Minor League Ball Community Mock Draft Day
by John Sickels on Jun 5, 2025 11:00 AM EDT
112 comments
The Minor League Ball Community Mock Draft starts at NOON CENTRAL TIME.
At noon I will post the first round draft thread and will post a seperate thread for each round as we get there. The draft occurs in the comments thread.
Use this thread for pre-draft discussion, and I will see you at noon!
0 recs |
112 comments
| Add comment
Email
Print
Comments
Signability
I assume that because we have budgets in mind, we should consider signability when making our picks?
by dtung on Jun 5, 2025 11:07 AM EDT reply actions
No point in having budgets
If you’re not going to take signability into account.
http://twitter.com/FutureSox
http://FutureSox.com
by The Big Hurt on Jun 5, 2025 11:08 AM EDT up reply actions
no info
this comes up every year, but nobody knows what the budget is or what guys are really looking to sign for, so what is the point?
by cooper7d7 on Jun 5, 2025 11:12 AM EDT up reply actions
Historical tendencies
For team budgets. It’s not always going to be accurate, sure, but we can get a rough estimate.
Numbers are starting to float around for players, too. Again, not always going to be accurate, but we have a rough idea who is going to be looking for overslot deals (Wilson, Cowart, Ranaudo, Lee, Vanegas etc.)
http://twitter.com/FutureSox
http://FutureSox.com
by The Big Hurt on Jun 5, 2025 11:17 AM EDT up reply actions
we have pretty decent ideas
Basically, it’s just a matter of using common sense.
by mrkupe on Jun 5, 2025 11:18 AM EDT up reply actions
fine
You have an unlimited budget and can do whatever you want. Go draft Austin Wilson and Zach Lee, and add on Brian Ragira while you’re at it.
by mrkupe on Jun 5, 2025 11:30 AM EDT up reply actions
yankees
or the red sox $100M talent machine could do that right?
by cooper7d7 on Jun 5, 2025 11:33 AM EDT up reply actions
one maybe
Wilson and Lee has about as much chance of happening as Bryce Harper to the Pirates.
by mrkupe on Jun 5, 2025 11:37 AM EDT up reply actions
being snarky...
but the idea is that the yanks have an “unlimited” budget, maybe not for amateur signings, but in general, so why couldnt a team spring for the, what, $6M for Wilson and Lee are romored to be seeking…
and where do these rumors come from? the scouts of wealthy teams looking to drop these guys into their laps, perhaps?
by cooper7d7 on Jun 5, 2025 11:41 AM EDT up reply actions
I think the key is to be reasonable. Certain things are pretty much known like the Mets and ChiSox will spend at most 5MM total. The Pirates will probably spend about 9MM.
Try not to draft overslots and unsignables at every turn and try to stick to organizational philosophies.
Yeah, this mock won’t be perfect, but it could be utterly useless. Lets avoid that.
by crawdaddy on Jun 5, 2025 11:42 AM EDT up reply actions
ok
in 09 phillies, without a 1st, spent ~$3M on bonuses…so do I use the same # plus inflation, or do i add $1M for the 1st? Or since those pesky rumors have Amaro loving Wilson, will my entire budget be blown on my 1st?
by cooper7d7 on Jun 5, 2025 11:47 AM EDT up reply actions
phillies
If the Phillies ended up with Wilson in the mock draft, I don’t think anybody would complain. They’re still evaluating his signability, but he’s certainly a player that fits their MO.
by mrkupe on Jun 5, 2025 11:50 AM EDT up reply actions
right, but
while Im sure Lee wouldnt be there at 77, does the $3M rumored to be Wilson’s price wipe out my budget and I therefore sign 4th year seniors in the 2nd?
by cooper7d7 on Jun 5, 2025 11:52 AM EDT up reply actions
i think it might be likely that they would go after their typical raw tools guys in the second and afterward . . . but probably guys who rate out a round late.
by crawdaddy on Jun 5, 2025 11:53 AM EDT up reply actions
Phillies
They don’t spend much in the draft, but there was a recent year they spent $6.7m. The money’s there when they want to use it.
Link
by Outshined_One on Jun 5, 2025 11:55 AM EDT up reply actions
I love that the Pirates spend a ton of money
Taillon is going to take a big chunk, but I should still have plenty to go after another prep draftee in subsequent rounds.
by jar75 on Jun 5, 2025 11:12 AM EDT up reply actions
sure, but they would be on slot. i have a hard time seeing the pirates go large on taillon and then peppering overslots of 1MM afterward.
by crawdaddy on Jun 5, 2025 11:33 AM EDT up reply actions
The reports are that they will
I’m sure it’ll be more tempered than last year, but, when they spend ~$9M on the draft, I can afford another prep draftee later on.
by jar75 on Jun 5, 2025 11:59 AM EDT up reply actions
i think signing taillon will cost about 7MM . . . 2-3MM will be slots for the rest of the entire draft.
where do you see that money?
the things i have read on them taking chances deeper in the draft are dependent upon them being able to get someone for about 4-5MM at the 2 slot. taillon does not fit that scenario.
by crawdaddy on Jun 5, 2025 12:01 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm not expecting that much
Matzek and Turner were supposed to get ridiculous bonuses last year too. I actually think Matzek was a better prospect at the time than Taillon is now. I’m expecting Taillon to sign in the 4-6M range.
by jar75 on Jun 5, 2025 12:04 PM EDT up reply actions
As much as they went overslot, falling down to the 10th-15th picks decreasing leverage. Having to punt a 2nd overall pick is much more devastating than punting a 10th or 15th pick. You can get good slot value the following year in the teens . . . the same is not the case when you lose a 2nd overall selection.
So, I do not agree with that comparison.
by crawdaddy on Jun 5, 2025 12:05 PM EDT up reply actions
I just don't see $7M happening in this more sober MLB economy
And I’m not planning on going for the high end signability risks later on. I’m just not going to shy away from a prep draftee if I really like one.
by jar75 on Jun 5, 2025 12:10 PM EDT up reply actions
Is this year really more sober than last year? MLB suggested slots were raised this year.
by crawdaddy on Jun 5, 2025 12:13 PM EDT up reply actions
Strasburg was the only one to exceed $7M last year
Tate and Ackley were the only other two to exceed $4.7M.
by jar75 on Jun 5, 2025 12:16 PM EDT up reply actions
Ackley’s effective contract is 8MM . . . part of bonus deferred.
by crawdaddy on Jun 5, 2025 12:18 PM EDT up reply actions
Right and those numbers are incomplete. They will say Strasburg has something like 7.5MM and it was really slightly over 15MM.
by crawdaddy on Jun 5, 2025 12:20 PM EDT up reply actions
We're only talking about bonus numbers
The amount paid over 4 or 5 years doesn’t concern me. If you have Strasburg at $15M, then Washington would have a draft budget of around $20M.
by jar75 on Jun 5, 2025 12:23 PM EDT up reply actions
I think ignoring future cost is problematic and am confused why you think it would not matter. Yes, pushing off the money to a later date decreases cost, but it probably effectively reduces it by about 10-20% of that deferred money.
I don’t think that is a good way to look at it. I mean, if you buy a car from me for $10 now and $20,000 in two years. How much did that car cost?
by crawdaddy on Jun 5, 2025 12:26 PM EDT up reply actions
It complicates matters
Paying 500K to a guy over 5 years isn’t much money for a team yearly and only complicates matters if you consider that part of his bonus figure. Using BA’s numbers (which is what Selig really cares about and he’s the biggest obstacle to teams spending more) does the job just fine.
by jar75 on Jun 5, 2025 12:34 PM EDT up reply actions
That has not been my understanding of Selig’s views as evidenced by the teams that toe the line and about his comments on how hard slotting would work in the future. I think that statement is rather presumptuous.
by crawdaddy on Jun 5, 2025 12:37 PM EDT up reply actions
hard slotting
That would be a complete and utter disaster for baseball. You think they’re having a hard time stopping kids from playing basketball and football now? Hard slotting removes a lot of the incentive for prospects to choose baseball, and will drive more kids into college . . .where they will undoubtedly play football.
by mrkupe on Jun 5, 2025 12:41 PM EDT up reply actions
I think if anything, they need to use the revenue sharing money to create soft slotting and do away with the draft. Let teams bid for different players and force them to spend that revenue sharing money.
by crawdaddy on Jun 5, 2025 12:43 PM EDT up reply actions
That would be ten times as disastrous.
by RedSoxFaithful on Jun 5, 2025 12:44 PM EDT up reply actions
He does everything he can to make the numbers look closer to his arbitrary slot figure
He is the one putting the most pressure on keeping team’s from giving these kids more money. He even delays signings until the last few days keeping teams from getting their draftee into the organization.
by jar75 on Jun 5, 2025 12:41 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, I know what he does. I follow it pretty closely.
by crawdaddy on Jun 5, 2025 12:42 PM EDT up reply actions
Is there a page that shows those slots somewhere?
And while I like the work on the graph the Rangers might be an outlier since they weren’t allowed to give Purke the money they agreed upon. I would think by definition since they have 4 1st round picks they’ll spend more money this year.
by Hull Fan on Jun 5, 2025 12:17 PM EDT up reply actions
I am unaware. I don’t know if it is priveledged info that got leaked.
by crawdaddy on Jun 5, 2025 12:18 PM EDT up reply actions
If you're a BA subscriber
They have estimated slot bonuses for ‘06/’07/’08 here. They dropped by 10% in ’09, but are up again this year, I believe.
http://www.baseballamerica.com/online/draft/news/2008/266625.html
http://twitter.com/FutureSox
http://FutureSox.com
by The Big Hurt on Jun 5, 2025 12:21 PM EDT up reply actions
What I heard is that they are up but not equal to 2008.
by crawdaddy on Jun 5, 2025 12:23 PM EDT up reply actions
Thank you.
I figured BA had it but didn’t have a clue where to look.
by Hull Fan on Jun 5, 2025 1:39 PM EDT up reply actions
Are you running a mock?
If so, let me know your exact pick #s and I can tell you the slot values from 2009.
by siddfynch on Jun 5, 2025 12:57 PM EDT up reply actions
It should also be recognized that the Pirates have had a historical tendency to overslot past the 5th round on prep pitchers and slightly for hitters. I don’t think they have overslotted in the second round in the past three years. Last year was Brooks Pounders for 670k, which arguably below slot. Third round was Chambers at 420k . . . at slot. That was with Sanchez taking 2.5MM and Victor Black taking slightly below slot in the 1S at 700k.
Where is that money?
by crawdaddy on Jun 5, 2025 12:10 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm not emulating the Pirates
I’m using the budget as I see fit.
by jar75 on Jun 5, 2025 12:12 PM EDT up reply actions
Ok. To me, I think that misses the point, but I imagine there are a lot of different perspectives taking part today.
by crawdaddy on Jun 5, 2025 12:13 PM EDT up reply actions
It's hard to use trends after the first round
Greg Smith has had two drafts as the Pirate Scouting Director, and picked Tanner Scheppers the year that he selected Pedro Alvarez. Wouldn’t that count as an overslot guy? Sure, they didn’t sign him, but it showed that he’s willing.
by jar75 on Jun 5, 2025 12:20 PM EDT up reply actions
It might if they did not balk at him wanting an overslot contract with a bad shoulder. I think the idea was that he would sign for about 1MM and then they backtracked. If there is as good a polished arm available in the second (i.e. Ranaudo) . . . sure. But Zach Lee . . . I doubt it. They will go early overslot for college guys, not preps from what I have seen.
by crawdaddy on Jun 5, 2025 12:23 PM EDT up reply actions
Well, I’m not planning on targeting someone like Zach Lee. I know that he doesn’t come anywhere near plausibility.
by jar75 on Jun 5, 2025 12:25 PM EDT up reply actions
I think you would be fine maybe going for a 1MM guy in the second and then going slot third. I doubt it will be what they will do. They will probably try to max value on slot in the second and third and go all lotto past that point because the difference between overslot and slot talents is much greater in the later rounds than in the early ones.
by crawdaddy on Jun 5, 2025 12:29 PM EDT up reply actions
That's about what I'm planning
My original comment was mostly that I didn’t have to stick to signable college juniors in the 2nd and 3rd if I went Taillon in the first.
by jar75 on Jun 5, 2025 12:36 PM EDT up reply actions
considering how crappy the college class is
I don’t expect the actual organizations to be following such a policy this year, either.
by mrkupe on Jun 5, 2025 12:38 PM EDT up reply actions
One of the main reasons...
they most likely didn’t take another tough sign like Scheppers in the second round last year is because they had an extra pick in between. So if Pounders made 670k and black made 700k, I think the Pirates would easily spend something like 1.3 mil on their second round pick if they see someone worth it available since they don’t have to worry about that extra pick in between this year.
ETHAN MARTIN!!!!
by joegonzo on Jun 5, 2025 12:37 PM EDT up reply actions
Likewise, you might want to figure in the spreading of cost by drafting Sanchez.
by crawdaddy on Jun 5, 2025 12:38 PM EDT up reply actions
Not really...
because they drafted Alvarez the year before and still took Scheppers in the second. The spreading cost from Sanchez goes into the later round signs.
ETHAN MARTIN!!!!
by joegonzo on Jun 5, 2025 12:49 PM EDT up reply actions
What I tried to put forth is that Scheppers is a college talent. Polished. Prep arms and bats that go for later because of the difference in potential between overslot and slot in the later rounds. With Scheppers, you were talking aout a polished arm that dropped due to injury concerns. Totally different draft scenarios. The only one I could see similar would be Renaudo. Even last year, they bypassed the polished injured arms. Might be gunshy now. I don’t know.
by crawdaddy on Jun 5, 2025 12:52 PM EDT up reply actions
Scheppers being a college talent....
has nothing to do with them not being afraid to take a guy in the second round who could be asking for a bonus of over 1 million which is how the conversation started. They have shown that they are not afraid to take a guy looking for an overlot deal in the second, so Jar75 should be able to take anyone he wants in the second and not be told tht he is straying from the Pirates draft philosophy.
ETHAN MARTIN!!!!
by joegonzo on Jun 5, 2025 12:57 PM EDT up reply actions
Or that they just misread Scheppers' signability
http://twitter.com/FutureSox
http://FutureSox.com
by The Big Hurt on Jun 5, 2025 12:23 PM EDT up reply actions
Astros
Ed Wade apparently on a radio show interview last night said the budget is 8.5-10 Million…kind of surprising but that is just enough to sign most of the draft class at slot in first 5 rounds. And most of the remaining picks at slot and average for the late round guys. That will come out to around 8.2M. So gives room to go over slot with a few guys.
Pretty shocking that Drayton will allow for this. And sorry I have no link for it either.
by Subber10 on Jun 5, 2025 12:47 PM EDT up reply actions
maybe he is including the cost of the catering for the scouting department.
by crawdaddy on Jun 5, 2025 12:49 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm guessing
Part of it is due to having a top ten draft pick . . .you have to anticipate going a little over slot with that high a selection.
Still, I agree, it’s shocking. How in the world did Ed Wade manage to convince him that signing all of your early picks is a good thing?
by mrkupe on Jun 5, 2025 12:49 PM EDT up reply actions
yeah, astros and selig are typically pretty tight.
by crawdaddy on Jun 5, 2025 12:50 PM EDT up reply actions
Really nice
Makes my picks a little more flexible
by Archie A on Jun 5, 2025 12:56 PM EDT up reply actions
money
You should assume a realistic draft budget for the team you’re working for, based on historical tendencies and whatever the team is currently saying.
by John Sickels on Jun 5, 2025 11:43 AM EDT reply actions
for instance . . . Mets might grin and bear Kvasnicka.
by crawdaddy on Jun 5, 2025 11:52 AM EDT up reply actions
understand what ya'll are saying
but, doesnt it behove teams to low ball or sandbag their budget to the public? why flash the cash?
by cooper7d7 on Jun 5, 2025 11:53 AM EDT up reply actions
look at historical trends. teams are not going to low ball or sandbag past drafts.
by crawdaddy on Jun 5, 2025 11:54 AM EDT up reply actions
This
I’m using the 2009 Tigers budget as a guide. I figure I have up to $8mm to spend (though all that probably won’t be used) based on the high draft budgets from years past.
President, Vice President and Secretary of the Casey Crosby Fanclub.
Assist. Editor, Minor League Division, Bless You Boys
by David Tokarz on Jun 5, 2025 11:57 AM EDT up reply actions
you know they used that $8 million on
50 rounds worth of players though, right?
Not that they sign guys in all 50 rounds, and certainly the bulk of the budget is used earlier, but top ten round signing bonuses aren’t exactly low . . .
by mrkupe on Jun 5, 2025 12:01 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah
But with no first rounder, we can afford to spend 4mm-5mm on early picks.
President, Vice President and Secretary of the Casey Crosby Fanclub.
Assist. Editor, Minor League Division, Bless You Boys
by David Tokarz on Jun 5, 2025 12:03 PM EDT up reply actions
here is a post i threw up on last year’s draft a month or so ago.
http://camdendepot.blogspot.com/2010/04/another-look-at-2009-draft-budgets.html
by crawdaddy on Jun 5, 2025 11:55 AM EDT up reply actions
I like it...
but, looking at only one year is really misleading - the Phils had no 1st in ‘09, so they slid towards the bottom, but if you used ’08 they spent in the 6’s, so they’d be top 10 or so in ’09 [i know im mixing years]
by cooper7d7 on Jun 5, 2025 12:06 PM EDT up reply actions
I don’t know if it is misleading. People should recognize what one year of data means. One could say the data could be misconstrued.
by crawdaddy on Jun 5, 2025 12:11 PM EDT up reply actions
q:
doesn’t jamison tallion look JUST like John Lackey??
by Longhorn on Jun 5, 2025 12:15 PM EDT reply actions
He does look like a younger version.
Brett Anderson is the Truth. Brett Anderson is divine presence. Brett Anderson is eternal life. Brett Anderson is within you. Brett Anderson is here. Brett Anderson is Now.
by Frederick0220 on Jun 5, 2025 12:50 PM EDT up reply actions
If anyone needs a last minute fill-in
I’d be happy to do so. I participated in the last two mocks on the site but was out of town when this year’s sign-ups happened.
by threesixteen on Jun 5, 2025 12:22 PM EDT reply actions
phillies are yours...
I have a babysitting emergency!
1.27
2.77
3.107(?)
good luck!
by cooper7d7 on Jun 5, 2025 12:27 PM EDT up reply actions
Nice. It has been a lot of watching and reading this year as Nick and prepped about 10 rounds deep. Check out his main draft site PnR Scouting . . . solid work.
by crawdaddy on Jun 5, 2025 12:40 PM EDT up reply actions
I demand commentary from Steve Phillips and Harold Reynolds
How else will we know which guys are athletes and which ones are merely gamers?
by Outshined_One on Jun 5, 2025 12:41 PM EDT up reply actions
Steve Phillips isn't allowed within 200 feet of an MLB Clubhouse
Or a Chuck-E-Cheese
You’re name has 2k9 in it — what are you some 8 year-old who makes Pillsbury Doughboy cookies and jerks off to that bullshit video game with Tim Lincecum on the cover--
Frederick0220
by Mets2k9 on Jun 5, 2025 12:45 PM EDT up reply actions
Wait
I thought being a gamer was a good thing?
President, Vice President and Secretary of the Casey Crosby Fanclub.
Assist. Editor, Minor League Division, Bless You Boys
by David Tokarz on Jun 5, 2025 12:48 PM EDT up reply actions
It was a reference to last year's televised MLB Draft coverage
Everyone who was on MLB Network covering the draft, with the exception of Jim Callis (and I think Keith Law might have been there), clearly had no idea what the heck they were talking about. Reynolds and Phillips didn’t talk about the draftees in any constructive way; they just said all of them were “gamers” and “athletes” and “baseball players.”
It was like when you forget someone’s name and refer to him as “buddy” or “pal” to cover for it.
by Outshined_One on Jun 5, 2025 12:52 PM EDT up reply actions
there were lots of great moments
Like when they showed the graphic of Shelby Miller’s present/future grades, and gave his changeup an average present grade . . .
Nobody even knew that Shelby Miller had a changeup at that time! Fortunately, he’s been throwing it a lot this year, but still . . .
by mrkupe on Jun 5, 2025 12:54 PM EDT up reply actions
The Mike Trout hero worship stuff was the worst
by Outshined_One on Jun 5, 2025 12:56 PM EDT up reply actions
In one way, they were kind of ahead of the curve..
by dtung on Jun 5, 2025 12:58 PM EDT up reply actions
IIRC, they were calling him the best pick of the draft as he was picked, mainly becausehe was the only one to have gone in-studio
by RedSoxFaithful on Jun 5, 2025 12:58 PM EDT up reply actions
Yep
“This is your big day! This is what it’s all about!!! Every draftee should be here in the studio when they get picked!”
Meanwhile, they were running the MLB Draft out of what looked like a converted bingo hall. I’m guessing another 10 people in there and there would have been fire code violations.
by Outshined_One on Jun 5, 2025 1:00 PM EDT up reply actions
I think my all time favorite moment was a couple of years ago
When Aaron Hicks actually showed up with his family!
Unfortunately, they denied us the coverage of the Hicks family’s special celebration at a character breakfast in Cinderella’s castle.
by mrkupe on Jun 5, 2025 12:58 PM EDT up reply actions
Fair enough
Shows how well I can remember the draft…
President, Vice President and Secretary of the Casey Crosby Fanclub.
Assist. Editor, Minor League Division, Bless You Boys
by David Tokarz on Jun 5, 2025 12:56 PM EDT up reply actions
very nice
Brett Anderson is the Truth. Brett Anderson is divine presence. Brett Anderson is eternal life. Brett Anderson is within you. Brett Anderson is here. Brett Anderson is Now.
by Frederick0220 on Jun 5, 2025 12:51 PM EDT up reply actions
I need a backup for the Marlins
storm over here, and the DSL is going on and off.
I’ve got a mod post over on the right.
by siddfynch on Jun 5, 2025 12:54 PM EDT reply actions
Mariners are here.
Though I don’t pick for quite awhile.
MLB Bonus Baby - A Draft Blog
Pre-Order the 2010 MLB Draft Notebook
by Andy Seiler on Jun 5, 2025 12:59 PM EDT reply actions
Mets here
You’re name has 2k9 in it — what are you some 8 year-old who makes Pillsbury Doughboy cookies and jerks off to that bullshit video game with Tim Lincecum on the cover--
Frederick0220
by Mets2k9 on Jun 5, 2025 1:00 PM EDT reply actions
Red Sox here
Brett Anderson is the Truth. Brett Anderson is divine presence. Brett Anderson is eternal life. Brett Anderson is within you. Brett Anderson is here. Brett Anderson is Now.
by Frederick0220 on Jun 5, 2025 1:01 PM EDT reply actions
Twins here
"We're gonna do this f*ucking thing over again cuz I just f*cked it up.....oh, we're live, I didn't know that" Bert Blyleven
by smoooooth on Jun 5, 2025 1:01 PM EDT reply actions
White Sox in
http://twitter.com/FutureSox
http://FutureSox.com
by The Big Hurt on Jun 5, 2025 1:01 PM EDT reply actions
All Marlins associates present and accounted for
That includes both executives and fans
by siddfynch on Jun 5, 2025 1:02 PM EDT reply actions
Something to say? Choose one of these options to log in.
On Facebook? Use Connect to join SB Nation. Share insights with fans and friends.- » Create a new SB Nation account
- » Already registered with SB Nation? Log in!
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
MLB -- FanHouse
- Steve Phillips' Hot Corner: Which Team Has Brightest Future?
- MLB Draft Analysis: Winners and Losers
- Resurgent Scott Rolen Leading Reds
- FanHouse TV: MLB Draft Winners, Losers
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
