Bluebird Banter Top 50 Prospects Countdown: #26-30
Hi everyone. Continuing our prospect countdown here's the last installment of the first half of the prospect countdown. Most recently, Tom took on #31-35. Woodman was stellar as usual with #36-40. Yours truly tacked #41-45. And Tom got things started with #46-50.
30. Dickie Thon, Jr., SS: I had Thon ranked slightly lower than Tom and Woodman but am still a big fan. The son of major-league infielder Dickie Thon, our version was drafted in the 5th round in 2010 out of his Puerto Rican high school and was signed after a small amount of drama as to whether or not he would sign with the Jays or honor his commitment to his hometown Rice University. Thon is 20 now and didn't come to professional baseball with the pedigree one might expect from the son of a long-time major leaguer. That said, Thon's tools are regarded highly and some scouts project him as having starting shortstop potential. Thon's defense is reasonably well-regarded and he has a strong arm, though he is not a flashy shortstop. I'd expect a fair number of errors in the lower minors as he continues to work on his release points and footwork, but the talent appears to be there. At the plate, Thon shows a good line drive swing and decent power potential, but needs to work quite a bit on recognizing pitches. The young shortstop's green showed in rookie ball, where he hit just .223/.369/.322, but he showed a nice approach and respectable power for a 19-year old. You have to like a shortstop prospect with the glove to stick at the position and good potential as a hitter, but Thon also has quite a while to go.
29. Chad Jenkins, RHP: I ranked Jenkins a bit higher than this, but I can't at all disagree with where he ended up. Jenkins was drafted 20th overall in the first round of the 2009 draft out of Kennesaw State University, which isn't as great a baseball school as you would think given the name. Jenkins didn't pitch until 2010, which he split across Lansing and Dunedin and pitched well, if unspectacularly. 2011 saw Jenkins progress to New Hampshire, where he pitched most of the season and had another perfectly capable season. One could imagine Jenkins having a decent major-league career -- However, with the number of high-ceiling Jays prospects who have entered the system since 2009, Jenkins just isn't a guy to salivate over. He hasn't put up big strikeout numbers in the minors but he has limited the walks. What Jenkins has really excelled at, though, is keeping the ball down. The big righty has a heavy sinker and used it to great effect, both in inducing groundballs and keeping the ball in the park (essentially two sides of the same skill coin). If Jenkins can't succeed as a starter, you could see his heavy sinker (which sits in the low 90s) being a formidable weapon against righties as a right-handed reliever in the Casey Janssen mold. That said, Jenkins also throughs a mid-90s fastball and a quality slider. Continuing to develop his changeup as a weapon against lefties and to generate swinging strikes is a big key for Jenkins this season, and it'll be something for him to work on as he likely begins his season in New Hampshire but by no means needs to stay there. At 24, he could make the majors as soon as this season.
28. John Stilson, RHP: Stilson, a big Texan righty, was drafted out of high school by the MInnesota Twins in the 19th round, but chose to attend the Agricultural and Mechanical College of Texas (better known as Texas A & M). The Twins loss was the Aggies' and the Jays' gain, as the Blue Jays snapped up Stilson in the 3rd round of last year's draft. Stilson's stuff is extremely highly regarded and he would've likely been a first-round pick, but injury concerns caused him to slip down to the third round. A & M has had issues with their use of young pitchers and it may be that Stilson was a casualty. Specifically, Stilson was diagnosed with a tear in his labrum, always a dangerous injury for a pitcher. Consultations with Dr. James Andrews suggested, however, that Stilson could avoid surgery with a successful rehab. Stilson was known for three pitches: a fastball that sits in the high 90s and routinely hit 99, a plus changeup that serves as a weapon against both righties and lefties, and a hard slider with tons of movement. The Jays should at least try Stilson out as a starter and see how that goes, but if he has trouble staying healthy the advice given to Dustin McGowan, who suffered a similar injury, might come into play with Stilson - that regular but one- or two-inning work out of the pen would be easier on his arm than throwing 100+ pitches every five days. We'll just have to see, but in the meantime it's hard not to get excited about Stilson. When your fallback option is a shutdown closer, that's not a bad thing.
27. David Cooper, 1B: Cooper, a first-round pick back in 2008, was drafted out of UC Berkeley. David had an up-and-down career in the minors but improved greatly in the second half of 2010 and seemed to break out in 2011 with a monster year taking advantage of hitter-friendly Pacific Coast League (.364/.439/.535). Cooper was called up at the end of April and spent about two weeks with the team, not really enough time to judge much of anything. He returned to the minors where he continued to hit until he earned a September callup. Coop's (yes, I'm a Twin Peaks fan), September numbers were solid - .289/.325/.526, though he did benefit from a .357 BABIP (I guess he felt lucky, punk - wow, these are just writing themselves). Cooper doesn't seem like a future star, but he does have potential as a hitter as he enters his age 25 season. He is limited defensively so it'll be interesting to see how the lefty is used by the Jays in 2012.
26. Roberto Osuna, RHP: The 16-year old nephew of former major-league reliever Antonio Osuna was a bit of a coup for the Jays. Osuna actually managed the impressive feat of pitching successfully in the Mexican League at age 15. The Mexican league is generally regarded as being closer for pitchers to the high-minors than the low-minors, populated with former major-leaguers and hitter-friendly due to high elevation of most of the stadia. Osuna is only 16 but it's already clear that he is built much like his uncle - stocky and strong. Osuna can already hit 94 with his fastball and at 16 with inconsistent mechanics there's room to improve on that. It goes without saying that Osuna has a long way to go, but he already has an impressive resume and plenty of time to refine his mechanics. If he can continue to progress and mind his conditioning, the sky will be the limit for the young hurler.
Well, there you go. Two perfectly competent high-minors types close to the majors, and three young guys to get very excited over.
See you soon with our first foray into the top 25!
102 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Not trying to be a jerk...
But I thought the story with Dustin was that the lack of preparation and the rushed warmups required in the bullpen were actually bad for his shoulder and that regular intervals where he can get into a routine, starting every 5 or 6 days, was better?
EIther way, I think Stilson was a great pick. If he can fully recover, he should have a very good MLB career. Ceiling is very high.
Depends on the mechanics and arm action of the pitcher. If a lot of stress is being put on the elbow/shoulder, then yes throwing 95 mph pitches could lead to injuries. Good mechanics and arm action should reduce the chance of injury, even at those velocities.
"We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question that divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct."
- Niels Bohr
Sorry, unauthorized hotlinking of copyrighted material not permitted.
Thon
Hes maybe the most intriguing prospect to watch this season. He had a blood disorder so he wasn’t completely healthy entering the year, hopefully hes better conditioned this year because he started out hot and then really cooled off the last 17 games. His onbase numbers were already great at .369 so im optimistic.
Chad Jenkins
If he stays as a starter, I could see him potentially becoming a Jake Westbrook type of pitcher. A back-of-the-rotation workhorse with a pitch repertoire of a sinker, slider, a developing changeup, and a four-seamer (possibly with more velocity than Westbrook, too). Developing that changeup could be very important in Jenkins’ development, as he had some trouble getting lefties out last year (2011 splits: 21.2% K%, 4.7% UBB% v. RHB; 11.9% K%, 7.1% UBB% v. LHB). However, it’s good to see him cut down his weight.
"We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question that divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct."
- Niels Bohr
Sorry, unauthorized hotlinking of copyrighted material not permitted.
I have faith that he'll turn a change up corner
If there’s one thing the Jays system has been able to do, it’s develop the change up (Romero, Marcum, Cecil, Alvarez, Nicolino, etc.). He’ll probably never make it a plus pitch but I have faith he can get it to average.
by T_Mizz on Feb 18, 2012 12:27 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
To be fair
Nicolino’s changeup was his best pitch when drafted, so I’m not sure how much the Jays can claim credit for it.
Yeah you're right
But the emphasis on the change up is still there.
by T_Mizz on Feb 18, 2012 4:32 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Interesting
I did not realize his splits were that big at all. Excellent point, the change-up would be critical with the reverse splits, especially since sliders are much less effective to opposite handed batters.
I think there’s more good news here too – even if he doesn’t develop the change, he should be a decent two pitch reliever, even if it’s mostly as a ROOGY.
Disagree
The problem is the splits – if they prevent him from starting, you don’t want him facing a bunch of lefties as a long man. You’d want to maximize effectiveness by avoiding having him face lefties for the most part mostly as a ROOGY (if he went to the pen, it’s also possible that going max effort could mitigate the splits, though again, that’s pitching in short all-out bursts, not as a long man)
oh right that's what I meant
but he might not have to be a “ROOGY” per se, but he’ll definitely be a “righty specialist”
My first thought on reading this list
Was that everyone of these guys were too low. And then you remember how crazy stacked this system is. It’s almost miracluous comparing to 2 years ago.
The depth in this system is unbelievable. Not just the top 10, not just the top 20, but up and down the affiliates, top to bottom in the orgaization. I’m a glass half empty guy by nature, but the future is bright when you have a system like this.
Chad Jenkins would be a top 10 prospects in some systems (definitely in the White Sox system). That’s nuts!
"We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question that divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct."
- Niels Bohr
Sorry, unauthorized hotlinking of copyrighted material not permitted.
Even when you look at Cooper with his draft position and his numbers in AAA (granted, PCL, but still)...
He might not be top 10 in other systems, but he’d pop up close to there in a a few.
by allcanadian34 on Feb 18, 2012 1:57 PM EST up reply actions
Indeed
I wouldn’t be surprised if Cooper was a top 10 prospect in some systems.
"We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question that divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct."
- Niels Bohr
Sorry, unauthorized hotlinking of copyrighted material not permitted.
My God, it's full of Stars

"We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question that divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct."
- Niels Bohr
Sorry, unauthorized hotlinking of copyrighted material not permitted.
by Frag on Feb 18, 2012 4:33 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I have a nickname for Dickie Thon
Tuna
Man who has four balls cannot walk
by Beer Leaguer on Feb 18, 2012 2:08 PM EST via Android app reply actions 1 recs
Here's a question
Since he has already pitched all the way up at AA in the mexican league, where does Roberto Osuna start this season? Will the Jays be more aggressive with his placement given how he’s already pitched so high? Or will they stick him in the GCL like Cardona last season?
by T_Mizz on Feb 18, 2012 2:21 PM EST via mobile reply actions
The Mexican League is not AA (or AAA) quality
MiLB classifies it as along with the PCL and IL, but the level of play is not AAA (or AA, or anwhere close for that matter). Also, he didn’t pitch particularliy well (and of course, he was only 16 – I’m not suggesting that should be held against him, just merely the fact that he pitched in the league doesn’t tell us a lot).
My guess is he definitely starts in complex ball, he’s only 16 so you want to work on mechanics, etc. Maybe he gets promoted to short season at some point.
Also
Like Hugo pointed out, it plays like hugh minors for pitchers, so I’m not concerned with his stats.
I’m not saying we should start him in AA, but maybe after extended spring training and some GCL, maybe he could be ready for Bluefield.
by T_Mizz on Feb 18, 2012 3:03 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
I'll go further
Osuna has enough physical maturity and stuff that if the Jays feel he can handle it after extended ST, he could be assigned to Lansing or even Dunedin. He’d be ridiculously young for the leagues, but he’s already done that. I think it all comes down to how advanced the Jays think he is once they take a good long look at him.
I don't think it's about physical maturity nor stuff
from what I’ve heard, his arm action and mechanics are raw. he doesn’t repeat his delivery well, inconsistent velo (hand in hand) and these are things that are presumably very important to the Jays and to Osuna – solidifying his mechanics now should make his progression quicker. I could potentially see Lansing if he blows the Jays away, but Dunedin would be pretty much unprecedented
If Osuna plays a single game in Dunedin next year
I’d be thrilled!
"We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question that divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct."
- Niels Bohr
Sorry, unauthorized hotlinking of copyrighted material not permitted.
That would be amazing
But I think it’s ambitious. All I want to see is the trio of talented latinos pitching and working their way up the ladder together: Osuna, Cardona, and Labourt. Just like the trio of Syndergaard, Sanchez, and Nicolino will probably stick together as they go.
by T_Mizz on Feb 18, 2012 4:41 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Exactly
Cardona might make it to Lansing towards the end of the year – last I heard (over at Batters Box) there were no plans to start in full season ball.
As benk said, Osuna has some issues that they’ll want to address sooner, which is why they’ll keep him at the complex longer rather than shorter. I’d be surprised to see him in even short season ball this year, and I’d bet a lot against him pitching in Lansing much less Dunedin.
My thought is he’s so young and raw why bother trying to rush him through the system.
He’ll go to extended create a repeatable arm motion for him, teach him to disguise his pitches (IIRC from when he signed he had a huge tell for his changeup) and then depending on how he does in extended either GCL if he hasn’t gotten his new motion down, Bluefield if his stuff hasn’t translated but the motion is correct, or best case scenario Vancouver.
Kadri Fanboy since 2006
Didn't we go over this when he was first signed?
I thought I remember someone (Callis or Law?) Saying that although it’s classified as AAA, the mexican league should be considered AA? Maybe it was high A, but I could swear it was AA.
by T_Mizz on Feb 18, 2012 3:00 PM EST via mobile reply actions
I wasn't around then
So I don’t know about that. I certainly can’t recall ever having heard that, but that doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. I’d be very surprised to hear that though. I mean, the NBP is basically considered high minors type, and the Mexican League is far less developed than that.
I think Klaw made an interesting point the other day – the lower the overall quality league, the larger the spread between the talent at the top and bottom end. So while the Mexican League would have some good.decent players, there’s also a lot of not very talented guys too.
How healthy is Stilson?
I recall someone (Marc Hulet?) mention Stilson and Dyson did not look very good at instructs. Anyone hear of any updates?
Speaking of prospects
Albert Lyu @thinkbluecrew
Blue Jays fans will want to know this. Tyler Beede’s debut with Vandy? 4.1IP, 9H, 9R, 5ER, 1BB, 2K, 1HBP.
solid start!
+1 is only good if you actually rec the post
by Bowling_Guy25 on Feb 18, 2012 6:52 PM EST up reply actions
so do the forty somethings in my classes
but seriously if it were me it’d prob be a tough choice… ah hell I’d take the money cuz I’m a greedy bastard
It's not even a choice between college or money.
It’s the choice between guaranteed money now and college later
or
college now and chance of money later.
How this is a difficult choice, I do not know.
well I know from when I was looking at colleges
that they’re all advertising that you’ll be making friendships that you’ll have for the rest of your life. Don’t see how you wouldnt do the same on your team but then again college as a 30 or 40 something would be more strictly school than as an 18-20 something where academics aren’t the only thing going on
not singling out any of you in particular
I just don’t like how it’s implied in the tweet that Jays fans have a grudge on Beede
His 2011 wRC+ is 26
Actually, the guy who posted it doesn't think that fans should have a grudge.
Albert Lyu @thinkbluecrew
Oh come on, Blue Jays fans. Wanting to see Beede not succeed isn’t honorable. It was his FIRST college start vs. a stacked Stanford lineup.
His stats may seem bad but Stanford is (apparently) really, really good.
He doesn't think that Jays fans should have a grudge
but he implies that they do
His 2011 wRC+ is 26
If anything
I think people just don’t want to see the Jays having made an error in hindsight, ie, be “proved wrong”. It’s a logical fallacy, but very emotionally compelling.
It’s getting pretty ridiculous. I didn’t really care that he rejected the offer, as I was quite happy with the other picks the Jays signed (esp. Norris, who I thought was a better prospect prior to the draft).
"We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question that divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct."
- Niels Bohr
Sorry, unauthorized hotlinking of copyrighted material not permitted.
Don't get me wrong, I completely agree
I mean, the result was not optimal, but the process was 100% correct. Value the talent, determine the max you’d be willing to pay for that talent, and hold the line. And process>results. I’m just saying that the casual fan looks at the result and goes off that and thinks greedy Beede, so I understand the propensity for an emotional reaction.
Maybe the fact that his surname rhymes with ‘greedy’ might have something to do with it, too. lol
"We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question that divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct."
- Niels Bohr
Sorry, unauthorized hotlinking of copyrighted material not permitted.
Keith Law thought Beede was the better prospect
Beede told teams not to draft him. The Jays gambled and lost. Beede did nothing wrong.
Beede told teams not to draft him.
That was purely a bargaining ploy to drive his price up, so did Norris (though more accurately he just named his price – $3.8 million and said pay me, which is more honest)
The Jays gambled and lost.
They lost nothing, they have the exact same pick this year.
Beede did nothing wrong.
This is true. I think he likely cost himself a lot of money (or at the least least exposed himself to a lot of risk for very little upside), but he absolutely had the right to make the decision he did.
Very little upside
monetarily. No one but Beede knows how much value he places on going to college.
I play in a band too.
www.chasingmercury.ca
I don't understand your point
I said very clearly I was talking about money, the upside in the brackets was referring back to that.
As for the value he places on college, thats exactly why I said he had the right to make that decision. It’s not the decision I’d have made, but it wasn’t my decision and I’m certainly not going to judge some else’s choices.
Bargaining ploy?
A lot of players do tell teams not to draft them as a bargaining ploy. He turned down $2.5M (?) which kind of proves that there was at least some truth to that.
by JaysSaskatchewan on Feb 19, 2012 10:22 AM EST up reply actions
He turned down $2.5M because he wanted $3.5M
The implication was that he told teams not to sign him because he had no intention of signing. Which isn’t the case – he had a price at which he was willing to sign. The letter was to scare off team from drafting him who wouldn;t be willing to meet his price so that he’d be drafted by one would might. And apparently, the Jays would have, but for medical issues (according to Keith Law). So it was purely a negotiating/bargaining ploy.
He probably didn’t care too much how it turned out though. He placed a LOT of value on going to school.
by JaysSaskatchewan on Feb 19, 2012 12:47 PM EST up reply actions
I don't know how you make that inference
I mean, obviously having a full scholarship to Vandy to fall back on is a great option, but I think the preference would have been to go pro at his price.
I mean, the Beede family clearly cared enough to have a big draft gathering (Youtube video), and Beede and family sure looked excited enough about being selected – if you had essentially no interest in going pro becuase going to college was so important, then this kind of gathering.reaction makes no sense.
not to nitpick, but, technically,
the jays lost a little bit of leverage on who they pick next year. also the whole strength of the draft class thing. though, given how much variance there is in a pick in the draft, it’s probably just as likely that whoever they pick will end up being better than beede anyway
"Look at me! I'm Tomokazu Ohka of the Montreal Expos!"
Yes
And the word exact was overkill in hindsight, because it’s actually 1 spot lower.
Though, it’s worth noting (and this formally happened afterward, so it wasn’t necessary known at the time, though the front offices may have had a head’s up) that the new CBA changes the compensation for unsigned draftees so that if you don’t sign the draftee, and you get another pick and don;t sign that guy, you get a third crack at it. And the Beede comp pick is grandfathered in this new regime, so the Jays really didn’t lose any leverage, since they can get the pick in 2013 if something goes wrong.
Wow, didn't know they get an extra chance
it’s funny; something like that seems insignificant but actually provides a real incentive to make “reach” picks
"Look at me! I'm Tomokazu Ohka of the Montreal Expos!"
Beede wanted more than he was worth.
Almost everyone at the time thought 3.8 mill was a ridiculous amount. He wanted more money, which unless he does really well the next three years, he’s not going to get under the new draft system.
This is not true
His baseball worth is what he can produce on the field. He wanted more than the consensus view on his expected future production, but that doesn;t make the consensus right. He took a big monetary risk, one I wouldn’t have taken, but it doesn’t mean he’s not worth what he wanted.
Also, fwiw, Keith Law says it came down to medicals – they disagreed on the health of his shoulder (the implication being, without that disagreement, the Jays would have signed him). Now, to the extent that potential shoulder problems would reduce his future worth, it’s entirely with the above paragraph. But again, it’s possible the Jays were wrong about the health of his shoulder. Only time will tell.
But it's impossible to know what his baseball worth is going to be.
So the consensus view, or AA’s estimation of his worth was what was going to determine what he was going to be paid. 3.8 million is the equivalent of a top 5-7 pick and afaik no one said Beede was that good.
The shoulder thing is news to me though, hadn’t heard that before.
The consensus means nothing to his ultimate worth
It comes down to what someone is willing to bet his worth is, in this case, as you note, AA. But if he doesn’t think he’s being fairly paid for his future worth, he has the right to decline the deal, and essentially bet on himself.
As for the purely monetary calculation, I agree with your analysis. But, you have t remember that at the time, it was no slam dunk there would be slotting – it was a possibility, but not a certainty, so there’s some hinsight bias there.
Keith Law also said
The Jays weren’t really happy with the results of his physical in a chat, he said that had a lot to do with the impasse over dollars.
Well yeah
If he becomes the next Strasburg, then we’ll be left wondering what if. Like James Paxton, he’s a great prospect now, so it makes you think how great it would have been if he signed with the Jays. But, AA had his price and didn’t go over it, so it wasn’t a mistake.
by T_Mizz on Feb 18, 2012 9:18 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Like James Paxton, he’s a great prospect now, so it makes you think how great it would have been if he signed with the Jays.
Even then, the Jays used the compensation pick they got for not signing Paxton by drafting Syndergaard, a pretty good pitching prospect himself (though, not as good as Paxton right now).
"We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question that divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct."
- Niels Bohr
Sorry, unauthorized hotlinking of copyrighted material not permitted.
And part of the freed up money
Was reallocated to going overslot on Drew Hutchison, who they otherwise weren’t going to sign.
Indeed
So, one great pitching prospect for two good pitching prospects. Looks like a good deal so far.
"We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question that divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct."
- Niels Bohr
Sorry, unauthorized hotlinking of copyrighted material not permitted.
That's a nice story
But in ‘09, the Jays spent under $5 million on the draft and were 18th in spending. They also didn’t sign 2nd rounder Eliopolous and 3rd rounder Barrett. There is no reason the Jays couldn’t have signed Paxton and used the savings from the other 2 to sign Hutch. As for Syndergaard, they most likely could have gotten him anyway as he wasn’t high on some draft boards and the Jays had another pick 4 spots after the one they used on him.
There is no reason the Jays couldn’t have signed Paxton and used the savings from the other 2 to sign Hutch.
In theory, sure. They could have spent more on the draft. But this is about actual facts. If the Jays had signed Paxton, they would not have signed Hutch. Doesn’t mean that would have been the right decision, but that was the reality.
As for Syndergaard, even if your hypothesis is correct (and we know no other team would have snagged him, which we defintiely don’t), it still means there’s someone else they wouldn’t have got. Would it have been Nicolino? Wojo? Griffin? Sweeney? Who knows, but again, that kind of second guessing is inconsistent with what actually happens.
You say "this is about actual facts"
Then in the next sentence you say “If the Jays had signed Paxton, they would not have signed Hutch”. That is not a fact. They MAY not have signed Hutch, or they MAY have signed him. We’ll never know . That is a fact.
Sugar-coating JPR’s cheaping out on the ’09 draft is revisionist history. That may not be a fact, but no one will convince me otherwise.
According to Bob Elliott
That’s exactly what happened – here’s the link.
When the Jays could not agree on a deal with Paxton’s agent…The Jays didn’t put Paxton’s allotted bonus money into their pockets or open up an RRSP. They went over slot to sign Hutchison, a 15th-rounder, for $400,000
I’m not sugarcoating JPR’s 09 draft. I think they shuld have spent more – and it’s absolutely shameful that they didn’t sign Paxton due to a difference of less than $100K – I think it was closer to 50K. But, the fact is, it worked out for the Jays – they signed Hutch and used the next year’s pick to sign Syndergaard. Doesn’t mean it was right, because of the time it won’t work out at all, but in this case the bad process didn’t prevent an okay result.
BTW
If you doubt Elliott, that is entirely consistent with the facts…he signed on the last night (presumably after negotiations with Paxton broke down for good), at which point he had already moved into his dorm at the college he was planning on attending, since he told the Jays exactly what it would take to sign him and they weren;t initally willing to meet the price.
What you say is true, but...
negotiations were ongoing not just with Paxton, but Eliopoulos and Barrett as well.
What if (a) Paxton did not sign, but the other 2 did or (b) Paxton had signed, but the other 2 did not. Would the Jays have given Hutch his $400K bonus under scenario (a) but not (b) because it was only the Paxton monies being used, even though both scenarios would have resulted in substantial savings?
The fact in this situation is that the Jays saved a whack of money by not signing 3 of their top 4 ’09 picks and used a small portion of that pool of savings to give Hutch his bonus. Exactly whose bonus money was used for the Hutch signing is conjecture. And even though Elliott wrote it was Paxton money he was only honestly reporting the spin provided him by the Jays FO.
As I understand it, the Eliopolous and Barrett negotiations were never that close the way the Pxton ones were. And basically, once it became clear the Jays weren’t going to get those two, they went out and tripled slot to give Marisnick $1 million.
Look, I’m not defending the 2009 draft negotiation startegy. They should have budgeted more, and it was a fiasco. But keep in mind, it essentially represented a massive change from what the Jays did for the previous 7 years, and there’s a learning curve. The good thing they did was to pick a bunch of signability guys, so that if one didn’t sign, they could reallocate. They ended up with Marisnick, Hutch and Jenkins. Most teams would be happy to have that as thier top 3. And they got the picks back the next year. Paxton definitely should have been signed, the gap they couldn’t agree over was just stupid. But in hindsight, Eliopolous hadbusted since turning dow the $0.5 million, and Barrett is cnsidered a fringey last first round supplemental pick, but most consider him a reliever which means his value is not that high.
FWIW, the Jays did a similar thing in 2011 with Norris and Beede – they were insurance against each other (Comer in the mix too). Norris was first round talent who slid, and if the Beede and Norris selections had been reversed the only difference would be getting a worse pick back next year. Similarly, Marisnick was considered late first round talent who slid on signability, and Hutch was way higher on pure talent. So you provide options, essentially buying insurance, and you live with not signing some guys (under the old CBA)
Barrett is cnsidered a fringey last first round supplemental pick, but most consider him a reliever which means his value is not that high.
FWIW Baseball America put up their Top 100 draft prospects about a week ago and has Barrett at #19, a bit higher than supplemental.
As to the value of relievers, the Jays gave Stilson, a reliever with a torn labrum, $500K bonus last year.
I typoed
That should have read fringey late first round or supplemental round pick. Most draft board I’ve seen don;t have Barrett as high as that.
The Jays think Stilson can possibly start – probably won’t but no real harm seeing. And of course, relievers still have value, I just mean they’re much more fungible than guys who have a legit chance of being a starter. Again, I’m not saying the 2009 process was perfect – it would have been better had they signed Barrett than not, wikth perfect hindsight. Put you also have to put a value on the talent and hold your ground and be preared to walk away. It’s just that AA’s process a lot than JPR’s when it comes to the draft
Keith Law on Stilson
“given how violent his delivery”
“his delivery still screams bullpen and the majority of teams view him that way.”
“As a reliever, he could be a Craig Kimbrel-type with lots of missed bats and some dicey command, but I wouldn’t bet on him remaining healthy and effective as a starter.”
As far as Barrett, I’ve seen about 10 recent mocks. All have in in the 1st round, a couple as high as 14th, a couple as low as 27-28, all the others in the 18-22 range.
http://dcprosportsreport.com/MLBMocks.htm
Also
The Jays (or anyone else) could have had Paxton in the top 131 picks of 2010.
by JaysSaskatchewan on Feb 19, 2012 12:50 PM EST up reply actions
Paxton would have to allow the Jays to draft him, no?
"Look at me! I'm Tomokazu Ohka of the Montreal Expos!"
wonder if he was sour on them for not coming to terms
though, even if he was, maybe he wouldn’t have held it against a different GM
"Look at me! I'm Tomokazu Ohka of the Montreal Expos!"
Don't know
I think it’s worth noting that him and Seattle had trouble coming to terms too – he didn’t actually sign until around this time last year.
But if I were him, I’d be pretty ticked considerig if ultimately came down to something like $100K – which is really peanuts in the grand scheme (though on around $800 some odd K, about 10-12%)
Since Paxton was playing in an independent league, they had until May of the next year to come to an agreement. Thus, plenty of time to negotiate.
"We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question that divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct."
- Niels Bohr
Sorry, unauthorized hotlinking of copyrighted material not permitted.
Yes I know
The point was, they had trouble getting a deal done – Seattle would have loved to have him signed sooner.
Nov 2010 article
Jack Z interview Jan 2011March 2011 article on signing
Does the same apply to Eliopoulos?
Can the Jays still sign him if they want?
Different GM but,
Beeston was still there. Maybe once around dealing with Boras was enough for him.
I thought he would be more sour about Beeston
IIRC, he publicly stated that Boras helped Paxton during the negotiations, which led to the NCAA suspending him for an entire season.
"We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question that divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct."
- Niels Bohr
Sorry, unauthorized hotlinking of copyrighted material not permitted.

by 






















