What the Indians didn't do
With the 2007 draft season concluded as of last night's signing deadline, here are two scenarios the Indians didn't put themselves into:
- Give up first-round pick to sign Carlos Lee for $100 million.
- Give up second-round pick to sign Woody Williams for $12.5 million.
- Use third-round pick, now the team's top pick, on a guy they weren't sure they could sign.
- Fail to sign him.
- While you're at it, don't sign your fourth-round pick either.
- Give an 18-year-old a major league contract.
- Or anyone else for that matter.
The other one, however, is just 18 years old: Rick Porcello, now a RHP for the Detroit Tigers. Yes, yes, he'll make millions. Here's what else will happen, however, because he already has a major league contract.
- They're required to be added to the 40-man roster immediately, rather than at the end of 2011. This will prevent the Tigers from using that spot on a player to help them for the stretch run, or, on another emerging prospect in the upcoming offseason. They likely will lose a prospect in the Rule 5 draft as a direct result.
- Porcello will be out of options before he turns 22. Since he's added to the 40-man immediately, he then must be sent down to the minors immediately, which burns an option. Players in this situation do get four option years rather than three, but if he doesn't adapt quickly to very advanced competition, that fourth option will be used in 2010.
- If he does make it as a major leaguer, the Tigers will then take a bath in arbitration. Several of these contracts, incredibly, allow the players to opt out of the stipulated salaries in later years and go to arbitration instead -- and that is, of course, exactly what they'll do. Arbitrated salaries are based not just on the salaries of comparable players, but also on what each particular player has been paid in the past. So instead of a track record of $400,000 salaries, each of these players will enter arbitration with average annual salaries of up to $2 million.
One could argue that it was, ultimately, a good day for Indians fans. The Indians drafted Beau Mills, arguably the best college hitter in the draft, and signed him to a minor league deal for $1.6 million. He's been playing for almost two months now, as have several other top picks. The only late-ish signing was fourth-rounder T.J. McFarland, who got third-round money a few days ago.
The Indians seem to have adapted to the new signing deadline by adopting a two-month draft-and-follow approach. They devoted several picks in medium-high rounds to players avoided by other teams for signability reasons, then watched those players in summer leagues for two months. At that point, the Indians decided either to go over-slot to sign the player, or to let him go. It's a shrewd strategy that one could see being emulated by other teams in the future. In any event, McFarland made the cut, while 7th rounder Cole St. Clair and 11th rounder Matt Hague did not. The Indians signed all four of their picks from the first six rounds, and 11 of 13 from the first 15 rounds.
Mills turned 21 just last week, an age that combines with an already-advanced bat to make a delightful combination of projectability and maturity. The Indians had already scouted him heavily playing with wood bats a year ago, in the Alaska League. Mills doesn't have to be added to the 40-man roster until the end of 2010. In the event he doesn't develop quickly, he should not face an option crunch until Spring 2014, at age 27.
McFarland, several months younger than the trio discussed above, is on a roster track on year behind Mills. He won't have to be added to the 40-man roster until the end of 2011, which pushes any potential roster crunch for him until Spring 2015, at age 25. Of course he doesn't have the same kind of upside as the first-rounders above. But whatever potential he does have, the Indians should have plenty of time to realize it.
71 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Re: What the Indians didn't do
Nice post, Jay. Thanks for putting that in a nice perspective.
I can never get psyched up for the MLB draft for some reason... I don't know if it's the immense amount of rounds, or the fact that these guys won't crack the majors for some time, or anything else. It might be because I love the NHL draft too much... 7 rounds, might see those guys in the NHL (or AHL... like in Cleveland perhaps) sooner rather than later. But now, I'm just rambling.
by CarnegieAndOntario on Aug 16, 2007 1:46 PM EDT reply actions
Re: What the Indians didn't do
by supermarioelia on Aug 16, 2007 2:21 PM EDT up reply actions
Re: What the Indians didn't do
...sigh, if only.
I haven't really scouted the past two drafts so well, maybe it was the lockout that really got me down for awhile. But I'm getting back into fantasy hockey a lot, and I have renewed my love for the NHL lately.
by CarnegieAndOntario on Aug 16, 2007 2:23 PM EDT up reply actions
Re: What the Indians didn't do
Re: What the Indians didn't do
by CarnegieAndOntario on Aug 16, 2007 2:39 PM EDT up reply actions
Re: What the Indians didn't do
by CarnegieAndOntario on Aug 16, 2007 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions
Re: What the Indians didn't do
Re: What the Indians didn't do
by CarnegieAndOntario on Aug 16, 2007 4:00 PM EDT up reply actions
Re: What the Indians didn't do
Re: What the Indians didn't do
Re: What the Indians didn't do
by Luis (Tribe Fan in London) on Aug 17, 2007 3:39 AM EDT up reply actions
Re: What the Indians didn't do
And regarding fantasy hockey, if any of you are interested in joining a free Yahoo league with some sharks from north of the border, let me know. I'll warn you ahead of time, it's usually pretty competitive. I used to be a writer for fantasyhockey.com, and yet somehow I still missed the playoffs last year. So enter at your own peril I guess.
by supermarioelia on Aug 16, 2007 4:30 PM EDT up reply actions
Re: What the Indians didn't do
I'll take you up on the Yahoo league. The past two seasons (again, more part of the problem of disinterest) have been very non-competitive for me. I'd be pretty intrigued with some higher-class play.
by CarnegieAndOntario on Aug 16, 2007 4:36 PM EDT up reply actions
Re: What the Indians didn't do
Re: What the Indians didn't do
by CarnegieAndOntario on Aug 16, 2007 10:59 PM EDT up reply actions
Re: What the Indians didn't do
by Joe on Aug 16, 2007 1:47 PM EDT reply actions
Re: What the Indians didn't do
It's like winning a knife fight with a handgun.
Re: What the Indians didn't do
You could acually say that strategy is kind of brilliant, in the strict moneyball sense of taking advantage of a gap in the market. Other teams got scared off, and Detroit got to pull the trigger on elite prospects they arguably weren't in a position to even aim at.
Re: What the Indians didn't do
Re: What the Indians didn't do
Re: What the Indians didn't do
by Joe on Aug 16, 2007 7:29 PM EDT up reply actions
Re: What the Indians didn't do
Re: What the Indians didn't do
How can it be a good roster decision to have a high school kid on the 40-man when you're struggling to win a player spot? Obviously it isn't.
Know how many games this season have featured a pitcher under 21? Three. That's right, three games in all of baseball. One was started by Felix Hernandez, who turned 21 four days later. The other two were started by Phillip Hughes -- right before he went on the DL, where he later turned 21.
We'll see this kid in two years, if the Tigers are lucky. And there's a reasonably good chance that we'll never see him.
Re: What the Indians didn't do
Yeah he has to stick when he is 22, but that is not unheard of. It is not a ridiculous time schedule, it is a reasonable schedule. If he is later than that, he is either not progressing, or, more likely, hurt. Miller likely have been on the tribe's 25-man this year if he did not get hurt.
Sure, by doing this the tigers have lost some injury insurance, roster flexibility, and a modest amount of cash. But that was the price of doing business, and I'd put it on the cheap rather than expensive side.
Oh yeah, they have to be berated by the commissioner also. Big whoop.
Re: What the Indians didn't do
Re: What the Indians didn't do
It's easy to say now, looking back at who did well, "Rouse, Luna, Aubrey." But you don't get to pick after the fact. You couldn't have told me those were the three guys last November.
Yeah he has to stick when he is 22, but that is not unheard of. It is not a ridiculous time schedule, it is a reasonable schedule.
Easy to say, but is there any reason to believe it?
The normal time frame even for a top high school pitcher is 5-6 years, and the "deadline" generally is 7-8 years. There is nothing reasonable about three years. Andrew Miller was not ready to stick at 21 ...
If he is later than that, he is either not progressing, or, more likely, hurt. Miller likely have been on the tribe's 25-man this year if he did not get hurt.
... and Adam Miller is still not on the 40-man.
You're basically saying of Porcello, "If he can't stick by 21, then who needs him anyway?" That's crazy talk. Carmona at 23 is one of the best pitchers in the majors -- he wasn't ready to stick at 21, but he's incredibly valuable. How about Sabathia? Had he struggled in 2001, would that have made him more or less worthless? Of course not.
The normal draft signing -- 99% of them -- gives the team 7-8 years to develop the player into a major leaguer. To cut it down to three years is always questionable, but to do so for an 18-year-old pitcher is just insanity. Even among elite draft picks, very few pitchers can perform in the majors by age 21.
Re: What the Indians didn't do
Re: What the Indians didn't do
Re: What the Indians didn't do
Re: What the Indians didn't do
Re: What the Indians didn't do
This problem realistically affects only the first five or ten picks in the draft. So while it would be nice for it to get fixed, the problems that were addressed last year affect every pick in every round of the draft, as well as all international signings.
Consider the high school draftees, almost all of whom are 18, and the international signees, most of whom are 16. Getting an extra year to develop all those players is a much more significant win for a team like the Indians than whatever change would allow them to draft Jeff Porcello for the same money as Beau Mills.
And by the way, the minute that change gets made, a guy like Jeff Porcello never makes it out of the Top Five anyway.
Re: Just for the record, it's Rick Porcello!
Re: What the Indians didn't do
Keep in mind, too, that the Indians with the 13th pick faced a different choice than the Tigers. The Indians had Beau Mills available, for much more favorable terms. The Tigers could choose Porcello or Brackman, and put up with the ridiculous terms, or they could choose the 29th best player in the draft. And that 29th best player was no Beau Mills.
We can't be certain that the Indians and Tigers, in reverse positions, wouldn't have made reversed choices. I am pretty certain, however, that the Indians would never have agreed to a major league deal.
Re: What the Indians didn't do
But can you guarantee that about any 18-year-old?
Re: What the Indians didn't do
Re: What the Indians didn't do
Re: What the Indians didn't do
Re: What the Indians didn't do
Re: What the Indians didn't do
Re: What the Indians didn't do
The biggest weakness of the system, is lack of impact players- Beyond Adam Miller and Fausto Carmona(who was a surprise) the indians lack any players who have a legitamate shot at being an all-star. Even if you look at the major league roster, half of the impact players(sizemore, hafner, westbrook) were acquired by trade. I'd argue the best way to win is to develop a smaller number of impact players you can control cheaply, vs the indians method of developing solid, but often times redundant parts
Look at the indians history of 1st, sandwich, and 2nd rounders- find impact players. The history is littered with players who either didn't pan out or who have become average big league players. Looking back, the only 2 drafted players who have really panned out are sabathia and miller.
Jim Callis(BA) did a study in which he demonstrated that paying a premium for players early in the draft is more effective than picking safely.
It's much more cost effective to spend and extra 2-3 mil in the draft each year and build a dynamic system like the red sox or the yankees, or one could even argue the tigers- than it is to spend it on trot nixon, j-mich etc.
To me, shapiro's draft strategy is the most frustrating part of his reign
by prudential18 on Aug 16, 2007 8:24 PM EDT up reply actions
Re: What the Indians didn't do
Also I do agree that we haven't really drafted that well, no better than most teams anyways.
Re: What the Indians didn't do
There's no doubt we've done better the last few years in acquiring prospects through trades and international signings than through the draft. But I think there's been more focus on those areas, and that part of Shapiro's strategy undoubtedly has been dead-on.
I think the post prior suffers from a lot of unrealistic expectations, but I don't have time to get into it in detail at the moment ... maybe later.
Re: What the Indians didn't do
Teams always have spare parts to move or system strengths (like the Indians OF prospects) that they might be able to move for lower-level high-ceiling prospects.
Also, it's important to note that the draft is only a portion of prospect acquisition - efforts in Latin America are also important, although I don't have the knowledge to speak as to the Indians' relative success there as compared to other teams.
by dave @ Let's Go Tribe! on Aug 16, 2007 9:49 PM EDT up reply actions
Re: What the Indians didn't do
Not too bad, huh?
Re: What the Indians didn't do
The 2000 - 2001 - 2002 drafts were pretty disastrous.
I'm willing to give the subsequent picks some time to develop, but it's hard to project many of these guys as future all-stars. And I certainly don't see any Manny Ramirez / Jim Thome types in the bunch.
Time will tell, I suppose.
by CaptainEasy on Aug 16, 2007 9:18 PM EDT up reply actions
Re: What the Indians didn't do
Re: What the Indians didn't do
Well, that's certainly one metric, and it has simplicity going for it.
I think there are two problems with that approach:
- It doesn't take into account the age/experience of each team, compared to its opponents.*
- Good minor leaguers don't necessarily make good major leaguers.
Consider two minor league teams:
- Team A: 3 "studs" who are young for their level, but excelling; and 22 guys who are struggling.
- Team B: 25 guys, all average or above average age for their league, all solid contributors, but not dominating.
* I'm not asserting that the Indians' teams are older than their opponents (it would be easy enough to research that, but I'm not going to).
by CaptainEasy on Aug 16, 2007 11:38 PM EDT up reply actions
Re: What the Indians didn't do
Re: What the Indians didn't do
Re: What the Indians didn't do
Either these guys turn out to be Felix Hernandez, or they'll have success with their second team.
Re: What the Indians didn't do
Using total career stats is a foolish move in evaluating the value of draft picks -- and that is always what these studies purport to do. The only meaningful question is, how much major league value (go ahead and VORP it) does the drafted player provide within the context of his first contract?
Jamie Moyer, for example, was drafted by the Cubs in 1984, progressed rapidly in their system, played for the Cubs for a couple of years, got traded to Texas for value but eventually was released in 1990.
As a draft pick, that's where his ledger ends. 104 starts, 27 relief appearances, some 650 or so IP with just under a 5.00 ERA. Anything he achieved after 1990 has nothing to do with how good of a draft pick he was.
Re: What the Indians didn't do
Even if he does turn into a great pitcher, the Tigers' rights to Porcello will be gone by the time he's in his mid-20s or so. If I understand the system correctly, they're sacrificing a few years of controlling his contract when he'd likely give them the most value for drafting him.
We should learn from Guthrie and Wily Mo that the original contract will probably expire before they player provides much/any value.
Re: What the Indians didn't do
by homelytourist on Aug 17, 2007 4:35 PM EDT up reply actions
Re: What the Indians didn't do
"On September 12, 2006, DiPietro signed a 15-year, $67.5 million contract with the Islanders. It is the longest official NHL contract ever to be signed, topping teammate Alexei Yashin's contract of 10 years. Newsday reported that the team offered him a 15-year contract in September 2005, but the league discouraged this, instead he signed a one-year offer."
by CarnegieAndOntario on Aug 17, 2007 4:51 PM EDT up reply actions
Re: What the Indians didn't do
*I know little to nothing about the NHL, so I'm going on instincts alone here
by homelytourist on Aug 17, 2007 4:59 PM EDT up reply actions
Re: What the Indians didn't do
by supermarioelia on Aug 17, 2007 6:23 PM EDT up reply actions
Re: What the Indians didn't do
by Gradyforpresident on Aug 16, 2007 5:59 PM EDT reply actions
Re: What the Indians didn't do
Re: What the Indians didn't do
That said, what do you suggest the tigers, or anyone else, could have done differently? Meaning, the assumption here is that Porcello would not have signed with anyone for anything less than a major league deal, correct? I'm just trying to figure out if your argument is that he should have been signed for a minor league deal or, if his demands were so high, that maybe he should not have been drafted, period?
I think we have to assume that if he could have been signed for a minor league deal by Detroit, that he would have been. Or maybe I'm crazy?
This kid was coming out of HS, so he did have the leverage to say "I'm not going to sign if I don't get an MLB deal".
Re: What the Indians didn't do
While the earlier signing deadline and the compensatory picks have given the clubs more leverage, the good agents will still get their clients these kinds of deals.

by 















