113 replies to this topic

[BobPhelan]

Burns - $375K

Pavolony - $325K

Craig - $250K ($125K against pool)

[Mackus]

By my tally they have spent just under $200k less than slot for the picks they've signed.  Doubt any of the remaining guys get more than $125k so that may end up being the final number.  

 

Left a little bit on the table.  Especially if you consider they are allowed to go 5% (or $590k) over without any real penalty.  Which is annoying and fair to be upset about but its not quite to the level of storming the Warehouse that going $1M or so under the allocation would have merited.

 

Certainly fair to criticize the strategy.  I like the idea of going low in the 1st but prefer spending the savings immediately.  Two years in a row now the Orioles have gone low early but didn't use the savings until later on, basically adding two additional 2nd or 3rd round talents later on rather than finding one extra 1st round talent with their 2nd or 3rd pick.

[RichardZ]

We are simplifying their strategy. The very well have gone for the 2nd 1st round pick if the right guy fell to their position. I think their draft strategy is a fluid thing. They may have even drafted Rocker at #5 if all signs pointed north. It was reported that he he signed with the Mets but it's not official. There seems to be a rumor about the physical. We don't know what we don't know.

[Mackus]

Sure, that's fair, but if the strategy is to land a second 1st round talent and then nobody is there to do so, the ultimate blame goes on the team. That's part of the risk of going udnerslot, is that you may not get your top preferred end results. If getting two extra 2nd-3rd round talents is the backup plan, I think that's fine, but needs to be acknowledged as not being as good of an on paper result as what is hoped when you go underslot in the first.

[dude]

.....

 

Left a little bit on the table.  .....

 

Certainly fair to criticize the strategy.  ....

 

At the end of the draft, it is what it is.  I'm not on the 'storm the Warehouse because they left money out there' wagon, but there should be accountability for whatever it is they decided to do.

 

If you tell me it's the best Draft you can have at 1-5, great, let's see what happens.  When they do spend most of their money, it does leave them room to suggest they could have done more with 1-3 or 1-1, but so what at this point.

 

DBacks drafted 1-6, they will be the draft class I'll compare the Orioles too. They still (at least officially) have some work to do to get their class signed, so we'll see where they wind up....but if you want my opinion on what an "A" draft looks like at 1-5, look at what the DBacks did at 1-6.  

[RichardZ]

Sure, that's fair, but if the strategy is to land a second 1st round talent and then nobody is there to do so, the ultimate blame goes on the team. That's part of the risk of going udnerslot, is that you may not get your top preferred end results. If getting two extra 2nd-3rd round talents is the backup plan, I think that's fine, but needs to be acknowledged as not being as good of an on paper result as what is hoped when you go underslot in the first.

Again, you're assuming Cowser wasn't the guy they actually wanted. Big assumption. My take is that Cowser was either 1, 1A or 1B of available players at #5. Either he was there top choice there or their board was so close on value that he was their best choice. You assume they punted value to save money. I don't.

[Mackus]

I've acknowledged that possibility. I would have a hard time accepting it as likely. Certainly Elias and co are going to say that's the case, but that shouldn't be believed, just like similar comments on Kjerstad last year shouldn't. I do believe that there is a miniscule difference that is impossible to distinguish between many of these guys, so absolutely on board with picking whichever guy of a tier you think will sign for the most favorable deal.

Whether they like him better or not, after picking him they know they have extra capital to spend and that's part of the game plan. If you're able to find the guys you want with that extra capital that's Plan A. If it doesn't work out and you gotta go to Plan B or Plan C, that's less good but still better than not using the savings.

[RichardZ]

Draft grades are fun. Totally worthless, but fun.

[RichardZ]

Plan B is always less good than plan A on paper. You said/implied that there underslot strategy backfired. I positioned that they felt they didn't give up player value to take Cowser. The bonus, no pun intended, was extra money to spend later. They knew there were no guarantees of who would be available at each of their picks. The strategy was to make the best choices at each pick, knowing the money they were working with. I call that a sound strategy.

[makoman]

From what people say it seems that their model loves college bats above the other 3 possibilities. Assuming that to be true it’s easy to see Cowser at the top of their board at 1-5. I’m not trying to argue if that’s smart or not, but I can see it.

I’m definitely not knowledgeable enough to have any clue whether there might have been other options they might have hoped would be there in any of the later picks. I.e. whether picks 2-10 were plan A or plan D.

[Mackus]

The strategy was to make the best choices at each pick, knowing the money they were working with. I call that a sound strategy.

That's not a strategy it's a platitude.

Two years in a row they went underslot early and didn't use the savings until later rounds. I have no idea if that was their preferred outcome or if they had targets they wanted to spend the money on in Comp A, 2, or Comb B but they weren't available when it came time to pick. I'd have preferred they do that latter. I'm curious as to what the team actually would've preferred.

[dude]

Draft grades are fun. Totally worthless, but fun.

 

Sure, but one week after the draft, on an Orioles message board, we only have our opinions based on available information. 

 

While we're having this conversation, Del Castillo signed for the same 1M that Willems did. 

[makoman]

Sure, but one week after the draft, on an Orioles message board, we only have our opinions based on available information.

While we're having this conversation, Del Castillo signed for the same 1M that Willems did.

Is he better than Trimble? Cause that’s the only comparison really. I don’t know that that’s obvious. Know nothing about him. Seems like he didn’t hit much edit: this year. Good as a freshman and last year.

[RichardZ]

Sure, but one week after the draft, on an Orioles message board, we only have our opinions based on available information.

While we're having this conversation, Del Castillo signed for the same 1M that Willems did.

We have information from national publications and pundits. We don't have a lot of inside information on why the Orioles chose the players they did versus the popular picks. Based on that, I'd say it's tilted towards one side. Only time will decide if that tilt is correct or wrong.

[TwentyThirtyFive]

From what people say it seems that their model loves college bats above the other 3 possibilities. Assuming that to be true it’s easy to see Cowser at the top of their board at 1-5. I’m not trying to argue if that’s smart or not, but I can see it.

I’m definitely not knowledgeable enough to have any clue whether there might have been other options they might have hoped would be there in any of the later picks. I.e. whether picks 2-10 were plan A or plan D.

Yeah. Last year Im not sure I buy they had Kjerstad as high as or higher than anyone else at 2. This year I could buy Cowser was right there with everyone else who was available. You can acknowlwdge guys like Lawler, Watson, House, Rocker have higher ceilings but if you think they're less likely to reach it than Cowser it brings them back down. Especially if you love Cowser's floor.

[RichardZ]

Yeah. Last year Im not sure I buy they had Kjerstad as high as or higher than anyone else at 2. This year I could buy Cowser was right there with everyone else who was available. You can acknowlwdge guys like Lawler, Watson, House, Rocker have higher ceilings but if you think they're less likely to reach it than Cowser it brings them back down. Especially if you love Cowser's floor.

Unfortunately, we haven't seen Kjerstad on the field. However, a year later watching Asa Lacy in high A, and Austin Martin in AA, makes me much more receptive to the idea that Kjerstad's power bat carried at least as much value to them at the time.

[dude]

From what people say it seems that their model loves college bats above the other 3 possibilities. Assuming that to be true it’s easy to see Cowser at the top of their board at 1-5. I’m not trying to argue if that’s smart or not, but I can see it.

 

I doubt it's just the model.  It's the confidence they have in the data that goes into the model.  We should be comfortable abandoning the belief that they are drafting anyone but a college bat with an early pick.  If someone thinks that's ridiculous, take it up with Elias, not me, it's his strategy.

 

I don't really care.  I certainly have my opinions, but if that's how you think you generate results, own it.  It is clearly their strategy, I'm not bashing it, I don't care....but others seem to want to believe that there's an open world of possibilities for college players and pitchers in general.  Look at their last 10 years of drafts...it's not hard to figure out why they are where they are.

[Slidemaster]

I think Elias has shown us 3 things in his time here.

1. He hates drafting pitching with high picks. I'd go so far as to say it appears that he completely takes them off his board in the early rounds.

2. He hates drafting high schoolers with high picks. He actually seems to dislike drafting high schoolers in general, unless it's a late round lottery ticket (some exceptions not withstanding).

3. For as long as he's GM, we can expect him to load up on college bats. If the best player available isn't a college bat, he isn't going to take him.

Honestly, I think this makes it very easy to predict who he's going to take in the first round. I don't believe for a second that Cowser was the best player available, but I do believe he was the best player he was willing to take.

[RichardZ]

2. He hates drafting HS players with high picks. Ever hear of Gunnar Henderson?

He certainly seems to favor college hitters but I doubt they totally excluding other categories.

3. You don't believe they would have taken Leiter if he dropped?

[Mackus]

2. He hates drafting HS players with high picks. Ever hear of Gunnar Henderson?

He certainly seems to favor college hitters but I doubt they totally excluding other categories.

3. You don't believe they would have taken Leiter if he dropped?

 

Henderson is the only HS player Elias has taken in the top 3 rounds (12 picks total) since coming here.  Only 5 high schoolers taken among 27 total picks in the top 10 rounds.  It's only 3 years, so a small sample, but the extreme nature of the split is fairly alarming and I think it's at least fair to start assigning some weight to that trend.

 

However if you look at bonuses, HS players start equaling out a little bit more.  Elias has given out 10 7-figure bonuses since 2019, 4 of them to HS players.