A buddy of mine alerted me to this story on Baseball Prospectus' Web site, replete with information on the Yankees' 2008 amateur draft picks.
That prompted me to check with a source of my own, regarding what BP reported. Here's what I found out:
BP reported: While there has been little movement in talks with first-round selection Gerrit Cole, supplemental first-round pick Jeremy Bleich is close to signing for an over-slot bonus of somewhere just over $1 million.
What I hear: Accurate on Cole, and not surprising, given that he's represented by Scott Boras. But Bleich, pictured above, will likely sign closer to slot. He was the 44th pick of the draft; last year's 44th pick was slotted for about $700,000 (Texas paid considerably over slot, giving $1 million to high school pitcher Neil Ramirez).
BP reported: In addition, sixth-rounder Brett Marshall, a classic power arm teenager from high school is close to agreeing to a deal for around $750,000; seventh-round selection Kyle Higashioka, one of the best high school catchers in the draft, has been bought away from a commitment to Cal for "somewhere in Marshall's neighborhood"; and 10th-round pick D.J. Mitchell, who came on strong late in the season at Clemson, is close to signing for approximately $500,000.
What I hear: The Marshall figure will probably be right around there, but Higashioka, who is close to signing, will receive significantly less than $750,000. And Mitchell will get less than $500,000.
Just entering the top of the 11th here. What a week for extra innings at the Stadium...
Comments (14)
Ken, I like what you reported. It all sounds good to me. Thanks for the update. I think Damon Oppenheimer has done a fantastic job since gaining full autonomy in the amateur draft department. He has worked for the Yankees since 1994 and is/was one of Gene Michael's guys. Michael mentored him.
Certainly, Oppenheimer has done a great job in rebuilding the farm system. If Cashman leave, Oppenheimer will definitely be the leading canadiate to be the GM of the Yanks. He certainly will get some interviews from other teams for GM positions in the future.
Ken, The A's are example of why teams like the Yanks hate paying revenue sharing and the luxury tax. Billy Beane traded Rich Harden and Joe Blanton already and might trade their closer Hutson Street. It seems to me that Beane is making no effort to keep his players. He's more interest having young inexpensive players to develop and then when they get closer to being free agents, Beane traded them or let's them go and get draft picks or more young players.
Street spit the bit today against the Yanks. He's not a great closer, but he is good. You metion the Brewers are interest in Street. The Brewers definitely need a closer beacuse their bullpen stinks.
I am starting to really think that Billy Beane is seriously overrated. How can the A's go through this (trading top players) every year or two?
I really hope the Yankees can sign Cole. Not that I've ever seen him pitch, but I hear he wsa a great value pick when the team took him.
What's the endgame for the A's? The Marlins did the build-it-up-and-tear-it-down thing but won twice. I don't see what the goal for Beane is -- as Jim pointed out, he's developing and trading away his young players SO FAST now that he's not really getting anything out of them. When does he build a long-term team, the way the Rays have recently done? It seems like he makes deals to keep the team pretty good -- a solid, non-WS-contender -- and is satisfied in keeping it that way.
It says somewhere that the four players the A's have traded, Haren included, have brought back 20 prospects for the A's. So a return of 25% brings them five major leaguers to go with what they already have. You assume that Beane has written off this season because the team isn't going to catch Anaheim and looking at this lineup they have now, it's crap, so why not rip it up and start over?
The Brewers have traded for Ray Durham according to ESPN.com, which is an improvement over Richie Weeks for sure.
Beane did have an eight year streak of winning records with four division titles and a a wild card appearance. That's pretty good. Enough to make people like Bud Selig, Jon Heyman and the afternoon WFAN clowns start acknowledge to his talents. Beane would argue (or alibi) his teams had bad luck: Jeremy Giambi not sliding, a closer in Keith Foulke who was bad for him and great a year later for Boston. Joe Torre did not have a brain lock when he used Jeff Weaver as he did in 2003, leaving Mariano Rivera to rest (after pitching him with a 5 run lead a day earlier). David Wells having his fat cells act up after one inning. Remember the first Marlin title came in 1997 when they spent all kinds on money on Brown, Sheffield, Alou, Leiter, etc.
Jim Clark, The A's won one playoff series during that spam. Yes they ran into some back luck, but they stub their toe in elimination games. The A's never show any heart, grid and guts when they face adversity in the playoffs. They also play the Yanks, Red Sox, and Twins in the Division Series. The A's seem to find a way to lose in those games. Beane did said that the playoffs are a crapshoot, which he is definitely right. But his teams never were able to get over the hump in the playoffs.
Joe Torre: "The playoffs are a crapshoot." (But, give me a new contract for $7 million a year.)
Billy Beane: "The playoffs are a crapshoot." (But, I am so smart and wonderful that I should be paid to put down my philosophy in book form.)
I see a pattern developing here. If winning in the playoffs is the goal and if the games are merely a crapshoot, why pay top dollar for a manager and GM? Is merely getting there the goal or winning there?
You need 3 things to win the World Series.
1. Pitching
2. Clutch hitting
3. Luck
Great pitching stop great hitting every single time. The starters set the tone of the game. The bullpen can make or break your season, especialy the closer.
In the postseason runs are hard to come by. If you have a chance to score runs, you better take advatnage, otherwise you won't win.
You are going to run into adversity at some point in the postseason. To overcome it you need some plays to go your way to win. Luck plays a huge role in whiether teams can win.
The 3 things that I just metion are things that the Yanks have not have in the playoffs the last 7 years. The same is true with the A's.
Why do good teams seem to be luckier than mediocre teams?
Here's a link to an interesting article on summer ball:
http://www.newsday.com/news/local/suffolk/ny-liball0721,0,2314514.story
The postseason is indeed filled with luck -- and not the "residue of design" kind that Branch Rickey liked to talk about. (Hello, Jeffrey Maier.) Sure, a little more depth in the bullpen and an uber-strong nos. 1 and 2 starters don't hurt either.
Just as the A's have had little postseason success this decade, the Braves won only one World Series title in its amazing run of regular season success. Does this make the reputations of Kasten, Schuerholz, and/or Bobby Cox any less stellar?
Beane is the best in the game but that does not mean that he is the model for every other team to emulate. After all, not every city would be so forgiving of a general manager who played the odds (no matter how successfully) and decided that his team was better off retooling despite being only three-and-a-half games out of the wildcard.
JE, I am going to have to respectfully disagree. Yes, luck plays a role in everything we do in life, and baseball isn't any exception. But, other than the lottery, escaping a fatal car accident, etc., you have to have a lot going for you in order for luck to put you over the top.
Thus, for luck to have helped the Yankees, they already had to be a very good team. Yes, they benefitted from umpire's calls, strong efforts from players written off, etc., but what about the diving catches and assorted breaks that opponents benefitted by. After 25 years of coaching, I notice that luck comes down pretty much 50-50. Luck means nothing if you aren't already good enough to win.
Billy Beane the best in the game? Not IMHO. In anything that involves keeping score, you have to base "best" awards on winning. The A's might have been "winners" but they didn't win the World Series. That's how greatness is measured in baseball. The players know it and everyone else in the game knows it, too.
All this talk about the playoffs being a crapshoot, states the obvious, to some degree, but I feel it is offered up more as a hedge - as an excuse - should the team fail. But I know the supporters of St. Joe don't like hearing that so I am prepared to face their wrath.