The Boras effect, the yearly conversation

[colbyjack]

It seems as though some prized talent being advised by Scott Boras may just fall to the Brewers first-round pick, and farther, most notably, Matt Wieters.

 

Wieters is having a fine season, although expectations were very, very high for this young man. Despite posting .373/.507/.621 numbers this year, he's probably not in the Golden Spikes conversation, which doesn't put him on the same level as someone like Alex Gordon.

 

Personally, whether or not that is the actual case, I think that's a mistake. Wieters is an incredible player, is going to be an impressive run producer at the big-league level and is going to stick behind the plate. Basically, he's a potential perennial All-Star as a catcher, and despite the Boras connection, he is the type of player that could very well be worth every penny.

 

Just like Jered Weaver and Stephen Drew, who both fell in the 2004 draft.

 

Now the question is, as a Brewers fan, would you scream until you were blue in the face to see the team draft Wieters? Keep in mind the team is not cheap when it comes to the draft, but they do adhere to the pre-determined slot values handed down from the commisioner's office, and have always been able to sign their first-round picks rather quickly (with the exception of Weeks).

 

Or do you draft Wieters to call his bluff, offer him slot value, and hope he'll sign? Keep in mind there is now a mandatory, uniform signing date (August 15th), so negotiations wouldn't carry on needlessly. Plus, if the Brewers were unable to sign Wieters, they would receive a compensatory pick after the seventh slot pick in the 2008 draft. I wouldn't really use that as part of my approach, because the team would be passing on an excellent opportunity to add another impact player to the system not named Matt Wieters, but it is an improved consolation prize from the previous compensation system.

 

For background, Matt Wieters entered this spring as my favorite player in this year's draft, and my #1 prospect while everyone else ranked David Price #1 (I have since changed by 1-2 rankings). I was a huge fan of his coming out of high school, and he has only gotten better at Georgia Tech. He's the type of hitter that could debut next spring at high-A, get bumped up to AA midseason, and find himself playing for your big-league ballclub at some point in 2009. When you couple the Brewers need for catching, even if you are the biggest Angel Salome fan in the world, it makes the decision that much more tempting.

 

I don't see it happening, but if there were a player that I would campaign for the team to select in such a situation, it would be Wieters.

[sbrylski]

You take him, if they feel he really is that good. (And I think he is.)

 

What type of pay difference would we expect between what a 7th slot is supposed to get and what Boras will ask for?

[colbyjack]

The seventh slot is expected to be in the $2.25 million range, down from the $2.3 M the Dodgers gave Clayton Kershaw a year ago (the commissioner's office continues to cut back the signing bonus recommendations).

 

Wieters could be looking for money similar to players like Alex Gordon (who signed for a $4M bonus in '05), or Stephen Drew ($4M bonus, contract guaranteed at $5.5M with additional $2M in incentives), so the money is substantial. If you want to cite that the team will have "extra" money for not having a second round pick (which would be the 72nd overall selection, which would be in the half-million dollar range), keep in mind that the team has three of the five best DFE candidates in the nation, and reportedly are serious about signing all three, which could collectively add up to $2M or more.

[Badger OKC]

I would say that you take him. How often is it that the Brewers are in a position to take an impact catcher? We are going to be dealing with Boras soon enough with Prince.

[DHonks]

I'd stick with the previous approaches. I'd love to add a stud hitter, and they'll take whomever they feel is best. I'm a fan of high school pitchers, but I think after Yo and Inman, I like the idea of adding HS pitchers in rounds 2-5.

[gordofieldo]

Even though Matt Weiters is the best of the catching crop, and best of the offensive players in this years draft, I dont feel he is a cant miss type of player. I think his draft position/status is the result of this being one of the weakest draft classes in recent history. Is he a potential all star? Yes, but is he a guy like Griffey or ARod coming into the draft, no. His size is nice, but his performance offensively is just barely above what a scout would call "outperforming". Granted he plays against many players who will get drafted highly, but he is a guy I wouldnt mind seeing the Brewers pass on if he were available, and add to this the boras effect, not worth the hassle.

[fewgoodcards]

Quote:

---

Even though Matt Weiters is the best of the catching crop, and best of the offensive players in this years draft, I dont feel he is a cant miss type of player. I think his draft position/status is the result of this being one of the weakest draft classes in recent history. Is he a potential all star? Yes, but is he a guy like Griffey or ARod coming into the draft, no. His size is nice, but his performance offensively is just barely above what a scout would call "outperforming". Granted he plays against many players who will get drafted highly, but he is a guy I wouldnt mind seeing the Brewers pass on if he were available, and add to this the boras effect, not worth the hassle.

---

 

one of the weakest draft classes in recent history? maybe if you are talking college, but this is one of the best high school classes i can ever remember.

 

now on to him not being arod or griffey how many are? and another thing, those guys were #1 overall picks. you are talking about taking a guy at 7. what kind of reasoning is it to say a guy isn't worth the 7th overall pick on a guy b/c he is not a rodriguez or griffey? the guy is arguably the best position player in the draft. you are nuts if you don't take him at 7 even if he may cost a little extra.

[Oldcity]

It would be nice to have him, but with all things considered--it will probably take months to even sign him, cost more money than it should, etc--I would be very, very surprised if the Brewers took him. They've had Boras players fall to them before and they have yet to pick one. As you said, they are big on signing their first rounders quickly.

 

I get the feeling the Brewers will take one of the high school sluggers like Heyward or Burgess, but that's just a hunch.

[SheetsCyYoung04]

If the Brewers picked him I would be very giddy. Unfortunately, I dont see it happening as they havent done it before. It frustrating because Weaver and Drew would help us so much more than Rogers now.

[colbyjack]

I agree with fewgoodcards assessment of both Wieters and of the draft class as a whole. I'm not sure where anyone gets that this year's draft crop is one of the weakest in recent history.

 

And Arod and/or Griffey aren't the greatest examples because those are two of the greatest players ever available in the history of the draft. What if Wieters turns out to be as productive as Jason Varitek? At #2 or #7, that's tough to pass on.

 

you are nuts if you don't take him at 7 even if he may cost a little extra.

 

A team may be nuts to pass on a talent like Wieters, but it won't cost "a little extra" to sign him http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif .

[pogokat]

i'd take him, but the brewers will not...

[colbyjack]

For those questioning Wieters actual skills and ability, here are some comments on him from BA's most updated Draft Tracker:

 

www.baseballamerica.com/t...nk=tracker

 

Quote:

---

This weekend will be another opportunity for Wieters to solidify his status as the top college position player in the class, as the Yellow Jackets pay a visit to North Carolina for a three-game series. One national crosschecker said recently, " I would make a case for Wieters over Price at 1. With the switch-hitting, the power and he catches so easy, I think he's the best (amateur) catcher I've seen outside of Joe Mauer."

---

 

Again, he's going to be good, real good, it's just a matter of how much you're willing to pay him.

[fewgoodcards]

A team may be nuts to pass on a talent like Wieters, but it won't cost "a little extra" to sign him

 

i keep thinking back to 2004 when the padres wanted to save some money and took matt bush #1 overall. they ended up paying him just over $3 million to sign and he has been a total bust since the day he signed (i don't know why they haven't tried him at pitcher). they could have had stephen drew or jered weaver for less than a million dollars more. what is saving money, paying matt bush $3 million when he more than likely will never play a game in the majors or paying about a million more for a guy that could be a front line starter or everyday shortstop?

 

i don't understand the saving money idea at the top of the draft. you save money by getting guys to the major leagues and paying them the minimum for 3 years to provide a lot more than the minimum production. your best chance to get guys to the major leagues is to take the best players.

 

colby, you have said that wieters is likely looking for something in the range of stephen drew. now i know that the 7th pick isn't slotted for over $3 million like the #1 pick, but its still going to be about $2.5 million. i know that's not a "little bit extra" b/c its like having another first round pick to pay, but i don't see how that much could stop you from getting a top 3 talent later in the draft.

[colbyjack]

I agree that Matt Bush was a bad pick for the Padres, and felt pretty strongly about that when it happened. I wasn't so upset that they went cheap, but they took the wrong player in doing so. It just seemed as though the organization was completely unprepared when the brass mandated that they not spend much money on that first overall pick. Such moves can cripple a franchise, and the Padres farm system may look a lot different had they taken the right player vs. Bush, even if that right player wasn't Drew or Weaver.

 

However, it wasn't just a matter of spending an extra million to make it happen. Here is how their bonuses/contracts broke down:

 

Bush: $3,150,000 bonus, signed the day of the draft

Drew: $4,000,000 bonus, MLB contract guaranteed $5.5 million over four years, additional $2M in incentives believed to be easily attainable.

 

That's a $7.5 million investment, and Drew took until the week before the 2005 draft to sign. That money and effort in that process simply cannot be taken lightly.

 

Yes, looking at how Bush has panned at now it's easy to say that the extra $4M + would have been worth it, but what if the Padres had taken either Jeremy Sowers or Homer Bailey with that pick? They would look pretty smart today if they had made that pick while saving a rather large chunk of change.

 

The seventh overall pick is expected to be slotted at $2.25M, not $2.5M. $250,000 between the two projections could mean the difference between signing your fourth round pick. Even a $100,000 when it comes to bonuses can't be taken lightly, as we have to remember that teams typically have a pretty strict budget that they need to adhere to.

 

I always point out that the Tigers somewhat screwed the Brewers a few years ago by taking Scott Moore right after the Brewers took Prince Fielder. Moore signed within a few days of the draft for over slot value, and $100,000 more than what the Brewers were prepared to give Fielder. That meant they had to sign Fielder for $200,000 more than expected, and that year, coupled with the signing of DFE Manny Parra, meant the team lost several of their early picks that they had hoped to sign (although none of them came back to haunt the Brewers).

 

I agree with your assessment that you save money by having productive, young big-leaguers that make the MLB minimum their first three years in the big-leagues, and control their rights for another three years. However, the money again can't be passed aside, as it is a very, very, very big thing to scouting directors.

 

Again, I have no problem with a team like the Padres passing on Weaver and Drew, but they need to make sure they take the right player when they make such a selection, and unfortunately for the Padres that pick looked painfully bad even when it happened.

[fewgoodcards]

That meant they had to sign Fielder for $200,000 more than expected, and that year, coupled with the signing of DFE Manny Parra, meant the team lost several of their early picks that they had hoped to sign (although none of them came back to haunt the Brewers).

 

isn't it more important to get the right player early (especially in the top 10) than to worry about having the money to sign 3rd and 4th rounders. i know every pick is important, but i would think the percentage of top 10 draft picks that make it to the major leagues is a lot higher than 3rd or 4th rounders. if i had to choose between getting the guy i wanted in the first round and signing my 4th rounder, i am getting the guy i want in the first.