might be better opportunities elsewhere.
Yeah, I would guess that the better run teams will still rank their top prospects and top likely FA targets, with system needs in mind (and selling points to those preferred targets). It'll feel like college recruiting, only the money from MLB won't be as good ;).
 

bakahump

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 8, 2001
6,458
Maine
Agreed they have to Hit on the 1st Pick.

So do you Go with the highest floor? Or Ceiling

Will a safer pick inject the type of talent they need?
Or
Do they need to gamble and hope for a HR? Knowing if they miss the farm system will be that much more behind the 8 ball.
 

The_Powa_of_Seiji_Ozawa

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2006
5,954
SS Botany Bay
I can't believe we've come to draft day with nary a thread. The Sox have the 17th pick in a draft with Covid-19 altered rules that promises to have teams trying different strategies (or just going super conservative & trying to save money) in response.
I completely agree that they should be going for the surest possible MLBers with their actual draft picks, even if those guys have a somewhat lower ceiling (someone who projects as a steady major-league starter vs. someone who might be an All-Star but might also flame out). I'd like to see them focus on college players with their picks as well, all else being equal, because they will need less seasoning in the minors and at this point we just need major-league/high-minor bodies.
Sounds like David Murphy 2 Electric Boogaloo
 

Wingack

Yankee Mod
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
24,646
In The Quivering Forest
So since there are only going to be a few rounds, will the Yankees or Sox be able to swoop in with the most cash and by the rest of the best players up?

Sorry, I haven't been paying that much attention.
 

JBJ_HOF

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 5, 2014
364
No, anyone who is undrafted can get a max $20K + college scholorship. You can offer as many of those as you want. Kids with any real talent are not expected to take it and try again next year.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
12,061
Maine
So since there are only going to be a few rounds, will the Yankees or Sox be able to swoop in with the most cash and by the rest of the best players up?

Sorry, I haven't been paying that much attention.
Signing undrafted players is capped at $20K a piece, so no, they're not going to be able to do that. I suppose they might be able to afford more of those players than some other clubs, but they aren't going to be able to outbid anybody for any individual player.
 

The_Powa_of_Seiji_Ozawa

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2006
5,954
SS Botany Bay
Signing undrafted players is capped at $20K a piece, so no, they're not going to be able to do that. I suppose they might be able to afford more of those players than some other clubs, but they aren't going to be able to outbid anybody for any individual player.
So does this mean undrafted college seniors will be the most deperate to take these $20k offers? Sounds like a boon for cheap organizational fodder.
 

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
17,087
Rogers Park
No, anyone who is undrafted can get a max $20K + college scholorship. You can offer as many of those as you want. Kids with any real talent are not expected to take it and try again next year.
Prediction: there is going to be a ton of corruption in these signings.
 

JBJ_HOF

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 5, 2014
364
So does this mean undrafted college seniors will be the most deperate to take these $20k offers? Sounds like a boon for cheap organizational fodder.
There is going to be no more short season leagues like Lowell so those types of players really have no home anymore, sadly.
 

Just a bit outside

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 6, 2011
3,819
Monument, CO
This would be a great time for a team to raise minor league pay and benefits. With the max signing bonus at 20k an increase in pay, meals, housing might make a significant difference in signing players.
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
Well, it essentially erases 20% of their total picks, for one. More importantly, they have the 5th lowest draft pool in MLB and lost $1.338 in bonus money by losing that pick (a little more than 20% of their pool). Also given the short draft and limits on post draft signing bonuses, there is no way to get creative to make up the difference. So they lose 1/5 of their picks, 1/5 of their bonus and the nature of the draft takes away any real opportunity to get creative (senior signs, banking bonus etc).
Another way of looking at it is that they have been deprived of a pick that, using data from the last decade, would have a 7-12% chance of yielding a player who would eventually play in a major league game.
 

burstnbloom

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2005
1,878
Another way of looking at it is that they have been deprived of a pick that, using data from the last decade, would have a 7-12% chance of yielding a player who would eventually play in a major league game.
Sure, but that would be the case even in a regular draft. The bonus pool issues and scarce total of picks amplifies the punishment.
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
Sure, but that would be the case even in a regular draft. The bonus pool issues and scarce total of picks amplifies the punishment.
I don't see how this is any worse than a regular draft year. The draft protects teams who have a below-average chance at signing guys. I doubt the Sox are generally at a competitive disadvantage. The bonus pool will cost them but it would have anyway, right?
 

SemperFidelisSox

suzyn
SoSH Member
May 25, 2008
20,007
Boston, MA
MLB has tried so hard over the years to make this event more popular by televising it and moving the event to Omaha to attract more player involvement. What it really lacks is the excitement of trades and player movement. Fan interest would be far greater if there were opportunities to acquire higher draft picks and star players.
 

BigMike

Dope
Dope
Sep 26, 2000
22,090
MLB has tried so hard over the years to make this event more popular by televising it and moving the event to Omaha to attract more player involvement. What it really lacks is the excitement of trades and player movement. Fan interest would be far greater if there were opportunities to acquire higher draft picks and star players.
Yeah it is so hard, most people have never seen any of these guys play, and then after the draft he best of the best are a minimum of 12 months away from putting a mlb uniform on, and most are close to 3 years away

Still a far cry from the days where they didn't even want to announce the picks, so they could try to sign guys without them knowing where they were picked
 

The_Powa_of_Seiji_Ozawa

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2006
5,954
SS Botany Bay
Yeah it is so hard, most people have never seen any of these guys play, and then after the draft he best of the best are a minimum of 12 months away from putting a mlb uniform on, and most are close to 3 years away

Still a far cry from the days where they didn't even want to announce the picks, so they could try to sign guys without them knowing where they were picked
I remember when the Red Sox drafted Rick Asadoorian (aka the next Dwight Evans) and NESN brought him into the booth and tried to build him up, especially with his local connection. I think that was before they started showing the draft.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
40,433
Harold Reynolds is so bad. I barely trust him on MLB guys.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
40,433
Harold Reynolds said Howard could hit because SS with good hands like Ozzie Smith can track the ball and hit.

Uh...