Draft or College?

Very good post younggun.  

Going through rehab in proball has been compared to ground hog day.  It's not a fun experience,  but being at school with your teammates, coaches fall football, getting your degree while rehabbing is far better than the other.

My friends son just made the 40 man roster. He was a fifth year senior at Ohio State, drafting bonus was 10K. He is closer to 30 than 20. Not a prospect per say out of HS.  So anything is possible.  When all is said and done he has a degree.   There are a lot of stories like his, you guys just don't know about it.

Brett Cecil who just signed with the Cardinals was a 38th round pick senior out of Maryland  Mine was a second round pick out of Clemson the same year who is a coach now while Cecil will pick up 30.5M in 4 years.  He will never need his degree.   You just never know how it will turn out but for most, attending college will be the best option, but never turn down the money and a chance to be a millionaire out of HS.

Another player who was the first pick for Texas 5 years ago. Lewis Brinson, signed out of HS also traded during his time to the Brewers, that's tough but a quicker route to the 25 man roster, so it took him 4 years.  He gave up his scholarship to FL under Kevin O'Sullivan.  He would have gone to school if not a first round pick.  

Just a footnote as a parent whose son has been on both trips, there is no other experience than playing for a big college program. Nothing is even closeasier, maybe your first call up to the show. For most, that ends very quickly, if you guys think trying to stay on a college roster is tough, the 25 man roster is brutal.

The team you will sign with should also determine your decision. Signing with a smaller market team trying to make their youth their priority than a larger market team with older free agents who will block you is better choice.   That's is a lot more important than most realize.  

Either way, it's gonna happen that scouts come knocking at your door, but it's probably not going to happen that the GM comes to the door, that's the big difference as to your decision. Those fortunate to have a good agent to help thru the process also determines your value.  

For now, regardless stick with recruiting and school,  GPA, and getting to play on the best exposure travel  team that wants you for exposure. All of this analysis stuff is just stuff.

JMO

In the 2014 draft there was player A  ... a lefty that was committed to Vandy and he took the 1.2 million ... now he's at advanced A ball.

In the same class there is player B  he's a RHP that passed on the draft and went to Vandy.... some say this player could be the 1 player drafted in the 2017 draft.

This speaks to what TPM was saying.  

I feel once the 2018 draft is getting closer and the entire draft class is assessed, players will know more clearly what direction to take.   While 2018 has two more seasons of HS ball he could go up in the order , he could go down. 

I was told the more important thing to think about is the maturity level .   Its fun to speculate .....  can he handle the minors or does he need  TC for 3 years ?  I think that  might just give him a better shot in the minors , being older , having an education .

bacdorslider posted:

In the 2014 draft there was player A  ... a lefty that was committed to Vandy and he took the 1.2 million ... now he's at advanced A ball.

In the same class there is player B  he's a RHP that passed on the draft and went to Vandy.... some say this player could be the 1 player drafted in the 2017 draft.

This speaks to what TPM was saying.  

I feel once the 2018 draft is getting closer and the entire draft class is assessed, players will know more clearly what direction to take.   While 2018 has two more seasons of HS ball he could go up in the order , he could go down. 

I was told the more important thing to think about is the maturity level .   Its fun to speculate .....  can he handle the minors or does he need  TC for 3 years ?  I think that  might just give him a better shot in the minors , being older , having an education .

 

It takes most players drafted out of HS 4 or 5 years to reach MLB, there are exceptions.

A drafted player very high out of college can be in MLB within a year.  

This all depends on what the team has invested in a player.

And of course the rules are different for pitchers vs position players.

TPM posted:

bacdorslider posted:

In the 2014 draft there was player A  ... a lefty that was committed to Vandy and he took the 1.2 million ... now he's at advanced A ball.

In the same class there is player B  he's a RHP that passed on the draft and went to Vandy.... some say this player could be the 1 player drafted in the 2017 draft.

This speaks to what TPM was saying.  

I feel once the 2018 draft is getting closer and the entire draft class is assessed, players will know more clearly what direction to take.   While 2018 has two more seasons of HS ball he could go up in the order , he could go down. 

I was told the more important thing to think about is the maturity level .   Its fun to speculate .....  can he handle the minors or does he need  TC for 3 years ?  I think that  might just give him a better shot in the minors , being older , having an education .

 

It takes most players drafted out of HS 4 or 5 years to reach MLB, there are exceptions.

A drafted player very high out of college can be in MLB within a year.  

This all depends on what the team has invested in a player.

And of course the rules are different for pitchers vs position players.

These two post are where me and my wife's heads are at in regards to our son. Sure we'd like that pay day, who wouldn't, but what's another three years.

The only way I see my son going the MLB route is if he is a high round player signing for seven figures. That way I know they are going to have a vested interested in his development.

But right now my son isn't a high round draft. And when you look at the resources the power five school he signed with are going to bring to the table to develop him as a player...it's a no brainer.

SomeBaseballDad posted:

TPM posted:

bacdorslider posted:

In the 2014 draft there was player A  ... a lefty that was committed to Vandy and he took the 1.2 million ... now he's at advanced A ball.

In the same class there is player B  he's a RHP that passed on the draft and went to Vandy.... some say this player could be the 1 player drafted in the 2017 draft.

This speaks to what TPM was saying.  

I feel once the 2018 draft is getting closer and the entire draft class is assessed, players will know more clearly what direction to take.   While 2018 has two more seasons of HS ball he could go up in the order , he could go down. 

I was told the more important thing to think about is the maturity level .   Its fun to speculate .....  can he handle the minors or does he need  TC for 3 years ?  I think that  might just give him a better shot in the minors , being older , having an education .

 

It takes most players drafted out of HS 4 or 5 years to reach MLB, there are exceptions.

A drafted player very high out of college can be in MLB within a year.  

This all depends on what the team has invested in a player.

And of course the rules are different for pitchers vs position players.

These two post are where me and my wife's heads are at in regards to our son. Sure we'd like that pay day, who wouldn't, but what's another three years.

The only way I see my son going the MLB route is if he is a high round player signing for seven figures. That way I know they are going to have a vested interested in his development.

But right now my son isn't a high round draft. And when you look at the resources the power five school he signed with are going to bring to the table to develop him as a player...it's a no brainer.

But be realistic.  What was provided as a comparison wasn't equal.

"Most" HS players take 4-5 years to make MLB (if at all)

"A" player drafted very high out of college can make MLB in one year.

You can't take the extreme and make a valid comparison to an average and make a logical conclusion. 

Also, to your point, "what's three years"?  Except in those extreme cases, most Jr. draftees and ALL Sr. draftees out of college will be offered significantly less than HS players of the same draft selection range.  The college players don't have nearly the leverage as the HS players in those instances.

Actually had this very conversation with a scout yesterday.  In a perfect world, kid foregoes draft and goes to college.  Three years in college where kid improves each year and gets more mature and educated.  Kid gets drafted higher and for more money after Jr. year.  Kid goes on to make MLB roster in 2-3 years.  Now, what's the likelihood of that actually transpiring.  Read TPM's and MANY others posting history.  Didn't happen for hers or MAJORITY of others.  There are simply too many variables and individual decision points that each player needs to make for himself.  That's the qualitative analysis portion that JoeMktg alluded to in his OP.  The OP was to address the quantitative portion and does a good job of doing so.

As for the signability discussion, that is becoming one of the single most stressed topics in our experience.  We are learning that scouts can draft, sign and completely whiff on a high draft selection and still keep their jobs (of course, if this becomes an annual trend . . . ), however, what they CANNOT do is draft and not sign one of their top round picks and keep their jobs.  Those picks are simply WAY too valuable to a club.  They will quickly take a slightly lesser player ahead of another if the question of signability of one over the other is more likely.  We have been told this repeatedly by multiple teams as well as college coaches and agent/advisors.

Not sure of your point. As far as son, he was a 6th, 7th round out of HS, chose to go to college and improved to 2nd round, 71st pick, this was when the draft was much different than today. And yes signability is huge, no one ever said it wasnt.

Bottom line, would I advise someone to sign and become a millionaire, yes, would I advise someone offered 150k out of HS to sign, NO way.

I am not really sure about this discussion anyway, in all the years I have been here, there have been only a few who did sign for significant amount, some did make a 25 man rosters, others did not, while a lot of Websters sons signed out of college and on the 25 man roster.

http://usatodayhss.com/2015/ma...draft-high-schoolers

I think this is a very good article regarding the draft.  

I think a reason why the number of drafted HS Players decreased is basically mostly two things:

1) college Players are quicker to the Majors. kris bryant and kyle schwarber basically spend 1.5 seasons in the minors. Teams value contribution now over what they get in 3-4 years.

2) the 6 year window: HS Players often have more ceiling and better Overall careers but college Players often are better the first 2-3 years they Play in the Majors because they are more mature. so the HS Player might become better but many Teams don't care that much how good the Player is after he becomes expensive. many college Players already start to decline after the 6 years are over but then the Teams already have extracted most of their value.

if I was a GM I would concentrate more on college Players too unless it is really a hall of fame Kind of Talent (harper, correa), especially because of the bad track record of minor league coaches improving Players. the upside is with the HS Players but today it is more about getting cheap and quick contributions with a high floor.

I think the signability Plays a role too but there is a pretty quick Equilibrium with that.

I think there is also a misconception that a kid can game the market and tilt his opportunities to clubs of his choice. At the same time, there is no question that some clubs, IMO, stand head and shoulders ahead of other clubs on MILB coaching, development, and philosophy.  The problem is, until the draft contract expires (and then becomes a annual contract if a kid is signed), the kid goes where he is told.

Let's be clear: whether a first round "can't miss" pick (all those draftees are "can't miss") or the last pick, a player is meat and has no control over a club trading him to that club he most wanted to avoid. Turner, Musgrove, Jackson. All first rounders who were traded very early in their MILB careers.

"Loyalty" is a term thrown about which has great meaning and is used in copious amounts by club personnel  - until the club shakes up its scouting, development, coaching, front office and cleans house, or the HS player is found to have "a bad attitude" (as determined by adults who understand the ups and downs of the game while the kid has no clue due to his experience), or has a two year slump.  

Comfort is somehow found in a word which has no real meaning to proball. I have seen clubs demonstrate loyalty when guys are released on their first day on the field rehabbing from TJ; I have seen clubs trade first day draft picks who dropped their signing number just to go with that club. While the scout who advocated on a kids behalf may be loyal, the decision makers aren't - or if they are and the kid is a bust, those people are fired.

My point is, that a decision to sign a six year contract based upon the drafting team is a factor i would not even consider.  Simply put, the kid has no control - whether he plays well or is a seeming bust - over where his physical being will be located during the season.  So, basing a decision on whether to sign based upon the soft seductive voice of the club's representative telling the young player of the fantastic development which will be his over the coming years is, well, MALARKEY.

Goosegg posted:

I think there is also a misconception that a kid can game the market and tilt his opportunities to clubs of his choice. At the same time, there is no question that some clubs, IMO, stand head and shoulders ahead of other clubs on MILB coaching, development, and philosophy.  The problem is, until the draft contract expires (and then becomes a annual contract if a kid is signed), the kid goes where he is told.

Let's be clear: whether a first round "can't miss" pick (all those draftees are "can't miss") or the last pick, a player is meat and has no control over a club trading him to that club he most wanted to avoid. Turner, Musgrove, Jackson. All first rounders who were traded very early in their MILB careers.

"Loyalty" is a term thrown about which has great meaning and is used in copious amounts by club personnel  - until the club shakes up its scouting, development, coaching, front office and cleans house, or the HS player is found to have "a bad attitude" (as determined by adults who understand the ups and downs of the game while the kid has no clue due to his experience), or has a two year slump.  

Comfort is somehow found in a word which has no real meaning to proball. I have seen clubs demonstrate loyalty when guys are released on their first day on the field rehabbing from TJ; I have seen clubs trade first day draft picks who dropped their signing number just to go with that club. While the scout who advocated on a kids behalf may be loyal, the decision makers aren't - or if they are and the kid is a bust, those people are fired.

My point is, that a decision to sign a six year contract based upon the drafting team is a factor i would not even consider.  Simply put, the kid has no control - whether he plays well or is a seeming bust - over where his physical being will be located during the season.  So, basing a decision on whether to sign based upon the soft seductive voice of the club's representative telling the young player of the fantastic development which will be his over the coming years is, well, MALARKEY.

I haven't heard "loyalty," and I wonder if that's a term used mostly by fans. "Team" and "organizational philosophy" is what I've heard. 

Sports psychology is becoming the new Moneyball, attributes that are transferable to any other club via trade.

Over the years MLB teams follow the leader.  Whatever wins championships  becomes the standard in scouting. So if we take the Cubs and look at how their team was constructed, here is what you have.  I only put those that played in the playoffs and where they signed out of. Apologize if I missed a player.

Of the 10 pitchers listed - 3 signed out of 4 year colleges, 1 signed out of JC,  3 signed out of USA HS, 3 signed as young FAs

Of the 3 catchers - 1 signed out of a 4 year college, 2 signed as young FAs

Of the 4 infielders - 1 signed out of a 4 year college, 3 signed out of USA HS

Of the 6 outfielders - 2 signed out of a 4 year college, 3 signed out of USA HS, and 1 signed as a young FA

Of the 23 players - total - 7 signed out of a 4 year college, 1 signed out of a Junior College,  6 signed as young Free Agents, 9 signed out of USA high school. 15 of the 23 did not go to college.  Without the DH, and with their number one pitcher throwing, the Cubs started 2 college guys and 6 USA HS  draft picks.

just something to think about

Pitchers

Arrieta - College
Chapman - HS FA
Hendricks- College
Lester - HS
Lackey - Juco
Montgomery - HS
Edwards - HS
Strop - HS FA
Grimm - College
Rondon - HS FA

Catchers

Contreras - HS FA
Ross - College
Montero - HS FA

Infield

Baez - HS
Bryant - College
Russell - HS
Rizzo - HS

Outfield
Zobrist - College
Heyward - HS
Fowler - HS
Almora - HS
Soler - HS FA
Schwarber - College

Thanks PGSTAFF for the research.  I wonder if those percentages are representative of the Cubs organizationally.  In other words, 7 of 23 signed out of 4 year college, that's roughly 30%.  I wonder if around 30% of the Cubs minor league system players are 4 year college guys. 

I got a little confused on the "young FA's" - are these international players who sidestepped the draft?  Can anyone briefly outline what the owners are looking for in the new CBA as it relates to foreign players and how their "rights" compare to a US kids who essentially cannot escape the draft and the limitations it imposes.

2017LHPscrewball posted:

I got a little confused on the "young FA's" - are these international players who sidestepped the draft?  Can anyone briefly outline what the owners are looking for in the new CBA as it relates to foreign players and how their "rights" compare to a US kids who essentially cannot escape the draft and the limitations it imposes.

If you are looking for fairness on the draft issues with regards to CBA negotiation, you are looking at it wrong. International draft issue for the owners is about reducing expenses, for the MLBPA it is about increasing salaries for it's members.

And it is just a chip in the overall negotiation.

TPM posted:

http://usatodayhss.com/2015/ma...draft-high-schoolers

I think this is a very good article regarding the draft.  

Interesting that when the article was written, the percentage of high school kids drafted in the 1st round was on a rapid decline. For the past 2 years, it jumped back up to about 50%.

MidAtlanticDad posted:

TPM posted:

http://usatodayhss.com/2015/ma...draft-high-schoolers

I think this is a very good article regarding the draft.  

Interesting that when the article was written, the percentage of high school kids drafted in the 1st round was on a rapid decline. For the past 2 years, it jumped back up to about 50%.

Agree, but it was more or less about pros vs cons.

As far as the Cubs, Theo did a great job of assembling an unusually talented team.  High draft picks as well as talented international players.

Actually the Cubs were constructed mostly through trades and free agents.

Their entire pitching staff came from other organizations.  All three of their catchers came from other organizations.  They also got Fowler, Heyward, Zobrist, Russell, Rizzo and coglhan rom other organizations.  The only three that they actually drafted, of those that were contributors, was Bryant, Baez and Schwarber.  Not exactly a home grown team, but one built through trades and free agent signings.  Of course, the three they did draft all are young and played a big part in winning the Championship. They also drafted Almora in the first Rd. 

Theo proved once again that he is among the best at building a championship type club.

The reason I mentioned "young" free agents is because all of them were very young when they signed from Venezuela and the Dominican Republic.  Those players can sign at age 16.  The Cubs originally signed only one of them (Soler)

Theo is famous for drafting college players. 

top 5 round picks since 2013

2013: all 5 college players

2014: 3/5 college players

2015:3/5 college players 

2016: top 5 all college players (actually even all top15) 

I think his strategy is take the higher floor with college guys and trade for high upside players from other organizations so that they take the risk of them busting and Theo picks the cherrys that have made it through the lower Levels of the minors.

If HS Players bust they very often bust early in A ball or even lower so it makes sense to trade for HS Players who have succeeded in A ball to minimize risk. with college Players the risk of busting in A ball is lower but there is a higher risk someone does well in A ball due to polish/maturity and then run out of raw Talent at the higher Levels of the Majors.

If I had a HS prospect doing well in A ball and a college prospect doing well at the same Level I'm more exited about the HS guy.

PGStaff posted:

Over the years MLB teams follow the leader.  Whatever wins championships  becomes the standard in scouting. So if we take the Cubs and look at how their team was constructed, here is what you have.  I only put those that played in the playoffs and where they signed out of. Apologize if I missed a player.

Of the 10 pitchers listed - 3 signed out of 4 year colleges, 1 signed out of JC,  3 signed out of USA HS, 3 signed as young FAs

Of the 3 catchers - 1 signed out of a 4 year college, 2 signed as young FAs

Of the 4 infielders - 1 signed out of a 4 year college, 3 signed out of USA HS

Of the 6 outfielders - 2 signed out of a 4 year college, 3 signed out of USA HS, and 1 signed as a young FA

Of the 23 players - total - 7 signed out of a 4 year college, 1 signed out of a Junior College,  6 signed as young Free Agents, 9 signed out of USA high school. 15 of the 23 did not go to college.  Without the DH, and with their number one pitcher throwing, the Cubs started 2 college guys and 6 USA HS  draft picks.

just something to think about

Pitchers

Arrieta - College
Chapman - HS FA
Hendricks- College
Lester - HS
Lackey - Juco
Montgomery - HS
Edwards - HS
Strop - HS FA
Grimm - College
Rondon - HS FA

Catchers

Contreras - HS FA
Ross - College
Montero - HS FA

Infield

Baez - HS
Bryant - College
Russell - HS
Rizzo - HS

Outfield
Zobrist - College
Heyward - HS
Fowler - HS
Almora - HS
Soler - HS FA
Schwarber - College

You missed my man, Travis Wood - HS. Well, FA to the Cubs.

Thanks, mad that I missed him. He is one of our favorites.

Is signability really an issue with the very top talents?

I mean commitment or not, who is going to turn down 2 millions if it gets offered to them? I would assume that signability is more an issue for mid second round or lower Kind of Talent with a strong commitment.

If you are the 60th best Talent in the draft, commited to stanford and someone offers you 500K then signability will be an issue but if you are a top20 Overall type of Talent out of HS your stock is not going to get much higher but you could get injured and lose everything.

so which top HS Talent is going to wait and risk everything just to get from 2M to maybe 3M if everything goes perfectly?

A very wise man named Jerry Ford once gave advice. If its about the money, go to college, if you dont care about what your bonus will be, then sign. 

Dominik85 posted:

Is signability really an issue with the very top talents?

I mean commitment or not, who is going to turn down 2 millions if it gets offered to them? I would assume that signability is more an issue for mid second round or lower Kind of Talent with a strong commitment.

If you are the 60th best Talent in the draft, commited to stanford and someone offers you 500K then signability will be an issue but if you are a top20 Overall type of Talent out of HS your stock is not going to get much higher but you could get injured and lose everything.

so which top HS Talent is going to wait and risk everything just to get from 2M to maybe 3M if everything goes perfectly?

It can be an issue.  Tyler Beede would be a good example.

I would think Brady Aiken and Jason Groome are both good examples of top talent players having signability issues (at amounts exceeding $2 million) based on their initial expectations.  In Groome's case, I assume he was passed on by several teams for strategic reasons and once someone picked him, the assigned slot value was below his "minimum".  I understand the Aiken situation is different, but his decision to not sign clearly demonstrates the path folks might take if they think they are getting short-changed.  For all but the very top, $2 million will likely get a kid to sign, but there will be a few where, given some bad luck in the draft (draft order versus needs, etc.) they can go JUCO for one year any maybe earn back from $2 million back to $3-4 million.  Won't see it too often, but it can happen.