Unsigned Draft Picks and Problems with the Draft

The club didn’t lose a pick. They lost that player.

“If a team doesn't sign a first or second round pick, they will get to pick at the same slot plus one the following year. For example, if the team with the #5 pick does not sign that player, they would have the #6 pick the following year. The regular draft order would continue around those picks.”

Personally, I believe the pick should slide down the round as a penalty for failure to sign the player.

@PABaseball posted:

A high profile first round pick did not sign this year. I understand the issue. He didn't want his MRI done, the team that drafted him didn't like what they saw on their MRI. I have to imagine there is a better way to go about this so that the player isn't handcuffed to a team that doesn't want him.

I understand the club didn't like what they saw on their MRI, but why draft a guy who refused the MLBs predraft MRI? Isn't that the risk they take when they draft somebody in that position?

Should the MLB require all pertinent medical info and imaging to be done in order to be eligible for a draft slot? Hoping someone who knows more about the draft can shed some light on how this happens. Club loses a pick. Player loses out on millions. Hoping somebody can help me make sense of this.

You are assuming that you know all the details from what you have read and heard.

I agree, Mets should be penalized for not signing the player, not awarded.

@TPM posted:

You are assuming that you know all the details from what you have read and heard.

I agree, Mets should be penalized for not signing the player, not awarded.

Agree on not being awarded another pick next year, i disagree on the penalized...but this is like uncharted territory recently we are on similar pages!!

How will this be affected when they strike next year?

Good question, but I'll bet you a bottle of single malt that it's a lockout, not a strike.

@old_school posted:

Agree on not being awarded another pick next year, i disagree on the penalized...but this is like uncharted territory recently we are on similar pages!!

The question is how much from the initial offer of 6 million did Scott Boras come down?

Most of the 1st round picks signed below their slot value,  the Mets initial were willing to pay Rocker above said slot value because he was listed as a top 5 pick and he was technically a Covid Sophomore.

But did he slip because other teams saw his velocity drop and Boras tried to put lipstick on the proverbial pig.

Attached is the full draft with bonuses, slot value and differentials.

The Mets did not counter. They just walked away.

@PTWood posted:

The Mets did not counter. They just walked away.

Good stuff.

I found this interesting article

https://www.forbes.com/sites/m...-partially-to-blame/

Lots of stories circulating out there as to who is to blame, but the bottom line is who got hurt in this fiasco?

Not the Mets, not Scott Boras.

I find it all very sad for this young man who should have started his pro career weeks ago.

First observation is I hate the Mets, their colors, their chant, their airplane flyover field and everything about them....they can be -0-162 and i am happy.

if I understand the events properly Rocker refuses predraft medical exams, falls in draft but still get picked early due ridiculous amounts of talent, fails physical and the Mets walk away.

The rules in place negotiated by both parties in advance say they get another pick next year if they don't sign him...and there is a thought process that the Mets should be penalized and lose a pick and or acted unethically in some way? I don't get it, they took shot, by the rules and then pulled back to the fall back position. I would say this was logical, thought out and a good plan for the potential upside they stood to receive.

I am on board with the Mets losing their top pick and the entire 2022 draft if possible but i don't know why it makes any sense. I guess if you want to hate the rule fair enough but unfortunately i don't see where the Mets did anything wrong or unethical at all. Rocker gambled and lost for now, the Mets played it smart for the long game, Boras is a scumbag but he will take care of his client (for as long as he thinks there is a future meal ticket) ...seems like much to do about nothing to be honest.

This kind of ties in with the Players Union / MiLB story, nobody cares about you until you hold a Union card and vote.

@TPM posted:

Lots of stories circulating out there as to who is to blame, but the bottom line is who got hurt in this fiasco?

Not the Mets, not Scott Boras.

I find it all very sad for this young man who should have started his pro career weeks ago.

but his shoulder is hurt correct? An injury isnt a matter of fault but at the end of the day he isn't able to produce and his cost is higher then the risk of his healing according to his potential employer... If he had a the pre draft MRI and everyone knew the medicals before the draft then maybe you have a point.

I think it is reasonable to assume that Rocker and his advisors were well aware of how bad it was, they new damn well he was going to plummet in the draft, they he wasn't going accept lower round money. So they took a shot, they got picked high, they hoped to be able to land a big bonus prior to rehab and see what the future holds. It isn't a bad plan they just lost this round of betting.

As they say in Vegas 7 out, new money on the pass line...

How common is it for a pitcher to not submit to the pre draft MRI?  Sure seems like a red flag.

Boras says Mets reneged. Mets feel Boras misrepresented.

Boras missing a few bucks in the bank, Mets get another pick.

Rocker gets nothing. 

@K9 posted:

How common is it for a pitcher to not submit to the pre draft MRI?  Sure seems like a red flag.

The program is voluntary.  This is private and personal medical information, some might not want to give that out. They rely on their agent for best advice. 

100% TPM and old school. TPM on who got hurt the most in this whole thing and old school on the fact that in the collective bargaining agreement, the draft and minor league players are the ones who get screwed.

@TPM posted:

Boras says Mets reneged. Mets feel Boras misrepresented.

Boras missing a few bucks in the bank, Mets get another pick.

Rocker gets nothing.

agreed but Rocker is hurt, he knew it.

Rocker hired Boras who is known commodity and he knew exactly what he was hiring.

Boras took a shot to get the kid life changing money while being hurt and it didn't work. It was probably worthwhile and reasonable attempt. They were probably hoping to 75% or so of slot money which is still a lot more then where he may have fallen to if he allowed pre draft evaluations...I don't see any villain's here. It is just business, no different then some freshman being released from a scholarship.

Attempting to paint Rocker as some innocent bystander who is now not getting paid is just inaccurate IMO.

eliminate the draft.  Player should be able to shop his talents to the highest bidder.

Maybe we should blame St. Tim Corbin for running him out there the last how many starts with a bad wing...or maybe we just understand that sometimes there is nobody to blame for an injury.

This isn't the first time or the last that an injury is going to stop or at least delay a potentially amazing career. Assuming he gets healthy he will make plenty of money somewhere else.

The Red Sox drafted a kid at like 9 or 10 a couple years back, he was maybe the top pitcher prospect in the draft, hurt his shoulder soon after...he got lucky, the Sox didn't. It is just the other side of the coin. Maybe if Rocker had come out of HS so highly ranked he would have some of story like this.

"MLB Pipeline had Groome as its No. 1 prospect in the 2016 draft, suggesting the high school hurler had “everything to be a top-of-the-rotation left-handed starting pitcher.” He wound up slipping to the Red Sox at No. 12 overall, however, thanks in large to signability and makeup concerns.

There’s always risk associated with drafting high school pitchers, and Groome, who returned to Barnegat High School in New Jersey for his senior season after transferring to IMG Academy in Florida for his junior season, was a particularly precarious pick. Not only were there character questions surrounding Groome, who had been suspended for what was deemed an improper transfer and who had changed his commitment from Vanderbilt to Chipola College. There also were pre-draft reports linking Groome to the San Diego Padres, who owned the 24th and 25th picks.

Nevertheless, the Red Sox rolled the dice, for Groome’s upside at age 17 was too tantalizing to pass up. They reportedly awarded him a $3.65 million bonus, $457,000 above the value assigned to that slot in the draft.

You need to get over it. We don't need you to educate us on past players who were top prospects.

Also, stop challenging people opinions.

You might end up like OLD_SCHOOL.

"you need to get over it" says the retired lady living in Florida who is the number 1 poster on youth baseball ball web site...got it.

I blame them all.  Rocker who was hurt, I would believe anyone who watched him throw this year knows something was off.  He should have been honest about his medical, if he was not and I don't know for sure.  If you are well then you have no problem with MRI.  Boras did what he does and tried to get the most for his clients but in this case it backfired on him.  He is not hurting one bit.  Lost a little money but no big deal for him.  Mets if they drafted him and had a deal and reneged on the deal.  Many reports say the deal included a medical exam and MRI which Rocker refused to get.  I hope it works out for Kumar but I'm afraid he will never be the same.  He has to get fixed whatever is going on with him medically.  That is going to be hard to do without everyone knowing.  I'm not sure what he should/will do this year.  I'm not sure going back to Vandy will help him because he will have to throw a lot of innings again for them.  Not sure if overseas is the answer or just rehab.  That is why hopefully he has the medical guys and the baseball guys giving him advice.  Lots of stuff for a 21 year old to process.

@CollegebaseballInsights posted:

eliminate the draft.  Player should be able to shop his talents to the highest bidder.

Clearly this would be better for the players in the short term, but long term teams like the Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers and Mets would gobble up the best talent.  What happens to MLB competitive balance?  It worked barely when there were 16 teams but I don't see it surviving with 30 teams.

@old_school posted:

Maybe we should blame St. Tim Corbin for running him out there the last how many starts with a bad wing...or maybe we just understand that sometimes there is nobody to blame for an injury.

This isn't the first time or the last that an injury is going to stop or at least delay a potentially amazing career. Assuming he gets healthy he will make plenty of money somewhere else.

The Red Sox drafted a kid at like 9 or 10 a couple years back, he was maybe the top pitcher prospect in the draft, hurt his shoulder soon after...he got lucky, the Sox didn't. It is just the other side of the coin. Maybe if Rocker had come out of HS so highly ranked he would have some of story like this.

"MLB Pipeline had Groome as its No. 1 prospect in the 2016 draft, suggesting the high school hurler had “everything to be a top-of-the-rotation left-handed starting pitcher.” He wound up slipping to the Red Sox at No. 12 overall, however, thanks in large to signability and makeup concerns.

There’s always risk associated with drafting high school pitchers, and Groome, who returned to Barnegat High School in New Jersey for his senior season after transferring to IMG Academy in Florida for his junior season, was a particularly precarious pick. Not only were there character questions surrounding Groome, who had been suspended for what was deemed an improper transfer and who had changed his commitment from Vanderbilt to Chipola College. There also were pre-draft reports linking Groome to the San Diego Padres, who owned the 24th and 25th picks.

Nevertheless, the Red Sox rolled the dice, for Groome’s upside at age 17 was too tantalizing to pass up. They reportedly awarded him a $3.65 million bonus, $457,000 above the value assigned to that slot in the draft.

Groome has avoided any off-field issues since joining the Red Sox organization. Instead, injuries have held him back. Most notably, he missed the entire 2018 season after undergoing Tommy John surgery. He’s totaled just 66 innings in the minors and has yet to pitch above Single-A."

Red Sox Prospect Outlook: Where Jay Groome Stands In 2021 (nesn.com)

Five years later Groome is only up to High A. Minor leaguers are evaluated on far more stats. But Groome is 1-6 5.01. He has a K/IP ration of 1.25:1. But he doesn’t have enough control to average for than 4 1/3 innings per start. In the eyes of the Red Sox Nation Groome is a forgotten man. I hadn’t heard his name in over two years until this thread.

@Smitty28 posted:

Clearly this would be better for the players in the short term, but long term teams like the Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers and Mets would gobble up the best talent.  What happens to MLB competitive balance?  It worked barely when there were 16 teams but I don't see it surviving with 30 teams.

The big money teams still dominate with the draft.  The big money teams tend to be contenders from year to year. The other well run, lower budget teams teams can only hope to pop in and out of contention with younger players. These are players the lower budget team usually can’t afford to keep long term.

@RJM posted:

The big money teams still dominate with the draft.  The big money teams tend to be contenders from year to year. The other well run, lower budget teams teams can only hope to pop in and out of contention with younger players. These are players the lower budget team usually can’t afford to keep long term.

Sort of, but not completely.  Just since 2000 we've seen Diamond Backs, Marlins, White Sox, Astros, Cardinals, Rockies, Tampa Bay, Phillies, Rangers, Tigers, Royals, Indians, Cubs, Nationals in the World Series.  Some made it multiple times.

Look at the 2 decades before the draft... Yankees in the WS 15 times, Dodgers in the WS 10 times, along with a smattering of Cards, Giants, Indians, Reds, and Phillies.  

This was the problem that the draft attempted to solve, and it helped but free-agency has shifted a lot of strength back to big market teams.

@Smitty28 posted:

Sort of, but not completely.  Just since 2000 we've seen Diamond Backs, Marlins, White Sox, Astros, Cardinals, Rockies, Tampa Bay, Phillies, Rangers, Tigers, Royals, Indians, Cubs, Nationals in the World Series.  Some made it multiple times.

Look at the 2 decades before the draft... Yankees in the WS 15 times, Dodgers in the WS 10 times, along with a smattering of Cards, Giants, Indians, Reds, and Phillies.  

This was the problem that the draft attempted to solve, and it helped but free-agency has shifted a lot of strength back to big market teams.

Several of the organizations you mentioned are in the top ten metro areas. They don’t have an excuse for not maintaining a competitive level. The Red Sox aren’t in the top ten (11th). The Giants are right behind the Red Sox in metro area (12th).

Cubs - 3

White Sox - 3

Rangers -4

Astros -5

Nationals -6

Marlins -7

Phillies -8

D’Backs -10

The Cardinals have been historically one of the best run organizations in baseball. The Royals are a perfect example of an organization that pops in and out when young players peak before leaving.

The Reds haven’t won in 31 years. The Tigers haven’t won in 37 years. The Indians haven’t won 67 years.

The Rockies and Rays have never won a championship. They haven’t contended consistently in their history. The Rays were brutally bad for years.

If you look at metro population ranking it’s shoots a lot of holes in what the sports media refers to as small town teams. It’s just those teams are either poorly run or cheap.

There's a lot that goes into creating a winning organization, the draft is just one factor.  So is player development, coaching, trading, free-agent signing, etc.  But it seems pretty clear that the draft is a big reason that more teams are participating in the WS in recent years, which in my view is good for MLB and has been a big factor in revenue growth (which is good for players).

@TPM posted:

You are assuming that you know all the details from what you have read and heard.

I agree, Mets should be penalized for not signing the player, not awarded.

I don't know all the details and I don't have any inside information from either party. I can only work with the information made publicly available.

In any event, the question was mostly about medical information not being made available for every player to every team. The Mets gambled drafting a pitcher who chose not to submit imaging. Maybe another team was willing to take him at 11-30 that may have said it's worth the risk. But its complete BS that the Mets own this kid's rights for another year when I'm sure somebody else would have picked him up.

I understand the Mets not wanting to sign a player they didn't think was healthy, but why draft a player if his health is a question. In my opinion - Mets should be relieved of any obligation to sign, but the unsigned player should be allowed to sign with anybody else up to the slot value of the #10 pick (if the Mets can't reach an agreement). That should be the price to pay for the Met front office not doing their homework.

@PABaseball posted:

I don't know all the details and I don't have any inside information from either party. I can only work with the information made publicly available.

In any event, the question was mostly about medical information not being made available for every player to every team. The Mets gambled drafting a pitcher who chose not to submit imaging. Maybe another team was willing to take him at 11-30 that may have said it's worth the risk. But its complete BS that the Mets own this kid's rights for another year when I'm sure somebody else would have picked him up.

I understand the Mets not wanting to sign a player they didn't think was healthy, but why draft a player if his health is a question. In my opinion - Mets should be relieved of any obligation to sign, but the unsigned player should be allowed to sign with anybody else up to the slot value of the #10 pick (if the Mets can't reach an agreement). That should be the price to pay for the Met front office not doing their homework.

I think you're on a right track, but with that set up the Mets would have been taking a much bigger risk with the pick and almost certainly would not have drafted him in the 1st round.

@PABaseball posted:

I don't know all the details and I don't have any inside information from either party. I can only work with the information made publicly available.

In any event, the question was mostly about medical information not being made available for every player to every team. The Mets gambled drafting a pitcher who chose not to submit imaging. Maybe another team was willing to take him at 11-30 that may have said it's worth the risk. But its complete BS that the Mets own this kid's rights for another year when I'm sure somebody else would have picked him up.

I understand the Mets not wanting to sign a player they didn't think was healthy, but why draft a player if his health is a question. In my opinion - Mets should be relieved of any obligation to sign, but the unsigned player should be allowed to sign with anybody else up to the slot value of the #10 pick (if the Mets can't reach an agreement). That should be the price to pay for the Met front office not doing their homework.

Agree with most of your last paragraph.  That's why I believe he was the one who lost the most.

JMO

@old_school posted:

He wound up slipping to the Red Sox at No. 12 overall, however, thanks in large to signability and makeup concerns.

Not only were there character questions surrounding Groome, who had been suspended for what was deemed an improper transfer and who had changed his commitment from Vanderbilt to Chipola College.

I really hate the media. I'm not sure what's worse, publicly writing about a topic they know very little about or having a great deal of talent and knowledge and grossly exaggerating/reporting inaccurately.

He was suspended due to a transfer, same way every other transfer has to sit out for a month to start the season, he did too. His commitment change was solely for draft leverage. If he wasn't going to be a top 15 pick, he wasn't going to waste 3 years at Vanderbilt when he would be a top 10 pick the following year out of Chipola.

It's written properly, but it's done to discredit him. If there were makeup concerns for him out of high school, they existed for reasons other than this. Citing these reasons as makeup issues is just inaccurate.

That being said, I can't remember an injured first round non signee working out recently. So my issue isn't with the Mets not signing 10, it has more to do with them drafting him in the first place.

@JCG posted:

I think you're on a right track, but with that set up the Mets would have been taking a much bigger risk with the pick and almost certainly would not have drafted him in the 1st round.

Well that's really my point. The Mets should not have drafted him at all if they weren't comfortable drafting a player with an imperfect MRI. I don't expect the Mets to sign a pitcher with structural damage. The Astros passed on Aiken and they've been the best team in baseball for the past 5-6 years because of it (Bregman was comp pick the following year).

It's very possible and probably highly likely that the Mets told him if he falls to 10 they'll sign him for 6 million. So if the Rockies call at 8 and offer slot of 5.1 odds are him and Boras say no.

The other issue is that if the pre draft MRI is voluntary - why don't the Mets have to make a qualifying offer?

I have not thought  this though as completely as you but I think for the first couple of rounds at least, slot money should be be non-negotiable. The whole business of squeezing college seniors and using the money to pay down-draft HS players is BS.  OTOH, what you describe Boras and Kumar possibly doing is BS too.

Here’s the Brady Aiken story as it occurred. The Astros were heavily criticized. They whiffed on Aiken, Jacoby Nix and Mac Marshall.

https://grantland.com/the-tria...number-1-draft-pick/

Brady Aiken

http://www.thebaseballcube.com...rofile.asp?ID=187774

Jacoby Nix

http://www.thebaseballcube.com...rofile.asp?ID=188137

Mac Marshall

http://www.thebaseballcube.com...rofile.asp?ID=188097

The Astros fell on the faces but landed on their feet scoring a perfect ten by missing out.

@RJM posted:

Here’s the Brady Aiken story as it occurred. The Astros were heavily criticized. They whiffed on Aiken, Jacoby Nix and Mac Marshall.

https://grantland.com/the-tria...number-1-draft-pick/

Brady Aiken

http://www.thebaseballcube.com...rofile.asp?ID=187774

Jacoby Nix

http://www.thebaseballcube.com...rofile.asp?ID=188137

Mac Marshall

http://www.thebaseballcube.com...rofile.asp?ID=188097

The Astros fell on the faces but landed on their feet scoring a perfect ten by missing out.

RJM senior posters on this web sire have made it clear that no history lessons on past draft picks are needed. Do not waste our time with facts…

@Smitty28 posted:

Clearly this would be better for the players in the short term, but long term teams like the Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers and Mets would gobble up the best talent.  What happens to MLB competitive balance?  It worked barely when there were 16 teams but I don't see it surviving with 30 teams.

Business is never balanced, Free market principles.

@Smitty28 posted:

Clearly this would be better for the players in the short term, but long term teams like the Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers and Mets would gobble up the best talent.  What happens to MLB competitive balance?  It worked barely when there were 16 teams but I don't see it surviving with 30 teams.

@smitty28  you can still keep a salary cap and penalize those teams that go over the cap.

@RJM posted:

Here’s the Brady Aiken story as it occurred. The Astros were heavily criticized. They whiffed on Aiken, Jacoby Nix and Mac Marshall.

https://grantland.com/the-tria...number-1-draft-pick/

Brady Aiken

http://www.thebaseballcube.com...rofile.asp?ID=187774

Jacoby Nix

http://www.thebaseballcube.com...rofile.asp?ID=188137

Mac Marshall

http://www.thebaseballcube.com...rofile.asp?ID=188097

The Astros fell on the faces but landed on their feet scoring a perfect ten by missing out.

I think Bregman and Correa worked out pretty well.  Better than most other teams' draft picks.

@CollegebaseballInsights posted:

@smitty28  you can still keep a salary cap and penalize those teams that go over the cap.

Sure, there are probably lots of ways to solve the problem of competitive balance.  The union, however, includes only MLB players.  They generally are very protective of their turf (see MiLB player salaries...).