High Ranked Prospects Undrafted or Late Rounds?

It happens.  My son has a friend that was just very committed to playing baseball at his dream school.  During the draft, my son was texting him.  He got a call offering to draft him in the 3rd round, he turned it down.  Got a call from another team offering to draft him in the 5th round, he turned it down.  He did wind up being drafted in the 38th round and obviously, didn't go.  I think teams that don't believe a prospect will sign, will pass and not take that chance.  They'd rather take someone else who they have a better chance of signing.

It happens every year.  In our rankings players are ranked based on projection, not where we actually think they will be drafted out of high school.  

We had Matt Harvey #3 in his high school class behind Rick Porcello and Jason Heyward. Ahead of Madison Bumgarner and Freddie Freeman. He went in the third round despite being an obvious first round talent.  Then he went first round out of North Carolina.

We had Buster Posey ranked very high out of high school, he went in the 50th round. Later he was first round out of college. There are many examples.

What is important is to realize who the first and second round picks are.  Nearly every year you will see that those players were ranked very highly.  Truth is there are more good players than there are early draft slots.

Then, of course, the rankings are not perfect.  Perfection never exists in scouting. So it is always possible a certain player was ranked too high or too low. But 9 out of 10 times when you see a high ranked player moving down the draft list it is because of Signability  concerns or makeup issues.

A kid that simply doesn't want to be drafted due to a dream school makes sense. Some of the other cases make me wonder.

I know of a highly ranked kid from this last year's draft that dropped because the week of the draft he let everyone know that he wanted to play football.  He was still drafted in the 13th round, but was projected as high as the 1st round.  

Sometimes teams get scared away by signing bonus ultimatums. I know a very good player who went from ultimatums to begging to be drafted and willingness to sign for a lot less than his ultimatum. He went undrafted. He went off to college, had a great college baseball experience and was signed for close to his ultimatum three years later.

Sounds like the draft is a pretty finicky business and a tough one to hang one's hat on unless you are one of the most elite of the elite. I hear a fair amount of players & parents speak about the draft with real certainty as it pertains to being drafted & where. Sounds like you might be setting yourself up for some real disappointment if you buy into the hype too much. Probably best to stay on neutral ground as far as pro or college is concerned.

Because of the new draft rules things have changed, significantly.  Teams  can get penalized for not signing their top picks. The whole idea for teams is about drafting players that are willing to sign, not just be drafted to put this on their resume.

Remember that the first 10 rounds are $$ slotted.

Going into the draft son had several teams interested in him ranging from supplemental 1st round to 3rd round. He made it clear he was going to school first...they were all like, "cool, see you in three years." A team is not going to waste a high round pick with something they know is not going to sign.

At Texas Scout Invitational event in Houston earlier in the year they pounded home one word...SIGNABILITY

Sign ability is huge! Guys get passed over all the time, because of sign ability.  I am a huge Braves fan, and I love Chipper Jones.  ThankfullY, Todd Van Poppel wasn't singable. 

TPM is right on the money.  A team loses the money slotted for a pick that doesn't sign (use it or lose it, as far as slot $$ as part of the bonus pool goes).  This has only heightened issues of "signability," which have always existed.  For instance, Buster Posey was PG's #32 ranked prospect (as a SS/pitcher!) in the Class of 2005, but as he was solidly committed to Florida State, he wasn't drafted until the 50th round that year.  Three years later he was a first-round pick.  Using that Class of 2005 as a gauge (because there are some familiar names drafted as HS players there), out of PG's Top 20, most of the HS players that signed were drafted in the 1st round (a few in the 2nd, a few in the 3rd, one in the 5th), including names like Justin Upton, Cameron Maybin and Andrew McCutcheon.  The ones that didn't usually stand out for being drafted later, sometimes much later (PG #7 Jordan Danks in the 7th round; PG # 18 David Adams in the 3rd; PG #19 Bradley Clark in the 19th; PG #4 Justin Bristow in the 22nd).

It's all about signability.  It always has been, but I think it is even more so now, under the new CBA.  If a team thinks they can get to a player's "number" by going a few hundred thousand dollars over slot, they might be able to "save" that money by drafting highly signable players in earlier rounds/slots, but they have to be more sure of that number and how solid it is than ever, because of the "use it or lose it" rule that applies to slot values as part of the total bonus pool in the first 10 rounds.  If they aren't sure, or don't think they can get close enough to a player's number by saving $$ on other picks, there isn't any chance that kid will be picked in the first 10 rounds no matter how good he is.

Second emphasis at Houston event was that there is no need for an agent. :-)

Used to be a team could draft a questionable sign later in the draft and still pay somewhat close to first round money. See Austin Jackson who was committed basketball player at GA Tech.

I don't care so much for the new system.  I think it hurts baseball in some ways.  It is harder to get the two sport athletes to choose baseball.  The money is not available to buy them out of the other sport without drafting them real early. At he same time, it might actually benefit some football stars because to get them you have to pick them early. Basically the long shot guys have been eliminated from the process.  The opportunity to buy them out is more limited.

There have been many who put a price tag out there of two million.  The club thinks the player is worth one million.  In the past the club could draft that player late and hope he accepts the one million or whatever they are willing to pay.  More strategy than gamble!  Often that technique has worked, but it is a lot harder now. Signability has become even more important than ever.

Lots of people in baseball wish the kids didn't have an agent/advisor. However, the truth is nearly every top prospect gets one or already has one. Just the way it is these days.

PG, at the risks of sounding stupid, could you clarify your last statement.  Why would an "agent/advisor" be a bad idea for a prospective draft pick.  I certainly do not understand the whole draft process, but it seems to me that would only benefit the "club".  As a parent, I would think that you would want, and probably even need, an advisor to help navigate the process.  Just trying to understand.

I think that what he meant was that the way the draft has changed (slot) there really isn't much room to negotiate (what agents help you do).   IMO it is a personal decision but keep in mind that this is a business and the truth is that you need someone to help you navigate your way through the system.

My son has an agent and paid him a nice commission when he signed and he has been worth every single penny. 

I agree with Edgarfan,  it's all about sign ability, always has been and always will be.

I know you all are talking about agents and such, but isn't it an NCAA violation for an amateur player to higher an agent?  My understanding was that if you hired an agent, you would lose your amateur eligibility and not be able to play in college.

If that is still true, it kind of stinks because you really do need someone to help you navigate through this, but you are essentially giving up your option of going to play in college once you hire an agent.

You cannot "hire" an agent unless you are a professional. The agent plays the role of advisor until the player signs a professional contract. That is not against NCAA rules.

So, as long as you don't sign an agreement or pay someone it's OK?

Injuries or they know for certain the kid is headed to college.

As long as you do not sign a contract until you become a professional using an agent as an advisor is ok.

My son has been approached by an "Advisor", but I have also been told that if you use an advisor to keep it on the down low.  The reason I was given is that college coaches may shy away from you thinking that you are more interested in going pro instead of college.  

younggun,

I was responding to something posted about an event run by scouts.  There are people in baseball that wish kids didn't have an agent/advisor.  I did not say whether or not I felt that way.  However, there are many involved with MLB that do feel that way. Probably why it was mentioned at an event run by scouts.

my personal opinion is having an advisor can be great or it can be the worst thing you do. It all depends on who the advisor is?  You have to understand that they are not all the same.  Good, bad, and extremely ugly.

Rynoattack,

College coaches don't really care if a player has an advisor.  Having an advisor doesn't mean the player is going pro.  In fact, many of the best advisors will recommend college first, if they think it is in the players best interest.

Also, college coaches are good scouts.  They have a great feel for who is likely to be an early draft pick and who is not.  Who they can get on campus and who they might lose to the draft. Having an advisor really doesn't matter one way or the other. Advisors can't make a player an early round pick.  Players make the advisor who has an early round pick.

I really don't know for sure, but I would bet nearly all of those first 50 picks had an advisor.  If not they were bombarded by agents after the draft.  It seems like pretty much all the top HS players have an advisor before the draft. Some have advisors before their junior year in HS.

A good advisor can help a player in his college decision as well as give good advice regarding the draft. A bad advisor doesn't even care about the educational part.  He just wants his cut of that signing bonus.

What good is an advisor if he is giving you bad advice? The best ones give advice based on what is best for the player.  They end up being successful agent/advisors in the end because of the way they operate.  I have never been against the system or the many very good honest advisors. I've always been against the snakes out there that would purposely give a player bad advice only to serve their own needs.

The good ones know exactly what I am talking about.  It's the old... It's OK to be wrong... It's not OK to be wrong on purpose!

As far as college coaches not liking agents, we met son's through his college coach (recommended)  before he ever set foot on campus.  Agent/advisor recommended son not go pro but go to college first, which he did and son and his agent (then advisor)  developed a relationship, based on trust, that developed into a strong friendship over the 3 years before he was drafted. Their relationship is now going onto 11/12 years since they first met.  

I agree with PG on everything stated, there are some agents that are very good at what they do and care more about what is best for the player and not their cut of the signing bonus.  You have to be careful, the agent/advisor should know and understand enough about the business to help the player make the best decision based on his particular circumstance, not about the free stuff he can get for him. 

My advice is that if you or your son are approached by an advisor the first question asked should be, "do you have any player on the 40 man roster". 

If he doesn't it means he cannot do business with MLB. Buyer Beware.