Originally Posted by D-Man
With a limited budget, you have to choose your poison. The downside of putting a draftee on the 40-man is far less than either the Sowers or Schramek approach to drafting. Sure, you might have to do the 40-man kabuki dance for a year or two, or trade a player you would prefer to keep (Espinosa), or pass a guy through waivers (Sardinha). But I would rather have the top-shelf talent the roster guarantee provides. The Reds' main problem is a lack of high impact talent in the system. There is a strong consensus that Wieters is an impact talent--the very best in the draft--and he's ready to play. So if I have to choose between cheaper, lower-quality talent, and top-shelf talent with roster management issues, I would choose the latter.
I suppose it is irrelevant because the club is probably headed in the direction of the former (i.e. Schramek).
Aside: the 40-man issue crops up for players who need time to develop their craft. All of the 40-man busts needed more development time: like Borchard and Samardjzia (football players), Brazelton (needed to develop a curveball), Espinosa (HS player), or Sardinha (those who couldn't hit good pitching). And I don't think Wieters falls into any of these categories.
No, with a limiteds budget you draft a cheap, wanting to sign, high upside HS bat(yes Mr. Dominguez) then signable college pitchers with your sups. Schramek signed for 90,000 or something like that. He wasn't even a pick.
Right now, that seems to be the way the Reds are heading this draft.