* The Phillies signed Julian Sampson to an above slot deal ($390,000)
* The Phillies signed Jiwan James to an above slot deal ($150,000)
* The Phillies signed Jacob Diekman to an above slot deal (unknown)
* The Phillies signed Kyle Slate and Cedric Johnson, two prep prospects. Slate was given an $80,000 dollar bonus, plus $80,000 towards a college education should he later pursue that. For comparison’s sake, Tyler Mach got $95,000 in an under slot deal in the 4th round, while Tyson Brummett got $25,000 as a 7th round pick. No bonus amount has been published that I’ve seen on Johnson.
* The Phillies did not sign Brandon Workman, and will receive a compensation pick between the 3rd and 4th round of next year’s draft.
So, how’d they do? I’m planning a more in depth piece looking at the other NL East teams and how they did in the draft, as well as comparing the Phillies to a few other teams on both ends of the spectrum. But, weigh in, share your thoughts on this draft. Just remember to be civil.
Phuture Phillies 
i’m a believer that, in terms of stuff, most pitchers peak from ages 18-24. i’m also a believer that pitchers have a significantly higher rate of injury and attrition before the age of 23. i think of these as trends, not rules.
until about 3 weeks ago, i felt that the best plan for drafting pitchers was to get them out of college because they have 3 more years of development time, and they are closer to passing the injury nexus.
but after reading this book about the braves scouting and drafting habits, i think they have the right idea.
the brave way is to draft and sign a very high percentage of high school pitchers, and to nurse them through their age 18-21 years, so that they can age with minimal injury risk.
their philosophy hasn’t worked as well as it used to, since the braves budget has been slashed in the last 5 years. if you look at their draft this year, they only signed 22 players, but i still feel that it is an extremely sound philosophy.
LikeLike
You didn’t really answer the question, you talked about the Braves and general pitching philosophies.
I think you’re on target with the age for injuries and needing to regulate workloads prior to age 22/23, but I disagree that many pitchers peak at age 24.
LikeLike
Clearly with the teenagers it is still too early but to me the keys are: ? Can Mattair become a major league prospect at third and will D’Arnaud become the real deal behind the plate after driving in 7 runs as a DH yesterday. Both positions are areas of need in the system . Looks like Savery and Diekman are the only pitching prospects so far. If these four eventually make an impact at CBP then it will have been a successful draft.
LikeLike
yeah, i guess i failed to answer the question point blank, but if you extrapolate a little bit, and realize that the phillies signed 2 HS pitchers, you can see my position a little better. i was never high on this draft, and while i’ve come around on savery, and realize the opportunities that mach might create, i still don’t have a good feeling, at all, about this draft.
and stuff wise, i really do feel that pitchers peak very early. how many HS pitchers are drafted with 92, 94 MPH fastballs, but by the time they get to AA, they end up sitting in the high 80s. whether that’s because they gain too much muscle mass, or because they lose flexibility, i don’t know, but it is a general feeling that i have.
LikeLike
I believe another prospect that is doing well from this draft is Chance Chapman and Zack Sterner. Sterner is at Lakewood already and has been great as a reliever.
LikeLike
I think the phils did well.. Savery was a nice pick.. Mattair is holding his own (batting .255), especially when I saw that 1st round high school 3B Kevin Ahrens is hitting .212 for the gcl blue jays.. D’arnaud also is right about where you would expect him to be. I think Mach and Rizzotti both have been above-average so far in the offensive department.
And the pitching is certainly yet to be determined but looking okay so far. Chapman has been very good, granted he is old for the level, but at least he has been very good. Diekman looks good.. James has had good outings and bad outings but the potential is certainly there. And guys like Brummett, Kissock and Harris have shown the ability to shut people down, though they have been inconsistent.
We need to see what Sampson will be, and Johnson and even if Savery can dominate the rest of the way. I know i’m leaving out some guys, but from what I’ve seen I like the draft, a lot of potential.
LikeLike
No opinion about the draft – at all – I do not profess to know enough to comment. Once guys get some A level ball under their belt, then I feel qualified to say something.
As for pitchers peaking by age 23 or 24, I completely disagree. While pitchers may decline after this age if they have been injured or have pitched too many innings (with an emphasis on long outings – I cringe every time I hear about a high school pitcher who is really durable and throws a lot of complete games), absent those factors, I think most pitchers reach their peak probably between 27-29. The key, I think (and so does Bill James), is limiting injury and overuse before the age of 25 – if you can do that, there is a much greater likelihood that the pitcher’s talent will not ebb prematurely. In my opinion, more than a few great pitchers have had their careers “saved” by being relatively ineffective on the mound when they were young (see Nolan Ryan, Randy Johnson, Curt Schilling).
LikeLike
We can certainly grade more accurately in retrospect, but for now I give the draft a B+, assuming the Phillies make reasonably good use of their makeup 3rd round pick next year.
Can’t put too much stock in Chapman’s performance at this point, he is very old for the competition.
LikeLike
Just as a comment towards the bonuses that you listed. BA ranked the organizations according to bonuses paid out…
http://www.baseballamerica.com/online/draft/news/264679.html
Our Phils: 23rd out of 30.
LikeLike
23rd out of 30 – doesn’t that ranking just have “Phillies” written all over it? The number tells you nothing about the substance of what they did, but it speaks volumes as to their approach.
LikeLike
Was just looking at that myself H Man. At first I had the same reaction you did (ala, those cheap *!^@’s). Then I realized “hey – you have to look at the draft order, as the teams picking higher will have to spend a lot more on their first round pick.
Then after extensive research (at least five minutes) I was right back to where I started – “those cheap *!^@’s”.
If you put the signing bonuses up against the draft order you will see that while yes, some of the higher drafting teams are naturally higher up the list, there are quite a few teams who drafted in and around the Phils who spent more – and many a lot more.
Maybe it’s not “cheap” but I would definitely say shortsighted/misguided. They’ve been shelling out money at the big league payroll (not overly well mind you) so “cheap” is tough – but how can you not shell out another million to snag two or three more prospects? I mean hell, Barajas is costing you $2m a year – and we see what that’s getting us. And let’s not even get into the Garcias, Liebers, etc.
Again, to me it’s just very shortsighted thinking. Another million, or hey why not two, probably gets you another 6-7 prospects – and that sure increases your odds!
LikeLike
SteveB, you’re speaking my language, mon. There is just something about the Phillies that produces %&*(%* response in all of us.
LikeLike
The best way to gauge them against other teams is to remove the first round pick from every team. I’ll have something on that tomorrow, as that stuff is found in the advanced database for subscribers. If someone else gets to it first, by all means, go for it.
LikeLike
It’s been said before but it bears repeating: grading a draft is almost pointless until about five years have passed. Drafts are mostly luck after the first three rounds and even the first three rounds produce many more flame-outs than stars.
Look back to 1999 when the Phillies drafted Jason Cooper in the second round with the the 63rd overall pick. Cooper didn’t sign and went to Stanford instead. Eight years later, Cooper is stalled in AAA Buffalo (Indians) and may never get so much as a cup of coffee in the show.
On the other hand, in that same 1999 draft, the Phillies also failed to sign Joseph Saunders, a big lefty HS starting pitcher selected 156th overall. He, too, went to college and two years later he was drafted again by the Angels in the 1st round, 12th overall. Saunders is a solid fourth starter with the LA Angels now, 6-1 with a 3.51 ERA, one of about 170 players from that entire draft to ever make the show from the 1999 draft.
In the ten years from 1991 – 2000, the annual average of players drafted to eventually sniff the big leagues is just 200, which doesn’t take into account players drafted twice like Saunders. What’s more, the great majority of these are not impact players.
Five years after the 2002 draft, just 100 players selected have made it to the show according to the Baseball Cube.
Workman might be one of the fortunate few who are in the bigs 5 or 7 years from now, but the odds are against him. There’s just no reason to blow a gasket about not signing him, especially since the Phillies have a compensation pick next year.
Personally, I have no complaints about this draft. Now if you want me to vent, ask me about the Placido Polanco trade…
LikeLike
i’m a believer that, in terms of stuff, most pitchers peak from ages 18-24.
I’m not sure I agree with this, but I suspect one can make a very solid argument. The key phrase though is “in terms of stuff.” Adam Eaton’s stuff is far better than Jamie Moyer’s; that’s true at any age for either/both of them. Eaton’s stuff might well be better than Greg Maddux’s stuff. Still, I’d take Gramps and the Professor.
The point of course is that “stuff,” while you’d certainly rather have it than not, isn’t crucial for success and is probably less important than the pitcher’s ability to learn how to pitch and the organization’s ability to teach, coach and develop.
Are the Phillies good at this? I have my doubts. The best pitchers they’ve developed in the last ten years (arguably a lot longer than that) are Myers and Hamels, who’ve both got “stuff.” They haven’t produced many guys who succeed with fairly average stuff–though I guess there’s Kendrick, if he keeps it up. (I doubt that, too.)
With that in mind, it’s probably perfect that they’re focusing on guys like James and Sampson, high-ceiling arms who represent maybe a one-in-five (okay, one-in-ten) shot of turning into something good. But it would be nice if they could find a way to unearth more Jamie Moyer types. That doesn’t seem to be the way the scouting industry works, though.
LikeLike
Guess I win the award for “who needs a life the most”. Here you go PhuturePhillies – can’t let you have all the fun!
Team Round 1 Bonus Total 1-10 Beyond First
WAS $2,150,000 $7,619,300 $5,469,300
SD $1,260,000 $5,763,500 $4,503,500
NYY $3,350,000 $7,432,500 $4,082,500
DET $3,580,000 $7,305,250 $3,725,250
TOR $2,767,500 $6,290,500 $3,523,000
BOS $0 $3,505,500 $3,505,500
TEX $2,735,000 $6,102,500 $3,367,500
MYM $0 $3,328,800 $3,328,800
CIN $1,400,000 $4,352,250 $2,952,250
ARI $2,100,000 $4,946,000 $2,846,000
OAK $1,192,500 $3,944,900 $2,752,400
SF $4,290,000 $7,027,000 $2,737,000
STL $1,395,000 $3,781,000 $2,386,000
ATL $1,700,000 $4,047,950 $2,347,950
SEA $1,900,000 $4,034,800 $2,134,800
LAD $1,350,000 $3,337,250 $1,987,250
PHI $1,372,500 $3,312,000 $1,939,500
CHC $3,200,000 $4,932,250 $1,732,250
PIT $2,475,000 $4,162,900 $1,687,900
BAL $6,000,000 $7,672,500 $1,672,500
KC $4,000,000 $5,618,400 $1,618,400
COL $1,800,000 $3,393,000 $1,593,000
TB $5,600,000 $7,172,000 $1,572,000
FLA $1,800,000 $3,228,750 $1,428,750
LAA $0 $1,291,600 $1,291,600
CWS $1,200,000 $2,444,550 $1,244,550
MIL $2,000,000 $3,177,700 $1,177,700
MIN $750,000 $1,837,000 $1,087,000
CLE $1,575,000 $2,271,800 $696,800
HOU $0 $536,000 $536,000
We move up in the pecking order – but not a ton (just dropping below the top half of teams). I’m not a statitician so I won’t be getting into a big standard deviation/mean/median thing, but just on basic gazintas (you know – 2 gazinta 4, carry the naught) our delta to the bottom, about $1.6M, is much less than our delta to the top – or actually even the top 5.
At the end of the day – we’ll see in a few years how things work out but I’ve come to really hate this “slotting” thing. It’s now a game being played by different rules by different teams. Some adhere to it (way more than the Phils even) and others just say screw it). They either need to go to an NBA-like specific figure method (and screw you Scott Boras) or just let teams do what they will. This middle ground thing is a joke.
LikeLike
P.S. Sorry for how ugly that came out – I swear when I put it in they were in nice clean columns 🙂
LikeLike
For future reference, when you use want to make columns you cant use spaces, use …… instead and it will look fantastic 😉
LikeLike
Thanks for the tip – and thanks for being patient – I’m learning!
LikeLike
Its not how much we didn’t spend that irks me about the figures SteveB threw up there, about how the Braves, Mets, and Nats ALL spent more than us. I mean realistically, we can’t compete in a economic war with the Yanks, Red Sox, Tigers and so on, and I know the new ownership of the Nats has the $$ to turn this team around VERY quickly but this just goes to show why our team always seems to lag behind in the division.
Plus if we had signed Workman that would have pushed us past the next 4 teams above us!!!
LikeLike
Well I guess it could be worse – we could be the Astros. WOW!! They had no picks in the first two rounds, and then failed to sign their picks from the 3rd, 4th, and 8th rounds. Their fans should sue.
Again, I’m on the whole “it’s all relative” thing. As Nick mentions signing Workman moves them up five spots, but at the end of the day we’re talking $350K (if Texan, the guy who says he knew Workman, had the figure right) and more importantly $70K over slot – meaning going in the Phils had to know they were spending $280K for that pick. So if they were really high on that guy, and I hope they would be to use a 3rd round pick, what the heck is $70K? I guarantee you they spend more on that on socks each year.
SOOO – at the end of the day, to answer PP’s question – all things considered I am just ok with how the draft went. Not signing their third round pick stings a bit, but I’ll tell you I’m like most, what I know about these kids is what I read. We really won’t know what to make of the quality for some time, but they had 32 picks in the first 30 rounds and they signed all but 4. Again, as per the money spent thing, I sure would have liked us to be one of the teams snagging a kid here or there who fell due to “signability” because the dollars aren’t monstrous.
LikeLike
This years draft would have to rank as poor in my mind. The teams that have year in and year out produced the best farm systems have signed a number of high ceiling picks, and yes they paid over slot for them. The early senior signs may move through the system at a faster pace but most will flame out without making a mark in AA. A few extra $ and yes it was less than 70 K would have given the phillies another high ceiling player this year. A pick in the 120’s next year will get the Phillies another safe pick.
LikeLike