Signing 2 FA Pitchers and its affect on the Draft

[Stradling]

Hey smart guys, we know that if we were to sign Cole we lose our 2nd round pick as well as $500k in International Signing Bonus money.  I think I read that if we sign a second guy that received a qualifying offer we would then lose our 3rd round pick as well, however I don’t think International money would take another hit.  I can only assume that if you lose your 2nd and 3rd round pick you also lose the Dollar slot value of both of those picks.  Obviously this is the year to do it, but how would that affect Eppler’s draft strategy with us having the 10th pick?  Can Eppler even consider drafting a guy that might be a bit of a tough sign when he won’t have the ability to really go over slot to sign him?  When you have a 1st and a 2nd round pick you can play with the numbers a bit to go over slot and under slot on guys you like.  With less funds available it seems as though the draft strategy would definitely change a bit.  Just curious what your thoughts are on this.  Once again this isn’t about whether or not they should because they absolutely should but simply what it would do with the #10 pick.  

I’d also add that because of a loss of picks and international dollars this could impact whether or not they would trade pieces to get that 2nd or 3rd arm this off season.  

[vladdy#27]

In 2019 we had a bonus pool of 7,608,700, without the 2nd and 3rd round slot money that number would have went down to 5,664,100. Slot money for our first round pick was 3,885,800. So that would have left us with 1,778,300 for rounds 4-10 or to go over slot on our 1st rounder. If they lose their 2nd/3rd they could/should still go after the guy they like at #10 overall and draft college seniors in order to go over slot if needed.

[Docwaukee]

48 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Hey smart guys, we know that if we were to sign Cole we lose our 2nd round pick as well as $500k in International Signing Bonus money.  I think I read that if we sign a second guy that received a qualifying offer we would then lose our 3rd round pick as well, however I don’t think International money would take another hit.  I can only assume that if you lose your 2nd and 3rd round pick you also lose the Dollar slot value of both of those picks.  Obviously this is the year to do it, but how would that affect Eppler’s draft strategy with us having the 10th pick?  Can Eppler even consider drafting a guy that might be a bit of a tough sign when he won’t have the ability to really go over slot to sign him?  When you have a 1st and a 2nd round pick you can play with the numbers a bit to go over slot and under slot on guys you like.  With less funds available it seems as though the draft strategy would definitely change a bit.  Just curious what your thoughts are on this.  Once again this isn’t about whether or not they should because they absolutely should but simply what it would do with the #10 pick.  

I’d also add that because of a loss of picks and international dollars this could impact whether or not they would trade pieces to get that 2nd or 3rd arm this off season.  

Adell signed for slot.  Adams went over by 500k which could actually be made up from rounds 4-10

It's been pretty variable when they go over slot on those picks in rounds 2-4 so this year they likely don't go way over on a 4th rounder unless they go under early.  

if they make a trade for a pitcher, I doubt they'd sign two players with a qual offer.  I really do think the loss of those picks will play into their thought process of who they sign.  

 

[Glen]

You're bringing me down, @Stradling

[Jeff Fletcher]

You do lose the slot value of those picks but since you also don’t have the picks I don’t think it makes a ton of difference. It reduces your flexibility a little. 
 

Also, you are correct that you don’t lose another $500K from the international pool when you sign a second guy. 

[Dtwncbad]

Deleted post.  Misunderstood the context.

 

Edited November 15, 2019 by Dtwncbad

[floplag]

1 minute ago, Dtwncbad said:

Come on guys.  I get being worried about this in signing a Moustakas in his first year of free agency or Keuchel, but this is a truly elite player in his prime.

The odds of the lost draft pick being better than Cole or being able to help the team soon enough to matter in this Trout era are so minuscule, worrying about this is barely worth the time I just spent typing this post.

 

To be fair i think most are more concerned about the second singing, which most think should also come from that pool, than they are Cole.
Is Wheeler for example worth the contract plus the lost of draft pick and money? 

[ScruffytheJanitor]

4 minutes ago, floplag said:

To be fair i think most are more concerned about the second singing, which most think should also come from that pool, than they are Cole.
Is Wheeler for example worth the contract plus the lost of draft pick and money? 

Whenever I think this, I remember that Dillon Peters, Matt Harvey, and Trevor Cahill started 35 games combined last year. I'd probably sell one of my children to avoid that again.

[Docwaukee]

9 minutes ago, floplag said:

To be fair i think most are more concerned about the second singing, which most think should also come from that pool, than they are Cole.
Is Wheeler for example worth the contract plus the lost of draft pick and money? 

I think wheeler is personally.   None of the other pitchers are imo.  

[eaterfan]

13 minutes ago, floplag said:

To be fair i think most are more concerned about the second singing, which most think should also come from that pool, than they are Cole.
Is Wheeler for example worth the contract plus the lost of draft pick and money? 

Pick 10 in round 3 of last year's draft had a slot value of about $678,000. It's not a small amount but it could go a decent way to improving the overall draft. The team is better off signing 2 QO players in one year than one each over two years. Plus, the contract will presumably be lower for a player with a QO than for an equal player without one. That money can be put back into the team. I'd imagine that's why Ordorizzi signed his QO. He thinks that despite being one year older he'll make more money without the QO hanging over his head.

 

7 minutes ago, ScruffytheJanitor said:

Whenever I think this, I remember that Dillon Peters, Matt Harvey, and Trevor Cahill started 35 games combined last year. I'd probably sell one of my children to avoid that again.

I'd rather have them than Eovaldi. Nothing is a sure thing. At least our pitchers are off the books and allow us options for this year.

[T.G.]

39 minutes ago, Glen said:

You're bringing me down, @Stradling

[floplag]

19 minutes ago, ScruffytheJanitor said:

Whenever I think this, I remember that Dillon Peters, Matt Harvey, and Trevor Cahill started 35 games combined last year. I'd probably sell one of my children to avoid that again.

We all would im sure but none of them fell under this heading so,

[floplag]

15 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

I think wheeler is personally.   None of the other pitchers are imo.  

I agree myself, some of what ive read on him in terms of spin rates and other stuff suggest he has a leg up on the others.  I would not go any lower on that list though with the QO attached but if i can get Cole and Wheeler, i worry about that another day. 

[Glen]

20 minutes ago, ScruffytheJanitor said:

Whenever I think this, I remember that Dillon Peters, Matt Harvey, and Trevor Cahill started 35 games combined last year. I'd probably sell one of my children to avoid that again.

You probably already know which child you'd sell. Speaking as a parent, of course. We're prepared for that eventuality, even if we won't admit it.

[Stradling]

33 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

Deleted post.  Misunderstood the context.

 

Yea I was afraid that would happen, which is why I said this is the year to do it. 

[Inside Pitch]

19 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

I think wheeler is personally.   None of the other pitchers are imo.  

Same, he's Cole-light.

[eaterfan]

1 hour ago, Dochalo said:

I think wheeler is personally.   None of the other pitchers are imo.  

Here's my question. Do you think whatever we get next year via FA would be significantly better than Ryu, MadBum, whatever mid tier pitcher we get this year?

Assuming we sign Cole or Strasburg we lose our 2nd round pick and $500k in international pool money. Now we sign a mid-tier pitcher and lose about $680k in draft money and our 3rd round pick (a little more than slot for pick 10 in the 3rd round last year).

Assume we sign Cole or Strasburg this year we lose our 2nd round pick and $500k in international pool money. That's the same as scenario one, but now we don't sign a mid-tier pitcher. We need to sign a FA pitcher again. This time we finish in about 10th place so we're picking 20th instead of 10th. We lose our 2nd round pick and slot money about $1,190,000 and another $500k in international money. Plus we've burned another year. 

You think whatever guys are available next year will be enough better than a MadBum type to make it worth an additional $510k in draft slot money, $500k in international money, moving down in the draft about 30 spots (once comp picks are assigned) and an additional year of contention?

The obvious downside with signing a guy this year is that it doesn't fix the hole in the rotation and you have to sign a guy next year, too. So this is a matter of risk vs. reward. I agree MadBum is more of a risk to not fix the rotation than Wheeler or maybe some guy next year, but if we're going to sign another mid-tier guy then it's a lot less risky to do it this year than next. 

The numbers I'm using are just slightly above the '19 draft slot values for the Blue Jay's 3rd round pick (10th in round 3) and the Braves/Mariners (Picks 19 and 20 in round 2 because I'm assuming the Angels finish around 10th overall next year if they only sign one good pitcher and are a little healthier.

[Second Base]

I'm hoping b the Angels can hold off on signing two QO players, unless these two players are Cole/Strasburg/Wheeler. The main reason is the compensation. Losing a second round pick means you're losing a Brandon Marsh/Griffin Canning/Jeremiah Jackson level prospect.

Canning was a top 50 prospect, Marsh is a top 50 prospect, and Jackson just broke the Pioneer League HR record, as a 19 year old middle infielder. Even if you make a less than great 2nd round pick, like Jahmai Jones, you're still getting an intriguing power-speed-athleticism 2B/OF that figured to play into a starting role at some point. Kyren Paris, it's too early to tell exactly what we have there, but the organization loves his mind and mannerisms, and thinks he's got a great degree of potential.

Even if you lose a 3rd rounder, the Angels landed Kochanowicz in the third round last year and he's quickly going to become the Angels top pitching prospect.

I'm not saying it isn't worth. It's worth it for the right player (Cole, Strasburg and Wheeler only). That's why I'm hoping they'll make a hard it's for Hyun Jin Ryu, Rich Hill and Michael Pineda as their 2nd (Ryu) or third SP (Hill and Pineda).

Just better for the long term health of the organization. Just keep building and strengthening the farm system while spending money to become a contender. That's how the Dodgers did it. 

[ettin]

6 hours ago, Stradling said:

Hey smart guys, we know that if we were to sign Cole we lose our 2nd round pick as well as $500k in International Signing Bonus money.  I think I read that if we sign a second guy that received a qualifying offer we would then lose our 3rd round pick as well, however I don’t think International money would take another hit.  I can only assume that if you lose your 2nd and 3rd round pick you also lose the Dollar slot value of both of those picks.  Obviously this is the year to do it, but how would that affect Eppler’s draft strategy with us having the 10th pick?  Can Eppler even consider drafting a guy that might be a bit of a tough sign when he won’t have the ability to really go over slot to sign him?  When you have a 1st and a 2nd round pick you can play with the numbers a bit to go over slot and under slot on guys you like.  With less funds available it seems as though the draft strategy would definitely change a bit.  Just curious what your thoughts are on this.  Once again this isn’t about whether or not they should because they absolutely should but simply what it would do with the #10 pick.  

I’d also add that because of a loss of picks and international dollars this could impact whether or not they would trade pieces to get that 2nd or 3rd arm this off season.  

I am not too sure it matters that much in the scheme of things. The Angels could actually use at least three of those players that didn't accept their QO's (arguably more than three even) so if money wasn't an object I'd "punt" the upcoming Rule IV Draft and sign, baby, sign!

However I think the Angels can sign Cole and trade for 1-2 other starters thus only giving up the 2nd round pick and the $500K which is a perfectly acceptable route too.

In answer to your question the draft money might tighten up slightly but I don't think it is enough to materially change the approach or sign-ability of a particular player the Angels want. In other words they would probably allocate the money needed to sign the #10 pick as that is the slot with the most probable return on investment in comparison to the later round picks, even if it means we have a couple of picks in the early-middle rounds not sign because we used the money elsewhere.

[ettin]

4 hours ago, Glen said:

You probably already know which child you'd sell. Speaking as a parent, of course. We're prepared for that eventuality, even if we won't admit it.

Particularly if you know you're not the father.

[ksangel]

5 hours ago, RBM said:

Yes.

4 years of Wheeler for a 3rd round pick and no loss of international pool funds.

Agree...rather have Wheeler than Jacob Pearson, Nonie Williams, Grayson Long or Chris Ellis, Angels 3rd round picks recently.

[tdawg87]

1 hour ago, Second Base said:

I'm hoping b the Angels can hold off on signing two QO players, unless these two players are Cole/Strasburg/Wheeler. The main reason is the compensation. Losing a second round pick means you're losing a Brandon Marsh/Griffin Canning/Jeremiah Jackson level prospect.

Canning was a top 50 prospect, Marsh is a top 50 prospect, and Jackson just broke the Pioneer League HR record, as a 19 year old middle infielder. Even if you make a less than great 2nd round pick, like Jahmai Jones, you're still getting an intriguing power-speed-athleticism 2B/OF that figured to play into a starting role at some point. Kyren Paris, it's too early to tell exactly what we have there, but the organization loves his mind and mannerisms, and thinks he's got a great degree of potential.

Even if you lose a 3rd rounder, the Angels landed Kochanowicz in the third round last year and he's quickly going to become the Angels top pitching prospect.

I'm not saying it isn't worth. It's worth it for the right player (Cole, Strasburg and Wheeler only). That's why I'm hoping they'll make a hard it's for Hyun Jin Ryu, Rich Hill and Michael Pineda as their 2nd (Ryu) or third SP (Hill and Pineda).

Just better for the long term health of the organization. Just keep building and strengthening the farm system while spending money to become a contender. That's how the Dodgers did it. 

I generally agree with everything you say here but man, I just cannot wrap my head around the Rich Hill love. I understand the quality/quantity argument but the guy has averaged just 93.2 IP since 2015. 

That's half a season of innings. So basically we'd need another starter to fill in the rest.

[failos]

5 hours ago, Dtwncbad said:

Deleted post.  Misunderstood the context.

 

 

[ten ocho recon scout]

7 hours ago, Stradling said:

Hey smart guys

 

[Second Base]

1 hour ago, tdawg87 said:

I generally agree with everything you say here but man, I just cannot wrap my head around the Rich Hill love. I understand the quality/quantity argument but the guy has averaged just 93.2 IP since 2015. 

That's half a season of innings. So basically we'd need another starter to fill in the rest.

The Rich Hill love stems from his cost and performance. He posted a 2.45 ERA with 11 k/9. Those are elite numbers, and he'd likely only cost 5 million on a one year contract.

And you're right, chances are he's only got 100 innings in him. But that figures to be 2/3 of the amount Shohei Ohtani will throw, while also receiving at least mid rotation starter performance. And it gives the Angels a few more months to assess the aliments Barria, Sandoval and Suarez make in order to determine who is and isn't ready for a promotion, and it provides the Angels with depth, and Hill could be used in long relief come playoffs. 

It just seems like a ton of potential payoff for a minimal investment.