2nd pick vs Soriano

by cubsfan2883 on Oct 11, 2006 7:50 PM CDT Comment 25 comments

I got to thinking.. If the Cubs really are interested in Alfonso Soriano the Washington Nationals will receive the 2nd pick in the draft for him. Is giving up the 2nd pick (They drafted Prior with the 2nd pick in 2001) really worth Soriano?

I know Soriano is a great player but we all believe that drafting is going to be a key to being a successfull ballclub and if the Cubs do sign Soriano they will forfeit their 2007 Amateur Draft pick.

Thoughts?

Btw the last two 2nd picks have been
1- Greg Reynolds a RHP (COL)
2005 - Alex Gordon (best prospect in baseball) (KC)

To me I would rather have Gordon than Soriano..

What does everyone else think?

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of SB Nation or Al Yellon, managing editor (unless it's a FanPost posted by Al). FanPost opinions are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable baseball fans.

0 recs | Comment 25 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Nevermind

I apologize for not reading further in the compensation rules..

The Cubs would keep the pick even if they were to sign Soriano they would lose their 2nd round pick instead.. I apologize for this oversight.

by cubsfan2883 on Oct 11, 2006 7:55 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

You can

delete this diary by going to "edit diary" and clicking "delete" and the confirmation box.

by Josh77 on Oct 11, 2006 8:00 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

the cubs have the third pick, not the second

and this upcoming draft is so deep that our second round pick (early in the second round) might end up being the equivalent of a mid to late first round pick, and we are going to get some top notch talent if the Cubs draft intelligently for their first round pick.

I prefer we keep our early round picks next year

Baby, you got a stew goin'

by Thelonious on Oct 11, 2006 8:13 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Good thing

Hendry has nothing to do with the draft.

"Incidentally, Colossus was right and I was wrong about Maddux being dealt." -Al Yellon

by colossus on Oct 11, 2006 8:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wasn't scouting

supposed to be his strong suit? He must only scout the "toolsy" players that every team wants so bad. Amazing how we keep ending up with them, Hendry must be great at this.

by pageian on Oct 11, 2006 8:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

The Cubs have the 2nd pick

Due to the AL/NL cycle

by cubsfan2883 on Oct 11, 2006 8:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

they sure don't

look it up

Baby, you got a stew goin'

by Thelonious on Oct 11, 2006 8:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Agreed

on keeping the draft picks with the exception of a really good, really obvious free agent addition. Somebody like Beltran would have been a few years ago, or Zito could be this year. Good player, team needs him, lose the draft pick. Otherwise, horde them, don't give them away for just anybody.

by pageian on Oct 11, 2006 8:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well, since we're on the topic

Soriano would be worth a second round pick. iirc the biggest difference in talent in the draft falls between the first and third picks. So, if you pick first or second you aren't bad off. Third and below aren't nearly as sure bets. Obviously the cutoff isn't so severe but the point is that a true number one type player is much better than a true number 3 type player. So it's possible Soriano wouldn't be worth a top 2 pick especially if the draft was strong, but he's probably worth a later first round, second round type pick.

by pageian on Oct 11, 2006 8:18 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

false

the cubs won't be competitive in the next few years, and need to develop young players. Unless they are planning on spending 110-120 million next season, and are going to get one of the marquee pitchers, and another solid one, getting soriano is a pointless waste of money.

Trading away draft picks while we aren't competing is completely hendry-esque, and foolish.

Baby, you got a stew goin'

by Thelonious on Oct 11, 2006 8:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well

I kinda agreed with this in general in a post above this one. My point here was strictly in regards to Soriano. I'm not all that enthralled with him so yeah, he might not even be worth a late first/early second to me.

I understand the building through the draft thing, but we need to be adding talent to this organization one way or the other. Adding a Soriano is a much safer bet than drafting a kid. Our greatest strenght is money and we need to start using it on the best free agents, not the second class types. The question is can we/will we add enough top free agents to make us cometetive, and if we don't think we'll be competetive then we shouldn't be spending $ and draft picks for free agents.

A good free agent signing is always worth a draft pick, unless maybe it's a top pick. I'd trade our first pick for Barry Zito and I'd be making the right decision.

by pageian on Oct 11, 2006 8:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I should clarify

the last part of that post. By good free agent signing I mean one that helps make a team competetive and/or puts them over the top. In other words, not Jacque Jones. And by "unless maybe it's a top pick" I mean you don't pass up a Prior or Mauer if you know you'll get one of them.

Here comes the Prior bashing..........

by pageian on Oct 11, 2006 9:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Actually...

the biggest difference in consecutive picks is between the first and second picks of the draft.

You were close enough, though.

I think people forget that giving up draft picks isn't really that big of a deal. The average first round draft pick has a 15-year career WARP of 14. That's less than 1 win above replacement per season over 15 years.

The baseball draft is such a crap shoot that if you can sign a guy like, say, Soriano, who will give you 7-8 WARP the next few seasons, you've surpassed the win above replacement total that your first round pick would have given you over 15 years.

The problem that teams like the Cubs have is that they're giving their first round draft picks up for freakin' middle relievers that they're signing. For crying out loud, these are about the only guys that you can sign that aren't worth giving up a first round draft pick for.

All that said, a team in the Cubs shape needs to be stockpiling draft picks so they can rebuild their farm system. The best things the Cubs can do this offseason is hand out no long-term contracts. Not even to Zambrano.

The other thing to consider is that draft pick compensation is more than likely done away with beginning this offseason. It's not official yet, but teams have reportedly already been told that it no longer exists.

by Maddog on Oct 11, 2006 11:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

There are usually

3 to 4 quality draft picks that appear head and shoulders above the rest. So, while a middle or late first round pick might not be worth signing a quality free agent there are some that you just need to hang on to because you he's got star written all over him.

But, as you say, compensation appears gone with the new agreement.

Players win awards but teams win championships.

by tharr on Oct 12, 2006 4:01 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Definitely, tharr.

It's a judgment call when it comes to being willing to give up a 1st round pick. Fortunately the system was set up that the top 15 picks were protected. Still, in a very deep draft if you have the 16th or 20th pick and you think there will be someone who has signability issues who IS going to be a good ballplayer, then keep that pick.

But never ever give up a 1st round pick for a middle reliever.

It does appear draft pick compensation will be over. I think that's good news.

by Maddog on Oct 12, 2006 6:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I read that the Draft Pick compensation was

over going into the 2007 season. I was quite positive I read this.

Good pitching always beats good hitting.....just ask Joe Torre.

by TheBeerBaron on Oct 13, 2006 3:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Can anyone inform me

as to what the 2007 amatuer draft is shaping up to be? Is there a clear cut #1 in the field? Are there any Luke Hochevar's, Delmon Young's, Brandon Wood's or Alex Gordon's out there?

Good pitching always beats good hitting.....just ask Joe Torre.

by TheBeerBaron on Oct 13, 2006 3:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

One positive

thing the Cubs did last year was compensate for a lack of early round picks by drafting 1st-round talent in late rounds. Someone else will know the names, but there were a couple of guys who had fallen because it was thought they were unsignable. Wilken drafted them, and signed them to roughly 1st round money.

by davidalanu on Oct 12, 2006 6:30 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

The Cubs

need to be willing to do this. I'm not saying they should set the market for paying draft picks but they need to go after the guys other teams consider unsignable because those are usually the guys with talent. Give them credit for doing that. That's one way they use their resources correctly.

by pageian on Oct 12, 2006 6:49 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm not sure that's a positive though.

These guys they drafted in the later rounds, specifically Jeff Samardzija in the 5th round and Chris Huseby in the 11th. Both those guys got 1st round money. Drew Rundle, drafted in the 14th round received a signing bonus of $500,000, which is late 2nd round, early 3rd round money.

Huseby was coming off injury. he's got potential, but the Cubs need to refrain from taking high-risk pitchers in the draft. I had hoped that would change with Wilken, but it didn't. Samardzija just wasn't that good at Notre Dame and the Cubs should have learned their lesson about ND pitchers considering they drafted Bobby Brownlie in the first round in 2002 and he's a HUGE bust. Samardzija will also likely choose football when given the chance to choose between taking the bus between unknown cities or taking private plains with some NFL team. it's a pretty easy decision actually. I figure that money is wasted.

Rundle was a good sign. It's nice to get a guy who is expected to go in the first 5 rounds in the 14th and actually sign him especially when the guy is a position player. This is what Baseball America had to say about Rundle...

Two Oregon-bred outfielders went in the first round in 2005, but both Portland's Trevor Crowe and Madras' Jacoby Ellsbury were drafted out of college, not high school. Rundle entered the spring with a chance to join them as first-rounders after a strong summer on the showcase circuit, where he showed the ability to hit off top-flight pitchers in his draft class with good velocity. That momentum didn't carry over to the spring, though, and his hopes for being drafted highly rest primarily on his athletic ability and his performance last summer. Rundle has changed his approach this spring, spreading out at the plate (with a stance similar to Jim Edmonds') to gain better plate coverage. He's not strong enough to generate power from the stance and had only one homer all spring as the draft approached. Unlike Edmonds (or burners Crowe and Ellsbury), Rundle doesn't profile as a center fielder even though he's a present average runner, so scouts are seeing a corner outfielder who isn't showing present power. He has average arm strength, and scouts who like him point out he hasn't seen much to hit all spring. An Arizona recruit as was Crowe before him, he's expected to go off the board in the first five rounds.

by Maddog on Oct 12, 2006 6:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs