Note: I'll be handling the draft coverage here tomorrow, so I figured I'd start from the beginning. To many of you, this will be old news, so feel free to ignore.
Every year come June there's a pretty big hoopla over the Major League Baseball Rule 4 Amateur draft. Baseball America talks about it non-stop for months, it's televised at primetime, and everyone and their grandmother throws up mock drafts all over the place. I even took the day off tomorrow so I can focus solely on the draft without that whole being fired business. But why do we care? A significant number of the names said tomorrow won't make the Major Leagues despite signing bonuses in the hundreds of thousands, even millions of dollars. Not even those who make the bigs are guaranteed to have an impact. Look no further than our very own Jeff Clement, once billed as a power hitting lefthander who could be an elite bat at catcher and now mired in AAA pretending to be a first baseman. So why follow it at all?

Well, some people don't bother with it. These people comprise the vast majority of baseball fans, but I'll assume that you, dear reader, are more interested in the inner workings of baseball franchises than that. We care about the draft, and care deeply, because we care about prospects, because we care about the makeup of our team in five years, and because the players acquired each June make up the future of Major League Baseball.
Winning teams are almost never built on trades and free agents. Even last decade's Yankee dynasty wasn't fueled by its free agents but by the draft picks of the early-mid 90s. And if the most successful period of the richest franchise in the game didn't come on the back of massive spending (which actually marked the recent 'decline' of the Yankees instead), nobody else is really going to be able to spend their way up to the top either. The reason, of course, can be found in two words: Club Control.
No matter what anyone tells you, how much money a club commits to a player is important. Payrolls are not infinite, and stupid contracts can cripple a team's ability to be flexible with their rosters or make a big splash when required. Due to the Collective Bargaining Agreement, for the first six or seven years of a player's career in the majors, they are paid far less than what they would make in free agency, and for the first three they make more or less the league minimum. Think of it like this: You could get an entire 25 man roster of Adam Jones for the price of one Carlos Silva. It follows, therefore, that young, productive players are more valuable than old, productive players, because they are much much cheaper. Their very presence in a roster allows a team to supplement its young core with pricey free agents. A team of said free agents isn't magically available to pick up young talent from nowhere. Therefore, the goal of every major league team should be to put that core of talent into place and keep it stocked year after year, while adding pieces as required to go on championship runs.
Where does young talent come from? With the exception of the international free agency market, dominated by Caribbean players, it comes from this draft. The best young players in the United States and Canada are all* free for the taking, and if a team is in possession of one of the top draft picks it can come away with a truly special talent. Evan Longoria and Tim Lincecum, for example, were both taken inside the top 10 picks of the 2006 draft, while future stars David Price and Matt Wieters were taken at #1 and #5 in 2007 respectively. This year features the best amateur pitching talent the game has ever seen in Stephen Strasburg, with a reasonably strong supporting cast made up mostly of pitching, but also featuring hitting machine Dustin Ackley, generally considered to be the second best prospect in the country. This doesn't do the draft justice, though. There is talent to be found not only in the high rounds, but in the later days as well. Albert Pujols was drafted in the 13th round in 1999, and future hall of famer Mike Piazza was drafted in the 62nd (the draft only goes to 50 rounds these days).
In short, if you want young baseball players, June is where it's at. We have the #2 pick tomorrow, followed by #27, #33, and #51. Pay attention to the names you hear, because each of them has an excellent chance of turning into a household name. Pay especially close attention to the #2 pick. This team cannot afford to miss this time around. The first few rounds will be tomorrow starting at 3PST, and the draft will conclude sometime on Thursday. This should be a lot of fun.
*Assuming they are draft eligible, of course. The rules are as follows:
- Be a resident of the United States, Canada, or a U.S. territory such as Puerto Rico. Players from other countries are not subject to the draft, and can be signed by any team.
- Have never signed a major or minor league contract.
- High school players are eligible only after graduation, and if they have not attended college.
- Players at four-year colleges are eligible after completing their junior years, or after their twenty-first birthdays. The exception to this is Division III schools, where players can be drafted before their junior year.
- Junior and community college players are eligible to be drafted at any time. [Wiki]
1 recs | 129 comments
I’m very excited. As the years have gone by I’ve lost interest in Football and Basketball, and never really understood the hype of those drafts. The MLB draft though? Awesome, I cannot wait.
OceanBird - June 8, 2009
Welcome to Lookout Landing.
A friendly request:
please use the subject line.
Thanks in advance, and I hope you enjoy the site.
JLProck - June 8, 2009
That's very strange...
The picks in football and basketball have a much more immediate impact. They’re playing with the team immediately, and a good 18-22 year-old can have a huge impact on the game.
With the MLB draft you’re looking at something like a minimum two years for mature players to make the team, usually much more. And then several more years before they hit their potential.
Sidi - June 8, 2009
Agreed
Also, with the way those two drafts work, the players are more exposed to everyone. With the multitude of players in the mlb draft, along with the fact that many HS and JC players are picked up early, it makes it hard to track prospects. On the other hand, with the age limit in the NBA and NFL, the players gain exposure to the public in college football and basketball. Add this to the fact that college baseball is not widely televised, and you have the majority of the public not know who many of these guys are unless they are a phenom.
Brian Floyd - June 8, 2009
Not sure if this if OT or not
I’ve heard a lot of talk about there being a international draft. How far away are we from it and would they do it separately or within the Rule 4 draft?
Robert - June 8, 2009
I was about to ask this same question.
thewyrm - June 8, 2009
A few days ago, I read in an article (trying to remember - BA or something)
That Puerto Rico’s athletics officials were quite unhappy a few years after they got the draft in 1990s because it cut down the signing bonuses and put Puerto Rican athletes at a competitive disadvantage relative to their (more) international peers. I’ll try to find it.
Decatur - June 8, 2009
That really is unfair. The entire population has a higher quality of life han all of their neighbors on account of being a US territory,
and the athletes have to deal with the Rule 4 draft. Sucks to be Puerto Rico. Those damn Haitians have it so good.
Bearskin Rugburn - June 9, 2009
Well, I don't know enough about this to say one way or the other.
Here’s an article describing Puerto Rican athletic officials’ unhappiness with the draft. Here’s what Puerto Rico’s Secretary of Sport said in 2007:
Decatur - June 9, 2009
Do teams still have 5min to pick?
Trying to see if I can get home in time to catch the 27 and 33.
kentroyals5 - June 8, 2009
Yes, 5 minutes for the first round
Graham MacAree - June 8, 2009
Thanks Graham
kentroyals5 - June 8, 2009
4 min. per pick in Rd. 1, 1 min per pick for every round after
ConorGlassey - June 9, 2009
I'm glad to see you've made it to draft day still in one piece, Conor.
Keep up the great work at BA.
Decatur - June 9, 2009
Time to drafterbate!
Realistically: Ackley! Scheppers! Baron! Bailey!
Slurvey - June 8, 2009
Fuck no I don't want Scheppers
Graham MacAree - June 8, 2009
Even at 27th?
Slurvey - June 8, 2009
I hate his injury history. Hate hate hate.
Graham MacAree - June 8, 2009
I know absolutely nothing about Scheppers
How awful is his injury history?
BrianL - June 8, 2009
Nevermind, I see your post below.
Shoulder issues, awoooga.
BrianL - June 8, 2009
He hurt both his rotator cuff and his labrum before the draft last year
Stuff-wise, yes, he’s amazing. However, with shaky command and those injuries, I’m running the hell away.
Graham MacAree - June 8, 2009
Hmmm sounds like a reliever to me!
Slurvey - June 8, 2009
You could be right, but I see him as a starter if he doesn't get hurt again
Obviously I don’t like those odds
Graham MacAree - June 8, 2009
Couldn't he be a late round pick?
Something of a low risk, high reward situation?
Fin - June 8, 2009
Some team will like him a lot more than I do
Scheppers is going to go high
Graham MacAree - June 8, 2009
I'd still love to get a potential front-line guy at 27
For me, it’s more a question of bonus than health. Anyway, Keith Law seems to think Aaron Crow is falling and didn’t have him in the first round of his latest mock based on no one for sure wanting him.
I’d jump for joy if we get Ackley and one of Scheppers/Paxton/Crow/Purke/Gibson
seattlebruin - June 8, 2009
If Crow fell to 27, I'd leap joyously into the arms of whichever stranger is near me at the time
abender20 - June 9, 2009
Why?
I only have a passing knowledge of most draft prospects not named Stephen, Grant, or Dustin, and in my view, Gipson, Paxton, Purke, and Scheppers have basically been interchangeable (“Top rated arm that also has some questions”). I could obviously use some education here, so I’m curious why you don’t like him.
katal - June 8, 2009
Shoulder problems
Biggest red flag for future injuries in pitchers is past injuries.
Graham MacAree - June 8, 2009
This should be in bold, in blinking text, in multiple languages.
The biggest predictor of future injuries in pitchers is not an inverted L, a sideways sigma or tendentious tendon. It is past injuries.
If you have a pitcher with ‘amazing mechanics’ but a history of arm trouble, well…. remember the Ryan Anderson Experience?
marc w - June 8, 2009
No.
Matthew - June 8, 2009
Something amusing the other day:
Went something like ‘Since Scheppers has no mechanical flaws, his injury likely wasn’t caused by his pitching motion but by pitching at a high level for the first time. Therefore he shouldn’t be considered an injury risk.’
Marvelous.
Graham MacAree - June 8, 2009
I love that the theory that he's injured by moving up a level is somehow
a positive. Days ahead of the MLB draft.
marc w - June 8, 2009
Boras could sell glasses to a blind man
Brian Floyd - June 8, 2009
They make you look smarter and more trustworthy.
Allowing you to get more assistance from random strangers when you need it instead of them ignoring your pleas for help maneuvering in unfamiliar areas. Also, Chuck Norris once wore glasses. So did Jesus.
CapSea - June 8, 2009
So the stress of facing better hitters caused his connective tissue to spontaneously fail?
abender20 - June 9, 2009
Well that sucks then
I hope he doesn’t go to Texas – he’d get to face us and Oakland all the time
seattlebruin - June 9, 2009
That would cause hypertrophy of his rotator cuff
abender20 - June 9, 2009
God if we draft Scheppers, I may actually make a "WE DRAFTED A CLOSER" joke
please kill me if this happens
seattlebruin - June 9, 2009
BTW, I'll be kind of excited if we get him
he’s got a good arm. Yeah, it’s a lot more likely he flames out and never makes it to the bigs… but think of just how good he might be.
Of course, I’d rather have Purke anyway
seattlebruin - June 9, 2009
Fear not.
abender20 - June 9, 2009
The only thing that would make it better? If he's overweight with diabetes.
It would be nice if the M’s had some pitchers with original problems. Hey, a pitcher with hydrocephalus! Nothing funnier than a pitcher with a giant head
Kermit. - June 9, 2009
How about a position player?
Faux - June 9, 2009
STRASBURG!
Slurvey - June 8, 2009
Graham if we don't take Ackley who do you think we would draft instead?
Scruffy Lefty - June 8, 2009
Matzek!
katal - June 8, 2009
Crow or Matzek
Either one should make you angry though. This is as clear cut as #2 gets.
Graham MacAree - June 8, 2009
I keep hearing that Crow could drop all the way to 27.
This seems incredibly unlikely, yet is intriguing.
katal - June 8, 2009
I would do backflips if that were the case.
Slurvey - June 8, 2009
That seems as likely as Strasburg dropping to #2
Gibson and Purke are my hopes down there if we’re going for expensive pitching
Graham MacAree - June 8, 2009
Which of Gibson and Purke do you prefer, if you have a preference at all?
kentroyals5 - June 8, 2009
Gibson. Unlike Scheppers his injury is a stress fracture rather than ligament damage, and he's both cheaper and closer to the majors
Purke is awesome though, so I’d be pretty happy with him too.
It depends on how scary you find that injury of Gibson’s, but he should be able to at least be throwing again before the signing deadline.
Graham MacAree - June 8, 2009
How much money should the forearm injury knock off Gibson's signing bonus?
He could be a Dustin McGowen-like injury steal if things shake out right.
Decatur - June 8, 2009
Your guess is as good as mine but it'll be less than he was expecting
Graham MacAree - June 8, 2009
What is your opinion on Paxton?
I’m a fan of his, simply because I knew a lot of Paxtons growing up. — this is about the extent of my draft analysis. =/
It seems that with so many expensive arms floating around, at least one of them will drop to us. I’ll be very pleased with a set of Ackley + expensive pitcher + interesting HSer as our top three pics.
katal - June 8, 2009
He's better than his results
I suspect that if we had tRA for college pitchers it’d be screaming that he’s massively underrated. He’d fit right in #25-35, but I’m hoping we can turn out #27 into more like a top-10 pitching talent. I like him though
Graham MacAree - June 8, 2009
Possible bats at 27 or 33?
Scruffy Lefty - June 8, 2009
Tim Wheeler and Brett Jackson at 27th.
Baron is almost for sure the 33rd pick right now and his bat is a big question mark..
Slurvey - June 8, 2009
Poythress might be interesting also.
If I had my druthers we’d go pitching there with a middle infielder with #33.
Graham MacAree - June 8, 2009
I doubt Poythress falls that far...
…but if he does, he’s my pick. Unless Purke’s on the board, too. Poythress’d be less risky, I’d think, but Purke’s upside is sooo much higher.
PositivePaul - June 9, 2009
I'm just praying they promised Baron at 51
and will try and steal two top-ten guys in freefalls at 27 and 33
seattlebruin - June 8, 2009
I like the idea of Nick Franklin
abender20 - June 9, 2009
It would give us two legitimate Frabklins.
Decatur - June 9, 2009
Though probably not at the same time
abender20 - June 9, 2009
I think Piazza went in the 82nd round actually.
But that had to be almost a 1 in a million chance of finding someone like that.
Fin - June 8, 2009
Graham had it right.
It was the 62nd round.
katal - June 8, 2009
Yes you are right.
Damn, I should check my facts before speaking.
Fin - June 8, 2009
And the only reason he was drafted was as a courtesy
he’s Lasorda’s nephew and the Dodgers took him because Lasorda asked them to.
pdb - June 9, 2009
Nepotism finally pays off
abender20 - June 9, 2009
Big day tomorrow.
Lots of talk about the importance of this draft for the organization. The mantra for this one is “we have to get this right.”
Can’t wait.
ThundaPC - June 8, 2009
I think Club Control is also valuable because of the disadvantages of Free Agency
Most players don’t reach free agency until the middle or end of their primes. Coupled with the fact that many free agents are paid for past performance (although clubs are definitely getting better about paying for projected performance), it’s difficult to get a bargain in free agency without taking advantage of an undervalued type of player. Whereas players under club control who make the majors are almost automatically profitable (as long as they can contribute even a little above replacement level).
Milendriel - June 8, 2009
I want the Mariners to draft Rex Brothers because it would sound like the team was drafting two players at the same time.
csiems - June 8, 2009
This is a very good reason
bamfor - June 8, 2009
This is impossible to refute
gregrabble - June 8, 2009
Do you think the M's will take Baron or reach for Nick Franklin at 33?
Dave mentioned Franklin and I’d heard the Baron rumors before. If so, do you think it is a good idea to underpay those them at 33 in order to overpay a player who falls to 27 due to signability?
Brian Floyd - June 8, 2009
It depends who falls
If it’s Gibson or Purke I’d be fine with Baron at #33. We have to stay within our budget, after all. If we don’t get those two I’d switch gears and try to just go for slot at #27 and #33.
So yeah, it’s something they’ll have to choose on draft day.
Graham MacAree - June 8, 2009
Thoughts on Franklin?
Seems like a huge reach at 33 but would he still be around at 51 if they’re in love with him? What’s he comparable to? Also what kind of budget are we looking at for those first four picks?
Brian Floyd - June 8, 2009
Educated guess at a budget is somewhere in the $12-15 million range, but that's still just a guess
As for Franklin, it depends on how you much you trust his bat (much like Jio Mier, but to a lesser extent). If you think he can play short and hit like an average second baseman, by all means pop him at #33. Otherwise you’ll just have to hope he falls into your lap at #51.
Graham MacAree - June 8, 2009
If you reach for Franklin without his consent that is assault.
Sec 108 - June 9, 2009
I hope Matt Purke is this year's Tim Melville
and we smartly grab him and pay him what he’s worth
seattlebruin - June 8, 2009
Thoughts on Ackley's Major league position?
I’ve heard anywhere from 1B to OF to potentially converting to 2B. Gammons today was talking about how he “flies” on the basepaths and could easily end up at 2B. I don’t know what one has to do with the other but I’m also not paid to cover baseball….
Benjamin(not Ben) - June 8, 2009
CF
Graham MacAree - June 8, 2009
So then
2011 OF of Gutierrez/Ackley/Ichiro or do you see Franklin’s value diminished in a corner role?
Benjamin(not Ben) - June 8, 2009
Don't try predicting that far ahead with the draft. We have no idea what will happen.
Ackley could bust, Guti could lose his bat. We could have a Saunders/Ackley/Ichiro outfield for all I know.
Also, the reply button makes conversations much easier!
Graham MacAree - June 9, 2009
Noted, then I should ask,
as opposed to a lineup projection. I should probably ask it a different way.
Does Ackley’s glove project to be good enough to justify letting Gutz walk or ask him to move to corner as opposed to sliding Ackley over to LF?
Benjamin(not Ben) - June 9, 2009
At this point nobody's very sure, since scouts haven't seen enough of him out there to say more than he should be able to play the position
Graham MacAree - June 9, 2009
I can't sleep.
I feel like a 5-year-old on Christmas Eve. I left out milk and cookies, hoping that Santa has a Dustin Ackley in his bag.
Teej - June 9, 2009
Just make sure he doesn't put any moves on your mom.
russak - June 9, 2009
If I get Ackley in return, I'm cool with it.
Teej - June 9, 2009
I'd be cool with sleeping with Santa for a Dustin Ackley
Graham MacAree - June 9, 2009
Seems like he'd be gentle.
Teej - June 9, 2009
Yes, his soft beard sliding up and down your back.
russak - June 9, 2009
He'd be my beard.
Teej - June 9, 2009
I don't think it works that way
abender20 - June 9, 2009
How would you know
CapSea - June 9, 2009
While I'm no expert, I understand the point of a beard to be a fictitious heterosexual relationship as a facade.
I guess maybe it would make sense if Teej’s parents wanted him to be gay and he didn’t want them to find out about his girlfriend, so instead he dated Santa. Or maybe he’s secretly Jewish.
abender20 - June 9, 2009
Hey now.
What a coincidence!
ThundaPC - June 9, 2009
T'is the night before Strasburg and all through the site
not a poster was posting, cept maybe Graham and his mouse
Robert - June 9, 2009
This actually came to me in a dream last night long before I read this comment
Robert - June 9, 2009
what
seattlebruin - June 9, 2009
I dreamed I was in a old fashioned book looking into Graham's apartment with the narration of Clement Clarke Moore saying this over and over again.
Robert - June 9, 2009
That seems normal.
abender20 - June 9, 2009
I also dreamed Bryan Cranston was an adulterer/plastic surgeon who preformed surprise cosmetic surgery on the teens he wanted to sleep
He paid me 100 bucks a year to not tell his wife and I followed him around a Macy’s that had a lot of weird escalators.
Robert - June 9, 2009
If you become a mod, I expect this to be front page material
seattlebruin - June 9, 2009
This is why I will never take shrooms
Robert - June 9, 2009
Can somebody please explain why my comments are double posting 15 seconds later
and are un-z-able
Robert - June 9, 2009
I saw that happen as well, but when you refresh they go away.
abender20 - June 9, 2009
SBN is effed up for me right now, too
I come into a thread w/new comments and nothing’s z-able.
PositivePaul - June 9, 2009
So you had a marathon day of watching Nip/Tuck and Breaking Bad.
That makes a lot of sense, actually. Also, you secretly want to get raped.
abender20 - June 9, 2009
I think was more of a mix between Breaking Bad and Taub from House
Robert - June 9, 2009
I'm sad Breaking Bad is over for the year. I do like how they finished, though.
abender20 - June 9, 2009
And it's not so much a secret, I guess.
As we see here.
abender20 - June 9, 2009
Bryan Cranston starred in Nip/Tuck?
russak - June 9, 2009
We should have a pool on what time USSM goes down tomorrow.
I’ll take 3:03
Scrupio - June 9, 2009
3:06
Or shortly after the Mariners take Tanner Scheppers with the #2 pick :-P
PositivePaul - June 9, 2009
If the Nationals pass on Strasburg for signability reasons do we take him over Ackley?
Long shot I realize, but hope springs eternal.
PDXTai - June 9, 2009
Yes, but don't hold your breath
Graham MacAree - June 9, 2009
If the Nationals pass on Strasburg, the Mariners shouldn't even have to think before calling in their selection
seattlebruin - June 9, 2009
They'd take the full five minutes because I'm sure they'd want to be reading the blog as we all lose our shit with excitement/worry
Graham MacAree - June 9, 2009
This would be a most entertaining five minutes on LL.
waldo rojas - June 9, 2009
"With the second overall pick in the 2009 MLB Draft, the Seattle Mariners select Tann ::rest of anouncement obscured by the sound of 500 firearms fired simultaneously::"
abender20 - June 9, 2009
I think I'd shoot GMZ first if he passed on Strasburg for Scheppers
only then would I kill myself
seattlebruin - June 9, 2009
No they'd take the full five minutes because they are on tv and we need access to Steve Phillps' internal monologue.
Poochie - June 9, 2009
This point of Graham's caught my eye:
Undoubtedly true, of course. There’s one huge exception that comes to mind: the 2001 Mariners (of course, this is one of the most exceptional teams of all time, so it’s not a model)
Aaron Sele: High-profile (Type A?) FA
Paul Abbott: Scrap heap FA
John Halama: Randy trade
Freddy Garcia: Randy trade
Jaime Moyer: 1996 Darren Bragg (!) trade
Kazuhiro Sasaki: Japanese FA
Arthur Rhodes: FA coming off rough year
Jeff Nelson: high profile FA
Brett Tomko: Griffey trade
Norm Charlton: scrapheap FA
That leaves only three pitchers who pitched over 15 innings for us in 2001 were drafted or signed to their first contract by the M’s and were under club control – Ryan Franklin (0.5 WAR), Jose Paniagua (-0.3 WAR), and Joel Pineiro (1.5 WAR) (from Chone)
And for position players, only one of our five most valuable ones were develoepd in the M’s system and then retained (Boone was signed as a FA):
Mike Cameron: Griffey Trade
John Olerud: Type A FA
Brett Boone: FA
Ichiro: posted from Japanese club.
Edgar: only guy from system
David Bell: minor trade
Carlos Guillen: Randy trade
Mark Maclemore: Free agent
Dan Wilson: original 1994 Boone/Erik Hansen trade with Reds
Al Martin: Traded for Mabry
Stan Javier: Free Agent.
So, of all the players to have any impact whatsoever in 2001, only Jose Paniagua, Ryan Franklin, and Joel Pineiro were club controlled, and none of our position players were (only Edgar stayed with the club since signing his first pro contract with it).
Again, I think the draft is the cornerstone of almost any successful ballclub, of course. I just wanted to see how the 2001 M’s did it.
Decatur - June 9, 2009
Following the 2001 model off a cliff got us the team we have now
Yes, there are exceptions but holy crap don’t take those as the rule
Graham MacAree - June 9, 2009
And in theory, it was the result of the Griffey and Randy trades paying off finally
seattlebruin - June 9, 2009
Yeah, maybe I should've put a stronger exclaimer on it:
DON’T BUILD YOUR BALLCLUB LIKE THIS!
I just find it interesting seeing how the 116 win-club was constructed. My point was that we broke just about every rule for successful long-term roster construction and farm system construction in the early 2000s. That’s all.
Decatur - June 9, 2009
Gillick was better at building clubs that way than anyone else and it always came with a cost after he left.
Aaron Campeau - June 9, 2009
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Lookout Landing to post a comment.