Edwin Jackson Signs w/ Cubs: 4 years/$52 M

[Hairyducked Idiot]

It shouldn't.

 

Take the BPA with your first-round pick, take nine nearly irrelevant also-rans with the remaining slotted picks.

 

OR

 

Take BPA with your first-round pick, take nearly irrelevant eight also-rans with the remaining slotted picks.

 

The strategy is pretty much the same regardless.

[dew1679666265]

It's the draft pick and the financial flexibility that comes with that pick's allocation that concern me.

 

I'd still be strongly in favor of Bourn if I felt more comfortable about his chances of staying at the level he's been at - especially since we've had such strong drafts recently.

[KingCubsFan]

Bourn has averaged 50+ stolen bases with an 80+% success rate for 5 years now. That production seems plenty real to me.

Offensively, he's basically DeJesus. Not sure if stolen bases+defense make him worth $10-11 million more than DeJesus.

 

I don't think stolen bases are some sort of sorcery that is hard to get a handle on like some people consider defense to be.

 

That's a pretty clear cut and measurable contribution.

Sure, but how much is it worth? When our offense is so terrible, I just wonder how smart it is to pay so much for an average to below-average offensive producer whose main assets are defense and speed (which will decline during the contract).

[Rob]

Bourn's baserunning value has averaged about 9 runs per 650 plate appearances over the last five years.

 

Essentially, it's worth 1 WAR in and of itself. For lack of a better number, we can assign it the standard "market value" of about $5 mil per WAR. His career UZR/150 is about 11 runs -- which is worth about the same. His bat is just about average given the position.

 

All in all, it adds up to a pretty safe bet for a 4 WAR player. It's not crazy at all to suggest he'd be worth even $15 mil per season despite the Cubs current roster.

[davell]

It shouldn't.

 

Take the BPA with your first-round pick, take nine nearly irrelevant also-rans with the remaining slotted picks.

 

OR

 

Take BPA with your first-round pick, take nearly irrelevant eight also-rans with the remaining slotted picks.

 

The strategy is pretty much the same regardless.

Kyle, the point isn't that the second rounder is likely to be a world beater. That doesn't mean at all though, that it couldn't be a major piece in a trade at some point. Hell, within a year of being drafted, before the guy even shows off his warts. It's not nearly as simple as just looking at stats in the majors. The second rounder that fails can still be a very valuable asset, before he fails.

[davell]

That said, I have no issue giving Bourn a 5/75ish type deal. Trade DeJesus to Atlanta, trade Garza in ST for Olt + and head into the season.

[Rob]

The only issue I have with giving something like 5/$75m is that it looks like it wont take nearly that much.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

It shouldn't.

 

Take the BPA with your first-round pick, take nine nearly irrelevant also-rans with the remaining slotted picks.

 

OR

 

Take BPA with your first-round pick, take nearly irrelevant eight also-rans with the remaining slotted picks.

 

The strategy is pretty much the same regardless.

Kyle, the point isn't that the second rounder is likely to be a world beater. That doesn't mean at all though, that it couldn't be a major piece in a trade at some point. Hell, within a year of being drafted, before the guy even shows off his warts. It's not nearly as simple as just looking at stats in the majors. The second rounder that fails can still be a very valuable asset, before he fails.

 

Examples?

[Rob]

Guys have to be in a system for a year before they can technically be traded as anything other than a PTBNL. The only recent notable guy to be traded that way was Drew Pomeranz, I believe.

[davell]

Kyle, I'm not able to look that up right now. Nor should examples be all that relevant honestly. Yes or no: Most guys drafted in the 30's stick inside their teams top 10 org rankings for a few years? The answer there is yes. Yes or no: Top 10 guys in a system are attractive trade bait? Again, the answer is yes.

[davell]

Guys have to be in a system for a year before they can technically be traded as anything other than a PTBNL. The only recent notable guy to be traded that way was Drew Pomeranz, I believe.

Yeah, I knew that. Worded it wrong. But most guys picked in yhe 30's have trade value a year later or it was a really, really bad pick.

[davell]

The only issue I have with giving something like 5/$75m is that it looks like it wont take nearly that much.

I'm worried about Texas. Atlanta as well, but on a one year deal if he went back there, to try again next offseason. Texas also needs to stay away from Lohse, if getting Olt in a Garza trade is possible.

[sneakypower]

It shouldn't.

 

Take the BPA with your first-round pick, take nine nearly irrelevant also-rans with the remaining slotted picks.

 

OR

 

Take BPA with your first-round pick, take nearly irrelevant eight also-rans with the remaining slotted picks.

 

The strategy is pretty much the same regardless.

Kyle, the point isn't that the second rounder is likely to be a world beater. That doesn't mean at all though, that it couldn't be a major piece in a trade at some point. Hell, within a year of being drafted, before the guy even shows off his warts. It's not nearly as simple as just looking at stats in the majors. The second rounder that fails can still be a very valuable asset, before he fails.

 

Examples?

Josh Donaldson

 

just looking at the '10 draft at random...Jedd Gyorko, Yordy Cabrera (helped A's get Chris Young), Drew Smyly, Andrelton Simmons, Cody Buckel, Justin Nicolino (helped Blue Jays get crazy haul from Marlins) were all taken in the 2nd round and are very valuable (or super-elite) trade chips right now, even if they never achieve their full potential

[davell]

I'm wrong about sticking inside top 10 in org thing for a while though. That said, I looked at 09, 10, and 11. Guys drafted between 30 and 45 over that time include Aaron Sanchez, Bryce Brentz, Syndergaard, Ranaudo and Taijuan Walker in 2011, Mahtook, Brian Goodwin, Henry Owens, Bradley Jr, Larry Green, Goeddel, Michael Fulmer, Trevor Story, and Andrew Chafin. 2009 had Brett Jackson, Matt Davidson, James Paxton, Tyler Skaggs, Garrett Richards, Tanner Scheppers, and Brad Boxberger. Pretty solid value.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

OK. Then shouldn't their trade value be roughly equivalent to the value of their "hit" status discounted by the odds of them hitting?

 

Sure, there's always the chance to be better at scouting/development than the rest of the teams, but that's true with the free agents too. Otherwise, if 2nd-round picks are on average accruing significant trade value over the value of the pick itself, then that's a major market inefficiency.

[davell]

You've been acting like there's no value in that pick. Its not a total crapshoot and our guys appear to be upper echelon in drafting. Like I said, I'm FOR giving up the pick to get Bourn. But you're lumping everything outside the 1st(maybe even upper half of the 1st) as complete lotto. And its not the case. Especially when you add in the pick value and how it could lead to drafting a top 15-20 type value thats fallen for signability concerns, depending on how many picks after that you want to take 10k types with. Talent is going much more according to talent now, as basically all teams are spending their allotments too. There's plenty of ways to look at things obviously, you could even just look and rank the best 50 prospects to come out of a draft, regardless of round, to see how deep a draft is, to help evaluate the value of each subsequent pick after your 1st, I guess.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I'm acting like the value is minuscule in comparison to the value of an MLB player you want.

[davell]

I'm acting like the value is minuscule in comparison to the value of an MLB player you want.

I'm for adding Bourn. But I see that there is value in the pick and what it allows hou to do. I'm not sure if trading DeJesus, and adding Crisp, while keeping the pick, isn't the best solution for us.

[Gilby]

I'm acting like the value is minuscule in comparison to the value of an MLB player you want.

I'm for adding Bourn. But I see that there is value in the pick and what it allows hou to do. I'm not sure if trading DeJesus, and adding Crisp, while keeping the pick, isn't the best solution for us.

 

The second round pick most definitely has value, especially with where we will be picking. However, signing Bourn would allow us to trade someone like DeJesus right now and likely get decent value, as you mentioned. That softens the blow of losing the pick right there.

 

I could live with Bourn for 5 years, would love him for 4. If this happens though, we have to be a real threat by 2014, which judging by Sanchez/Jackson and the interest in Bourn, that is Theo's goal.

[jersey cubs fan]

It shouldn't.

 

Take the BPA with your first-round pick, take nine nearly irrelevant also-rans with the remaining slotted picks.

 

OR

 

Take BPA with your first-round pick, take nearly irrelevant eight also-rans with the remaining slotted picks.

 

The strategy is pretty much the same regardless.

 

Except the money allocated for a 2nd round pick means you have more money to afford the BPA in the first.

[mul21]

Except the money allocated for a 2nd round pick means you have more money to afford the BPA in the first.

 

This is the part that makes me pause when thinking about signing Bourn. Having that extra cash becomes pretty significant with the set spending cap. This new CBA continues to suck balls.

[Guest]

Can someone point me to at least an approximation of how much of the bonus pool is lost for giving up that 2nd round pick? Google is not proving much help.

 

EDIT: Nevermind, Round 2 pick 4 was a little under 800k last year. That should be ~10% of the total pool, maybe a bit less. Basically the difference in winning 65-66 games instead of 61 last year.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Except the money allocated for a 2nd round pick means you have more money to afford the BPA in the first.

 

 

Worrying that the best player available won't sign for something resembling the No. 2 overall pick money is a pretty baseless fear.

[davell]

TT, not sure why you're looking at round 2, pick 4, but remember, this is the first draft without typical supplemental picks. Round 2, pick 4 in this upcoming draft will likely be pick 41 and carry a slot value close to 1.2 mill.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

For reference, in the history of the draft, only 3 No. 41 overall picks have produced at least 5 bWAR in the major leagues (and that's not exactly a high standard).

 

Yes, in theory the prospect can have trade value before he hits the majors, but he could also bust out quickly. The average expected value should be the same no matter where into the future you project.