SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
2021 MLB Draft
|
Post by soxaddict on Jun 8, 2021 16:08:04 GMT -5
Wow, Lawlar down to 7, House down to 10, and Rocker out of the top 10. If Lawler is there at 4, that's who the Sox take, IMO. No way he makes it to 7.
|
|
|
Post by ramireja on Jun 8, 2021 16:14:56 GMT -5
How much bonus $$$ could Pirates save by taking Davis (no leverage) rather than say SS Mayer? I too am interested in this question. I tried looking it up, but between I should be working and I should be working I just don't have that much ambition. I believe it's somewhere in the 70-75% range that they have to offer. So, they can save somewhere in the 25-30% range. So the Sox for example, adding in the 5% overage could give themselves an extra 2.3 million or so to spread around elsewhere. Pirates would have more. Putting this out there so someone will correct me. My take is that there is no good answer to this without having knowledge that only the front offices and agents possess. I think if Davis has offers at slot (or above) from picks #2 and #3 that gives him leverage to demand slot from PIT or at least reasonably close to slot. If it feels like he'll slide to #4 (us) or #5, and those offers are at slot, it gives PIT a little negotiating power to offer something in the range between the #1 slot value and #4 or #5 in my example. Take Baltimore as an example last year....they signed Heston Kjerstad for $5.2M despite a $7.79 slot value at #2. That suggests to me that Kjerstad's agent knew the other teams' level of interest and that he was likely to slide at least past pick #7 ($5.43M) without an above slot offer. Its hard to say where Davis goes if he doesn't go #1...it could be #2 or it could be #4 but probably no worse than that. We won't have that info even on draft day, but the answer to that likely determines his potential savings.
|
|
|
Post by greatscottcooper on Jun 8, 2021 16:17:00 GMT -5
Wow, Lawlar down to 7, House down to 10, and Rocker out of the top 10. If Lawler is there at 4, that's who the Sox take, IMO. No way he makes it to 7. I would be very happy with that
|
|
|
Post by greatscottcooper on Jun 8, 2021 16:20:15 GMT -5
I too am interested in this question. I tried looking it up, but between I should be working and I should be working I just don't have that much ambition. I believe it's somewhere in the 70-75% range that they have to offer. So, they can save somewhere in the 25-30% range. So the Sox for example, adding in the 5% overage could give themselves an extra 2.3 million or so to spread around elsewhere. Pirates would have more. Putting this out there so someone will correct me. My take is that there is no good answer to this without having knowledge that only the front offices and agents possess. I think if Davis has offers at slot (or above) from picks #2 and #3 that gives him leverage to demand slot from PIT or at least reasonably close to slot. If it feels like he'll slide to #4 (us) or #5, and those offers are at slot, it gives PIT a little negotiating power to offer something in the range between the #1 slot value and #4 or #5 in my example. Take Baltimore as an example last year....they signed Heston Kjerstad for $5.2M despite a $7.79 slot value at #2. That suggests to me that Kjerstad's agent knew the other teams' level of interest and that he was likely to slide at least past pick #7 ($5.43M) without an above slot offer. Its hard to say where Davis goes if he doesn't go #1...it could be #2 or it could be #4 but probably no worse than that. We won't have that info even on draft day, but the answer to that likely determines his potential savings. That makes sense, there's always a deal or two cut at the top but the guys who project to go in the top usually get slot or something very close to it. I took his question as what is the hypothetical savings? I believe there is a certain percentage of the slot value that you have to offer the player. I thought it was 75% but admitedly I do not really know.
|
|
|
Post by xithereon on Jun 8, 2021 16:31:01 GMT -5
Personally, Lawlar is the guy I least want, out of the consensus top guys. The available bat speed data for him is very underwhelming (although it is a year out of date). He was 10th percentile in max barrel speed at a Perfect Game event a year ago (so 10th percentile amongst elite prospects). His overall max barrel speed is 66th percentile for his class (at Perfect Game events). That, coupled with his strikeout numbers in high school this year, does not have me convinced that he will ever be able to hit at the major league level.
A lot of the hype around him seems to be his speed and defense coupled with a projection to hit, but the available data has me concerned about whether that projection is reasonable. Later in the first, I would be happy taking him, but he seems too risky for a top 5 pick to me. Honestly, I would take any of Davis, Leiter, Mayer, Watson, House, or Jobe over him and would have it close between him and Rocker. Now, if we end up with him it would not be overly disappointed, but I personally feel like he is overrated a bit.
|
|
|
Post by philarhody on Jun 8, 2021 16:57:57 GMT -5
Personally, Lawlar is the guy I least want, out of the consensus top guys. The available bat speed data for him is very underwhelming (although it is a year out of date). He was 10th percentile in max barrel speed at a Perfect Game event a year ago (so 10th percentile amongst elite prospects). His overall max barrel speed is 66th percentile for his class (at Perfect Game events). That, coupled with his strikeout numbers in high school this year, does not have me convinced that he will ever be able to hit at the major league level. A lot of the hype around him seems to be his speed and defense coupled with a projection to hit, but the available data has me concerned about whether that projection is reasonable. Later in the first, I would be happy taking him, but he seems too risky for a top 5 pick to me. Honestly, I would take any of Davis, Leiter, Mayer, Watson, House, or Jobe over him and would have it close between him and Rocker. Now, if we end up with him it would not be overly disappointed, but I personally feel like he is overrated a bit. Let’s not forget he is also old for his class.
|
|
|
Post by ramireja on Jun 8, 2021 17:14:45 GMT -5
Five prospects who looked good at NCAA Regionals, courtesy of MLB Pipeline: 1. Niko Kavadas, 1B, Notre Dame 2. Dominic Keegan, 1B, Vanderbilt 3. Matt McLain, SS, UCLA 4. Doug Nikhazy, LHP, Mississippi 5. Aaron Zavala, OF, Oregon
|
|
|
Post by vermontsox1 on Jun 8, 2021 17:21:23 GMT -5
Five prospects who looked good at NCAA Regionals, courtesy of MLB Pipeline: 1. Niko Kavadas, 1B, Notre Dame 2. Dominic Keegan, 1B, Vanderbilt 3. Matt McLain, SS, UCLA 4. Doug Nikhazy, LHP, Mississippi 5. Aaron Zavala, OF, Oregon Kiley McDaniel was gushing about him last week as a potential 2-3 round pick. Eric Longenhagen also had a write-up about him in his daily prospect notes today: blogs.fangraphs.com/daily-prospect-notes-6-8-2021/
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jun 8, 2021 17:34:33 GMT -5
I don't know that anyone from the Meyer/Lawlar/Rocker/Leiter/Davis group is going to cut a deal. Guys who cut deals that save 7 figures are the ones like Kjerstad who otherwise wouldn't sniff that pick. Like if you're otherwise going 8th but a team wants to take you 2nd, you have incentive to sign for somewhere between what a normal no. 2 pick would sign for and slot for 8, right? If you're otherwise not falling out of the top 5, that gap is way less.
In that group, maybe we're talking differences of <$1M between guys based on what they want to sign, but I don't think we're seeing a team offer the bare minimum they need to offer and the player taking it.
Keep in mind that while, in theory, the team not signing the pick gets another one next year to compensate, they lose all of that slot money off of this year's draft. It would affect what they do in the entire rest of the draft if they didn't sign pick 1-1.
|
|
mobaz
Veteran
Posts: 3,014
|
Post by mobaz on Jun 8, 2021 17:36:58 GMT -5
As of now my order is Mayer, Leiter, Davis, Watson. I'll be happy with any of them and disappointed with anyone else. The age gap between Watson and Lawlar turns it for me. It's 9 months but I'm gonna take it.
|
|
|
Post by vermontsox1 on Jun 8, 2021 18:27:24 GMT -5
On their podcast today, Callis and Mayo agreed that the Rangers are in on Watson at 2. Also mentioned that if the Pirates don't take Davis, they doesn't see the Rangers or Tigers taking him...so he'd be there at 4.
|
|
|
Post by soxaddict on Jun 8, 2021 19:10:19 GMT -5
I don't know that anyone from the Meyer/Lawlar/Rocker/Leiter/Davis group is going to cut a deal. Guys who cut deals that save 7 figures are the ones like Kjerstad who otherwise wouldn't sniff that pick. Like if you're otherwise going 8th but a team wants to take you 2nd, you have incentive to sign for somewhere between what a normal no. 2 pick would sign for and slot for 8, right? If you're otherwise not falling out of the top 5, that gap is way less. In that group, maybe we're talking differences of <$1M between guys based on what they want to sign, but I don't think we're seeing a team offer the bare minimum they need to offer and the player taking it. Keep in mind that while, in theory, the team not signing the pick gets another one next year to compensate, they lose all of that slot money off of this year's draft. It would affect what they do in the entire rest of the draft if they didn't sign pick 1-1. What about House? Hypothetically, if the Sox could sign House underslot and Jayden Hill is available at 40.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jun 8, 2021 20:00:58 GMT -5
I was talking more about the top of the draft. I don't think House signs at 4 for much under slot.
|
|
|
Post by stevedillard on Jun 8, 2021 20:05:05 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by bnich on Jun 8, 2021 20:13:18 GMT -5
Agreed, Leiter giving up a solo homer to one of the best Freshmen in the country on a night where he went 6 3 1 1 2 11, the takeaway is not that he's having an issue with the longball. Pitch was 95 and while Leiter got too much of the plate that's more good hitting than bad pitching. 3-1 pitching sitting fastball.
|
|
|
Post by bnich on Jun 8, 2021 20:21:05 GMT -5
Has Adrian Del Castillo fallen off the map? Any chance we could grab him in round 2? Pop strangely disappeared I watched their game the other night. According to the broadcast, his coaches noticed some changes in his swing and they’re working to get him back to where he was.
|
|
|
Post by pedroelgrande on Jun 8, 2021 21:38:31 GMT -5
So if the first three picks go Mayer, Watson, Leiter who do you guys want the Red Sox to take?
|
|
|
Post by marrcus on Jun 8, 2021 21:54:34 GMT -5
^I lean C Davis while looking at recent cross-checks on Lawlar which interest me more than his 1 year overage.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaydouble on Jun 8, 2021 21:57:53 GMT -5
So if the first three picks go Mayer, Watson, Leiter who do you guys want the Red Sox to take? I think my preference would be: 1. Davis - safe 2. Lawlar - upside 3. Rocker - risky, but if Bloom believes in him I'll buy in But I think I'll quickly talk myself into liking whoever they pick.
|
|
|
Post by kingstephanos on Jun 8, 2021 23:43:42 GMT -5
So if the first three picks go Mayer, Watson, Leiter who do you guys want the Red Sox to take? I've been on record for Henry Davis since page 72 of this thread! Haha 😅
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 15,659
|
Post by cdj on Jun 9, 2021 0:10:58 GMT -5
Davis Lawlar Rocker Jobe House
In that order I think
|
|
|
Post by dyoungteach on Jun 9, 2021 1:57:44 GMT -5
On their podcast today, Callis and Mayo agreed that the Rangers are in on Watson at 2. Also mentioned that if the Pirates don't take Davis, they doesn't see the Rangers or Tigers taking him...so he'd be there at 4. [ “As The Draft Turns” will be back next week with another installment with new rumors and twists. My way of saying..... the twists and rumors are far from over. We haven’t even gotten into the “ player x is asking for top 2 money” talk yet. One question I have: does anyone know who the boras clients are this year of the top 6-8 guys? Last more obvious statement: IF Davis and Watson go 1/2. That pushes the top 2 shortstops to us. Or one of them plus the top “ugh” pitcher. I trust this group and their thought process. The talent they have added in one year to the system is very impressive ( not saying all will work out just that they have really injected a ton of talent into the system). They will pick a guy who will contribute to the overall talent within the system on day 1.
|
|
|
Post by kingstephanos on Jun 9, 2021 4:58:10 GMT -5
I will say that Jackson Jobe does intrigue me a lot...
From Prospects Live: "sits comfortably 95-97 while touching some 99s... with a potential double-plus wipeout slider [at] 3200+ RPM spin and command... unicorn potential..."
And for Devil's Advocate sake, if MLB does come down hard on 'spider tack' and other grip-enhancing substances - A kid like Jobe, with preturnaturally high spin rates, could settle in head-and-shoulders above the rest stuff-wise when the dust settles.
Amateur pitchers with extremely high spin rates could become the new market inefficiency in the draft, as average spin rates decrease overall - following a ban of rosin/pine tar/sun screen blends in clubhouses around the league.
|
|
|
Post by jbreault on Jun 9, 2021 8:19:59 GMT -5
Why would we assume amateur pitchers aren't using substances,just as much if not more than big leaguers? We know steroids trickle down to the amateur level, why not other forms of performance enhancing? If anything it would make me more suspicious of these other worldly spin rate numbers.
|
|
|
Post by kingstephanos on Jun 9, 2021 8:30:14 GMT -5
Why would we assume amateur pitchers aren't using substances,just as much if not more than big leaguers? We know steroids trickle down to the amateur level, why not other forms of performance enhancing? If anything it would make me more suspicious of these other worldly spin rate numbers. Oh, I definitely believe amateur pitchers are using substances to better tack the baseball, jbreault. They probably don't have lab chemists on the payroll along with trackman cameras to chart their progress though (a la the SI article). I'm stating above, regarding Jackson Jobe, that there will be a very small few that DO have the spin rate prowess without necessitating the use of "glue"-like products - which could come en vogue if a crack down was enforced going forward. Even in the steroid era there were guys (very few) that were genetic anomalies - the Frank Thomas's and Bo Jackson's of the world, for example.
|
|
|