| By Jason A. Churchill |  | By 08-13-2010 |
Over at ESPN MLB Rumor Central, where daily we take regular news -- injuries, call-ups, trade rumors, actual deals, ideas, contract negotiations, etc. -- and spin it forward, I've been following the worst three or four clubs in baseball by win-loss percentage and updating it as "The Race for Rendon."
Rendon, of course, is Rice third baseman Anthony Rendon, who is the likely No. 1 pick next June as long as his ankle injury doesn't play a role -- it's not expected to stop him from starting the season fully healthy in February.
Heading into the Cleveland series, Seattle sits 4 1/2 games back of the Pittsburgh Pirates, who overtook the Baltimore Orioles for the worst record just this week.
With the way the O's are playing under new skipper Buck Showalter, it wouldn't be a big surprise to think Seattle could end up with the No. 2 pick.
To get to No. 1, however, will be much more difficult, despite the fact that Seattle's remaining schedule is .38 points tougher via win percentage than is Pitt's.
The M's are five better than the Pirates in the win column and would lose any tie-breakers because they had a better record a year ago. Plus, the Bucs, right now, are playing so poorly when it comes to pitching, untimely miscues and lack of a stopper -- like Felix Hernandez -- that fans are much better off not hoping for the miracle.
The Arizona Diamondbacks are just a game and a half off the Mariners' pace, too, and Kansas City and Cleveland are within striking distance of the top three spots.
But even if the Mariners do not get the top selection, getting one of the top three or four players in the 2011 draft class is not something at which to sneeze.
Many believe that right-handers Sonny Gray at Vanderbilt and Gerrit Cole at UCLA or Connecticut outfielder George Springer are the next-best talents as we stand here in August, and UCONN right-hander Matt Barnes could end up in that mix, too.
Virginia southpaw Danny Hultzen, TCU lefty Matt Purke and a couple of prep stars, including left-hander Daniel Norris and right-hander Dylan Bundy, all figure into the top-10 discussion.
And it's a legit first round this year, too.
"There might end up being 40 legit first-round picks," said one scouting director. "It's a really good year."
And I can tell you that M's SD Tom McNamara agrees, so the hometown outlook is fun, fun, fun.
Georgia Tech LHP Jed Bradley, Vandy's Jack Armstrong and South Carolina CF Jackie Bradley, Jr. could also end up in the top 10.
In other words, it's truly loaded and clubs may get first-round talents in round two, without signability being the culprit.
Class of 2010
From what I can gather, the M's are likely to get second-round pick Marcus Littlewood under contract before the deadline after midnight eastern Monday, but third and fourth-round picks James Paxton and Ryne Stanek are far from sure things.
Stanek, I was told, is "about 50-50," and Paxton is a zero, meaning, there is very little chance Paxton signs by Monday night.
But he doesn't have to, since he came from an independent league club, and was not a college underclassmen or prep player.
Like Josh Fields before him, Paxton has until late May of next spring to sign with Seattle.
Don't even think about Harper in '11
It's not happening. He's going to sign. What may or may not happen, however, is the Nationals having enough cash left to sign others like A.J. Cole, which would mean he heads to Miami and is part of the 2013 class.
I do not expect Harper to get more than the $15 million that Stephen Strasburg received a year ago, however, which is probably better for the game in the end.
I'm usually all for the biggest bonuses -- why let the owners pocket such a large percentage of the money when the players, coaches and management make them all the money? -- but in this case, the less Harper gets the fewer high school dropouts we will likely see in the future.
the-race-for-rendon-and-draft-notes
Comments
The following 48 comment(s) for this article are shown below:
| 1. By: km4_1999 on 08-13-2010 20:10:31 Jason - any chance the Pirates who need an ace take a pitcher since they already have Alvarez at 3B? Or do they just move one to first? |
| 2. By: Galway on 08-13-2010 20:20:23 Danny Hultzmen is a guy I think has more potential than most think. Besides his stuff, this is a guy who really has never dedicated himself to being a pitcher 100% of the time. He made great strides this year and developed significantly by focussing soley on pitching. I think he has more developing than many of the others in his talent range which makes for good potential. I think he will be the surprise of this draft a few years from now, plus he's everything you want in kid mentally. |
| 3. By: Blowgun7 on 08-13-2010 20:33:55 Rendon is the perfect fit. Think about a Rendon-Franklin-Ackley-Smoak infield is very exciting. That being said, as long as we stay in the Top 5 I'm going to be thrilled. I think Rendon-Springer-Cole-Gray-Barnes are all going to be excellent if they stay healthy. Heck even the guys in the 6-10 range have a good shot to end up being great players. Jason, can Springer play CF? And who would be a good comp for him? Stanton? |
| 4. By: rjfrik on 08-13-2010 23:17:57 If we finish second and the Pirates pick ahead of us, we get Rendon. They will take a pitcher. I have no actual hard proof to back that up obviously, but it's just the feeling I get. They DESPERATELY need pitching, desperately. It's really the only thing that is standing in their way. With all the young position players they have, they are fine on offense for the future, but they have no pitching. A MLB close Gray or Cole will look too appealing to that font office to pass on. Here is to hoping both Gray and Cole have BIG years. |
| 5. By: Blowgun7 on 08-13-2010 23:23:29 They just drafted two good pitchers in the draft. The only way they pass on Rendon is if they are stupid enough to think Alvarez is the 3B of the future. |
| 6. By: johnburkland on 08-14-2010 00:04:06 Jason- Do you think Shipers gets signed, is it a him or Stanek situation? |
| 7. By: Jason A. Churchill on 08-14-2010 00:06:20 km4, No. Alvarez needs to be at 1B anyway. Galway, We like Hultzen a lot, but he's not quite Gray/Barnes/Cole stuff wise. He's certainly a top 10 talent going into the season, though. Blow, Springer could be OK in CF, but he's also getting bigger and stronger and will very likely end up in right as a very good corner defender. Bradley can play CF, though. He'd be a target if the M's won 25 games down the stretch and ended up picking 8-12. rjfrik, Before this year, it was assumed that Pitt would stay clear of the prep pitcher and take the safer college bat until they stayed on Taillon all the way. So if they are more likely to go one way or the other, it's not pitcher. I would bet that if Rendon isn't the pick, Springer is before one of the SPs. |
| 8. By: Missthosepilots on 08-14-2010 00:07:06 Blowgun, these are the Pirates! Actually, they looked Yankeesque when I watched them beat up on Rockies pitching several games. But unlikely they are going to catch the M's. Hard to figure these pitchers who hold out and miss the season. I think, in the long run, it has to cost them money later if they get held back and don't perform. |
| 9. By: Jason A. Churchill on 08-14-2010 00:07:39 Not an either or on Shiper/Stanek. It's about how much they want. If Stanek took slightly over slot and Shipers would take 5th round money, it would get done. But Shipers wants more than that, and he's not going to get it. We'll see if he blinks. |
| 10. By: Edman on 08-14-2010 00:20:15 Teams don't in general draft for need, they draft the best player available. Rendon is probably the first player taken, no matter who's drafting, unless they can't afford him. Regardless, Seattle is going to get a couple of great players from the first and second round next year. My guess is that Seattle gets the third over-all pick. |
| 11. By: masonb on 08-14-2010 00:45:44 What is the Littlewood situation looking like? Is it a pretty good bet he signs. Also, I've heard that Paxton does not need to be signed by the deadline. Is that truth or rumor? |
| 12. By: Jason A. Churchill on 08-14-2010 00:52:26 masonb, The group of words above these comments tackles both subjects. |
| 13. By: Adam T on 08-14-2010 01:06:27 So how does Springer's bat and power rate? Is he a RH bat who will have any trouble w/Safeco? And he advanced enough to get to Seattle as early as 2012? And what is Boras thinking by keeping Paxton from signing? Staying in the indy leagues really seems like a bad idea. |
| 14. By: Jason A. Churchill on 08-14-2010 02:33:51 He's a RHB, but legit power doesn't have problems anywhere. It's the fringe guys or severe flyball guys like Beltre who also have below-average on-base skills that have issues. Springer's power is at least a 60, maybe a 65 on the 20-80. He does whiff a lot, but he also works counts and walks a lot, so the OB ability is above average. As for the ETA, it's too far away to say. As for Paxton, it's about not having leverage but trying to negotiate as if you do. |
| 15. By: Iowa Ms Fan on 08-14-2010 09:58:51 Jason: What are you hearing about other later round draft picks and their odds to sign. Such as Keller, Linehan, or Guarnaccia? Thanks in advance. |
| 16. By: Rudolf on 08-14-2010 09:59:26 Jason or Chris, In general, when does a skill become plus-plus on the 20-80 scale? If Springer has 65 power, and a 60 hit tool, with whom does he compare? Numbers-wise, how many home runs does a 65 power guy project to hit? What are Michael Saunders power and hit grades? Thanks! |
| 17. By: maqman on 08-14-2010 10:06:08 Jason thanks for your appreciated input. I'm here most days but don't think I've taken the time to say that yet. You do good stuff. |
| 18. By: baseballman on 08-14-2010 11:46:22 Great stuff as usual JAC. I know its not an either or right now, but are the Ms more focused on signing guys like Littlewood, Stanek and Shipers opposed to Paxton right now because Paxton has no deadline? Or are they negotiating equal with all the picks wanting to get them all in the system as soon as possible? If we could add those 4 players before the deadline that would be huge. Paxton could actually get some work in before the season is over and he would be a part of the org. for the off season which would only help his development and lessen his ETA. Boras is destroying this kids career by not having him sign soon. Another year in the INDY league is not what Paxton needs if he wants to be paid. Sign and then work your butt off to get to the majors, then you make all that money back and then some. Since Springer has legit power from the right side that will play in Safeco, does he make more sense for us? We badly need power from both sides, but our lineup is so LHB heavy it would be very nice to have a HR threat from the right side. Not sayin hes better than Rendon and if the Ms are 1, we take Rendon in a heartbeat. But its kind of like the Strasburg-Ackley scenario. Strasburg>Ackley, but Ackley is what the Ms needed more. Or am I way off track? |
| 19. By: baseballman on 08-14-2010 12:02:42 I feel like an idiot Rendon is a right handed bat, I have NO CLUE what I was thinking when I wrote that last paragraph...ha |
| 20. By: rjfrik on 08-14-2010 14:09:44 While Springer is a nice consolation prize I feel very confident we will be acquiring Rendon come next year's draft. Call it positive thinking, call it intuition, call it what you will, but I the M's will finish with the 1st or 2nd pick and if it's the 2nd and it's the Pirates ahead of us, I think they pass on Rendon for a pitcher. Just a hunch and obviously not one with any calculated facts, but I still got it. Still a long way to go. If Gray or Cole pitch their asses off this year, which is likely and Rendon is slowed down by his ankle surgery it will just pour more fuel on the fire for the Pirates to select a pitcher. But this is all a moot point because the M's are going to start a 15 game losing streak as of today!!!!! Come on M's tank. |
| 21. By: rjfrik on 08-14-2010 14:10:39 I should of said a moot guess. LOL |
| 22. By: Jason A. Churchill on 08-14-2010 15:09:29 While I don't that for fact, baseballman, I imagine, so, yes. rjfrik, My only suggestion would be to not get all happy about the idea, since it's unlikely -- highly -- and would take an injury worry or a huge dollars issue to dissuade the Pirates. Even if the Pirates go off of org. need, an outfielder or SP isn't such a big need. Tabata and McCutchen are already in the big leagues and maiking peanuts, and they are about to add both Taillon and Allie for big, gigantic bucks. There's certainly a chance Pitt would take Cole, Barnes or Gray, but hoping and praying about it only makes it that much more disappointing when it doesn't happen. I'd be giddy with Cole, Springer or Rendon. |
| 23. By: bcsimons on 08-14-2010 17:40:59 Jason, What do you think of Harrison? |
| 24. By: Jerry on 08-14-2010 21:55:29 Jason, You said that you would be giddy to get Cole, Springer, or Rendon. Wouldn't each of those guys rank as legit 1/1 guys in a normal draft? Seems like the top 5-7 guys are all elite talents - Rendon, Cole, Barnes, Gray, Springer, and Purke. Rendon is a great player, but it seems like Springer or Cole would be solid #1 overall picks in a normal draft, and the guy taken at #5 will still be a great prospect. |
| 25. By: JohnMcD on 08-15-2010 03:35:42 Jason, Since Rendon looks out of the question and you had to choose between Cole and Springer who would you take? I really like Springer the more I hear about him |
| 26. By: Edman on 08-15-2010 04:08:57 I wonder how the betting against the M's thing is going for rjfrik? probably not making money right now. Something about just deserts? |
| 27. By: greymstreet on 08-15-2010 08:56:40 Does signing Shipers mean the M's don't think they can sign another of their top picks? |
| 28. By: bakomariner on 08-15-2010 09:24:16 Jason, Just read they signed Shipers for 800k...what is his ceiling, and how does his signing affect the signing of Paxton and the others? |
| 29. By: marinermutt on 08-15-2010 10:38:01 I'm surprised by the amount Shipers got. That is supplemental to 2nd round money. Maybe this suggests that Stanek won't sign. Let's hope there is still a chance and that both Littlewoood and Stanek get done by Monday night. |
| 30. By: rjfrik on 08-15-2010 12:33:17 Ed, It's obvious you don't bet on sports because if you did you would know not to bet on the M's at all over the last week. I never bet against them when they are playing mediocre teams, it's just not worth it. Every once in a while they get lucky with the bats and go on a mini streak against the mediocre teams. Wait till next week to bet when they will embark on a pretty awesome losing streak. At Baltimore, Boston and New York. That's when you bet. Especially the games in the Boston and New York series. As for my betting this week, I'm up 1800 and I have four games I played today. So hopefully I can tack on some more $ before I collect next week. I will admit I thought the M's would at least lose once in Cleveland if not twice and I was hoping for another loss in the Oakland series. But it is what it is. After Cleveland their schedule gets really daunting. I'm hoping for no more then 10 wins the rest of the year. In a perfect world they would only win 3 more the rest of the year and secure the number one pick. |
| 31. By: Blowgun7 on 08-15-2010 12:42:25 It really sucks to be an M's fan right now. I'm actually at the point where I get mad when they win. As a fan of a team, you hate to be put in that position, but I this team has driven me to that point. What's really annoying is that it's not Saunders, Guti, Moore, etc.. winning these games. If they were having big games then I would be perfectly happy with us blowing our draft position. But when it's Josh Bard, or Lopez, or Kotchman it's a double whammy. We're losing our draft position and it's guys who have no future here being the reason why. |
| 32. By: The Great Pumpkin on 08-15-2010 12:51:12 I disagree. I'm excited about the M's right now. Just look at all the young studs coming up; Smoak, Ackley, Pineda, and Franklin to name a few. I get pumped just typing that!! |
| 33. By: Blowgun7 on 08-15-2010 12:57:27 Yeah, but it's going to take more than that. I won't be excited about this future offense until I see a Rendon or Springer type talent added to the mix. I still see no power whatsoever in this organization. The guys that do have power are way too strikeout prone at this point to project them into the middle of a major league lineup. |
| 34. By: The Great Pumpkin on 08-15-2010 13:05:00 Most the experts predict Smoak to be the middle of the order bat the org needs. I sure hope Jack is a better talent evaluater than you are, because we need Smoak to be a big bat for years to come. |
| 35. By: Blowgun7 on 08-15-2010 13:07:47 No need to be a smart ass. Most good offensive teams need more than one big bat. It's great that we have Smoak and Ackley, but this organization needs considerably more in regards to position players. |
| 36. By: The Great Pumpkin on 08-15-2010 13:21:01 Not being a smart ass, I'm just hoping you're opinion is wrong and our Front Office is right. It would be nice to have some some more power coming through, but Rendon isnt the only option, |
| 37. By: Edman on 08-15-2010 15:35:09 Wow, how sad for you blowgun, that the only joy that you get is related to a draft pick. You choose to feel the way you do, don't blame the M's, that's all on you. And really, because it's not Saunder, Guti or Moore, you can't enjoy a win? Sorry that you feel that way. I'm sure they'll work hard to underachieve, so you can feel better. |
| 38. By: Edman on 08-15-2010 15:36:54 I don't think Shipers' signing has anything to do with any other potential signings. I can't imagine it's an either-or situation. They'll try to sign them all. |
| 39. By: shemberry on 08-15-2010 15:53:07 Ed, If you could go back in time, would you hope that the M's could win 5 more games in 1986 to give the number 1 pick to the Twins? How much joy would you have received from those wins in comparison to the joy you would be feeling right now watching MLB Network highlights of the St. Petersburg Mariners? |
| 40. By: Blowgun7 on 08-15-2010 16:12:45 I will not fault somebody for continuing to root for this losing team/roster. Just don't understand the folks who don't understand that having a Top 2 or Top 3 pick is what's in the best interest of a rebuilding team. The team has a better chance to get a difference making/elite talent with a higher pick. I don't know why you would want to give that up for a couple of meaningless wins. Do you actually experience joy these days Edman, when the M's win a 3-1 game in which David Pauley pitched well and Casey Kotchman and Jose Lopez had RBI singles?? Are you actually happy as an M's fan when you see a result like that, that brings the teams record to 25 games under .500 and 25 back in the division? |
| 41. By: yohnhimself on 08-15-2010 16:43:06 I get the point that we want the M's to have the best draft pick possible, but having the highest possible pick does not necessarily entail getting the best possible player. If the professional careers of each draftable player could somehow be known beforehand and the best player then was slotted at #1, the second best at #2, and so on down the line sequentially then I could see myself getting all worked up about draft positioning. But the fact is that the draft is not an exact science; in 2005 we picked at #3 and drafted Jeff Clement whereas if we'd picked at #4-#7 and Clement had been gone already we could have been "stuck" with Zimmerman, Braun, Romero, or Tulowitzki. I know that was the Bavasi front office, but still, maybe picking lower will save the M's from making a mistake on a guy (Zduriencik isn't perfect you know) they shouldn't be enamored with and instead pick one that turns out to be an impact player even though he isn't thought of as highly at the time. My point is that it isn't absolutely insane to be happy when the M's win every once and a while, superior draft position isn't everything, especially when we're talking about the difference between #2 and #7 in a really strong draft class. |
| 42. By: slamcactus on 08-15-2010 16:44:48 The gap between the eventual value of the #1 and #2 pick is the single biggest gap in the entire draft when you look at the draft over the years. The higher the pick, the better. |
| 43. By: Blowgun7 on 08-15-2010 16:52:44 I trust the guys doing the drafting. Therefore, I want them to have as many players available as possible. I agree that no player is a given but if you trust Jack and his amateur scouting department, you should want them to have the best pick possible. Just my opinion. It's not the end of the world if we draft 8th or something and that player may end up being better than a Rendon, Springer, or Cole, but for me, I want our scouting department to get the guy they deem the best. The higher the pick we get, the better chances of that happening. |
| 44. By: rjfrik on 08-15-2010 18:48:57 Exactly. In all honesty I want a bat in the draft next year, not a pitcher. And by the looks of it the only two bats that will be top 5 worthy, where we will be picking are Rendon and Springer. So the higher we pick the better chance we have at drafting one of those two guys. If we finish 4th or 5th and those two are drafted ahead of us then we will be forced to take the best player available which will be a pitcher. I have no problem with the front office is put in the position of taking the best player available. That's what good F.O.'s do. That is why I'm rooting for the M's to lose so the F.O. is in a position to take the best player available and that player is a bat. I want Offense. Please for the love of God give us a young offensive stud. Sherm had a great point. If you are in this position, why in the best interest of the franchise would you root for meaningless victories. With out L's we would of never drafted Griffey Jr. or A-Rod two of the top 10 greatest players to ever play the game. I'm not saying Rendon or Springer is at that talent level but they are at the same talent level of the Longoria and Upton's. I personally would love to have that type of bat sitting either behind or in front of Smoak in two years. Oh and Edman. I actually looked back and the M's did win my some money early in the week. I bet against them against Oakland one game and won $200. And then I bet the Under in a game with Oakland and won $350. So the M's have banked me $550 dollars this week. Thank you Mariners!!! |
| 45. By: DKulich44 on 08-15-2010 19:07:51 42. I don't think your comment could be much more misinformed, did you look at the last couple drafts? |
| 46. By: Edman on 08-15-2010 19:50:33 #39, that's an insane question. Are you saying that the M's tanked the season so they could get the #1 overall pick? And, just so you know, Griffey was almost NOT selected, in favor of pitcher Mike Harkey. Had the scouting department not convinced George Argyros otherwise, Griffey wouldn't have been here. He wasn't that clear a choice. It's really a lacking comment, because the 1986 Mariners were bad, but not bad because they weren't trying. Nor were fans going around rooting for a draft pick. Many were so use to losing, it didn't bother them. #43, I have to agree with DKulich, that it a truly misinformed statement. First of all, it's depth dependant. In a deep draft, there is very little difference in overall value, for the first three to five picks. Last year was a fluke. Strasberg was a once a decade talent. I have seen few drafts where the #1 overall pick is a guarantee compared to others drafted within the first five picks. Seattle's had a couple #1 overall picks who were complete disasters. And not because they didn't take the player that everyone thought was the best player in the country. #40, I experience joy anything the M's win. I don't worry about draft picks, and it's not because I don't care about the organization. Would you feel better if Saunders and Moore drove in runs with singles, rather than Kotchman and Lopez? How about Pauley? Doesn't he deserve to develop too? He might be an important piece in the near future, even if it's not obvious. I believe in trying, no matter what. You let the cards get dealt however they do. It's senseless to carry out a death watch. I understand your point of view, but it's not any more noble than those who want this team to win and not give up. |
| 47. By: shemberry on 08-15-2010 20:05:28 Ed, In response to your response to me: Are you insane? I am in no way saying that the M's tanked, what I am saying is that I am glad they didn't win 6 more games and glad that we didn't take Harkey. Had the team won 6 more, we wouldn't have had a chance to take Jr. I don't think this year's team should tank either, but I don't think you can call people bad fans that would just as soon the team lose enough to get their pick of any one of a number of excellent options at 1-1 in the 2011 Draft. My point is that the extra six wins wouldn't have been worth losing Jr. My point is that if the M's lose enough to get the top pick and Rendon goes on to be a superstar in Seattle, I won't be sad we didn't win a few more meaningless games. |
| 48. By: slamcactus on 08-16-2010 04:15:14 45 - Actually, I read Rany Jazayerli's series on the draft in depth, which compared the results of all draft picks between 1984-1999. It's behind a subscriber firewall, but if you care to look at the exhaustive analysis of data yourself, you can find it here: http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=4026 The most important passage (quoted directly): "The typical #1 overall pick is worth more than 46 WARP in the first 15 years of his career; no other draft slot comes within even 10 wins of that total. Just as importantly, the benefits of the #1 overall pick do not extend to the #2 pick; in fact, historically, the #2 pick has been worth slightly less than the #3 and #4 picks, and from that point random variation kicks in and strongly influences the downward progression for the rest of the first round. This leads me to coin the first of many draft rules from this study: Draft Rule #1: The greatest difference in value between consecutive draft picks is the difference between the first and second picks in a draft" It's funny: sometimes people actually know what they're talking about. |
Haven't created a Prospect Insider account yet? Sign up!
|
|
 |
|
|
| Copyright 2010 Prospect Insider | Created by AQ Central Prospect Insider is optimized for Mozilla Firefox and Google Chrome |