Overdrafting and Overslotting

[BRM]

I continue to disagree that Dusty doesn't like rookies. I think he's done a very good job of sticking with our young players. I really don't see this complaint, in particular.

Dickerson should probably be in CF every day but he's sharing time right now. Janish almost never plays. We had to endure Gonzalez and his .200 stick when he was healthy. Those two don't have top prospect pedigrees though.

That said, he stuck with Edwin and Jay Bruce when they were struggling. He played them every day. He went to Votto early last year and never looked back. I can see the criticism personally but I don't think Dusty is quite the "rookie hater" he's made out to be.

[Benihana]

I believe Gammons had them at 3.8 million this year, one of the top teams in baseball. I don't know if the number is accurate, but he reported it.

Since Castellini took over, the Reds have made a lot of headway in their approach to signing amateur talent. They are drafting and signing guys who drop in the draft -- maybe not in the fashion some would like, but it is instructive to remember that most draftees fail to reach the majors -- and they are now legitimate players in Latin America. I think that's about all you can ask. To rail against the franchise for being shortsighted in its approach to signing amateur talent lacks perspective, in my opinion, concerning both the advances the team has made and the scope of effort required to be competitive in those markets.

Note: Sano remains unsigned by anyone, and there are now some rumblings that his case may be similar to Edward Salcedo's last year (a guy who was initially reputed to be the plum prospect and on the verge of signing a big deal, who later turned out to be older than advertised, never signing at all). So let's wait a while before declaring the Pirates the best bounty hunters in the land.

Have they made progress? Sure.

Are they anywhere close to where they need to be, especially for a small-market team? No way.

There's no reason why they can't accelerate the pace of these changes. Again, if the Orioles, Pirates, and Royals can all do it- so can the Reds. I am looking at this from a business perspective, and where they can get the most ROI from an organizational point of view. Now obviously like all drafts less than one year out, the results remain to be seen. But the amount of "overdrafting and overslotting" they did in this year's draft was quite underwhelming, especially when they didn't have a single 7-figure guy on the international market. Humberto Valor has promise, but most scouting services did not rank him as a Top 5 talent in this year's international class.

And this is not even about Miguel Angel Sano. The Pirates (yes the PIRATES!) just devoted five million dollars to build a state of the art, never-before-seen top class facility in the DR in order to attract all of the best talent down there. Now which would you rather have, a facility that is lauded throughout baseball that can attract the top talent in the DR for several years to come, or one year of (fill in the blank retread.) Where will you see a better ROI?

[lollipopcurve]

And this is not even about Miguel Angel Sano. The Pirates (yes the PIRATES!) just devoted five million dollars to build a state of the art, never-before-seen top class facility in the DR in order to attract all of the best talent down there. Now which would you rather have, a facility that is lauded throughout baseball that can attract the top talent in the DR for several years to come, or one year of (fill in the blank retread.) Where will you see a better ROI?

Of course the Reds should be investing in Latin America instead of churning retreads year after year in key spots on the major league roster. I was saying years ago that the Reds' dirty little secret was that they were doing absolutely nothing in Latin America. You're not enlightening me one iota on that front. The fact is, they do have a new facility there -- they put it in when they realized Rijo's academy was a joke. You cannot expect them to go out and build another one so soon after doing that.

Having the best facility does not guarantee you get the best players. Doling out the highest bonuses does not guarantee you get the best ROI. I agree with the general direction of your comments -- investing in amateur talent is good -- but I disagree that the organizations you name -- KC, Pittsburgh and Baltimore -- are necessarily doing a better job than the Reds, simply based on the $$$ amounts they're spending. It's easy PR for teams to claim they're forging a new direction by citing these large contracts for amateurs. However, until we see what kind of professional players these kids turn out to be, it's PR only.

[Benihana]

Of course the Reds should be investing in Latin America instead of churning retreads year after year in key spots on the major league roster. I was saying years ago that the Reds' dirty little secret was that they were doing absolutely nothing in Latin America. You're not enlightening me one iota on that front. The fact is, they do have a new facility there -- they put it in when they realized Rijo's academy was a joke. You cannot expect them to go out and build another one so soon after doing that.

Having the best facility does not guarantee you get the best players. Doling out the highest bonuses does not guarantee you get the best ROI. I agree with the general direction of your comments -- investing in amateur talent is good -- but I disagree that the organizations you name -- KC, Pittsburgh and Baltimore -- are necessarily doing a better job than the Reds, simply based on the $$$ amounts they're spending. It's easy PR for teams to claim they're forging a new direction by citing these large contracts for amateurs. However, until we see what kind of professional players these kids turn out to be, it's PR only.

Of course. We'll have to wait five years at least to see which of these international talents pan out. But that doesn't mean we can't speculate on it now, right?

As far as the draft goes, my concern about Buckley and co. is that they are great at finding good organizational depth guys which could even be major league role players. But I fear that he is very poor at finding premium talent- guys who can be All-Stars at the major league level. He often opts for the safe pick, or whiffs completely when he doesn't (eg Mesoraco.) Yonder Alonso will be his true test, as he was picked to be a superstar- even when some other top names (Beckham, Smoak, etc.) were still on the board. If Alonso turns into Adrian Gonzalez, that will be great. But otherwise, I can't see a single player that Buckley has drafted in his four drafts that has true All-Star potential. (Well, maybe one- and he was traded two weeks ago.) And that is very, very worrisome.

Perhaps if he were allowed/encouraged to take some real chances on first-round types that slid into the 4th, 5th, 6th rounds etc. because of signability concerns, that could change. That's my point in this thread.

[lollipopcurve]

As far as the draft goes, my concern about Buckley and co. is that they are great at finding good organizational depth guys which could even be major league role players. But I fear that he is very poor at finding premium talent- guys who can be All-Stars at the major league level. He often opts for the safe pick, or whiffs completely when he doesn't (eg Mesoraco.) Yonder Alonso will be his true test, as he was picked to be a superstar- even when some other top names (Beckham, Smoak, etc.) were still on the board. If Alonso turns into Adrian Gonzalez, that will be great. But otherwise, I can't see a single player that Buckley has drafted in his four drafts that has true All-Star potential. (Well, maybe one- and he was traded two weeks ago.) And that is very, very worrisome.

Let it play out. I don't think there's a scouting director in the game who specializes in finding superstars.

Keep an eye on Yorman. He could have the kind of high ceiling talent you're looking for.

[bucksfan2]

I like the idea of spending more money in the amateur market. But I think with the overdraftign and overslotting you are asking for trouble. There is a reason that 1st round talent falls into the late rounds. The most common reasons are college as well as signability issues but you could also have an attitude or mechanical issue. You could have a guy who may be ranked high by certain scouting reports that your organization just don't like.

What I found was humorous when I followed the MLB draft is the number names that were thrown out. In round 3 it was "player X" is still available, the Reds have to pick him. Then when "player X" wasn't pick there was almost a level of disgust towards the Reds that they didn't pick said player. The reality of the situation is many of the players who were drafted in this past years draft very few of us have ever seen play.

One final comment, isn't it hard to draft a player in the later round and give them 1st or 2nd round money when you don't have your top 2 picks signed? That may go a lot way to hurting negotiations with your top picks.

[Benihana]

Let it play out. I don't think there's a scouting director in the game who specializes in finding superstars.

Maybe so, but I know a lot of scouting directors that have a better track record of finding premium talent- especially when you're drafting in the Top 10 three out of four years! I mean, we've basically been given similar opportunities as the Rays to add premium talent through the draft, and so far it hasn't looked like we've risen to the task.

Keep an eye on Yorman. He could have the kind of high ceiling talent you're looking for.

I agree about Yorman- and that's why I'd like to see a lot more of those kinds of chances taken (that's exactly what I'm advocating.)

[Benihana]

I like the idea of spending more money in the amateur market. But I think with the overdraftign and overslotting you are asking for trouble. There is a reason that 1st round talent falls into the late rounds. The most common reasons are college as well as signability issues but you could also have an attitude or mechanical issue. You could have a guy who may be ranked high by certain scouting reports that your organization just don't like.

What I found was humorous when I followed the MLB draft is the number names that were thrown out. In round 3 it was "player X" is still available, the Reds have to pick him. Then when "player X" wasn't pick there was almost a level of disgust towards the Reds that they didn't pick said player. The reality of the situation is many of the players who were drafted in this past years draft very few of us have ever seen play.

That's fair, especially if this year was Buckley's first running a draft. But my point is we've seen what his drafts have produced so far- a lot of role players and no premium talent. Of course no one knows on draft day how any of these prospects will pan out. If Buckley had a Belicheck-like record in the draft of finding premium talent where no one else was looking, most of us would suspend disbelief. But he doesn't, and that's just a cold hard fact.

One final comment, isn't it hard to draft a player in the later round and give them 1st or 2nd round money when you don't have your top 2 picks signed? That may go a lot way to hurting negotiations with your top picks.

No one said you have to sign these "overdrafted/overslotted" guys immediately after the draft. Most of them are agreeing to deals this week- in the last week of the signing period. There's no reason why you can't sign your top guys first, unless of course, you are the Reds (or the Bengals, for that matter.)

Again, the Orioles and the Pirates got their top guys signed quickly, and then got to work on these later guys. Sure, their first round picks may have been "signability" guys, but by most accounts, so was Leake. It's not like the Reds took Crow or Matzek.

[lollipopcurve]

I agree about Yorman- and that's why I'd like to see a lot more of those kinds of chances taken (that's exactly what I'm advocating.)

So, how many 2.5 million dollar 16 year olds should the team be signing each year?

[Benihana]

So, how many 2.5 million dollar 16 year olds should the team be signing each year?

Whether it's 16 year olds, 18 year olds, or 21 year olds- I don't really care. I'd just like to see the Reds bring in more premium talent. Usually, the "hefty" price tag comes with that (but it's still peanuts compared to what they'll pay for these guys 5-10 years from now.)

Plus, it doesn't have to always be $2.5MM- a lot of times it can be half that amount. Again, look at the examples I'm talking about (von Rosenberg, Cain, Dodson, J.Pena, Stassi, C.Coffey, etc.)

Do you think the Reds would have drafted Weiters (had he fallen three more picks?) Did they take Porcello when he was there? Sure, these are gambles- but a desperate team needs to take some chances.

[lollipopcurve]

Whether it's 16 year olds, 18 year olds, or 21 year olds- I don't really care. I'd just like to see the Reds bring in more premium talent. Usually, the hefty price tag comes with that (but it's still peanuts compared to what they'll pay for these guys 5-10 years from now.)

The general consensus is that the team's minor league system is in the top half vs all others. Sure, we'd like to see blue chippers littering the team's top 10, but it's important to remember that all 30 teams are out there trying to do the same thing, and quite a few have more $$$ to spend on a year by year basis (cold, hard fact). So long as they're making a solid effort and getting solid results -- understanding that ALL teams miss on some of their high picks -- I don't see how it's fair to rip them a new one for not seeming to keep up with some of the least successful franchises in the game.

[bucksfan2]

That's fair, especially if this year was Buckley's first running a draft. But my point is we've seen what his drafts have produced so far- a lot of role players and no premium talent. Of course no one knows on draft day how any of these prospects will pan out. If Buckley had a Belicheck-like record in the draft of finding premium talent where no one else was looking, most of us would suspend disbelief. But he doesn't, and that's just a cold hard fact.

I see all star type player being thrown out there quite a bit. What exactly is an all star type player? Are we talking perennial all star? Are we talking making one all star game? Are we talking top 3-5 at your position?

IMO you are being very critical of Buckley and his drafts. Quite frankly I think he has done a pretty good job of drafting over the past few years, especially when you throw in the fact that the draft is such a crap shoot. It is pretty much a crap shoot as to whether or not your 1st round pick will be a bust or not.

I think you could make the argument that no drafter has shown the ability to consistently find premium talent where no one else is looking. The reality of the situation is that premium talent has a pretty good shot of flaming out before it becomes a premium major league player.

No one said you have to sign these "overdrafted/overslotted" guys immediately after the draft. Most of them are agreeing to deals this week- in the last week of the signing period. There's no reason why you can't sign your top guys first, unless of course, you are the Reds (or the Bengals, for that matter.)

Again, the Orioles and the Pirates got their top guys signed quickly, and then got to work on these later guys. Sure, their first round picks may have been "signability" guys, but by most accounts, so was Leake. It's not like the Reds took Crow or Matzek.

The O's and Pirates are two of the worst run organizations in the game. The Pirates did build a new, state of the art facility in the Dominican, but that doesn't mean that they will sign any more top players than they normally do.

As for them signing picks, so be it. I don't see much value in drafting a signability pick with your first pick in order to attempt to pay over slot for a pick in the later rounds. I too am curious as to why the Reds haven't signed their top two picks as of yet, but I am sure there is a pretty good reason for that. In reality it isn't a bad draft when you sign your top 12? picks (believing that the Reds top two sign). If they are able to sign one of those Florida SS then that would be even better.

[Benihana]

The general consensus is that the team's minor league system is in the top half vs all others. Sure, we'd like to see blue chippers littering the team's top 10, but it's important to remember that all 30 teams are out there trying to do the same thing, and quite a few have more $$$ to spend on a year by year basis (cold, hard fact). So long as they're making a solid effort and getting solid results -- understanding that ALL teams miss on some of their high picks -- I don't see how it's fair to rip them a new one for not seeming to keep up with some of the least successful franchises in the game.

I just refuse to accept being content to remain competitive with all 30 teams (or even in the top-half) as opposed to a desire to be the best, cutting-edge, industry leader in an area where they actually have the resources available to do it. Again, reeks of the Bengals to me.

They may never be able to outspend the Yankees or Red Sox in major league payroll, but they are capable of outspending every other team in amateur talent acquisition- at least at the current rates they are going for. You have to pick an area where you can compete, and really go for it. Otherwise you may as well give up and lament that the game is rigged against you.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

[Benihana]

The O's and Pirates are two of the worst run organizations in the game. The Pirates did build a new, state of the art facility in the Dominican, but that doesn't mean that they will sign any more top players than they normally do.

I would argue that the O's would be much better than the Reds for the next five years if they were allowed to play in the Reds division. Since MacPhail has arrived, I'd argue that they are one of the better run organizations in the game. I'd trade our talent for theirs everyday of the week.

[redsmetz]

Dickerson should probably be in CF every day but he's sharing time right now. Janish almost never plays. We had to endure Gonzalez and his .200 stick when he was healthy. Those two don't have top prospect pedigrees though.

That said, he stuck with Edwin and Jay Bruce when they were struggling. He played them every day. He went to Votto early last year and never looked back. I can see the criticism personally but I don't think Dusty is quite the "rookie hater" he's made out to be.

You're right about Dickerson and for whatever reason, Baker & management did not believe he was the solution for centerfield. Likewise, they also mistakenly saw something in Taveras they thought they could fix (and I purposely use the plural there - I don't think this was just Dusty advocating for Taveras). That proved wrong, no question there. And I'm not sure if the Reds believed Dickerson couldn't handle it being young, but he's moving up there (I think he's 26 now). But otherwise, as you note, Baker's been good with both EE (probably the best Reds manager he had) and definitely Bruce. Likewise, I think with the young pitchers.

I just get frustrated because folks just very easily throw off this vet love notion about Baker that I haven't seen here really.