Looking ahead to the 2017 draft

[Austinfan]

The new academy is also for the Venezuelan players (and other SA like the Columbian pitchers they just signed).
Venezuela is a horrible mess, and they're trying to get the players out of there as much as possible.
They've always had two teams in the summer leagues, so it's a lateral move more than an expansion.

[Phils2020]

Good point. I'm back to saying lets go with the best player available on the board.

[andyb]

FWIW we did not get 5 or 6 of the top 50 internationally. More like 1 Top 20 guy, another in the 20-30 range, then 3 or 4 more in the top 100 (not 50). We had depth but less high ceiling talents. The top 4 guys we signed were 12 (Morales), 19 (Gonzalez), 45 (Torres), and 47 (Aparicio) in a ranking without any Cubans. Realistically they are more like 20,30, 60, and 65. And a couple other guys (Tortolero, Muzzioti) are top 100. We only got our top 2 on Fangraphs top 47.

I would be on board with going with ceiling at number 8 unless there is a Nola type arm that could move really quickly. There usually are not too many of those college players that can be up in a year though (maybe a closer is more likely), so going high ceiling given our depth in mid-level prospects is probably the right call.

[flyers19rw]

While supporting the concept of BPA, all things considered, the Phillies don't seem to have a top of the rotation pitcher or front of the rotation lefty that is close to being ready to step into the game. If one of these highly rated collegiate SPs can fill that bill, it would be hard to pass him by in the June draft.

[allentown]

There is merit in that suggestion. Also, I think it a serious mistake to confuse highest ceiling available with BPA. The highest ceiling is frequently a H.S. kid, whose ceiling is astronomical because actual knowledge about what he will actually turn into as a professional is so meager, while some of the negatives of the college kids have been exposed against quality competition. If you can sign a Moniak, you draft him, but we have failed on so many high ceiling H.S. kids in trying to hit the lottery on the high ceiling first rounder. It's easy to say 'don't take a Jeff Jackson, or Hewitt, or LGJ, but these are precisely the kids who our scouts defined as high ceiling and the pitfalls didn't become obvious until later. It is certainly better to draft from a baseball hotspot with a long H.S. season, better to draft a position player with hit tool rather than speed and athleticism or raw power as the super tool, better to take a pitcher who shows some control to go with blowing out the radar gun, but except for the best, who are often gone by #8, it remains a gamble. BPA is a far superior criterion than highest ceiling, since it gives more than a passing nod at the probability of approaching that ceiling.

[julio]

One rule of thumb in evaluating the ceiling of high school kids - especially those in backwater situations like Jackson or Larry Greene Jr. - is that if your scouts have a very different opinion abut a player than the rest of the industry (other teams' scouts, BA, Perfect Game, etc., etc.), that ought to be a huge (or "reaallllyy yuuuuge!") red flag. If your scouts are seeing something nobody else is seeing, the odds are very large that your scouts are simply wrong.

Now, if you have a veteran scout with an unusual track record, I might agree that the risk is somewhat mitigated. But that said, the last thing we want to see with the #8 pick (or with any first/second round pick) is one of those cases where the kid selected is simply "off the board," in that everybody else in the business finds the pick puzzling.

Later in the draft - not such a big deal. If the Phils want to take a gamble with pick #83, on a high school kid who their scouts value more than other clubs (or on somebody that nobody else thinks will actually sign) - I'm OK with that. That's Lucas Williams, Cord Sandberg, Dylan Cozens territory. But in the first round? No, thank you.

[flyers19rw]

With all of these H.S. all star tournaments going on, how many backwater unknown gems are there?

[julio]

With all of these H.S. all star tournaments going on, how many backwater unknown gems are there?

Probably not many. Somebody who's picked from out of left field (pun intended) is likely not quite a "gem."

[julio]

With Mark Trumbo going back to the Orioles:

Jon Heyman (JonHeyman)

...the Phillies will have 2017 picks numbers 8, 45, 83, 113, 143, etc.

[Squire]

Cool. Compared to last year we dropped 7 slots in the first, but only 2 in the second and then 5 in the third and 6 slots in every round thereafter.

[julio]

Cool. Compared to last year we dropped 7 slots in the first, but only 2 in the second and then 5 in the third and 6 slots in every round thereafter.

Yep. This is because there are only three free-agent compensation picks this year. Only three "qualified" free agents - Desmond, Encarnacion, Fowler - signed with new clubs, and none were signed by clubs with protected picks. Also, there's only one non-signing comp pick (#42 to the Pirates, who failed to sign Nick Lodolo last summer).

[Squire]

2017 Draft Bonus Pools

Good stuff here. It looks like under the new CBA the delta in the top picks is less than it used to be. So the Phillies got the last big benefit of the big differences. Phillies have the 11th largest pool at $8.32 million (4.55 million of which is the 8th overall pick).

[zambonir]

Wouldn't have minded being Top 5 on that list though.

[julio]

Per Baseball America, here's what the Phils bonus pool looks like (I'll be filling this table in come June/July!):

Rd	#	Draftee	Slot Amt	Bonus	Over/Under
1	8		4,552,300	-	-
2	45		1,451,100	-	-
3	83		644,600	-	-
4	113		450,600	-	-
5	143		336,500	-	-
6	173		254,100	-	-
7	203		198,600	-	-
8	233		158,100	-	-
9	263		137,700	-	-
10	293		129,000	-	-
		POOL	8,312,600	-	-
11	323			-	-
12	353			-	-
		TOTAL	8,312,600	-	-
		Draft Pool x 5%	415,630		(415,630)
		TOTAL @ Pool + 5%	8,728,230	-	(415,630)

[gmwannabe]

There is a featured article on the young lefty from the Malvern area in BA. brendon little. the picture shows him??? in a phillies uniform. what's up with that. sounds like he could help with the phils dearth of lefties in the system.
gm

[Squire]

Just to compare. Last year the Phillies were allocated 9.015m for 1.1. This year the Twins were allocated 7.4m

[allentown]

So, MLB and PA have ended the games teams have been playing with the excess bonus value of first pick. Although none of this year's top draft prospects can be pleased to see the change, it should reduce ill-feeling in future. Also removes a bit of the draft incentive to really tank, although that will still exist in years with a super talent. For this year, I think this slightly improves our chances of drafting top-notch guys in the first 3 rounds, since the game we played to get both Gowdy and Stobbe will be a lot harder to play.

[Squire]

It looks like just less money in the top pools. The Twins have about the same money that the Phillies did last year (13.5 million) but that includes a competitive balance pick the Phillies didn't have at about 1.75 million. I don't know if that means more HS kids will go to college or not but it does feel like the closer gaps at the top will mean a more "true" draft in terms of talent matching up with slot.

Anyway, I don't have a good handle on what I want. As I mentioned upthread, I generally think the system is deep enough for us to take a risk by taking the highest ceiling guy available rather than a safer college pitcher. But I don't feel strongly one way or the other yet.

[baseballoldie]

It seems very odd that MLB & Players association would agree to LOWER the slot values for 265 of the 315 slots as compared to last year's values. When you look at the reduction amounts (average reduction in picks 56 through 315 is almost $50,000 per slot) it makes me wonder if maybe this is the MLB's first step to improving Minor league player monthly salaries. Why else would both sides agree to reduce bonus amounts?

[baseballoldie]

The MLB draft signing bonus pool went from $224 million in 2015 to $234 million in 2016 - a $10 million increase. Pretty odd that there is effectively no increase in the bonus pool from 2016 to 2017 and generally not something the players union would agree to. There has to be some other reason why both sides agreed to no increase in the bonus pool money. Putting an additional $10 million toward minor league salaries would make a big difference for the majority of minor league players - maybe this lack of increase in the bonus pool money is partially how that gets funded.