Official pre-Draft thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
smootness said:
No, it isn't.

This is what I'm talking about. People have equated 'projected 13th and taken 3rd' or 'signed for $2 mil under slot' with 'lacks upside.' But it isn't the case at all. He was projected lower because he was younger and had less of a track record than the guys ahead of him, not because he lacked the same upside.

Did Ronald Acuna sign for $100,000 because he lacked upside? Of course not. Or looking at this year's draft, if Kendall is drafted higher or signs for more money than Adell, does that mean he has more upside? No, Adell clearly has more upside. He is just younger, with less of a track record, further away from the majors, and more risk.

Your value is basically your talent against your risk, assuming those things have been evaluated properly. So the reason Anderson signed for less is because we could go to him and say, 'Look, you're projected here, which would slot for this money. If we take you at 3, we'll offer you this. Will you take it?' Coming back by saying, 'No, because I have more talent than that' wouldn't make sense. It's not about talent, it's about where you're likely to go otherwise.

Value and upside are not the same thing. Mallex Smith and Luiz Gohara may have similar values. Gohara clearly has more upside. Anderson has a ton of upside, the idea that he's a Mike Minor is insane.
Click to expand...

Great post.
 
My recollection is that Broome, Puk, and to some extent Pint were regarded as the high upside arms going into the draft. I have no recollection of Anderson being discussed in the same way.
 
nsacpi said:
My recollection is that Broome, Puk, and to some extent Pint were regarded as the high upside arms going into the draft. I have no recollection of Anderson being discussed in the same way.
Click to expand...

And Puk is the only one that has done even remotely close to what Anderson has. SSS for certain.
 
nsacpi said:
My recollection is that Broome, Puk, and to some extent Pint were regarded as the high upside arms going into the draft. I have no recollection of Anderson being discussed in the same way.
Click to expand...

Of course he wasn't, but that won't stop the homers from regurgitating the line they were fed by the FO.

A guy drafted #3 doesn't agree to sign for #6 pick money unless he knows he wasn't going to be picked any higher than that by any other club. Guys agree to under slot deals before the draft because they know it's the most money they are going to be offered. Why else would they do it?

The Braves overpaid Anderson in order to save money to also get Wentz and Muller. By its very definition, a guy signing under slot means he was over drafted.

There is no other way to interpret the relevant facts unless you are gulping the posi-Braves koolaid.

The Braves decided the package of Anderson/Wentz/Muller was a better use of resources than going absolute BPA at pick 3. It's fine if you agree with that tactic. I tend to think they made the right call (even though I would have preferred Lewis). But stop with the stupidity that is suggesting Anderson was the #3 prospect in the draft.
 
Enscheff said:
Of course he wasn't, but that won't stop the homers from regurgitating the line they were fed by the FO.

A guy drafted #3 doesn't agree to sign for #6 pick money unless he knows he wasn't going to be picked any higher than that by any other club. Guys agree to under slot deals before the draft because they know it's the most money they are going to be offered. Why else would they do it?

The Braves overpaid Anderson in order to save money to also get Wentz and Muller. By its very definition, a guy signing under slot means he was over drafted.

There is no other way to interpret the relevant facts unless you are gulping the posi-Braves koolaid.

The Braves decided the package of Anderson/Wentz/Muller was a better use of resources than going absolute BPA at pick 3. It's fine if you agree with that tactic. I tend to think they made the right call. But stop with the stupidity that is suggesting Anderson was the #3 prospect in the draft.
Click to expand...

Groome signed for less money. Does that mean he was thought of as a worse player?
 
Ventura's Stolen Bases said:
Groome signed for less money. Does that mean he was thought of as a worse player?
Click to expand...

And this post right here demonstrates how little understanding about the financial side of the draft most fans possess.

If you can't understand the difference between the scenarios behind Groome's and Anderson's signing bonuses, you don't really have any business participating in these discussions.
 
btw...i don't mind giving the braves a ton of credit for signing someone like Acuna or drafting Soroka...but I also don't mind laying out the case for the 2016 draft strategy being a bit dodgy
 
the braves were also a little unlucky...they made clear after the draft that Senzel was their man....a player who received remarkably little support around here before the draft...i wonder what the post draft narrative would have been if he had fallen to us
 
nsacpi said:
btw...i don't mind giving the braves a ton of credit for signing someone like Acuna or drafting Soroka...but I also don't mind laying out the case for the 2016 draft strategy being a bit dodgy
Click to expand...

The Braves obviously didn't feel there was a single player available at 3 who was worth $6M. So they decided to get 3 guys they felt were worth a combined $10M.

I can't fault them for that view, even though I would have preferred they found a way to get Lewis in there somehow. Of course, we can infer that since Lewis ultimately signed for less than Anderson got they could have had him in that trio, we can't be certain that would have been the case had they drafted him at 3.
 
Enscheff said:
Of course he wasn't, but that won't stop the homers from regurgitating the line they were fed by the FO.

A guy drafted #3 doesn't agree to sign for #6 pick money unless he knows he wasn't going to be picked any higher than that by any other club. Guys agree to under slot deals before the draft because they know it's the most money they are going to be offered. Why else would they do it?

The Braves overpaid Anderson in order to save money to also get Wentz and Muller. By its very definition, a guy signing under slot means he was over drafted.

There is no other way to interpret the relevant facts unless you are gulping the posi-Braves koolaid.

The Braves decided the package of Anderson/Wentz/Muller was a better use of resources than going absolute BPA at pick 3. It's fine if you agree with that tactic. I tend to think they made the right call (even though I would have preferred Lewis). But stop with the stupidity that is suggesting Anderson was the #3 prospect in the draft.
Click to expand...

You really slayed that straw man.

Please find one post here that said Anderson was the #3 prospect in the draft.
 
smootness said:
You really slayed that straw man.

Please find one post here that said Anderson was the #3 prospect in the draft.
Click to expand...

This is where I was trying to go with my facetiousness.

Just because we drafted Anderson third (or he got the third highest bonus pool money or whatever it ended up being) doesn't mean that he was widely thought of as that level player (I would definitely say top 10 though), just like Groome was a consensus top 5ish talent and still was picked later and got less money (probably because he wanted to play for the Red Sox). I know draft slots play into this as well, but as we have talked about endlessly, we probably could have gotten another player like Lewis (though I know it's not definite), so I would safely say the Braves had Anderson pretty high on their board.

Braves could have been wrong to do that, but Anderson has played well so far at least.
 
nsacpi said:
I dunno what you are imlying...i DID praise the 2015 draft strategy including the selection of Allard based on upside
Click to expand...

Just saying that just as there are those who see something as positively as possible because the Braves did it, there are also those who see things as negatively as possible because the Braves did it. Wasn't necessarily saying that about you.
 
Excited for this draft.

Would love Greene but would be happy with Adell, Lewis, or Beck, too. I want the available HS arm/bat with the most upside.

Hard pass on the college pitchers.
 
nsacpi said:
btw...i don't mind giving the braves a ton of credit for signing someone like Acuna or drafting Soroka...but I also don't mind laying out the case for the 2016 draft strategy being a bit dodgy
Click to expand...

I didn't (still don't) really like the Ian Anderson pick. Not liking the pick and stating Anderson has high upside aren't mutually exclusive.
 
Ventura's Stolen Bases said:
This is where I was trying to go with my facetiousness.

Just because we drafted Anderson third (or he got the third highest bonus pool money or whatever it ended up being) doesn't mean that he was widely thought of as that level player (I would definitely say top 10 though), just like Groome was a consensus top 5ish talent and still was picked later and got less money (probably because he wanted to play for the Red Sox). I know draft slots play into this as well, but as we have talked about endlessly, we probably could have gotten another player like Lewis (though I know it's not definite), so I would safely say the Braves had Anderson pretty high on their board.

Braves could have been wrong to do that, but Anderson has played well so far at least.
Click to expand...

Calling the Braves decision to draft Anderson over Lewis a mistake is simply fans substituting their own opinions for that of the professional scouts.

It's possible the braves could have signed Lewis and two pitchers sure, but it's also clear the braves didn't see him as a difference maker or the third pick in the draft and frankly neither did many other teams.

So the continual clamor about this really flies in the face of evidence and generally boils down to message board posters who wanted to draft a local player based on a perceived need on organizational depth chart,

Not really best player available at all.

Also, the finances of the draft are interesting but there were some pretty distorted and self contradictory attempts at pontificating about its workings in this thread.
 
nsacpi said:
the braves were also a little unlucky...they made clear after the draft that Senzel was their man....a player who received remarkably little support around here before the draft...i wonder what the post draft narrative would have been if he had fallen to us
Click to expand...

I don't think we can really consider it unlucky when they did everything possible to win as many games as they could that year, and it directly led to us finishing behind the Reds. Signing Nick and having Fredi manage every game like it was the World Series hurt us that year and cost us Senzel (time will tell if that means anything).

You make an interesting point about Senzel though. I know there were 2-3 posters that were high on Senzel, but the majority did seem pretty lukewarm towards him (including myself). So far hes looking very good though, and I wish we had him.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top