Aug
17

Open Thread: 2009 Draft Signing Deadline Day

By

The deadline for teams to sign their draft picks is the stroke of midnight tonight, and you can expect most of the high picks to sign just a few minutes before that. You can read up on the Stephen Strasburg situation here; it’s not worth the bandwidth for me to regurgitate it all. I think he signs for something in the $18-22M range right before the deadline. That’s just too much money for him to pass up, and realistically his stock can’t get any higher.

The Yankees have already announced three significant signings today, landing first rounder Slade Heathcott for $2.2M, second rounder JR Murphy for $1.25M, and fifth rounder Caleb Cotham for $675,000. You can see all of the Yankees picks here, the names in bold are guys who have signed. As of right now, they’ve signed their top eight picks and 13 of their top 14.

My quick take: they definitely overpaid Heathcott, that’s 7th overall pick money. He’s just not that kind of talent, however the Yanks had their backs up against the wall because it was an unprotected pick. No complaints about the money given to the other two players, both are solid talents. I’m going to post my annual post-draft signing period top 30 prospects list on Wednesday, so be on the look out for that.

While we wait for some signings to be announced, use this sucker as an open thread to talk about all things draft. I’ll post more updates later as signings are announced.

Categories : Draft, Open Thread

253 Comments»

  1. gxpanos says:

    I’m sure someone’s gone over this, but I dont remember. How does Heathcott compare to AJax? Higher ceiling because he has more pop?

  2. Charlie says:

    not a big deal, but the yanks haven’t signed any SS’s from the draft of IFA

    • Andy In Sunny Daytona says:

      Sano will be signed by the Yanks or the Ynaks.

      Just my opinion.

      • Mattingly's Love Child says:

        I’ve been swamped with work for almost a month so I’m very much behind the times…. Sano is still out there? Are there any rumors about him and the Yankees?

        • zs190 says:

          He played at the Yanks’ Dominican academy for a while. Apparently Pirates have an offer around 2 million out there, he wants to sign with the Pirates but his agent is waiting for a better offer for him (Pirates or otherwise). At this point, I don’t think we are players for his service, he’ll probably end up with the Pirates (not really a legit SS anyways, more likely to be a 3B from what I hear)

          • Mattingly's Love Child says:

            Thanks. Yeah after what I had heard already I didn’t think he was a viable SS prospect, but 3B prospects are nice too.

          • Andy In Sunny Daytona says:

            Bite your tongue zs190. Sano WILL sign with the Yankees. My sources have told me that he is rooming with Melvin Croussett at the Yankees Dominican Academy. Melvin has inspired Sano to a point that he is learning Conversational Aramaic along with Theoretcal Physics in hopes of being able to talk to God like Melvin.

    • Tom Zig says:

      Sano is still out there

      cue Andy in Sunny Daytona

      Plus there is still time to sign the two SS not named Steven Bruno.

  3. Mike bk says:

    not to mention on stasburg the worst 3 teams right now are washington, kc and pitt so dont see them paying more than that next year. maybe baltimore would and maybe he would take less to stay in sd.

  4. Mike bk says:

    Axisa,
    i asked about kyle perkins in the last thread if there was any new reports on him and if he was still coming next year. also where would he rank in our catching system with he, sanchez, and murphy basically all starting out next year? thanks.

  5. Jose says:

    I’m putting the over/under for a Strasburg signing at $21 million. What do you guys think? Over or under?

  6. Jake H says:

    How many 1st rounders do you guys think don’t sign? I’m going to say 3.

    • Mike bk says:

      purke, matzek, apparently tampa isnt signing levon washington, and i would say ackley might not cant remember anyone else left.

      i think tate, wheeler, miller and strasburg get done.

  7. Tom Zig says:

    So I guess we are pretty loaded with catchers…

  8. Doug says:

    Mike, I asked this in the prior thread, but don’t think you responded. The fact that you say “they definitely overpaid Heathcott”, was there a $ that the Yanks should have just walked away?

    • Mike Axisa says:

      I’m sure they had a number, but I have no idea what that could have been. Maybe $3M?

    • Mike bk says:

      i dont think they really could this year. next year when they would have compensation for it they would be more likely but dont see it this year. in reality the lack of compensation probably cost them 400K in my book.

  9. Mike bk says:

    could be OT but this an open thread “Jon Heyman of SI.com says the Red Sox are “thought to have offered a five-prospect package of [Clay] Buchholz, Michael Bowden, Justin Masterson, Nick Hagadone and a position player” for Roy Halladay.”

    I dont like the sox system but that wasnt a bad offer it is real, still probably not enough on the top end to get roy.

  10. Strasburg is an idiot if he doesn’t sign.

    Signing alone he gets enough $$ that he never has to work another day in his life if he doesn’t want to…

    • A.D. says:

      That and he can’t gain anymore hype, if he goes back and dominates college again, that’s what everyone expects, meanwhile he could get hurt, have a down year, have other players step up and thus lose hype.

      Basically as an amateur (or in indy leagues) Strasburg’s value can’t be higher than right now.

    • JMK says:

      While the fact that he may not have to work another day in his life is probable (certainly no guarantee-see the MC Hammer story), bear in mind that he does have other options, though his value may never be as high as it is now.

      So, let me put it this way: You’re looking for a job as a director of reenactments of medieval history for some sort of company. Your resume is sparkling, your references are top-notch–you’re something of a prodigy in your field. You can sign today for $220k guaranteed, and work there for a few years until you’ve earned a higher raise. Or you can go back to school and grab an even more advanced degree in a year (hypothetically, of course. A PHD would take much longer, but I digress). Say you go back to school, polish your work, and reenter the field after proving you were what you thought you were worth. You could still net the same value (or even higher) and be closer to perfecting your craft, ultimately leading to a larger raise down the line than what you would have received not going back to school. Or option three: You don’t go to school, and instead work internationally, come back to the States and have your pick of signing TOP dollar at whatever firm wants you the most (a free agent, if you will) and instead of looking at 220k, you could net 10X that.

      This is a lengthy, poor analogy, as the two circumstances are completely different and barely relatable (since baseball isn’t entirely a free-market system of employers, which you would be open to from the on-set), but I hope this expresses the risks and possible benefits of not signing immediately.

      • Doug says:

        but you’d have to become a citizen of said nation and live there > year, something most wouldn’t be willing to do

        • JMK says:

          If he continues to stay enrolled at SDSU, maybe he can finagle a way to convince them that pitching in Japan qualifies as a work/study abroad.

          Besides, I’m down with any country that sells used girls underwear in vending machines.

        • YankFan says:

          There’s also a chance that Selig will not allow that since it would be seen for what it is – a sham.

          He wants that bigger payday down the line then he should sign today & get the clock started. He loses this year of 15M & signs next year for 18M he is up 3M but still has one year to play to hit the FA market.

          • Doug says:

            yeah, but it’s the $50M payday today that he’s looking for.

            but, i agree…if boras thought he could realistically get strasburg to free agency next year by having him play abroad, he’d have him on a plane already

      • Sweet Dick Willie says:

        By your own admission it is a poor analogy, but mostly because it would be hard to imagine Rebecca getting hurt in her additional year of school work, whereas that is a distinct possibility for Mr. Strasburg.

        • JMK says:

          Ahh, but you forget that Jousting is quite dangerous, as are those large turkey legs on sticks. But yes, it was a poor analogy and it wasn’t intended to fully explore all details in true harmony, though her field aides itself better than many others, with the exception of loggers, fishermen, athletes in contact sports, construction, citizens of Camden, etc,.

          /Just finished LSAT studying and testing
          //Now only thinks analogously.
          ///Needs coffee and a hug

        • toad says:

          Exactly. For Strasburg to turn down an eight-digit contract is an insane gamble on his part. Yes, he might win his bet, but that doesn’t mean it was sensible.

    • King of Fruitless Hypotheticals says:

      not for nothin (i really dont know what that means, but it has a good ol’ down home country feel to it), but we’re talking BASEBALL.

      if i could play ball and make what i make now, i’d do it in a heartbeat!

      man…makes you ask ‘how much is enough?’

  11. emac2 says:

    Has there ever been a solid reason established for signing so many catchers?

    There has to be some stat or trend they are looking at that shows catchers having some ultimate advantage that would offset the reality that these are normally slower players. With the numbers being signed we’re drafting catchers to feed a lot of other major league positions.

    Maybe their mental involvement in the game leads to an understanding of the game that ends up being of more value then drafting more athletic players that aren’t as involved in the action when it comes to players who end up contributing at the major league level….:)…or something like that.”’ Maybe the conversion rate the the majors is simply higher overall.

    Has anyone ever heard the Yankees give a believable answer to that question? I can see them giving a phony reason especially if they have found something that they think works. I also have to think they have found something very convincing to spend so much on a single position. It’s one thing to feed a 10 man pitching staff or a 3 man outfield.

    • Andy In Sunny Daytona says:

      From what I’ve read, it seems like JR Murphy is the same kind of player that Brandon Inge is.

    • “Has there ever been a solid reason established for signing so many catchers?”

      I’d imagine it’s just because those are the players they happen to like the most, not because they’re operating under some sort of plan to acquire as many catchers as possible.

      • Doug says:

        also the fact that so few catchers actually make it to the bigs as catchers. so, the more you acquire, the better the chance that one sticks.

      • emac2 says:

        So they basically draft a bunch of players to trade knowing we can only use 2 and have Tex and Arod at the corners?

        Not impossible, cornering the catcher market would be a viable business plan but it doesn’t seem very baseball like.

        • “So they basically draft a bunch of players to trade knowing we can only use 2 and have Tex and Arod at the corners?”

          Hold on… I said the opposite, I said I don’t think it’s necessarily a plan to load up on catchers but rather a result of them taking the players they think are best and those players happening to be catchers pretty often lately. Maybe it is a plan, I certainly don’t have any inside info… But your response to me insinuates that I said it’s a plan when I actually said the opposite. I think the plan is to go after talent with position being a lesser concern.

          Also, I find it interesting that people seem to find it so strange that the Yankees have acquired multiple catcher prospects. I mean, they acquire multiple prospects at every position.

          And… How does it not “seem very baseball like?” I’m not sure what that means.

          • K.B.D. says:

            “Also, I find it interesting that people seem to find it so strange that the Yankees have acquired multiple catcher prospects. I mean, they acquire multiple prospects at every position.”

            Yes, but catchers have probably the least flexibility in terms of positions they can play. Playing catcher isn’t like playing any other position on the field and such you can’t move off it very easily. Whereas failed shortstops can possibly move to second or third and center fielders can move to the corner spots with not nearly as much trouble as trying to take a catcher from behind the plate and put him out in the field.

            • Right… But the Yanks have more guys at other positions than they do catchers, partly for that reason. That’s just logistics. I think this whole thing is just way overblown. The Yankees don’t have any more catchers in their system than they, or any other organization, ever has. They have just happened to really like the catchers available the last couple of years more than they’ve liked the other players available to them either through IFA or at certain of their spots in the draft. It’s almost like the recent success of some of the Yankees catching prospects has made some people feel like they concentrate too much of their attention and resources on catching prospects.

              • ColoYank says:

                Pretty reasonable comment for a member of Congress.

              • K.B.D. says:

                Part of the hullabaloo is due to the fact that their top prospect is a catcher and two of their three biggest signings from the IFA and draft this year were catchers, hence, too many catchers. I think it’s the high profile nature of the catchers they’ve gotten that’s led to some backlash. They could have used picks 30-40 on catchers, signed them all and the uproar wouldn’t be nearly as big.

                • Right. There’s an uproar because they’re… good. It’s interesting.

                • emac2 says:

                  There isn’t an uproar because someone asks the logic behind a player development focus.

                  The number of prospects at a position however is exactly the type of disinformation I would expect from a member of congress. Who cares how many low draft choices you have at a position. The point here is the percentage of the development budget as we paid 1.25 for the second rounder after giving a few mil to an IFA.

                  That is having not only Montero but a good second catcher in Cervelli and our number 4 prospect in Romine.

                  I think instead of getting hysterical that someone whold ask the question you could maybe guess at the possible reasoning or argue why it doesn’t matter with something other than comparing the number of SS after the 30th round.

                • “There isn’t an uproar because someone asks the logic behind a player development focus”

                  Yes. But you’re assuming he meant there’s an uproar based solely on your comment, which gives your comment a bit too much credit. He wasn’t just referring to your comment. “Uproar” is probably a bit of an exaggeration, though. There are certainly a lot of people asking questions about it and seeming unhappy about it.

                  “The number of prospects at a position however is exactly the type of disinformation I would expect from a member of congress.”

                  Disinformation? How is it disinformation? And, nice work replying to an actual point, as opposed to just making a snide, unfortunately unfunny, irrelevant ad hominem comment. Bravo.

                  “Who cares how many low draft choices you have at a position.”

                  Seriously!? There are a lot of people around who are plenty unhappy about the Yankees not signing later draft picks, so clearly those picks are not unimportant, as you insinuate.

                  “The point here is the percentage of the development budget as we paid 1.25 for the second rounder after giving a few mil to an IFA.”

                  You’re assuming there was another player out there, when the Yankees made the Murphy pick, that they liked just as much as they liked Murphy and who plays a position at which the organization has less depth than they have at catcher, but that they chose Murphy anyway. That doesn’t make much sense, clearly they liked Murphy more than their other options, even after taking position into account. I don’t think anyone is confused as to what your point is, but that’s the counter-point.

                  “That is having not only Montero but a good second catcher in Cervelli and our number 4 prospect in Romine.”

                  This is a non-sequitur. I’m psyched we have those guys in the system, though.

                  “I think instead of getting hysterical that someone whold ask the question…”

                  Nobody got hysterical about anything, you’re the one who seems to be taking this conversation personally.

                  “… you could maybe guess at the possible reasoning or argue why it doesn’t matter with something other than comparing the number of SS after the 30th round.”

                  That’s been done, multiple times, in this very thread. Just go read those comments, they’re not hiding from you.

                • K.B.D. says:

                  The reasoning I believe has already been stated, so I refrained from reiterating, but if you want my opinion so badly:

                  I think the Yankees take players that they like, not positions that they like. Recently, a lot of players they like have happened to be catchers.

                  I don’t think there’s anything more to it. I don’t perceive a pattern of behavior from one player acquisition period (IFA and draft), so I would hesitate to call it anything more than (let’s get all baseball statistic-y here)… a sample size issue.

                • emac2 says:

                  Disinformation is the inclusion of mildly relevant information with the pretense that it supports a point when it does not.

                  Of course some low draft choices have value.

                  That doesn’t have anything to do with the actual point which was that too many of our top prospects are catchers and this isn’t offset by the fact that we have a bunch of non prospects at other postions.

                  You could argue this with more disinformation as in “We have lots of good non catching prospects” but you are playing a debating game instead of discussing the subject.

                • King of Fruitless Hypotheticals says:

                  …weren’t we making jokes about having too many catchers, then Posada, Molina, Cash all got hurt within a few days and our AA Francisco Cervelli was playing in the Bronx with no backup for a day, or at least a backup whose name I cannot recall at this time?

                  I think that was either just before or just after we were all saying ‘damn quality pitching so thick we can’t them work!’ And then Veras, Wang, IPK, etc etc.

                  Guess there’s a reason we have 837 developmental farm clubs…

                • K.B.D. says:

                  Your point is that “too many” of our top prospects are catchers? We could easily remedy this “problem”, as you’ve labeled it, by releasing Austin Romine. Then somebody else can slide on up in our top five.

                • “Your point is that ‘too many’ of our top prospects are catchers? We could easily remedy this ‘problem’, as you’ve labeled it, by releasing Austin Romine. Then somebody else can slide on up in our top five.”

                  Yup. It sucks having too many good catching prospects.

                • “Disinformation is the inclusion of mildly relevant information with the pretense that it supports a point when it does not.”

                  No, disinformation is false information used in an attempt to intentionally mislead people. So, if you actually knew the meanings of the words and phrases you used, I would have to conclude that you were actually accusing me of attempting to intentionally mislead people by lying, which would be insulting. But luckily that’s not the case.

                  “That doesn’t have anything to do with the actual point which was that too many of our top prospects are catchers and this isn’t offset by the fact that we have a bunch of non prospects at other postions.”

                  Already responded.

                  “You could argue this with more disinformation as in ‘We have lots of good non catching prospects’ but you are playing a debating game instead of discussing the subject.”

                  Again… I’m not sure those words, used in that order, actually mean anything coherent. I’m interested in debating instead of discussing? That definitely doesn’t mean what you think it means. Try harder.

          • emac2 says:

            Baseball like in this case refers to how baseball is usually run.

            I didn’t accuse you of saying it was the plan. I extrapolated that what you said led to an obvious plan of some sort that allowed the team to increase the emphasis on catching this year.

            I find it interesting that you would ignore how out of proportion the focus on catching has been as compared to the depth or lack thereof at other positions.

            • “Baseball like in this case refers to how baseball is usually run.”

              Ok… Still not really getting it. And it’s not even really true, is it? I mean, we’ve certainly seen teams wind up with multiple top prospects at the same position, have we not? It’s not like it doesn’t happen… Which, I think, according to your reasoning, would make it “baseball like.” No?

              “I didn’t accuse you of saying it was the plan. I extrapolated that what you said led to an obvious plan of some sort that allowed the team to increase the emphasis on catching this year.”

              Right… But what you extrapolated was kinda the opposite of what my comment said, and I’m pretty sure my comment was pretty clear and concise. Thus, my confusion as to why you would seem to think I meant the opposite of what I said.

              “I find it interesting that you would ignore how out of proportion the focus on catching has been as compared to the depth or lack thereof at other positions.”

              First of all… I reject the assertion that the Yankees FOCUS more on catcher than other positions. Do you think they say, when they look at a group of players, “well, let’s just look at the catchers first and disregard the other guys” I don’t. I just think, in the last couple of years, they’ve happened to have liked the catchers that were available to them, at certain times in IFA and certain spots in the draft, more than they liked players available to them at those times/spots even though those other players may have played other positions. And I find it interesting that you think I’m ignoring the Yankees depth at catcher. I’m not. I just don’t see it the same way you do (as a reason to stop acquiring top amateur catchers).

              • emac2 says:

                “Ok… Still not really getting it. And it’s not even really true, is it?”

                Just to remind you…this point was in reference to cornering the market in prospects at a single position thus requiring anyone trading a great catcher and wanting a cheap quality replacement would have to trade with that team.

                “But what you extrapolated was kinda the opposite of what my comment said, and I’m pretty sure my comment was pretty clear and concise”

                It was very clear and consise. In chess moves are made after consider of several future moves based on the current options. Your consise comment had repercussions that led to an overload at a single position that would have to be used in some way. I was trying to discuss these downstream results of your single statement to draft the best player at any position.

                You should stop rejecting assertions and give me some facts to support what you are saying. that might help me get it.

                • “Just to remind you…this point was in reference to cornering the market in prospects at a single position thus requiring anyone trading a great catcher and wanting a cheap quality replacement would have to trade with that team.”

                  False. Just to remind you, it was about when you called something “baseball like,” a term I’ve never heard before, especially in this context, and a term I didn’t really understand.

                  “You should stop rejecting assertions and give me some facts to support what you are saying. that might help me get it.”

                  I’m starting to seriously doubt when that’s true. I’m pretty sure we exist on different planes of reality.

                • emac2 says:

                  Something???

                  I tell you what the something is…cornering the market would not be very baseball like… and you tell me that it isn’t true because it was something baseball like???

                  clown

                • CLOWN!!!!!!!!!

                  Dude, are you Pinstripe Destiny?

    • Jake H says:

      Yes, it is the toughest position to fill. You can’t have too much top notch catching prospects. Some won’t make it, some might make it and hopefully 1 will make it.

      • emac2 says:

        That works to a point but the numbers we are throwing against the wall far exceed the cost of any catcher in the game.

        At what point is it better to buy the real thing instead of devoting 30% of your player budget for low percentage players looking for a single diamond? This has been going on for years now.

        • Jake H says:

          That just doesn’t make any sense. First off more and more players aren’t getting to free agency in their mid 20′s. Most of them are signing contracts that will take them into their late 20′s.

          What catchers in the new few years are going to be free agents that you want? 1 Joe Mauer and it isn’t a sure thing that he won’t 1. sign an extension or 2. get traded and then sign an extension.

          • emac2 says:

            What part doesn’t make sense?

            Anyone is available if you pay enough money and all I am wondering is at what point are you spending more on unproven players than you would on a proven player. The real goal is NOT to get a 25 year old catcher. It is to have an elite 2 way catcher. If we can get that for less money on the trade/FA market we should consider it and if it keeps us from a large number of good players at other positions it might cost more in both talent and money.

            Personally I thought we should have signed Bengie Molina instead of Posada but Mauer or Yadler would be fine. Montero as a C/DH next year in the second half with Cervelli as the number 2 all year and POsada as the number one as long as he is healthy would be my plan for now.

        • “At what point is it better to buy the real thing instead of devoting 30% of your player budget for low percentage players looking for a single diamond? This has been going on for years now.”

          You’re exaggerating more than a little bit here, aren’t you? I’m pretty sure the Yankees have devoted less than 30% of their budget on catchers. And it hasn’t been “going on for years.” In 2007 BA had the Yanks’ top catching prospect at number 21 (Montero, and he was the only catcher in the top 30) and the third guy on the organization’s catching-prospect depth chart was Joe Muich. In 2008 BA had Montero, Romine and Cervelli (who most agree will be a back-up, not an MLB starter) in the Yanks’ top 30. They certainly have more depth at the position now and have acquired some nice prospects in the last couple of years, but it’s inaccurate to insinuate they’ve been spending a disproportionate amount of resources on catchers for years.

          • The Fallen Phoenix says:

            Also, the Yanks’ catching depth got them a pretty good bench player at the deadline in Jerry Hairston, Jr.

            Having depth at a position is never, ever a bad thing.

            • K.B.D. says:

              Untrue. Having “depth” cosmically causes it to be erased through a series of injuries/underwhelming performances (see: Sox, Red – 2009).

            • JMK says:

              And Weems never would have factored into the big league equation. Why not just draft every catcher in the draft next year and trade them away for other players at other positions?

              /kidding

              • “Why not just draft every catcher in the draft next year and trade them away for other players at other positions?

                /kidding straw-man’d

              • K.B.D. says:

                God, that’s an awesome idea. Having a monopoly on any position would be great. Our entire A-ball team would consist of catchers playing every position on the field. Then when teams need a catching prospect, they’ve gotta come to the Yankees. Supply control, baby.

                It’s like Matt Millen trying to have an offense consisting purely of eleven first round picked wide receivers.

          • emac2 says:

            it looks like it is up to 30% this year when 2 of our top 5 are already catchers.

            • Yeah, but you’re hedging and changing your point now. I don’t know what the percentage will be this year (we’ll see when the dust settles) but you were saying it’s been 30% for years, not just this season. Your point, the point that I was responding to, was that it was a multi-year trend, not a one-off thing. Have they been devoting 30% of their player development budget on catchers for years, like you said? No, I don’t think so.

    • A.D. says:

      They can easily be moved, especially compared to 1B prospects, if they’re athletic catchers especially they can always go elsewhere, JR Murphy was an outfielder until a year or so ago.

    • ColoYank says:

      It certanly isn’t a plan to load up on catchers. It’s a plan to take the best player available. How far is Murphy going to advance in the Yankee system? How far Gary Sanchez, or Kyle Higashioka?

      The Major League draft is more crapshoot than anything. Organizations have no choice than to take who they think has the best chance to contribute of all players available.

      Plus I think someone quoted Oppenheimer on Murphy: “He. Can. Flat. Hit.”

      • K.B.D. says:

        Unfortunately, Oppenheimer said the same thing about Chris Smith.

        • Andy In Sunny Daytona says:

          No he said, “He. Can. Flat. Out. Eat”

        • ColoYank says:

          Wow. you’re ready to write off a guy who turned 19 earlier this year? Tough room.

          • K.B.D. says:

            It’s a Chris Smith joke. As long as he keeps “hitting” the way he has, you should get used to them.

            BTW, I’d love nothing more than for him to turn into a real prospect, but I have to deal with the pain of his professional stats by poking fun. It helps me cope.

  12. J.R. says:

    damn, the Rockies have signed every pick 2-28. Thats pretty impressive. And 39 of their total picks. Thats an amazing draft haul.

  13. Johan Iz My Brohan says:

    I wonder when the rest of our picks gets announced. It’s been wicked slow since Heathcott and Murphy signed.

  14. Reggie C. says:

    I’m way late on this thread. Aww well…

    These waaaay overslot deals just goes to show you the pitfalls of going all in on high-ceiling but risky HS picks. Last year Heathcott signs for slot. This year he lands the lottery.

    Not that there’s anything wrong with the successful negotiating tactics employed by Heathcott or Murphy , its just that I wouldnt exactly classify today as a WIN for the front office.

    Sorry if this comes off as sour grapes but certain guys aren’t gonna get signed b/c these deals went this way overslot.

    • Mike bk says:

      i agree. combined they probably are 1 mil over where they should be and that probably means 2 players at 500K we could have added.

    • Doug says:

      absolutely agree, and i mentioned this in the prior thread. to me, there has to come a point where you just let these guys go so you can sign more of the guys drafted later. obviously, the yanks didn’t get to that point with either heathcott or murphy

      • BklynJT says:

        I wouldn’t miss out on Heathcott, but I would of certainly considered not signing Murphy and using that money for Lyons and Meade or others. At the same time, I think we become so in love with the signability cases, that we let it cloud our judgement. By the outcome, it seems that Murphy was move valuable to D.O. than both Lyons and Meade.

        • “At the same time, I think we become so in love with the signability cases, that we let it cloud our judgement. By the outcome, it seems that Murphy was move valuable to D.O. than both Lyons and Meade.”

          This. I agree with this.

          • Mike bk says:

            we could also argue that the reason for that is the success many of our pitchers have had this summer where it is not a statement on murphy, lyons or meade but the pitching already in our system vs the position prospects. and yes i know murphy is slated to play catcher which is one area we have depth in the system.

            • But… Doesn’t your second sentence kind of invalidate your first sentence?

              • Bo says:

                You guys dont know anything about Lyons other than he had a good Cape.

                You dont think the Yankees scouted him? They obviously dont feel hes a major league talent. They could be wrong. Who knows. But I wouldnt call them cheap. I’m sure they would let 500k stand in their way of 1st rd talent.

              • Mike bk says:

                not if players like jesus arent going to stick at catcher. it was just heading off the argument that many were going to make that we didnt necessarily need more catchers.

                • So… You get to decide that depth at the position doesn’t matter in Murphy’s case, because Montero might not stick at catcher (nevermind that the Yanks have a few other catching prospects not named Montero), but position depth does matter in cases like Meade?

                  That’s arbitrary, to say the least.

  15. Johan Iz My Brohan says:

    Russ Ortiz just opted out of his contract

  16. Mike bk says:

    cody stiles and chad thompson are the two that i want most right now with Bryan Mitchell another UNC commit 3rd.

  17. JMK says:

    We hear a lot of chatter about the draft and IFA budgets. But does anyone actually know what they are? Even a rough estimate?

    • Mike bk says:

      all i heard was what callis said this morning after the slade deal that the yanks had one, a substantial one but still a budget.

    • zs190 says:

      I think I’ve read that the draft budget is about 8 million, and the IFA budget is about 5 million or so. I don’t remember where I saw those numbers though…

      • Mike bk says:

        well 8 million would be great news because the known bonuses to this point are about 5 million for 9 players and most of the others were probably very small so we should have around 2 million left if it was 8 mil.

        • zs190 says:

          Yeah, wouldn’t be surprised if we get 2 or 3 more signability guys (Thompson and Mitchell seem likely).

          Thompson might cost a lot, wasn’t there a guy named Coffey that the O’s signed for a million with similar circumstances?

          • Mike bk says:

            the more i hear about stiles the more likely it seems and if those are the 3 i am very happy today.

            • JohnnyC says:

              If they can sign both Stiles and Thompson, that would certainly trump Meade and Lyons. Much more upside with the 2 high schoolers.

          • JohnnyC says:

            Coffey signed last week. 22nd round. Just had TJ surgery in March. Was going to go to Duke. Signed for $990K…the highest bonus ever given to that late a pick. FWIW, he threw 95 before surgery.

            • Mike bk says:

              which means Thompson would take around 1 mil. i think that was the sort of number that was out there on him around the draft. i believe thompson has his early may.

  18. Johan Iz My Brohan says:

    Bryan Mitchell: Negotiations still going on.
    Chad Thompson: Negotiations still going on.
    Joseph Talerico: Slight negotiation.
    John Ebert: No negotiations.
    Brett Bruening: Door isn’t shut, but no negotiations have been going on.
    Kyle Ottoson: No negotiations.
    Cody Stiles: Going to UNC.
    Evan DeLuca: Negotiations still going on.
    Tony Plagman: No negotiations.
    Xavier Esquivel: No negotiations.
    Stephen Kaupang: Slight negotiations.

    Sorry for all you Stiles fans.

  19. Doug says:

    just in from NoMaas:

    Bryan Mitchell: Negotiations still going on.
    Chad Thompson: Negotiations still going on.
    Joseph Talerico: Slight negotiation.
    John Ebert: No negotiations.
    Brett Bruening: Door isn’t shut, but no negotiations have been going on.
    Kyle Ottoson: No negotiations.
    Cody Stiles: Going to UNC.
    Evan DeLuca: Negotiations still going on.
    Tony Plagman: No negotiations.
    Xavier Esquivel: No negotiations.
    Stephen Kaupang: Slight negotiations.

  20. Drew says:

    You’d think the Nat’s would commit to a GM before they attempt to commit to what may very well be the future of their franchise.

  21. Doug says:

    the o’s just spent almost $2M on an 11th rounder and a 22nd rounder. what recession?

  22. Doug says:

    stassi just signed for $1.5M, new high for a 4th rounder

  23. Makavelli says:

    Do you think we’ll ever get a crop of guys like Derek Jeter, Mariano Rivera, Andy Pettitte, Bernie Williams, and Jorge Posada again…that are so good all around the same time where we keep all of them for 14+ years (except Pettitte who left for 2 years and came back)…

    It’s very similar to Boston’s crop that just came up recently (Youkilis, Pedroia, Ellsbury, Lester, Papelbon, etc) except not as good.

    We kind of have something with Joba, Hughes, Cano…and then to a lesser extent, Melky…and it goes down hill from there…

    Jeter and Mariano are both 1st Ballot HOF and Pettitte, Bernie, and Posada are all borderline HOF…very close to it.

    The odds are probably very low we have a crop like that again no?

    • Mike bk says:

      well we already have joba, hughes, cano.

      melky has shown more this year while others like robertson are starting to show a good deal and we have jackson and montero at least on the way.

      • Makavelli says:

        True. I still think the previous crop I talked about is far better lol…but then again…we were spoiled.

        • Mike bk says:

          but were they all better 2 years in. remember bernie struggled for 3-4 years before he really caught fire. mo and jete were much better year 2, andy was pretty good right off the bat. tough to match potential hall of fame groups though.

    • Drew says:

      Wang. Joba. Hughes. Young guys in the pen. ?IPK? Cano. Melky. soon Jesus.

      Are they likely to draft/sign 3 HOF’s in the span of 7 years? No. Is the crop of above players pretty good, yupp.

  24. rmel says:

    i just don’t think they want Meade and Lyons…i don’t think its about money….its about that they are not what they are looking for their system….they love high school kids that can grow and develop and don’t mind paying for them…think about it what college player have they really over paid for… Melancon at 650k….they love younger kids

    • zs190 says:

      Huh? We just signed Caleb Cotham and Graham Stoneburner to well over slot deals and both of them are college guys.

  25. V says:

    So, let’s say the Nationals don’t up their 12.5M offer, and they fail to sign him.

    If you’re the Padres or Royals, etc., do you waste your 1st round pick on him next year if you’re not willing to pay the $$$?

  26. Makavelli says:

    Is Darvish going to come to the States you think? If so, is his bidding $$ and signing money worth more than a guy like Strasburg’s signing money, wait…etc??

  27. Drew says:

    It seems like every deal that comes through on MLBTR is the “largest ever for X pick.”

  28. emac2 says:

    The budget is usually 6-7 mil for the draft. I think the draft and follow style this year led to a bounty with so many late bloomer and they just couldn’t sign them all.

    BTW

    I’m not sure what we spent on IFA’s (3?)but 8+3=11 mil 4-5 mil on catchers.

  29. Doug says:

    latest on lyons and meade from NoMaas:

    I just got in contact with Tyler Lyons and Aaron Meade, both of whom recently said that they were going back to school because the Yankees told them they weren’t going to be able to match their asking price.

    Tyler told me that his phone is on and he’s willing to listen if they call, but that he hasn’t heard from the team in four days, so it’s not looking to promising.

    Aaron is in the same boat, telling me that he’s hoping to hear something because there’s nothing like playing for the Yankees, but that it doesn’t look good. The lefty from Missouri State is seeking a similar bonus figure to Lyons’ price tag.”

    • Mike bk says:

      i was having a convo on lane’s board where one person said that lyons might have a medical issue so that could be the issue with him. as for meade if his price tag is where lyons was rumored to be around 500K i would still kick the tires if one of these guys they are pushing on falls through.

  30. Stryker says:

    really not sure what’s going on with lyons and meade…they haven’t been contacted in 4 days, meanwhile the guy everyone thought the yankees were pushing for (stiles) opts for college. if i were them i’d at least use the stiles money toward preparing an offer for one of the two of those guys.

  31. King of Fruitless Hypotheticals says:

    hey…need a research pointer here. i’m hoping not to wade through google’s multi layers–does anybody know of a good place to get some background info on:

    24 735 Isaac Harrow 2B Appalachian State N.C.

    ?

    thanks!

  32. King of Fruitless Hypotheticals says:

    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.c.....strasburg/

    Strasburg offerred $12.5m!

  33. Doug says:

    #19 shelby miller just got $2.9M from the cards

  34. Mike bk says:

    chris dwyer to the royals is now official. didnt we draft him late last year maybe mid 30′s?

  35. Doug says:

    oh, and in case you guys didn’t hear, tigers traded for aubrey huff. yankee related because we may see him in the playoffs.

  36. Doug says:

    pads signed everett williams for only 20% over slot.

    someone forget to send them the memo that you MUST sign guys to at least twice the recommened $.

  37. Ant says:

    Anyone know when the trade deadline is?

  38. Januz says:

    Right now I am looking at a Yankee Grade of B-Minus (A “B” if the sign Thompson). I really wanted Stiles and Bruno, but things could be worse: You could be a fan of thr one team that gets a ZERO draft score……… The New York Mets, who have FAILED to sign 3 of their top 5 picks. Damien Magnifico, David Buchanan, and WORST if all…… Steve Matz, a local kid of East Setauket and their top pick. If the sign Matz, they should but moved up to some kind of positive number (Even if their letter grade is still “F”). Otherwise, this may be an all-time bad draft.

    • JohnnyC says:

      Damien Magnifico? No need for a nickname there.

    • Mike bk says:

      if we get thompson, mitchell and deluca it probably gets a B+ for me. i would have really liked stiles and/or mckenzie too never thought bruno was a possibility.

      • Stryker says:

        the thing i have to keep telling myself is that no matter how exciting the draft/minor leagues are, you can’t get too attached to these guys. there’s a strong possibility that they’ll never even pan out or sniff the majors.

    • Zack says:

      B or B- isnt bad considering you lost a 1st, 2nd and 3rd round by signing FAs

  39. Mike bk says:

    Colvin for 900K to the phils. the more i see some of these numbers the more Cotham looks cheap.

  40. Nick says:

    Murphy scouting report and interview:

    Scouting report

    http://blog.imgacademies.com/2…..an-murphy/

    Interview

    http://blog.imgacademies.com/2.....h-yankees/

  41. Christos says:

    im thinking that this could be the best draft the yankees have had since 2006…warren and black tearing up staten island. heathcott and murphy could be above average major league hitters for many years. im excited!

  42. Januz says:

    Colvin is a huge sign for the Phillies. From what I heard, he was the highest rated guy they drafted (They are trying to add tewo other guys: Jake Stewart & Andrew Susac). As for LSU, they had a disasterous signing period. losing Colvin, Heathcott & Zach Von Rosenberg (Pirates). Just another nail in the Mets coffin. All they need is not to sign Matz, and see Strasberg in the division to Washington.

    • Drew says:

      I don’t get LSU, they revoked Slade’s scholarship and they damn well knew the Yanks, even if they wanted to, couldn’t offer him a deal by that August 3rd deadline LSU set up.

      • Mike bk says:

        simple fact was he knew he was gone so he wanted to get the best replacement he could find since that is his job.

        • Drew says:

          I hear ya, that said, it can’t be good publicity for those highschool kids that truly are undecided. LSU basically said, “we’re not going to wait for you to make a decision.”

          • Zack says:

            in fairness, baseball programs do not get alot of scholarships like football. they cant afford to wait around til the final deadline and risk losing that player and other replacements who may go to other schools

            • Drew says:

              It’s a tough spot for them, no doubt. I just thought the August 3rdish deadline they imposed was extremely unrealistic.

              • Zack says:

                well has that been the standard for LSU for years and other players?

                • Drew says:

                  No idea, I’m viewing this as an outsider. If I was a highly touted highschool prospect, I’d probably find it strange that a player with the talent of Slade Heathcott had a scholarship revoked before he was even allowed(by MLB) to sign with a team.

                • Mike bk says:

                  all i know is it was one hell of a recruiting class considering it took over 4 mil to get 3 players not to show up.

  43. I really want Brett Breuning, though it doesn’t look like that’s gonna happen.

    • Mike bk says:

      why? he was walking batters a brackman type pace in the cape 20 walks in 24.2 innings. that said it could still happen as he has few options considering lsu dropped him.

  44. King of Fruitless Hypotheticals says:

    is it too late for us to sign Strasberg? Ca$hman is teh sux if he can’t find a way to make that work :P

Leave a Reply

You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> in your comment.

If this is your first time commenting on River Ave. Blues, please review the RAB Commenter Guidelines. Login for commenting features. Register for RAB.