PDA

View Full Version : On "moving down" in the draft



John Bonnes
05-21-2013, 08:36 PM
Rumors persist that the Twins might make a deal for less than slot with a lower ranked prospect to allow them to use that money on their second or third round pick. On it's face, and given the payroll cuts the Twins had this year, this made me a little nauseous. After crunching a few numbers, I'm wondering if it might not make sense.

The slot for the 4th overall pick is slotted at $4.5M. Their 2nd pick (43rd overall) is slotted at $1.3M. Together, that's $5.8M.

If the Twins offered 5th overall pick money (instead of 4th overall money) to several of the players (everyone except Appel, Gray and Bryant) they would save $750,000. If that was added to the money for the 43rd overall pick, it would be like having money for the 20th overall pick.

Similarly, if the Twins talk down the money paid to the 4th overall player, here's the "slot" that their 43rd overall pick improves to:

1. If they offer #5 money, they can improve from 43rd to 20th.
2. If they offer #6 money, they can improve from 43rd to 16th.
3. If they offer #7 money, they can improve from 43rd to 14th.
4. If they offer #8 money, they can improve from 43rd to 13th.
5. #9 => improves 43 to #12
6. #10 => improves 43 to #11.

They way this would likely work is something like this, I think....

1) someone with high contract demands falls past the slot where they're happy being taken. So a player who wanted top 20 money (~$2M) ends up falling out of the top 20 and has made it clear that if he doesn't get $2M, he's going to (or back to) college.

But when the Twins come up at #43, they can offer that $2M even though that's way over slot, because they saved money by paying the #4 guy the amount given to the #5 guy.

2) Someone is not ranked as high as they think they'll eventually be. A players is told they will likely only get drafted in the 2nd round, but they want 1st round money, so they're already committed to college. But the Twins approach that player and make sure that if they offer $2M (mid 1st round money) that player will sign. Then, when it's the Twins turn, they choose that player in the 2nd round, but give them 1st round money.

I think what encourages me the most is that there is so much extra money between the 4th and 5th pick: ~$750k. If they are neutral between Frazier and Meadows, or Manea and Stanek or Stewart, it makes a ton of sense to go through and offer them #5 money and take the additional leverage they gain with that 43rd overall pick.

What does NOT make sense, IMHO, is taking a guy out of the top 10. That might get them even more money, but the incremental savings between #5 and #9 is also about $750K. I don't know that additional money is going to be able to make much difference in who they get with that 43rd (or 78th) pick.

What do you guys think?

Thrylos
05-21-2013, 09:04 PM
Makes sense, but nobody knows the Twins' draft board... Maybe they have a a guy that is Law's or Manuel's number 14, ranked as their number 4. And the other thing is that they cannot negotiate with someone before they draft him. So they don't know whether someone is willing to sign under spot or for how much over spot someone else is willing to sign (or even if he is going to be available...)

kab21
05-21-2013, 09:14 PM
It makes sense if the guy that they are taking is still #5 or #6 on their draft board but projects in the #7-10 range.

I'm not sure if you're aware but the Twins can spend an extra 750ish K without losing a draft pick. Amounts of up to 5% over are only subject to a luxury tax. So the Twins could get their guy and still go overslot in the 2nd rd.

However last year a couple of high picks IIRC took advantage of that extra 5% (of the entire bonus pool) and were able to negotiate overslot bonuses. If there is one guy in the draft (available at #4) with this leverage then it is Stewart. It's possible that the Twins could have the option to take Shipley for 500K underslot or Stewart for 500+K overslot. This could tilt things towards Shipley who seems like a very solid pitcher with some upside at #4.

Jeremy Nygaard
05-21-2013, 09:18 PM
John, you're using my GATG material!

Jeremy Nygaard
05-21-2013, 09:21 PM
Makes sense, but nobody knows the Twins' draft board... Maybe they have a a guy that is Law's or Manuel's number 14, ranked as their number 4. And the other thing is that they cannot negotiate with someone before they draft him. So they don't know whether someone is willing to sign under spot or for how much over spot someone else is willing to sign (or even if he is going to be available...)

They aren't 'allowed' to, but they do. They will know the price tag on the guy they draft. That is part of the area scouts job. The Twins knew that Buxton was gonna cost $6m.

Twins Daily Admin
05-21-2013, 09:23 PM
And the other thing is that they cannot negotiate with someone before they draft him.

Is this true? Are you saying that when the Astros drafted Correa last year, they didn't know he would sign for less than slot? That can't be right.

Twins Twerp
05-21-2013, 09:40 PM
Is this true? Are you saying that when the Astros drafted Correa last year, they didn't know he would sign for less than slot? That can't be right.

I feel tampering in the MLB draft is ignored. Of course they know what a kid will sign for. That is how a Lance Mcullers drpped. Teams knew what it would cost to sign him. I would not doubt the front office and agents just call each other without using an untraceable phone.

Jeremy Nygaard
05-21-2013, 10:29 PM
It is a rule, yes. It's also completely ignored. There is also a rule against having 'agents', so they call them 'advisors' and work on a handshake-wink-wink agreement until they sign.

nicksaviking
05-21-2013, 11:03 PM
If I liked more than four players it would be a good stratagy, however this class looks sketchy outside of the top three or four. Any GM who happens to agree would then be passing up superior talent just to get a steal in the second round. The Twins have a ton of prospects as it is. They need to go for quality not quantity now though judging from Ryan's free agency stratagy I don't think he agrees.

Einstein
05-21-2013, 11:41 PM
Rumors persist that the Twins might make a deal for less than slot with a lower ranked prospect to allow them to use that money on their second or third round pick. On it's face, and given the payroll cuts the Twins had this year, this made me a little nauseous.No need to go any further, it makes me nauseous too, just pick the damn BPA.

righty8383
05-21-2013, 11:46 PM
No need to go any further, it makes me nauseous too, just pick the damn BPA.

QFT...If the Twins' system was thin I might support this...somewhat. But the farm is strong so I do not favor reaching at number 4 just for the CHANCE that you might get a steal later.

clutterheart
05-21-2013, 11:49 PM
They aren't 'allowed' to, but they do. They will know the price tag on the guy they draft. That is part of the area scouts job. The Twins knew that Buxton was gonna cost $6m.

If you go this this link:
Welcome to Diamond Mines | Diamond Mines (http://scouts.baseballhall.org/)
You can read historical scouting reports. You can see that the Pre-Draft reports show clearly what the scout "thinks" the prospect will go for when it comes to money.
They don't pull that # out of their butt.

From my point of view, if the Twins go under slot they better be sure they can use that money later in the draft. It would be a PR nightmare for them to go under slot in Round 1 and miss their targets in later rounds.

greengoblinrulz
05-22-2013, 12:26 AM
Spend little & you receive little
terry ryan is a piece of work

drjim
05-22-2013, 07:26 AM
Spend little & you receive little
terry ryan is a piece of work

You are aware that Ryan hasn't done this yet right? This is idle speculation - the odds are overwhelming this doesn't happen.

spycake
05-22-2013, 08:10 AM
It seems like this strategy would really depend on who was available at #43, which is not only out of the Twins control, but with the hard slotting system, it seems unlikely that significantly better "signability" guys are going to fall to that point, or that an extra $750k will make a difference for them.

Get the best guy you can with each pick. If you try to get cute around that, you can save money but you're not going to get better talent.

mike wants wins
05-22-2013, 08:14 AM
I'm with spycake on this completely. And also the goblin.....pick the BPA on your board (which better be a pitcher :))

Twins Twerp
05-22-2013, 08:29 AM
Spend little & you receive little
terry ryan is a piece of work

Haha, if you are referring to the draft than you have no memory. Buxton was BPA and signed for 2 mil more than the 1st overall pick (which Ryan has no control over). These are the types of posts that make me want to abuse the sites rules. But I will just let it go and drop "that time of the month" jokes and pessimist jokes to myself. P.S. When are we going to get a "DISLIKE" button on this site. Or an "D' BAG POST" button.

mike wants wins
05-22-2013, 08:32 AM
To be clear, I was with goblin's thought that spending less is a bad idea, not that Ryan has or will do that with the draft. Though they did spend under their alloted amount.....not that I think that had anything to do with anything, it was a pittance.

jay
05-22-2013, 08:46 AM
I'm with you, John. This is exactly the point I was trying to make in the thread about who we'd be disappointed with at #4. If they value a band of talent equally, which is quite possible given this board, then they should make the best economic decision to support the possibility of getting additional talent later. If the value someone higher or if one of the top 3 drop (Grey, Appel, Bryant), then they should certainly take the BPA.

Brock Beauchamp
05-22-2013, 08:50 AM
Initially, I was dead-set against this move but if Appel & Co are off the board at #4 and Manaea is the "best" option remaining (the more I read on this kid, the more I'm not a fan), moving down might not be the worst thing in the world.

But if they do this while one of the top three are still on the board, I'll go absolutely crazy.

markos
05-22-2013, 09:08 AM
If my quick research is correct, there 4 players that were signed in the supplemental 1st round for approximately $1 million over slot.

Here are the four with their pick number, position, signing amount, and BA pre-draft rank

Pick 39 - Joey Gallo, HS 3B, $2.25M, BA #33
Pick 41 - Lance McCullers, HS P, $2.5M, BA #13
Pick 50 - Matthew Smoral, HS P, $2M, BA #24
Pick 55 - Walker Weickel, HS P, $2M, BA #37

There were a smattering of additional over-slot picks in the later rounds, but I'm too lazy to dig for them all.

If the Twins could save a million bucks by drafting Shipley instead of Stewart, then they could draft a Lance McCullers instead of a Luke Bard in the 2nd round (using last year as an example). In my opinion, I would only support this if they are able to snag a consensus top-25 pick in the second round. Judging from last year, that may be risky as there was only one available last year at #43.

mike wants wins
05-22-2013, 09:23 AM
great research markos. thanks.

Dance with Disco Dan
05-22-2013, 10:04 AM
As others pointed out, the biggest problem with the "trade down" plan is the uncertainty that an above-slot worthy player will be available at pick no. 43. Moreover, the plan is almost certainly being considered by the three teams picking ahead of the Twins which would decrease the likelihood of a McCullers-type being available. Even if we assume that the team picks Appel will not be paying under slot, the other two teams could very well negotiate first-round bonuses that'd allow them to employ this strategy both before and at higher dollars than the Twins.

If the top 3 players go as expected, I'd prefer that they take Stewart at slot (if he insists on above slot then pass), if not then Frazier at slightly below slot (if he insists on more then pass), if not then Shipley at a deep discount and try to employ the "trade down" strategy.

Only 15 more days to obsess about this. Oh no.

diehardtwinsfan
05-22-2013, 11:11 AM
Truth be told, there's always someone who's a signability risk in the second round. The issue at hand is that the Twins have zero control over who that person might be. I think this is a great strategy if the Twins look a 4-10 and see that they are all about the same in terms of risk/reward. At that point, I agree wholheartedly with John.

The problem though is that I still think the reward is there at 4. I'm a bit more leary on Manaea now after the injury, though I'm not against getting him (especially under slot), but I think the guy they should be targeting is Stewart. He's got Gray/Appel upside but a longer development time. Unless Houston takes him, I don't see any way the Twins don't grab him short of something really surprising happening where one of Appel or Gray is sitting there at 4.

IdahoPilgrim
05-22-2013, 11:16 AM
If they do decide to follow this strategy, you have to admit it would be a gutsy call for the organization - little cover if it goes bad and the 4th pick ends up being squandered. Maybe this year that's less of an issue, given the draft depth.

jay
05-22-2013, 11:21 AM
As others pointed out, the biggest problem with the "trade down" plan is the uncertainty that an above-slot worthy player will be available at pick no. 43. Moreover, the plan is almost certainly being considered by the three teams picking ahead of the Twins which would decrease the likelihood of a McCullers-type being available.

If one of the top 3 are still there, then the decision on what to do becomes pretty easy and this entire debate is moot...

However, I do tend to think that Stewart might be the choice anyway who is going to want every bit of the pool to sign.

InfraRen
05-22-2013, 11:32 AM
I'm just not a fan of this. We are building an extremely exciting nucleus of minor leaguers, that, when all ready are going to make us a GREAT team for years once they arrive. You take the guy with the HIGHEST potential at #4 and you keep bolstering the farm.

SD Buhr
05-22-2013, 12:36 PM
I think this is a very legitimate strategy... for an organization that has, for example, decimated their minor league organization through trades or losing compensation picks recently (see: Angels). That's not the Twins.

The Twins have the best organizational depth I can ever remember them having right now. It just isn't the time for them to worry about drafting several "good" players, while sacrificing their chance to draft a guy with a "great" ceiling. Even if the kid eventually busts, now is the time to take that risk.

cmb0252
05-22-2013, 12:47 PM
This was a great break down of the value of going under slot early. Like most I feel BPA is always the best bet but it is hard to complain about using this strategy with out knowing the names linked. I'm not a fan of McGuire but maybe if they tried this with Shipley/Ball it wouldn't look so bad.

mike wants wins
05-22-2013, 12:49 PM
Another upside is that if it does not work, they can use the cash to get better MLB FAs next year....................

righty8383
05-22-2013, 12:51 PM
Another upside is that if it does not work, they can use the cash to get better MLB FAs next year....................

:roll:

Seth Stohs
05-22-2013, 01:15 PM
As everyone knows, I'm a Best Player Available guy. However, I also like using the rules to your advantage. So, I feel like, if they don't think that they BPA has a huge upside or has too much risk, pick a guy a little ways down and get better players later. Obvously the scouts will have to have bonus expectations discussions with players (not negotiating, just discussing). But, I feel that the more upside prospects you get, the more likely one of them will make it. The draft is impossible to predict (in terms of results), so accumulate as much talent as possible. I also agree, don't just take a guy ranked #20 with that 4th pick.

kab21
05-22-2013, 08:23 PM
One thing that people are forgetting is that the BPA based on the internet scouts might not be the BPA according to the Twins. I could see the Twins leaning towards Shipley instead of Stewart especially if there is a 1M difference in signing bonus that could be used later. Part of that 1M could be Stewart trying to go overslot.

People are also forgetting that the Twins have an additional 750K available to them w/o a draft pick penalty (luxury tax penalty of 400-500K) attached to it.