Columbus is on their All-Star break. The Triple-A All-Star Game is scheduled for Wednesday July 17 at 7:00PM in Louisville, KY.
Record: Columbus 52-44, 3rd place IL West (3GB)
Today: Triple-A All-Star break
Harrisburg went into their All-Star break on a high note with a four-game sweep of the Bowie Bay Sox capped off by a 3-2 walk-off victory on Monday afternoon (box/gamer/recap).The stories of the game were 22-year old RHP Jordan Zimmermann and 25-year old RF Garrett Guzman. Zimmermann allowed only three hits and two walks over seven innings of work with nine strikeouts. His only mistake was surrendering a lead-off home run in the seventh. So far in three July starts, he is 2-0 with a 1.29 ERA and 0.90 WHIP over 21IP with 19 strikeouts and only 5 walks. Guzman was 4/5 with the game-winning bases-clearing double in the bottom of the ninth inning. Over his last 10 games for Harrisburg, Guzman is batting 0.500 and slugging 0.775 with 15 RBI. 23-year old LF Marvin Lowrance was 2/4 and started the ninth inning rally with a double. 23-year old 1B Bill Rhinehart was 1/3 with a walk and double and is now hitting 0.321 for the Senators.
Record: Harrisburg 54-41, 2nd place EL South (6.5GB)
Today: Double-A All-Star break
Potomac lost their lead late, allowing three runs in the bottom of the eighth in an 8-6 loss in Salem (box/gamer). Ryan Zimmerman made his first rehab appearance for the P-Nats as their DH, going 2/5 with a pir of doubles and a run scored. 24-year old CF Francisco Plasencia and 24-year old 1B Andrew Lefave were each 2/4 with a double, RBI and two runs scored. RF Aaron Seuss was 2/4 with one RBI and one run. And 23-year old 2B Dan Lyons was 1/3 with a double and two RBI. 22-year old LHP Ross Detwiler made the start allowing five runs (four earned) on nine hits over 6 1/3 innings with six strikeouts and no walks. 23-year old RHP Josh Wilkie took the loss giving up three runs on three hits and one walk over 1 2/3 innings of relief.
Record: Potomac 13-11, tied for 1st place Carolina North (2 games ahead)
Today: RHP Jeff Mandel (3-2, 3.28) at Salem RHP Chad Wagler (2-0, 0.00) 7:07PM
Hagerstown split their double header with Hickory, losing the first game 8-1 (box) before gaining the split with a 6-5 win in game two (box/gamer). In the resumption of their suspended game from Sunday, 22-year old RHP Brad Meyers took th loss as the Suns could not rally from their early 1-0 deficit. Meyers allowed one run on one hit and two walks over three innings of work while striking out a pair. 22-year old Terrence Engles was knocked arounf four five runs (four earned) on seven hits and a walk over his four innings. 23-year old CA Travis Reagan was 1/1 and scored the only Suns run while 24-year old 2B Jake Rogers was 1/3 with a double and the only Suns RBI.
The Suns won the second game on a walk-off single by 19-year old RF Michael Burgess scoring 22-year old SS Jose Lozada. Burgess was 3/5 with a double and two RBI while Lozada was 3/5 with a pair of runs scored. 25-year old 1B Tim Pahuta was 4/4 with a home run and two RBI for Hagerstown. 23-year old RHP Hassan Pena made the start allowing two runs (one earned) on four hits and two walks over four innings with three strikeouts. 22-year old RHP Ryan Harrison picked up the victory with a scoreless inning of relief.
Record: Hagerstown 11-14, tied for 4th place Sally North (7GB)
Today: No game scheduled
Vermont rallied to tie Jamestown 5-5 in the sixth but fell 6-5 in 10 innings (box/gamer). 19-year old LHP Pat McCoy started for the Monsters, allowing five runs (three earned) on six hits and one walk over five innings while striking out four. 22-year old RHP Carlos Peralta threw three one-hit shutout innings of relief, striking out four. And, 21-year old RHP Casey Whitmer took the loss, surrendering one run on two hits and two walks over 1 1/3 innings of relif. It was the first run that Whitmer allowed in nine professional appearances. The middle infield pair of 21-year old 2B Nick Arata and 20-year old Dani Arias were a combined 4/7 with a double, RBI, and three runs scored. 21-year old RF Michael Guerrero was 2/5 with a solo home run.
Record: Vermont 15-12, 1st place NYP Stedler (2 games ahead)
Today: GCL Nats at GCL Cardinals 10:00AM
The GCL Nationals did not play on Monday.
Record: Columbus 52-44, 3rd place IL West (3GB)
Today: Triple-A All-Star break
The DSL Nationals2 defeated their Nationals1 teammates 6-4 (box).18-year old SS Hendry Jimenez was 1/3 with one run, two walks, and three stolen bases for the Nats2. 21-year old CF Eleazar Cuevas was 2/4 with one walk, one stolen base and two runs scored. The Nats2 were aided by five Nats1 errors leading to four unearned runs. 20-year old 1B Eduardo Urbina was 2/4 with one RBI for the Nats1 while 21-year old CA Yan Carlos Hiciano was 1/3 with a double and two runs scored. Both players began 2008 in the GCL but have returned to the DSL. 20-year old 3B Starlin Cespedes was 2/4 with a stolen base for the Nats1.
19-year old LHP Francisco Vizcaino was the starter for the Nats two, allowing three runs on four hits and three walks over four innings of work. 21-year old RHP Miguel Sabala picked up the win with two scoreless innings of relied with one strikeout. And, 20-year old RHP Rafael Castillo got his third save with one inning of work, allowing one run on two hits and one walk. 20-year old LHP Jose Taveras started for the Nats1, allowing three runs (one earned) on two hits and four walks over three innings.
Record: DSL Nats1 31-6, 1st place DSL S.D. West (13 games ahead); DSL Nats2 13-24, 3rd place DSL S.D. West (18GB)
Today: DSL Nats1 at DSL Tigers; DSL Nats2 at DSL Padres; both games at 10:30AM
EdDC | 15-Jul-08 at 9:14 am | Permalink
So, what is the assessment/projection of Ross Detwiler at this point? What does he have that made the scouts drool, made Baseball America love him, and earned him such a high slot in the draft?
His college numbers (for a mid-major university) were not stunning (unlike the fabulous numbers of Crow, this year’s #1), and so far his record in the farm system has been unspectacular as well. So naturally, you wonder what this guy has that will likely boost him into the rotation at the MLB level?
Brian Oliver | 15-Jul-08 at 9:16 am | Permalink
Here is the PGCC scouting report “Detwiler is a thin, loose 6-foot-4 and 180 pounds and was basically the same size as a junior in high school, so projecting him isn’t necessarily valid. His velocity has come on from the 87-90 mph he threw when he was 17, however. Detwiler has a whippy arm action from a high three-quarters release point and throws a fastball in the 92-94 range and a very sharp upper 70s curveball with 12-6 type of break at times. His changeup is a promising pitch, too. Detwiler throws strikes with all his pitches, has a clean injury history and finished the season strong before leaving his last start with a broken finger nail.”
Brian Oliver | 15-Jul-08 at 9:17 am | Permalink
BBA scouting … “Though he packs just 175 pounds on his 6-foot-4 frame, Detwiler has the leverage and whip-like arm speed to consistently deliver 92-95 mph fastballs. He also throws a hard spike curveball at 78-81 mph, and sometimes will drop his arm angle to give it more sweeping break against lefthanders. His changeup has shown improvement this spring. Detwiler hasn’t been able to put on weight yet has been durable.”
Andrew | 15-Jul-08 at 9:45 am | Permalink
I saw on BA that Jim Callis now ranks Zimmermann as our top prospect. Just found that interesting.
Brian Oliver | 15-Jul-08 at 10:02 am | Permalink
Here is what Andrew is talking about
Marcus | 15-Jul-08 at 10:47 am | Permalink
Totally agree with Callis on that one. It’ll be interesting to see if he falls down to number 2 once Crow signs or has his full season given him the nod over Crow’s potential.
btw when is Smoker going to pitch again?
Marcus | 15-Jul-08 at 10:52 am | Permalink
btw did we have any prospects in BA’s midseason top 25? I’m guessing no with Marrero and Detwiller having bad season…but maybe just maybe…:-)
Brian Oliver | 15-Jul-08 at 10:58 am | Permalink
Marcus - None in the top twenty-five.
In their recap of their pre-seeason top 100, they break some out into categories …
STAY AWAY FROM TRAINERS - 27. Chris Marrero, of, Nationals
ON THE BRINK (Players in this group have proven themselves in the high minors and may not qualify for next year’s Top 100, so we acknowledge their fine work) - 86. Collin Balester, rhp, Nationals
GROWING PAINS - 51. Ross Detwiler, lhp, Nationals
ON THE RISE (By definition this group is disparate, a group of all kinds of players who weren’t in the Top 100 coming into the season but are strong contenders right now.) - Michael Burgess, of, Nationals
Brian Oliver | 15-Jul-08 at 10:58 am | Permalink
I have asked about Smoker.
Marcus | 15-Jul-08 at 11:04 am | Permalink
Thanks for the quick reply. It’ll be interesting to find out what’s the deal with Smoker. Hope it’s not a health issue. I’m honestly wondering why they didn’t just start him in Vermont, instead of pushing him in Hagerstown.
How many players do you think we can get in the Top 100 next year?
I’m thinking(no specific order):
J. Zimmermann
A. Crow(plz sign this man!!!)
C. Marrero
M. Burgess
R. Detwiller
E. Gonzalez(i think he has an outside shot at making it if he can get promoted to Vermont and continue those same numbers)
Brian Oliver | 15-Jul-08 at 11:15 am | Permalink
Honestly, I’d expect no more than four. Crow seems an easy choice (assuming he signs) given BBA’s proclivity to get the current top 10 or so from the draft counted. Marrero will slide quite a bit but probably stick around the top 100. Detwiler seems likely to drop out of the top 100. Zimmermann might make the bottom 20. Burgess might crack 81-100. I doubt Smiley makes it.
If you asked me to bet, I’d say Crow, Marrero, and one of Zimmermann or Burgess.
Marcus | 15-Jul-08 at 11:36 am | Permalink
Yeah i figured Smiley was a reach but I think Detwiller can make it if he can string together some more strong starts in the second half. He was top 60, I believe so that’d be a big fall. He’s been much improved in his last 2-3 starts.
Marcus | 15-Jul-08 at 11:49 am | Permalink
btw Brian figured since BA’s doing a Mid-season top 25; It’d be cool to come out with a Mid-season top 10(or more lol) :-). Here’s what I came up with:
EdDC | 15-Jul-08 at 11:55 am | Permalink
Somehow, I am getting this sinking “feeling”: The Nats sign Crow (no way they will miss on Crow), everyone is happy, and the Nats, the Post, fans, etc. make a big deal of it.
But the Nats fail to sign a couple other high draftees, just to send a signal to future draftees that the Nats can’t always be expected to pay above slot. They can get away with it, since most fans (outside NFA readers) do not pay close attention to these things, and are happy enough that Crow is on board. It would be a reasonable business decision, though awful from a baseball standpoint.
Kasten was quoted as saying he has a budget he has to adhere to on the draftees, so he can’t give above slot to some without taking away from others.
Hopefully, that’s just negotiation trash talk. What bothers me about the quote is that the Nat’s major league player budget is strictly small market (about on par with Pittsburgh and KC payrolls). You would think saving money at the major league level would free up money for the kids. All of their budgets can’t be small…
Lots of time left I guess, for it all to be sorted out.
Brian Oliver | 15-Jul-08 at 11:58 am | Permalink
No debate from me on your top 5.
Numbers 6-10 (you can likely expand that to 6-15) are so close, it’s a matter of personal preference in most cases. Guys like Mike Daniel, Roger Bernadina, Luke Montz, Leonard Davis, Marco Estrada, Josh Smoker, Jack McGeary, Jake Smolinski & Zech Zinicola all are worthy of consideration as well.
Chris | 15-Jul-08 at 11:59 am | Permalink
I’ll put my vote in for Derrick Norris for the top 10 above Rhinehart and King (although this will set off 30 posts on how great Rhinehart is)
Marcus | 15-Jul-08 at 12:01 pm | Permalink
I think we get Crow, Hood, and Nieto. A lot of Hooplah has been made out of all three and even the casual fan would notice if we missed out on them. The SS from LB State I think we’re going to toe the line on and miss out on him and G. Hicks we might not get as well.
Brian Oliver | 15-Jul-08 at 12:03 pm | Permalink
Kasten was quoted as saying he has a budget he has to adhere to on the draftees, so he can’t give above slot to some without taking away from others
That’s the comment that I have seen a few times that I dislike the most. If it is a negotiating/posturing thing, I don’t like the idea of playing one player’s bonus of another. Just seems too much a small market mindset.
If it’s true, then the Nationals should only sign their top selections (rounds 1-20) and ignore everyone else. If they are going to paint it as if the $250K is going to make or break them, I’d rather they miss out on every guy from rounds 26-50 to “save up” enough to pay a second, third, or fourth rounder.
Chris | 15-Jul-08 at 12:04 pm | Permalink
I think Nieto is the least likely to sign. I think we get Crow, Hicks and Espinoza. I thought Hood would be easy but as time goes by and get less confident.
Marcus | 15-Jul-08 at 12:08 pm | Permalink
After Bernadina’s dayview I’ve really cooled on him. Zincola’s a reliever so while he’s been performin well I figured I’d value starters over him.
McGeary and Smoker to small sample size although I really like what I’m seeing out of McGeary’s last two starts. Smolinoski been injured but he does have potential, top ten as of now though Idk?
Daniel and Estrada don’t have the cieling imo to be top 10.
I like Norris more than Montz and am not a huge L. Davis fan.
Andrew F | 15-Jul-08 at 12:10 pm | Permalink
Does Stammen get in the mix? I think he deserves a little love.
How long is the honeymoon on Detwiler’s potential/draft status? I realize it has been only one year, but still.
Marcus | 15-Jul-08 at 12:15 pm | Permalink
It’s just his first year and his last 2-3 starts have shown that he still has potential. I’d give him till the end of next season before the honeymoons over.
I’d put Stammen in the same boat as Callis put VanAllen when comparing him to the rest of our pitchers.
Q: Eric from Bonn Germany asks:
Jim…. If one ranks Crowe with the other Nationals pitching prospects how would you rack and stack them - Detwiler, Zimmerman, Crowe, Smoker, McGeary, Ballester, Van Allen etc. Thanks!
A:
Jim Callis: I like a lot of those guys, but Crow is the best for me. I’d go Crow, Detwiler, Zimmerman, Ballester, Smoker, McGeary. Van Allen is not in the same class for me.
http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/draft/chat/2008/266306.html
EdDC | 15-Jul-08 at 12:46 pm | Permalink
Destin Hood is the one I worry about the most. With his great wrists, bat speed and foot speed, he could be a good one, a five-tool guy, once he focuses on baseball.
His father says he needs first round money to forgo the Alabama scholarship, while Kasten wants Hood to come into his slot.
McGeary of course set the precedence last signing season, but now the Nats want to move in a new direction. So who will blink?
This situation is perfect for a compromise, with both sides winning, and Hood coming in between first and second round money. But can the Nats be flexible enough to see the possible need for flexibility, given Hood’s leverage with the college option? Will a strong “not-above-slot” stance blow the chance at negotiation and compromise?
It seems to me the the voluntary nature of the slot is due to some draftees having more options than others–and thus a need for flexibility.
Mike Morris | 15-Jul-08 at 1:15 pm | Permalink
I have a hunch that Hood will be signed by the end of the week. He immediately becomes the top prospect in the organization. Bowdin will not allow this “toolsy” player to escape. Hood does indeed remind me of Tori Hunter.
Ric | 15-Jul-08 at 1:21 pm | Permalink
Brian - your argument that the Nats should focus on 1-20 at the exclusion of 21-50 and NDFAs neglects that, generally, after the 10-15 range, the signees are not receiving bonuses, so they don’t count against the pool of signing bonus money. The real answer is that if they really have a limited budget and won’t exceed slot, they need to draft more for signability. As you’ve said before, Crow, Hood, Nieto and Akins were all perceived as tough signs. I bet that it is more an issue of not wanting to annoy the Commissioner’s office.
I just don’t get the delay with Espinosa, Hicks and Jones — the first two were overdrafts relative to consensus and should be thrilled with slot, and Jones has a chance to play for his hometown team and is unlikely to improve his position materially next year.
Ramirez was a long shot, with a strong college commitment, and seems never to have been a serious possibility. Coleman had success in the CWS and, given expectations for LSU, has decided to come back for another shot at the title. He won’t hurt himself by staying out a year.
I will predict they sign Hood (a bit over slot, but not first round money), Espinosa (slot), Hicks (slot) and Jones (about 10th round money), but lose Nieto and Akins. I would guess that they sign Crow, but it will come down to the wire and I won’t be shocked if they walk away and take the draft pick compensation in 2009.
Berndaddy | 15-Jul-08 at 1:25 pm | Permalink
Here’s open question from someone trying to learn who’s a prospect and who’s organizational. I’ve got three players on that brink.
Matt Rogelstad
Edgardo Baez
Josh Wilkie
All of these guys are doing well this year. Can they ever be prospects? What makes someone a prospect?
Nate | 15-Jul-08 at 1:51 pm | Permalink
Bd,
Designating someone as a prospect vs. organizational filler is at least as much art as science, so opinions will vary. Much depends on the player’s age relative to their level of competition and to the evaluation of their talent ceiling.
That said, Rogelstad is organizational filler. At 25 going on 26 he’s too old for AA ball, and doesn’t have the track record to make you think he could vault to AAA and then the Majors. Doesn’t mean he won’t get a cup of coffee at some point, but he’s likely a career minor leaguer.
Baez is a prospect, but not a top-tier guy. He’s at an age when he really needs to handle AA, but even if he does he probably maxes out as a 4th OF type.
Wilkie isn’t a prospect both because he’s too old for his level and he probably profiles best as a back of the bullpen arm, a Saul Rivera-type. Again, that’s not to say that he won’t have a big league career, but middle relievers are almost never “prospects” in the traditional sense.
One fan’s two cents.
Marc | 15-Jul-08 at 2:05 pm | Permalink
I’ll be interested in reading Brian’s take on this, but to me, “prospect” is a little bit in the eye of the beholder - between late bloomers, second-chancers, etc. guys can and do cross that line between “prospect” and “organizational” - though there do seem to be some general guidelines - to me, the first one isn’t actually performance - it’s age and level - Baez, for instance, is 22 years old, and has moved up slowly every year/18 months since being drafted - suggests a little bit prospecty. Performance matters, too, of course, and it’s the combination of all three (age, level, performance) that defines “prospect” vs. “organizational” - you’ve gotta show that you can handle and succeed with successively tougher challenges.
Baez is only now showing anything like very solid numbers - so I’d say he’s still prospecty, but really fringe - he certainly doesn’t scream “can’t miss” to me. He’ll have to finish the year strongly in Harrisburg and have a good ‘09 to hang on to that “prospect” tag. Wilkie’s similar, only more so - a year older, I’d like to see him build on that 32/7 K/BB rate in Harrisburg before you decide he’s clearly a prospect - that said, he seems to have found a little something this year.
Rogelstad, on the other hand, seems more classically “organizational” He’s 25, playing High-A ball, has repeated that level every year for the last three and has never OPS’ed better than his .780 last year, which is a little too low when you’re on your second and third year at High-A. Maxwell, for instance, who we know is a “prospect” OPS’ed .830 on his way through there last year.
So, for my admission fee, I’d say Baez and Wilkie are fringy prospects but are slipping towards organizationality, and Rogelstad’s already there. Of course, I’m just some guy on the internet, too. If I knew what I were talking about, I’d be drawing a paycheck for it.
Jon | 15-Jul-08 at 2:21 pm | Permalink
Rogelstad is closing in on becoming an organizational player, however his play suggests he should be a prospect. He was posting fantastic numbers in High-A and has been putting up absurd numbers with Harrisburg. Also, after seeing him numerous times, he constantly comes through in the clutch. The talent has consistently been there but the opportunity has only just begun. Hopefully he will make the most of the chance he is being given playing for the Canadian national team in the upcoming Olympics.
Jon | 15-Jul-08 at 2:23 pm | Permalink
And on the matter of Detwiler, I suggest going to see him pitch. His numbers have been inconsistent but simply watching him lets you see just why he was such a high draft pick.
Brian Oliver | 15-Jul-08 at 2:30 pm | Permalink
Marc - I appreciate the confidence in my opinion, but I’m drawing the same salary for this as everyone who frequents NFA.
I look at the guys in farm in these groups:
(1) Premium prospects - Guys that are most often hyped, written about, considered by other teams as targets. These are the players that Baseball America talks about most often. They are the future starters and high visibility players. There are typically only a handful of these guys. (see Marrero, Chris or Detwiler, Ross [too early to cut bait])
(2) Debatable prospects - This is where you hear the term projectability. The jury is still out on these guys but the organization has high expectations. They typically filter fown to the next category (#3) but occassionally you’ll se one bubble up to #1. Much of this group are the high ceiling high schoolers with an occasional sprinking of underrated collegians (see King, Stephen)
(3) Fringe prospects - These are the guys who are future role players as a ceiling. There is no shame in this because a typical major league team has at least 6 to 8 of these guys serving as #4 or 5 OFs, utility IFs, spot starters, and bullpen arms. (see Bernadina, Roger)
(4) Former prospects - These are guys who were once highly thought of but linger in the organization with hopes of recapturing what they had. They are more valuable to the Nats as an organization than they are as trade targets (see Hinckley, Mike)
(5) Organizational players - The bulk of what is in the farm system. These are the guys that fill out the largest part of many of the minor league rosters. They typically are older or more experienced for the levels at which they are playing (see Bynum, Seth)
(6) Quad-A guys - Guys whose primary purpose is to fill in for the major league 25-man when injuries happen (see Langerhans, Ryan)
Brewer | 15-Jul-08 at 2:39 pm | Permalink
In terms of Hood signing, I read somewhere that he had not yet reported to training camp for Alabama and, as a result, would likely not be playing much if he decides to go with football. That doesn’t necessarily mean he will sign with the Nats, but it does sort of indicate that he would prefer to do so.
MiLBFan | 15-Jul-08 at 2:39 pm | Permalink
Jon, I agree. Rogelstad has been mis-managed and should have started in Harrisburg. On Detwiler, he does have that intangible “something” that makes a successful pitcher. If you speak with the catchers-even those who have been in Potomac on rehab - they all agree that he will be an excellent pitcher. I know others will cite stats to the contrary, but he is a work in progress and is showing why he was our 1st round. Even yesterday, he had no walks. Everyone needs to be patient.
Tofu Dog | 15-Jul-08 at 2:42 pm | Permalink
The one on the mid-season top-10 that I think is getting short shrift is Martis. He is only 21 and has made the jump to AAA successfully. His numbers in his last few starts are as good as Balester’s. He does not throw the 95-96 mph fastball but he does something right and deserves to be ranked ahead of Detwiler.
With Martis, Zimmerman, and Balester looking like they have a legitimate chance to make the big leagues–where they join Lannan as a rotation–I would trade Detwiler to Kansas City for the the bat we did not get in the draft. He needs a change of scenery for his sake and for us while he still has prospect value. I worry that if we keep trying whatever we are doing, we will lose that value as well.
Dick | 15-Jul-08 at 2:48 pm | Permalink
Brian: I think Stan’s quote relates to the Wieters factor. We’re not going to use $6 million in budget for Crow.
EdDC: I can’t fathom how Hood would perceive himself to be better off going to ‘bama. Would be intested to see what your thinking is. ‘A million or bust’ is a dubious strategy on his part. I can’t see a scenario where he could reasonably expect to get $760,000 from football at this point.
Clearly, lots of posturing going on by all parties!
Brian Oliver | 15-Jul-08 at 2:52 pm | Permalink
Dick - I would prefer to hear nothing or at the very most lay off the “we are a slot team” comments. They can imply a hard line without saying something that many can read as “cheap”
Dick | 15-Jul-08 at 3:02 pm | Permalink
Brian: I’ll be sure to share you concerns with Stan the next time I talk to him. I agree that keeping their mouths shut publicly is a much better policy.
I made my comment with the belief that the gaps are not in the quarter million range, but are much higher in most cases.
A DC Wonk | 15-Jul-08 at 3:11 pm | Permalink
Tofu Dog — I hear ya’ re: Martis. See, it seems if you’re not a high draft pick, you’re not a high prospect (or throw in the 90’s), and you have to do extremely well for people to remove the “not a high ceiling” label. Martis is a good example. Bill Rhinehart’s another one.
I’m one, however, that believes performance matters. I think the jury’s still out on Rhinehart (he just started AA — but I don’t understand why everyone says “not a high ceiling” — my view is “unknown ceiling), but Martis definitely belongs on the list.
EdDC | 15-Jul-08 at 3:32 pm | Permalink
Dick,
When it comes to leverage, it is clear that McGeary (with his family money) had much more than Hood does (with his lack thereof). My guess is that Hood is holding out because of a fairness factor–”If you, the Nats, can do that for the Stanford guy, why can’t you do at least a part of that for this ‘Bama guy?”
He has a little leverage, still, because it is a scholarship, and playing Alabama baseball still counts as a legit baseball option.
All things considered, you may well be right about this–what you say makes sense to me. A torn knee tendon from football won’t help him any, will it?
Los Doce Ocho | 15-Jul-08 at 4:17 pm | Permalink
I’d be surprised to see Hood at Alabama. Signing two sport athletes to over slot bonuses isnt necessarily frowned upon by MLB as it is for baseball only players. MLB wants to pull athletes away from football and basketball. Plus, his bonus can be spread out over 3 to 5 years. Its what the O’s did with Avery, the A’s with Dixon and even the Rays with Beckham. Spreading the bonus over a period of years reduces present value as well for the team.
Marcus | 15-Jul-08 at 6:05 pm | Permalink
EdDC: I don’t think you can assume Hood has a lack of money or that his family money has anything to do with the decission. He did have his draft party at a Hotel so while he may/may not be as wealthy as McGeary I wouldn’t assume he’s as poor as say Dukes/Burgess.
Nationals Fan | 15-Jul-08 at 6:30 pm | Permalink
“Prospects” are about tools (run, hit, hit with power,arm,and glove)and age, and younger players simply have more time to develop, and thats why they remain “prospects”. Younger players with more tools are given more time to develop because their tools and age simply mean they are more likely to develop into major leaguers. Some rely on all five tools to help them perform, and some simply are so outstanding in two or three of these areas that that warrants them being labeled “prospect”. Marrero (06)was rated VERY high on hit, and hit with power(tremendous), and this is very unusual for high schoolers. Burgess(07) was rated the same way, with arm and some speed thrown in…a great “prospect”! No one seems to mention England(06) and Souza(07) anymore, just because they are struggling right now, but they possess more of all five tools, and that, along with their age, would keep them as “prospects”. King(06) also had shown all five tools (speculation was that his knee inury took him out of a first round pick by the Cubs), and so once again you know that the physical ability is there. You must be patient with high schoolers who demonstrate so many tools, simply because they do have the PHYSICAL ability to play at the highest level, but must learn to put it all together…and this takes time. Call them what you want, I just think they are all “prospects”…and I think the more specific labeling is based on current performance, and not the probability of actually “making it”, which is the only thing that really matters.
Suns Fan | 15-Jul-08 at 7:16 pm | Permalink
My understanding is that low round draft picks receive a flat, nominal bonus. It’s a very low amount on an individual basis. Give 25 players that amount, and it’s a moderate sum (by baseball standards at least).
Dick | 15-Jul-08 at 7:24 pm | Permalink
EdDC, Marcus: While I believe you can’t take family money out of the equation, I believe (as EdDC agreed) that Hood has no better option than to sign for slot money, which is quite a lot of money. I’d tell my son to sign for that!
He may yet cut off his nose but I doubt it. It’s just bidness, after all.
Positively Half St | 16-Jul-08 at 7:19 am | Permalink
Who is going to get the next call-up, now that WMP is going on the disabled list? With Orr, Kasto, and Langerhans up, and Escobar released, does this simply mean it is time for Johnny Estrada to finish his rehab assignment? Zimmerman will still be playing at Columbus this weekend.
EdDC | 16-Jul-08 at 9:23 am | Permalink
Just a final note to Marcus on this: McGeary got a $1.8 million signing bonus. If he had family money it could have given him more options and leverage than Hood may have now. Just guessing on this.
McGeary went to a prep school with a $17,900 tuition, so maybe there is some family money there–unless McGeary worked his way through prep school with after school jobs. This is possible but unlikely, given the high academic standards of Roxbury Latin.
Nonetheless, I agree with Dick that Hood really doesn’t have as much leverage as McGeary’s situation. And i agree with you that I do not know all the facts! Both McGeary and Hood could have received financial aid for their high school tuition, as far as I know.
Marcus | 16-Jul-08 at 12:58 pm | Permalink
EdDC: I don’t doubt that McGeary has money(1.8 million richer now lol) but he could’ve also recieved a scholarship for playing baseball there(Kids not well off in the D.C. area recieve scholarships from private schools like St. Johns/Dematha; to play sports there). Just trying to make the point that we can’t assume Hood isn’t well off enough to bypass this money.