2018 Actual MLB Draft Day(s) Thread

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Looks like slot for Hoerner.

 

[tweet]

[/tweet]

[davell]

Was hoping for less, although its good to see they think that highly of him. Doubt we've got any extra money to play with now. But, I'm assuming Davis and Roederer both get over slot, in saying that. Guessing that's where our 5% money is going.

[UK]

....

So I have to say I'm NOT a big fan of these draft selections and this draft class overall for the Cubs. It seriously lacks in upside, and the chances of landing an impact player from this group is very low. ..... What I mean is that this group has an even smaller chance of landing an impact player compared to other team's draft selections. The best way to land an impact player is by taking a talented HS player with that coveted high-risk/high-reward profile. The Cubs didn't do that...

 

Brennan Davis does fit that profile, but I almost guarantee that won't work out. I actually really dislike that pick and think it's stupid considering we're giving him an overslot deal......

 

Interesting article in the Athletic about the Cubs draft, with some good quotes from Dorey etc..

https://theathletic.com/384762/2018/06/07/an-inside-look-at-how-the-cubs-2018-draft-class-came-together/

 

Show, I hope you're wrong. I think some of your arguments are a little mixed. Seems to me that one argument is:

1. Cubs haven't done well outside of the first round thus far (I agree), so they won't do well outside of the first round in this draft either.

2. A second argument is that have failed with raw prospects before, so will fail with Roederer and Davis.

3. A third is that they didn't draft upside guys.

 

You may well be right.

 

But I think your second argument is the hinge one. I think Wilson is the only $$-HS guy they've signed. Hanneman is another example of a raw guy who didn't work out, but he was college already. The others, Crawfords and the like, those are 3rd-day picks. So to me, it seems like the Cubs record with HS-hitters like Roederer and Davis is pretty much wilson and that's it.

 

I agree, Wilson's been a hopeless failure, and a wasted pick. But I'm not sure failing on one HS pick, and then also some 3rd-day guys, I think that's a small data pool on which to conclude a trend. So I'm optimistic re both Roederer and Davis.

 

I think your 3rd argument is somewhat confusing. You complain that they didn't select upside guys, when to my perspective they took two such in Davis and Roederer. Reading what Dorey said, they were very much looking for upside guys, and ID'd Davis and Roederer as such. So the attempt is clearly there. You've already concluded that their attempts will fail, and you'll probably be correct. (Most 60-80 picks fail, especially HS ones....)

 

But that's a scouting evaluation on your part, I think, (or a scouting failure on their part), more than a strategic failure. If in fact they did fail.

 

My thinking is that although some of their HS guys have failed (Wilson and Sierra), they've had good luck with Gleyber and Eloy and Amara. So I'm not sure it's as well established and conclusive that they will fail to identify and develop teenage hitting prospects.

 

I don't know what to make of Roederer so I didn't actually mention him. I'm not sure how high his ceiling is or how his tools rate when he was fully healthy. I need to find out more info before I make a proclamation on him. Keith Law on Roederer:

 

Cole Roederer (2C) is a center fielder now with good feel to hit but has a hitch in his swing that probably has to be cleaned up for him to become a good hitter in pro ball. He also likely ends up in a corner where his fringy power could become an issue, so I'm not sure what the carrying tool is here.

 

That doesn't instill me with a lot of confidence...

 

I do count Hannemann as a raw guy who didn't work out even though he went to college. There are definitely parallels between Hannemann and Davis. I know Davis is the better athlete and has a higher upside. Brennen Davis actually has one of the highest ceilings in the entire draft... I just don't think he reaches it or even gets close. I believe Kiley McDaniel mentioned how some scouts were worried his bat was a 30 or 40.

 

I don't count IFAs with amateur draft picks. I'm strictly talking about the draft and the scouts involved with the MLB draft. I don't want to compare Gleyber and Eloy against our draft picks because it creates weird comparisons and we lack a lot of knowledge about how they scout internationally. It's not fair to compare Kris Bryant and Kyle Schwarber to Gleyber Torres and Miguel Amaya and so on. MLB teams scout those kids at a very young age and come to agreements when they are 14 or 15. Sometimes even younger now...

 

I do totally give credit to the international scouts for doing a great job and signing some top prospects.

 

I think we need to ask UK what he thinks and what other scouts think of the Cubs 2018 draft class.

 

Too early to tell.

 

To grade a draft property, there are 3 components in order of importance:

 

1) Player development

2) Draftees signed

3) Players selected

 

I don't know their strategy. From what I gathered, they went high contact ratios with hitters with athleticism with raw power potential. Contact rates are key among amateur hitters b/c swing and miss in HS, you're swinging and missing in pro ball. I like their strategy with position players.

 

As far as pitchers, they're obviously collegiate heavy. They have their justifiable reasons, I would like to see more higher ceiling arms that might be more raw but more signable than someone like Rocker. Its fine that want to go safer usually 2-10 (minus Hudson and Little) but throw some 11-40 money on a raw HS pitcher who might go the JUCO route.

 

As much as signability is a negative when they ask too much, the opposite is often ignored. If you get a marginal HS arm that will sign for anything, that increases his value. I remember we drafted a HS kid in the 13th rd and my boss said jokingly, here's 1000.00, he said where do I sign.... We had to tell him to take more.

 

The college players are all pretty safe bets, lower floors/lower ceilings. Minus Artis, I cant see a collegiate player above slot. Maybe Reynolds/Thompson but that'll be easily off-set by earlier picks.

 

The 3 HSers in the top 10 picks and their signings will determine the effectiveness of the draft.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Arizona Phil[/url]"]RHP Paul Richan (Cubs 2018 2nd round compensation pick - U. of San Diego) has officially signed and has been assigned to AZL Cubs #1.

 

Several other 2018 draft picks arrived at the Cubs facility in Mesa this morning (or are presently en route as we speak) and will sign later today.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

[Cubswin11]

Thought for sure that guy would be an under slot

[davell]

Well, he may be. If he got 450k, then it's a pretty major under slot, since pick value is 762,900. Really need clarification on this one, as it could go either way obviously.

[Named After Maddux]

Well, he may be. If he got 450k, then it's a pretty major under slot, since pick value is 762,900. Really need clarification on this one, as it could go either way obviously.

 

And Richan was quoted as saying he was expecting 4-6th rounds. $450k is slightly above slot for our pick in the 4th round. Fingers crossed for the figure being correct. Otherwise I’m curious where we found the funds to pay our HS picks.

[jersey cubs fan]

[Hrubes20]

That Richan pick is my least favorite one. I know the underslot was necessarily, but just yuck.

 

Not thrilled with the draft overall, but definitely interested in following how these "cognitive skill darlings" (CSDs for short, that's trademarked) are going to fare. It's clear as day that the Cubs selected their guys and didn't give a crap about where others valued them, or that they had higher bonus demands than the rest of baseball thought they were worth. Here's hoping they are onto something.

 

Worst case scenario, is that we have an influx of new bats to follow in the minor leagues every day. That in itself makes me happy.

[craig]

..definitely interested in following how these "cognitive skill darlings" (CSDs for short, that's trademarked) are going to fare. It's clear as day that the Cubs selected their guys and didn't give a crap about where others valued them, or that they had higher bonus demands than the rest of baseball thought they were worth. Here's hoping they are onto something...

 

Yeah. Cubs made their valuation and don't seem to care what other teams thought. Their valuation may be (or maybe isn't) way different from what other teams evaluated. Whatever, lets just hope they are vindicated.

[CyHawk_Cub]

[tweet]

[/tweet]

[CaliforniaRaisin]

[tweet]

[/tweet]

 

First post updated. Here we are after two top 10 round picks have signed:

 

2018 Bonus Pool (signed picks only): $955,400

2018 Bonus Pool (signed picks only) Including 5% Overage: $1,003,170

2018 Bonus Pool Spending: $700,000

2018 Bonus Pool +/-: $255,400 Under Budget

2018 Bonus Pool +/- Including 5% Overage: $303,170 Under Budget

[Transmogrified Tiger]

[tweet]

[/tweet]

 

First post updated. Here we are after two top 10 round picks have signed:

 

2018 Bonus Pool (signed picks only): $955,400

2018 Bonus Pool (signed picks only) Including 5% Overage: $1,003,170

2018 Bonus Pool Spending: $700,000

2018 Bonus Pool +/-: $255,400 Under Budget

2018 Bonus Pool +/- Including 5% Overage: $303,170 Under Budget

 

This is very helpful, thanks! One small suggestion, can we include the overage amount that assumes everyone in the Top 10 signs? I know the technical overage amount requires signings and until they're finalized that's in doubt, but given how likely it is for Top 10 picks to sign, I feel that number has more practical use in guiding these conversations.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

[tweet]

[/tweet]

 

First post updated. Here we are after two top 10 round picks have signed:

 

2018 Bonus Pool (signed picks only): $955,400

2018 Bonus Pool (signed picks only) Including 5% Overage: $1,003,170

2018 Bonus Pool Spending: $700,000

2018 Bonus Pool +/-: $255,400 Under Budget

2018 Bonus Pool +/- Including 5% Overage: $303,170 Under Budget

 

This is very helpful, thanks! One small suggestion, can we include the overage amount that assumes everyone in the Top 10 signs? I know the technical overage amount requires signings and until they're finalized that's in doubt, but given how likely it is for Top 10 picks to sign, I feel that number has more practical use in guiding these conversations.

 

Something like this?

[Transmogrified Tiger]

 

First post updated. Here we are after two top 10 round picks have signed:

 

2018 Bonus Pool (signed picks only): $955,400

2018 Bonus Pool (signed picks only) Including 5% Overage: $1,003,170

2018 Bonus Pool Spending: $700,000

2018 Bonus Pool +/-: $255,400 Under Budget

2018 Bonus Pool +/- Including 5% Overage: $303,170 Under Budget

 

This is very helpful, thanks! One small suggestion, can we include the overage amount that assumes everyone in the Top 10 signs? I know the technical overage amount requires signings and until they're finalized that's in doubt, but given how likely it is for Top 10 picks to sign, I feel that number has more practical use in guiding these conversations.

 

Something like this?

 

Fancy!

 

Really I was just thinking that if we're including overages, in the technical sense they're really $630k under budget(375 is the 5% overage for everyone signing, 255 under slot from confirmed signings). To me that's a more actionable number that helps me understand the room to play with as they sign, maybe I'm alone on that front though.

[davell]

 

That's less than I figured on him.

[Hrubes20]

In a world where we gave guys like Stinnet, Skulina, and Pierce Johnson the time of day for a few minutes, what's so bad about Richan? He's healthy, young, can hit 94, can locate it, healthy, can locate at least two other pitches, keeps the ball in the park, and missed bats this year. Plus he's not unathletic and repeats his delivery really well. Most of these college arms, especially the RHs, do one or two of those things with the rest getting covered with promises of upside ceiling development.

 

He has less fastball than all of them, and doesn't even flash a plus secondary like each of those 3 you listed. Those are the big reasons why he was knocked around all year at the college level. It's not always a great thing to throw strikes when your stuff is as mediocre as Richan's.

[Hrubes20]

 

That's less than I figured on him.

 

Same here. I thought I saw that he was asking for $1.2-$1.5 or something like that.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

2018 Bonus Pool (signed picks only): $2,016,300

2018 Bonus Pool (signed picks only) Including 5% Overage: $2,117,115

2018 Bonus Pool (all top 10 rounds) Including 5% Overage: $7,892,955

2018 Bonus Pool Spending: $1,800,000

2018 Bonus Pool Remaining (signed picks only): $216,300 Under Budget

2018 Bonus Pool Remaining (signed picks only) Including 5% Overage: $317,115 Under Budget

2018 Bonus Pool Remaining (all top 10 rounds)Including 5% Overage: $592,155.00 Under Budget

 

TT, that last line is what you're looking for, right?

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Per AZ Phil:

 

The Cubs have officially signed eight more players selected in last week's MLB First-Year Player Draft:

 

D. J. Artis, OF (7th round * Liberty University) - COLLEGE JR

Riley McCauley, RHP (14th round * Michigan State) - COLLEGE JR

Carlos Vega, RHP (21st round * Southeast Missouri State) - COLLEGE SR

Jamie Galazin, OF (22nd round * St. John's University) - COLLEGE SR

Blake Whitney, RHP (24th round * USC - Upstate) - COLLEGE SR

Drew Wharton, OF-1B (30th round * Clemson) - COLLEGE SR

Clayton Daniel, 2B (31st round * Jacksonville State) - COLLEGE SR

Jack Patterson, LHP (32nd round * Bryant University) - COLLEGE 5th YEAR (REDSHIRT SR)

 

Galazin and Wharton were assigned to AZL Cubs #2, and the other six were assigned to AZL Cubs #1.

 

This brings the total number of draft picks signed to nine.

 

https://www.thecubreporter.com/comment/259251#comment-259251

[Transmogrified Tiger]

2018 Bonus Pool Remaining (all top 10 rounds)Including 5% Overage: $592,155.00 Under Budget

 

TT, that last line is what you're looking for, right?

 

Sure is, thanks!

[toonsterwu]

In a world where we gave guys like Stinnet, Skulina, and Pierce Johnson the time of day for a few minutes, what's so bad about Richan? He's healthy, young, can hit 94, can locate it, healthy, can locate at least two other pitches, keeps the ball in the park, and missed bats this year. Plus he's not unathletic and repeats his delivery really well. Most of these college arms, especially the RHs, do one or two of those things with the rest getting covered with promises of upside ceiling development.

 

He has less fastball than all of them, and doesn't even flash a plus secondary like each of those 3 you listed. Those are the big reasons why he was knocked around all year at the college level. It's not always a great thing to throw strikes when your stuff is as mediocre as Richan's.

 

I think the biggest issue I had with Richan is simply that, at the moment, it felt like a high floor guy. In the moment, we had drafted Hoerner, which wasn't off the board but overall seemed a tiny bit higher, two OF's that, if I recall the thread, drew mixed reactions then (and now). Richan also came out saying he got slot, which seemed to send confusing signals on the draft.

 

I mean, I simply don't see the gap between Casey and Richan as being all that much, and no one would has an issue with Casey. In hindsight, knowing Richan was an underslot purpose, then okay. I still don't love Richan ... but the system is the system, and there is a need for underslot guys.

[davell]

Brayden Fisher signed for under 500k, Justin Jarvis signed for a bit over 300k. Fisher in the 3rd as an UNDER SLOT HS arm, same with Jarvis in the 4th, would have made me very happy.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

In a world where we gave guys like Stinnet, Skulina, and Pierce Johnson the time of day for a few minutes, what's so bad about Richan? He's healthy, young, can hit 94, can locate it, healthy, can locate at least two other pitches, keeps the ball in the park, and missed bats this year. Plus he's not unathletic and repeats his delivery really well. Most of these college arms, especially the RHs, do one or two of those things with the rest getting covered with promises of upside ceiling development.

 

Just an FYI, USD is one of the best pitcher’s parks in college baseball in terms of suppressing home runs.