2012 draft

[moriartp]

Luhnow said on the pre-game show that there was no final decision. Still looking at five guys or so. Will continue to kick it around tomorrow. I don't know if he's telling the truth but that's what he said.

Callis seems to think that's the case: I'm told that #Astros have no decison at 1-1 and are discussing five names. I guess Appel, Buxton, Correa, Gausman & maybe Almora.

[Ebby Calvin]

Thanks again for everything you do. It's been great to be able to so easily catch up on the latest rumors and info.

Very much this.  Great work all around - Admins or otherwise.

[pots]

Farm over the past 5 days: 18-2. 

[OregonStrosFan]

Here's one that'll blow you away (or did me anyway...).  Remember that 'coveted 100 mph arm' (Steson Allie) from the 2010 draft.  Pirates are now converting him from pitching to hitting...  LINK  WOW!

[tlott33]

Here's one that'll blow you away (or did me anyway...).  Remember that 'coveted 100 mph arm' (Steson Allie) from the 2010 draft.  Pirates are now converting him from pitching to hitting...  LINK  WOW!

Funny thing about that, Allie was either first or second to Nick Castellanos in the Under Armour All-American Home Run Derby. Castellanos is hitting over .400 at the FSL this year.

And just to throw my two cents on Appel, a big reason he isn't all that dominant is the way the coaching staff has their guys pitch. They want them to pitch to contact, so you see a lot of pitching backwards (throwing sliders, breaking balls early in counts etc.) so that is a reason he may not seem entirely dominant. And one other random stat from Appel's year from Friday's broadcast--He has only given up three home runs this year and two of those were to one guy from Fresno State. I don't care who you are, if you only give up three home runs going through the Pac-12, you are doing pretty well for yourself.

But what am I saying anyway? I kind of want Correa with 1-1. I may be stupid, but when you get ARod comps, I think that sounds pretty good.

[Mike S.]

As we reach the T-25.5 hour mark here before the draft, a few misc. comments:

* I am greatly intrigued by the way that Luhnow/Heck, et al will 'play' the new financial limitations imposed in this draft.  'Who' at 1.1 will be a 'huge' decision, but at the same time saving $2-3M at 1.1 for use in later rounds could also play exceptionally well...

Me as well, my good sir.  Me as well.

[Mike S.]

Tom Verducci is weighing in with some interesting comments on the new spending rules for the draft:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/tom_verducci/06/01/all.dl.team.draft/index.html?sct=mlb_wr_a1

The Major League First-Year Player Draft enters a new era on Monday with the cap system on bonuses. With severe penalties for going even five percent over budget (75 percent tax and the loss of a first-round pick), clubs will have an available pool of money (roughly $189 million for the 30 teams) that represents a 20 percent cut from what they spent in a free market system last year ($236 million). What other industry cuts its research and development investment by 20 percent in flush times?

No team has less money to spend than the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim. Because of the free agent signings of Albert Pujols and C.J. Wilson, the Angels don't get a pick until the 114th selection. Their entire draft budget, based on values assigned to every pick through 10 rounds, is just $1,645,700, according to Baseball America. How small is that? The Angels spent $1,467,000 last year on one pick, first-rounder C.J. Cron.

And don't expect the Angels to overpay for a difficult-to-sign high schooler in the later rounds. If you spend more than $100,000 for a pick after the 10th round, the overage counts toward your budget.

Here's an example of how the money has dried up: In 2006 the Padres -- the Padres, mind you, not the Yankees or Red Sox - drafted high schooler Mat Latos in the 11th round. He slid in the draft because of rumors about his signability and his makeup. The Padres kept an eye on him as he went to junior college, and then signed him just prior to the 2007 draft for $1.25 million. Neither scenario is likely under current rules: not the draft-and-follow scenario and not the late-round big money to convince a hard to sign kid to sign.

So the Angels will have had scouts scouring the country for the past year and are left with only $1.6 million to sign amateur players. Just how small is that kind of investment in future players? The Angels' entire 2012 draft budget would cover only 10 days of pay for Pujols when he's 42 years old.

[Fynn]

Here are the 2012 draft slotting values: BA LINK

A $3M savings at 1.1 (i.e. difference in signing someone at 1.4 money vs. 1.1 money) is the MONETARY equivalent of the Astros having an extra 3.5 second round picks.  Depending on what they are hearing about some players falling in the draft because of 'signability' issues, a 'savings' at 1.1 could be big. REALLY big.

Again, don't have a clue as to the correct way to pick 1.1 based on the new restrictions, but I am certainly intrigued...

Surely the Boras factor has to be part of the equation.  If the Astros wish to have extra money for secondary picks, this strategy would necessarily exclude a Boras client at 1-1.

[jbm]

And just to throw my two cents on Appel, a big reason he isn't all that dominant is the way the coaching staff has their guys pitch. They want them to pitch to contact, so you see a lot of pitching backwards (throwing sliders, breaking balls early in counts etc.) so that is a reason he may not seem entirely dominant.

Either that, or the fact that every third or fourth pitch is completely off target.  That wouldn't be my way to pitch to contact. 

The guy has trouble repeating his delivery.  Who knows if he figures that out.

[astrosfan76]

Frankie Piliere with a chat all day today.  Not really conducive to getting any work done, but, hey, I'm just showing you where to find it, I'm not making you use it.

http://sbb.scout.com/2/1191795.html#.T8yydHdkqxE.twitter

[Fynn]

Frankie Piliere with a chat all day today.  Not really conducive to getting any work done, but, hey, I'm just showing you where to find it, I'm not making you use it.

http://sbb.scout.com/2/1191795.html#.T8yydHdkqxE.twitter

Thanks!

[jbm]

I see BA is still reporting that the Astros will take Appel because Jim Crane wants him, but that the baseball men want Buxton.  It could be that this disturbing rumor that won't go away is simply disinformation used to negotiate with someone else.  That is the best case scenario at least.

[Navin R Johnson]

I just don't see Crane demanding the team take player X over player Y, that is 110% opposite of everything he has said since being in the running for buying the team.  About the only thing I can imagine him saying to the Lunhow is that he prefers a pitcher.  From what I have learned about Lunhow, I don't think there is anyway he takes the Astros job if he thought Crane was going to be calling the shots.

This BA rumor sounds like a bunch of horseshit, but pretty typical in todays world of twitter journalism.

[jbm]

I tend to agree with your first statement about Crane and Luhnow, as I tend to be optimistic.  However, I don't agree that BA can be lumped in with the sloppy twitterverse.  I highly doubt it is made up horseshit.  It is out there for a reason, either because it is true, or is useful to somebody. 

[Navin R Johnson]

I tend to agree with your first statement about Crane and Luhnow, as I tend to be optimistic.  However, I don't agree that BA can be lumped in with the sloppy twitterverse.  I highly doubt it is made up horseshit.  It is out there for a reason, either because it is true, or is useful to somebody.  

The only thing I saw BA say (I only looked at the sight for 30 seconds) was this, "new owner Jim Crane wants a frontline starting pitcher"

What else did they specifically say that leads you to believe that BA thinks Crane is FORCING Lunhow and Heck to take Appel over Buxton?

And unless they have something more than "rumor is" then yes, they should be lumped with the other dumbasses.

[moriartp]

The "Buxton appears to be the preference of the team's baseball decision-makers" from the next couple of lines is the damning line.

[jbm]

The only thing I saw BA say (I only looked at the sight for 30 seconds) was this, "new owner Jim Crane wants a frontline starting pitcher"

What else did they specifically say that leads you to believe that BA thinks Crane is FORCING Lunhow and Heck to take Appel over Buxton?

The next line: 

Buxton appears to be the preference of the team's baseball decision-makers and would be Plan B if a deal with Appel falls apart

You couple that with BA predicting the Astros will take Appel, and it is not a stretch to conclude that Crane's desire for a pitcher is tantamount to telling his employees to take Appel.

[Navin R Johnson]

The next line:   

You couple that with BA predicting the Astros will take Appel, and it is not a stretch to conclude that Crane's desire for a pitcher is tantamount to telling his employees to take Appel.

Total BS speculation based on absolutely nothing concrete.  It is like people need a reason or a person to get mad at if their guy isn't picked 1-1.  If they take Appel, it is because that is who the team decided to take.  I'm not buying the meddling owner, he said/she said stuff until I hear something a lot more substantial.

BTW, I don't think what BA said was nearly as sinister as you are implying.

[VirtualBob]

Funny thing about that, blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah .400 blah blah blah blah .

And just to throw my two cents on Appel, blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.

But what am I saying anyway? blah blah blah blah blah blah . I may be stupid, but blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.

I think you figured it out for yourself.

[Bench]

Total BS speculation based on absolutely nothing concrete.  It is like people need a reason or a person to get mad at if their guy isn't picked 1-1.  If they take Appel, it is because that is who the team decided to take.  I'm not buying the meddling owner, he said/she said stuff until I hear something a lot more substantial.

It's necessary in order to declare the winners and losers of the draft and to hand out grades tomorrow morning.  The narratives don't write themselves, you know.

[Navin R Johnson]

It's necessary in order to declare the winners and losers of the draft and to hand out grades tomorrow morning.  The narratives don't write themselves, you know.

I am sure that plays in to it when it comes to the people who cover the draft.  When the guy they have listed as 1-1 isn't taken, well it wasn't because the writer was wrong, it was because Jim Crane stormed into the war room, hit Heck over the head with a chair and made Lunhow pick Appel 1-1 at gun point.    I mean, it couldn't be as simple as the team just having a different opinion....

[OregonStrosFan]

Okay, here is where I've decided that I stand on the 'issues at hand':

(1) Crane is going to let the decision makers make the decisions. Just my 'gut'.  Sure he might have an 'all things being equal I'd like a front line pitcher' type comment out there. So what. At the end of the day, he has ceded the baseball decisions to the baseball decision makers.

(2) I'm not wedded to any particular player in this draft. As long as they are not 'reaching' (taking a guy seen as a late 1st round type), I don't care who it is (based on the 6 or so kids typically mentioned in association with the Astros).  The scouts have seen each of these kids enough to know the pros and cons of each.

(3) My comments as to 2 above notwithstanding, if there are 2-3 guys who basically grade out close / there is no true consensus in the draft room about at 1.1, take the kid who will sign at 1.1 for a $2M-$3M discount.  It is here that I think the real play in the draft is going to be made.  Having this extra money for later round picks could be the boon of the draft.

[Bench]

I am sure that plays in to it when it comes to the people who cover the draft.  When the guy they have listed as 1-1 isn't taken, well it wasn't because the writer was wrong, it was because Jim Crane stormed into the war room, hit Heck over the head with a chair and made Lunhow pick Appel 1-1 at gun point.    I mean, it couldn't be as simple as the team just having a different opinion....

Even for sports journalism the coverage of the MLB draft is beyond moronic. 

[Navin R Johnson]

(3) My comments as to 2 above notwithstanding, if there are 2-3 guys who basically grade out close / there is no true consensus in the draft room about at 1.1, take the kid who will sign at 1.1 for a $2M-$3M discount.  It is here that I think the real play in the draft is going to be made.  Having this extra money for later round picks could be the boon of the draft.

And don't the Astros hold nearly all the leverage here?  Hey kid, sign for 4 million, or good luck next year in the draft.  Assuming that if we didn't sign 1-1 this year, we would have 1-2 next year, which is likely to produce a slightly to much better prospect.  Although I am sure the mouth breathers would tar and feather Crane for being "cheap." 

[astrosfan76]

And don't the Astros hold nearly all the leverage here?  Hey kid, sign for 4 million, or good luck next year in the draft.  Assuming that if we didn't sign 1-1 this year, we would have 1-2 next year, which is likely to produce a slightly to much better prospect.  Although I am sure the mouth breathers would tar and feather Crane for being "cheap." 

Not necessarily.  If we try to get the player to sign under slot so we can free up money for the other rounds, they can always refuse.  In that case, we lose out on any extra money we thought we could free up.  The silver lining is that we would get a high pick next year, but there are no guarantees that next year will provide that much better of a player at 1/2 and we need talent in the system now. 

[OregonStrosFan]

Although I am sure the mouth breathers would tar and feather Crane for being "cheap."

Don't underestimate the 'power of the mouthbreathers' so to speak, or their breadth.  For example, Justice = mouthbreather. On this subject, perhaps a majority of non-Astros-affiliated writers, prospect pundits, bloggers, etc. = mouthbreathers.  Like it or not, what the team does at 1.1 is going to shape how Crane is viewed for a lot of years. And how is is viewed could very well impact 'asses in seats' for a number of years to come.  IMO, there is significant leverage with the player on this aspect alone (though I agree with other comments that the Astros do have significant leverage as well).

[pots]

And don't the Astros hold nearly all the leverage here?  Hey kid, sign for 4 million, or good luck next year in the draft.  Assuming that if we didn't sign 1-1 this year, we would have 1-2 next year, which is likely to produce a slightly to much better prospect.  Although I am sure the mouth breathers would tar and feather Crane for being "cheap." 

Unless the prsopect is willing to sign early, you can't use the extra money on other picks.  The prospect would have you by the balls if you signed someone else above slot.    Outside of the first pick you have 4 million to spend, if you spend 4.5 million signing the rest of your prospects and the first guy doesn't sign then you've gone 12.5% over and lose your first and second round draft pick next year.  (not to mention an extra 500k penalty)

[moriartp]

Law's draft day mock is also up, also says Appel. Nothing new there, but in the notes he says the Astros are on California prep SS Daniel Robertson at 41.

[moriartp]

Piliere: Starting to hear things like Astros settled on Appel. I can't confirm it but starting to get texts of that nature.

[MusicMan]

Nobody expects the Luhnow Inquisition!

[moriartp]

Goldstein guesses Buxton: This still seems to be a coin flip between Buxton and Appel. If the coin lands on its side, it's Carlos Correa, but while he's in the mix here, he seems like a long shot at this point. The smart money might be on Appel, but there were some early Sunday rumors that checks on signability with him were not going well. This is a gut, but it might be a bad one.

[pots]

Was liking this Ty Hensley kid till he mentioned he was a Braves fan

Especially liked this one:

 [Comment From Fred Fred: ]
Ty, Do you tend to go right after hitters or rely more on out of the zone stuff to get strike 3?  
Monday June 4, 2012 2:37 Fred
2:38 Ty Hensley: My philosophy is to always attic hitters early no matter who it is. You can't be a true pitcher if you don't attack people especially early in the count.  

[OregonStrosFan]

Hey Bus Ride Admins: perhaps, since this pre-draft thread has gotten so long, we should start a new one tomorrow for the actual draft itself, just to make it easier to go back later and have that as a reference?

Good idea. We'll be locking this thread at 5 CDST and opening the '2012 Draftees and Status' thread at that time.

[OregonStrosFan]

The pre-draft thread is now closed and locked.  Please use the '2012 Draftees and Status' thread to post your comments.  LINK