Update, 4:00 pm:
…as people have pointed out to me on e-mail, the Mets did not have a legit number one
pick, nor a sandwich pick, thus lowering the amount of money they’d likely have spent…
…plus, the number is for just seven picks… so, to compare to a team like the Nationals, who had the top pick in the draft, plus additional players to sign, is unfair…
…excellent point, guys… thank you… nice catch…
Original Post:
According to Baseball America, the Mets spent the least amount of money on top draft picks of any team in the major leagues, totaling $1.9 million on seven players.
…thanks to D Ross Baker for the link…
In terms of team’s from the NL East, the Nationals spent the most, followed by the Marlins, Braves, Phillies and Mets.
…i am not going to pretend to understand what this means, or how this influences the ultimate production of a farm system… especially since this isn’t for the entire draft, just top picks… that said, for a team whose minor league system is always be questioned in the media, and is ranked middle-of-the-pack by Baseball America, you’d think the team would at least spend middle-of-the-road money…
For what it’s worth, the Yankees spent $4.7 million on eight players.
…by the way, i’ve been at Citi Field all afternoon, filming a segment for SNY and Verizon, and word is the team’s top pick from this season, Stephen Matz, is in the house and could speak with reporters later tonight… where, i am sure, he will get tackled with questions about being a Mets fan from Long Island, as he should…
The Wilpons aren’t cheap I guess, huh???
That means the Royals, Marlins, and Rays spent more than the Mets. PATHETIC!
LOL, those teams had first round picks.
This is the case EVERY season.
We could have a minor league system like the Angels, Red Sox, and Yankees except our owners have been cheap. It’s completely true.
No, it is NOT the case every season. It’s not that the Mets are cheap. It’s that they don’t pick wisely or maintain their picks through proper roster planning.
You’ve got it wrong, Lorenzo.
It’s both, IMHO. The Mets lacked the early picks, it’s true. But they also didn’t aggressively spend in the rounds in which they did have picks to make up for that.
So yes they were in a tough position missing their first rounder and not having any compensatory picks. And yes they were cheap (Matz aside) when it came to the picks they did have.
What do you mean by cheap? Do they spend like the Yankees? No.
But I would be that they spend on average the same as other big market clubs (based on round and position).
People like to call them cheap. But no one will ever give reasoned proof, with numbers, to support that opinion.
I don’t think the Mets are cheap in general. I don’t want to give you that impression. Unlike a lot of people on this site, I don’t think the Wilpons are cheapskates. I think that (for whatever reason) they are cheap when it comes to the draft. I don’t need them to spend like the Yankees, but they could certainly afford to spend more than they do on the draft.
That’s an important distinction to me. I think the Mets are very willing to spend to win when it comes to free agents. I just think they are too stingy when it comes to the draft. They don’t value it as an investment as much as I believe they should.
I’m going to have to see numbers before I believe that.
Along with numbers for what they spend on international free agents.
Until I see that, I just don’t believe they are cheap when it comes to acquiring young talent.
They may not spend what the Yankees do, but they are on par with most of the other big money clubs.
agree…we haven’t been cheap in the market, maybe spent poorly, or very poorly, but we spend money.
And early on when we increased payroll (2005) we did so at the expense of losing draft picks. More recently, we have spent poorly and lost picks, but overall they spend money. They even signed the largest pitchers contract ever (at the time).
OMG I’m not even going to bother…
Just read what everyone else is writing..
Thank you theperfectgame. The Mets ARE not aggressive in the draft. Its basic and common knowledge to be true. Vcarver wake up
LOL, what do you expect when you don’t pick till #72??
Of course you’re going to spend less than everyone else. First round picks are going to get millions. The Mets had no first or second round pick.
Duh!
You really dont understand how the draft works. You should research it before defending the Wilpons cause you will realize why EVERYONE on this site is against your draft comments.
No, Lorenzo, you don’t understand it.
All other teams had first round picks or picks much earlier than the Mets. So their top picks were paid more. It’s common sense.
not the Phillies…
Ok, so that’s just one team.
That still doesn’t make the Mets the lowest spender if you go by round and position.
Do you have that data? I would really love to see it, but I’m too cheap to get a BA subscription (although this year I would’ve gotten more value out of that than I did out of my mlb.tv subscription… yuck). We can both guess one way or the other all day, but if we don’t have the data, we can only say what we suspect. And I suspect that the Mets would be near the bottom.
John Heyman was on WFAN this morning and as he has done in the past RIPPED the Mets organization for how they handle the draft and their approach.
John isnt the only guy writing it. ESPN.com, Foxsports.com, si.com, AND EVEN
SNY the tv home of the Mets have stated it in shows like The Wheelhouse and Loud Mouths.
It is true they are cheap when it comes to the draft and not aggressive. I dont make this stuff up.
I don’t have a subscription. I would like to see the data that says they are “cheap” in comparison to other big market teams (not the Yankees) based on round and position.
I don’t think we will ever see it. Because it’s not true.
But there’s no data indicating that they’re spend more than other clubs, factoring in draft position, either.
you know its a bad season when in August, there are passionate and heated debates regarding the mets and how they suck at drafting high school kids.
Where did I say they spent more? If I did, I didn’t mean to say that.
My position is that the Mets spend on par with other big money teams when it comes to the draft (and international free agents).
They are certainly not at the bottom of the barrel in terms of spending to acquire young talent.
I will welcome any proof to the contrary.
lol starz
VCarver, I apologize, replace “more than” with “on par” in my post (and then fix up the grammar). Still, there’s no evidence of either side because neither one of us has a subscription to BA, so neither one of us can run the numbers. I can’t prove my position, and you can’t prove yours. And neither one of us is going to be able to convince the other without the numbers. So it seems like we’re running in circles. But if I do get the numbers somehow, I’ll present them, whichever way it breaks.
Show me proof that the Mets spend on par with other big league clubs in the draft and I promise you will not find it because it is true..
YOu will only find that they spend less than every other big market team. Jeff Wilpon if you read his quotes today confirms that becuase they dont like spending more than what the spot requires.
But here’s the thing. The writers DO have access to these numbers. Many of these writers (like Heyman) like to throw around the “coupon” accusations in terms of the draft.
Do you think once, just once, they can substantiate the claim in their article with numbers and an argument that make sense???
Simply saying the Mets spent the least makes no sense when they didn’t have a pick till #72.
I bet they won’t trot out the numbers. Because if they did, it would contradict their opinions!
Not sure I buy the conspiracy theory regarding the writers, but hey, you never know. I agree that a straight comparison of $$ spent on the top 10 rounds is going to be misleading when the Mets didn’t have a first rounder. But the only comp I can come up with is the Phils, who, there’s no way around it, outspent us, both overall, and relative to draft position. Even if you remove the commissioner’s guidelines for the Phils’ 5th and 6th round picks (IIRC, ~$300,000 combined) from their total, they still come out over a half a million dollars ahead of the Mets.
Yes every writer and sports talk radio host that all agree the MEts dont spend in the draft are part of a huge conspiracy! LOL dumbest thing I’ve every heard.
THey all say itt and agree on it cause it is true. There is not one person in the media who has gone against the fact that the MEts dont spend money in the draft like other big market teams
And forever reason VCARVER is still thick headed to disagree with them all. They dont make it up!
Nope. Never said it was a conspiracy theory.
It’s just been a common refrain among many, but not all, writers. Just like some common and fraudulent whines about the Mets medical doctors when we know it’s not the doctors at fault, but the front office, manager and players.
What’s curious is that these writers DO have access to the numbers. We fans don’t. You would think that if they really believed it, they would give hard facts to support their position. But they can’t.
So they won’t even attempt to.
Until they do, it’s just a bunch of BS.
It’s a valid point that the Mets didn’t pick until #72, so they obviously weren’t going to be near the top of the list. However, the Phillies did not pick until #75, and they also had 9 picks in the first 10 rounds, yet they outspent us by almost a million dollars. Put another way, the Mets’ chief divisional rival, who was in a slightly worse draft position spent roughly 1.5 times what the Mets spent on the draft’s first 10 rounds.
I don’t have a BA membership, so I can’t verify this, but if you remove the first round from the equation entirely, I would expect the Mets to still come in near the bottom of this list. And if you compare the sum of slotting guidelines for each team’s picks to actual dollars spent per team, again I’d bet the Mets were near the bottom. The Rule 4 Draft is an investment the Mets FO seems unwilling to make.
To put it another way the phils signed every one of their picks through the 1st 14 rounds, met’s couldn’t even sign every pick through the 1st 5 (starting with the 2nd)
This used to be on the scale of annoyance back when only the sox/yanks exploited mlb’s draft system, now that everyone but us does, it’s a downright embarassment.
I would bet the Mets are not near the bottom if you compare money paid per round and position.
Also, the Mets didn’t sign their 5th and 6th round picks. But is it clear that both were not signed due to money issues????
Sometimes, prospects don’t sign for other reasons.
Entirely true, VCarver. And honestly, I don’t know (although if there were other issues, then it was an error in judgment to burn such valuable picks on them in the first place). I’m willing to give them somewhat of a pass on Magnifico, who from what I’ve heard increased his perceived value (and thus his contract demands) by throwing 97 after the Mets drafted him. But even with that, they should have been more aggressive not just in signing the players they did draft, but drafting higher cost (and higher value) players. Max Stassi is an example that has popped up a few times. Looking at who signed above slot after the 2nd round, it appears there were plenty of others.
The Yankees did not sign 2 of their top 3 picks last year. Are they cheap? They must be, right? Because they didn’t sign them. And those were first and second round picks!
I think it’s quite possible the Mets spent more on the draft last year than the Yankees.
But lets all dump on the Mets this year because they’re all injured and in 4th place!
But did they go over slot in the later rounds to make up for not signing those early round guys? If a team drafts above slot talent in multiple rounds, they can afford to not sign everyone. I don’t have last year’s data on the Mets and Yanks signing bonuses or how much they spent overall. Do you?
No, I told you I don’t have access to the data. But the Mets signed all their top picks last year and they were early round picks.
I would bet that Mets spent more on the draft last year than the Yankees.
IIRC, though, the Mets signed their top picks for roughly slot money. It would surprise me if the Yanks didn’t dole out at least one big bonus to a mid-late rounder, but hey I suppose it’s possible. I may have to just break down and get a subscription. This is gonna drive me nuts :-)
Please don’t lump me in with the crowd that just dumps on the Mets because they’re ridiculously injured and in 4th place. I have been plenty willing to cut the org slack, especially at the major league level this year. I think it was smart and uncharacteristically forward-thinking to stand pat and take this lost season for what it is rather than to add a Mark DeRosa or Adam LaRoche while eroding the farm. But I disagree that the Mets spend an appropriate amount on the draft, especially when they’re short on picks.
OK. Fair point. I won’t lump you in with the Lorenzos.
But I’d like to see just once, someone provide concrete proof that the Mets spend less than other big teams per round and position, historically.
With the Lorenzos?
If you want to keep acting delusional and think their is nothing wrong with this organization when the Major LEague team sucks and the Triple A team sucks thats your problem. I’m a realist.
And most people on this site that are pissed off at the organization invest in the team thru season tickets or ticket packages and have EVERY RIGHT to complain. Unlike you so dont comment and judge people unless you know where they are coming from. When you pay over $12k for season tickets you could say whatever the f * c k you want when the team sucks. Get that thru your head!
easy now…not worth stressing over this…at the end of the day, we still suck lol
LOL thats why we are arguing…
We suck cause our owner and GM sucks. The mistakes they’ve made during previous drafts and via free agency have proven to hurt this teams future. You could see it this season when we have to keep Livan in the rotation with a 17.00 ERA lol
LOL, thanks for proving my point, Lorenzo.
You react more on emotion than reasoning.
I state facts which I happen to read in the paper or hear on tv or the radio I dont make things up and just yell emotionally. Especially on this issue when it is obvious and true that the Mets do not take an aggressive monatary approach to the draft. Wake up.
I state facts too. And what you read in the papers is not necessarily fact. Especially when writers fail to back up their opinions with REAL facts (numbers).
Anyone can state an opinion in the media and they usually do. The important thing is being able to distinguish between opinion and speculation and real fact.
And you need to “wake up” Lorenzo and read people’s position correctly and be consistent with your own. I never said the Mets take an “aggressive monetary” approach to the draft. I said they are NOT CHEAP. You are the one saying they are cheap. And you are clearly wrong.
IOW, if BA did an analysis of spending by round and position, the Mets would NOT be last in the majors.
But… Magnifico was an over slot pick. They knew they would have to ante up if they drafted him. If a player states they will only sign for a certain amount, then you are committing to that amount or close to it. If guy like Magnifico drops to you, and you don’t sign him, it’s like throwing away a lottery ticket
Fine AC. That’s just one player they didn’t go way over slot for. That still doesn’t mean they are last in the majors if you go by round and position.
It’s really inane to think a club not picking till #72 would be spending a lot on the draft.
… or, a club not picking until #72 had better be spending a lot on the draft, taking more chances on players who dropped due to signability concerns, to make up for not having those early picks.
Maybe the Mets did not like the players who dropped (like Stassi).
Tell me, who else should the Mets have drafted at #72 instead of Matz??
I will bookmark this thread and see in a year from now how those draftees did.
It’s fair to say that it’s waaaaaay too soon to judge this draft. And the Mets have actually reasonably good value out of their mid-late round slot money draft picks in the past half dozen or so drafts. Even Brad Holt, who was a bit of a surprise pick and who the Mets did not receive high marks at the time for drafting, is an example of how the picks that everyone loves on draft day don’t always mean anything. But there are exceptions to every rule. And in general, the players who command the biggest initial paydays are the ones that turn into the blue chip prospects that have 2-way value (as players, and in trades). My concern is less with the specific players the Mets drafted or didn’t draft this year, and more with the strategy of taking too few chances on guys who fall due to signability concerns. Stassi may well bust, and Robbie Shields may become a stud one day. But I believe that over the long haul, the team that consistently takes the higher cost, higher expected reward guys ends up developing more impact MLBers than the team that adheres to slotting guidelines.
Re: Matz, I don’t have a problem with that pick at all. In fact, I’m happy with that pick, especially with the fact that he was expected to go earlier but fell due to signability.
TPG and anyone else …
C’mon. I want names. It’s not helpful to say the Mets would be better off going for players with signability issues if you can’t give any examples.
I’ve been having this argument for years with fans here on Metsblog. When I asked for names in the past, the one name I got back was Pedro Beato. Well you know what? The Orioles signed him the next year and he stinks. He’s got a 5.63 ERA in AA ball now, after putting up a 4.53 ERA in high A ball earlier this season. His career minor league K9 is just 6.1. My prediction is he will never amount to anything.
So, please give me names. Now. Not a year from now with the benefit of hindsight.
VCARVER you act like Stassi was the only situation when this happened. The Mets do it every year it is known knowledge…
Jeff Wilpon just ADMITTED to it!!!!!
His quote on the slot system:
“We’re in favor of the slotting system. Sometimes it gets a little out of whack because different teams go way out of the process. If everybody played within the process, we’d be happy to play there. There’s a couple of instances where you have to go out of it because people around you have done that and it costs everybody money. Everybody thinks they want more than they’re supposed to get. We have a price that we think he’s worth and we’re not going to pay more than that because if we don’t get him this year, we’ll turn around and get a supplementary pick next year in the second round. We’ll get 72A and that works in our favor.”
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/mets/#ixzz0OZBNvgRG
That is their attitude… We aren’t paying more than what the slot calls for unlike the Phillies, Yankees, Red Sox, Angels, Dodgers, etc…
They dont go the extra mile for the team EVERRRRR
Lorenzo. Read that again. Because you read it incorrectly.
Wilpon just said that they believe in the slotting system BUT that sometimes they break slotting because they have to.
Geez. Some of you Mets fans are so whacked because of this season you can’t even read correctly.
I’m not arguing with you anymore its annoying…
See thedudes posts below and everyone else on this site.
Lorenzo, I don’t think he’s saying that they aren’t willing to go above slot. In fact, he says directly that they will if they see the need. What he is saying is that thae team attaches a value on a prospect, much like you would a free agent, and they’re not willing to go above that. While you’re sure to lose some prospects that way, it’s good business. You have to trust your people to make these decisions, and if they say a player’s not worth more than x dollars you go with it.
Thank you shea. That’s exactly what Wilpon is saying. It shows just how emotional and irrational Lorenzo is. He thinks what he wants to think — despite the facts and common sense and common English!
I don’t think there is much to this story as the Mets “first” pick was the 72nd player in the draft. It’s no surprise that the first few teams on that list are Nationals, Mariners, and Padres who picked 1-3.
Completely disagree.. they didn’t sign their 5th or 6th round picks.. plenty of value to be had..
Being dead last in this list should be a major wake up call to mets fans, and yet one more thing this team does tremendously wrong.
Exactly right.
Even the Yankees had a first round pick this year.
It’s not a matter of cheapness for the Mets, but of where their picks were.
Completeley wrong.. as noted the Phils picked after us, and outspend us by a million bucks.
0 defense for this, none zilch, nadda..
Nope. That’s just one team. Show me proof that the mets spent the lowest or even in the bottom half, going by round and position.
No one has any proof.
See thedudes posts below and everyone else on this site.
Its you vs. Every writer and commentator from fox sports, espn, SNY, the newspapers, and almost every fan on this site that knows whats going on.
Your the minority that feels that way.. I’m too exhausted to argue with you.. All I know is the Mets run by The Wilpons havent won a World Series since 1986 and have made the WS only once since then are definitely doing something wrong. Sorry if your to blind to see it.
You’re right Lorenzo. All you know is that the Mets haven’t won a WS since 1986. That’s about the extent of your knowledge because you certainly don’t understand the draft.
Apparently, the fact that the Mets haven’t won a WS since 1986 is your single minded obsession. It’s so obvious in all your over emotional posts.
Pretty sure that was the first time I said it and I have been quoting newspapers, SNY, and John heyman to back up my point…
Look around you everyone on this site disagrees with you about the draft. What are you talking about????
LOL, Heyman has as much credibility as a communist newspaper. Don’t you know he is the mouthpiece of Boras? Didn’t you pay attention in the winter when the literally made up all these phantom suitors for Manny? LMAO.
I know I’m right when you have to cite Heyman as your source.
And in case you hadn’t noticed, I am not the only one who says the Mets aren’t cheap in the draft. But then again, you’re too busy ranting to notice what’s going on around you.
Ok name someone
Let me tell you how to understand this.. the mets are dead wrong in their approach to the draft, and everyone gets it but them.
and VCARVER
In the organizations defense, it seems to spend a lot on Latin American players.
Letting Magnifico walk over a million seems short sighted. This means if he comes out next year, we can’t touch him?
How can a team with one of the five highest payrolls be last in draft day signings?
We signed 1 Latin American player this year, 1… and not for that much money… it should come as no surprise that the Sox and Yanks trumped our international spending as well this year.
Right, but there were PLENTY of guys drafted after the second round who commanded million-plus bonuses. They were guys who fell because of signability and those are the guys the Mets should be snapping up.
I know the Yanks have more resources than anyone, but their 44th round pick got a bigger bonus than all but 2 Mets picks (Matz, Dotson).
Oakland gave Stassi 1.5 million in the 4th round, Orioles gave big money to a bunch of late picks, etc.
I wish you would step back from that ledge my friend
You could cut ties with all the lies
That you’ve been living in
And if you do not want to see the Mets again
I would understand
I would understand
Nationals spent the most…and will do so again next year when they have beat the contract they just signed.
The biggest problem here is not the amount of money spent, but as many people above have pointed out, how the mets go about the draft.
Thanks Yanks/Sox/Angels/etc all have great farms while signing Type A FA’s, and they do this by offering Arbitration to departing FA’s so they can get supplemental picks, trading and drafting wisely, etc.
The mets do not do this. For next year the Mets should pick up Putz’s option, and trade him at the deadline for prospects. They should either trade Wagner now, or offer him arbitration to be a set up man and when he declines pick up the supplementary picks.
Its that sort of roster management that the mets lack and therefore can not bolster their farm. That and I believe their scouts are just not as good as other teams scouts. MHO of course…
The part about Putz assumes he comes back healthy next year and show cases his dominance again so we can package him off.
Worst case scenario is he performs real well next year, helps keep us in it, and we offer him arbitration (like wagner) to continue being a set up man. assuming he declines we get supplementary picks with him. its a win-win for the mets
I don’t think it is the amount of money that the Mets need to worry about. It is the actual talent that they are drafting. Paying this class more money means nothing. If they don’t perform we got a bigger bargain then other teams. If they perform we got a great bargain. It has nothing to do with the money, just the performance.
That said, at one point the Mets were close to not signing their number 1 pick. That would have been a disgrace considering the money that he got. We need to develop talent in the minors but find a way to be cost effective. Use the money for the majors. Unless a player is head and shoulders above the rest, they should only be in the slotted area.
Hi Fred, welcome to Metsblog
haha I was actually going to say the same thing, but to Bud
a big thing to take from that is we’re talking about high school kids and college kids…players that may or may not ever see the major leagues. and if they do, its years down the road. everything is a gamble. point worth noting is that taking players over slot is big in the early rounds when the talent is higher and the ML-ready window is sooner than others…but, the draft is 50 rounds long for christ sake…its crazy to get worked up about this stuff.
Starz, you’re right and wrong.
The draft is the MOST important thing when it comes to the long-term success of an organization. That’s been proven time and time again.
It might be crazy to argue about specific players, because that’s a crapshoot, but an organizational philosophy when it comes to the draft isn’t. And the Mets seem to share your opinion that the draft doesnt matter. And it shows.
I agree with that. The philosophy needs to be addressed. It’s obviously important, we’re seeing that firsthand this season with our depleted depth, or lack there of.
I agree the draft is important but please, tell me high school kids in the real world that know what they want to do and invest millions of dollars in them. I bet you the failure rate is HUGE. To draft well is important. To spend tons of money is not. I will bet you this DC kid will end up being a bust and yet he made a ton of money. Piazza was drafted in what, the 56th round. How much money up front did he get?
The teams with good farm systems are the ones that find the hidden gems that do not command Boras money. Minnesota, Boston, Atlanta to name a few. Do those guys spend money? Yes. Do they spend 15 million on a 20 year old? No. They spend 15 million over several solid players and sign guys from countries that are not draft eligible. That is how a system is built and maintained. You can not maintain a farm system of AAA, AA, and several A teams spending tons of money on draft picks. You do it drafting wisely, not paying too much and looking at things like foreign non-draft eligible countries and rule 5 drafts to stock the system with solid players.
I have a Baseball America subscription and the numbers aren’t good for Mets. They only had two guys 500k or more (2nd rounder Matz, 13th round Dotson)
Red Sox had 6: 1.1 million to Fuentes in first round, 470k to second rounder, 1.4 million to 3rd rounder, 975 k to 7th rounder, 550k to 9th rounder
Philly was similar to Mets: 485 and 475 to first 2 picks, 300k to 6th rounder, 900k to 7th rounder
Tampa didnt sign first 2 picks but was very aggressive after that: 930k in 3rd round, 750k in 4th, 680k in 5th, 625 in 9th
Even Pittsburgh went over slot more than the Mets: 423k in 3rd round, 600k in 4th, 1.2 million in 6th, 1.1 million in 8th, 425k in 12th
thedude abides
Thanks for posting this. I still may have to get a subscription. Speaking of which, do you think the online content is is worth it? I’d probably get the magazine, too (I’m old school like that, need something to read on the john). In general, are you happy with your subscription?
I actually dont pay for it. A friend has one and I hop on every now and then.
It’s nice to have, but I probably wouldnt buy a subcription if I had to. BA has a ton of good free stuff, I can usually get by on that.
Maybe VCARVER will shut up now.
Again, prove that per round, per position the Mets spent the least.
I’ll tell you what. You email your BA login information to me and I’ll do the work.
I’lll prove that the Mets are NOT the bottom spenders based on round/position.
You guys are wrong.
Matt, I didn’t know Jeff and Omar emailed with you.
But seriously, that update is ridiculous. Philly didn’t have a first or a supplemental and spent more money.
Tampa didn’t sign its first or second-round pick and spent nearly twice as much money in the first 10 rounds.
In the first 10 rounds, the A’s signed 8 guys and spent 6 million; the Mets signed 7 guys and spent 1.8.
I was going to say well we shouldnt judge the draft by comparing our spending to other teams because who’s to say that that player who is being paid more is better than the one we got, but looking at those totals, there seems to be something wrong with what we’re doing (thats obvious to most, I know)
A’s with 8 guys for $6 million and us 7 for 1.8? I mean, wow. I would say well, i hope their scouts are right blah blah blah, but the point worth noting is, they are taking a chance. And we are being conservative. and that just wont cut it in this day and age anymore.
We get out spent EVERY year by other teams. IT is part of the problem why our minor leagues suck and people, like myself, consider the Wilpons cheap at times.
That you thedude for providing the necessary information that should shut VCARVER up because it’s exhausting arguing with him lol
dude, if you’re going to give out numbers, give the rounds and the positions of the prospects picked.
Don’t just cherry pick stats like that.
Again, I maintain that the Mets are NOT the lowest spenders in the draft if you go by round and position.
And historically, they are on par with other big market teams.
LOL you dont stop even when proving wrong…
Enough
Yes, Lorenzo, enough. You were proven wrong plus overly emotional, plus you demonstrated your inability to read Wilpon’s statement correctly.
You were wrong. Plain and simple.
???
Look bove where Shea agreed with me and corrected you.
You completely misread Jeff Wilpon’s statement which actually disproves your opinion about the Mets position on slotting.
it’s true those stats are somewhat cherry-picked, but at the same time, I included the Phillies, who are nearly identical to the Mets. If I was just trying to make my point, I wouldnt have included them
Well dude, if you email me your login info to BA or get the data off the site and send it to me or post it where I can download it, I will do the work and number crunching and prove you guys are wrong.
Send me at least two years worth of draft data — this year and last year — for the Mets and two other top market teams plus the Yankees. Names and dollar amounts. If you can get it for a few more teams as well that will be great.
This is such a great debate—I had to join in, just to feel like I was part of something. [laughing]
I guess I don’t quite understand why everyone is so upset that the Mets didn’t spend much. My own outlook on the draft is that players in the first 3-4 rounds have a fair chance at success (premium talent increases odds of being a decent ML player—less random).
After that, tho, I don’t see getting jacked up about 5th and 6th rounders not signing. My feeling (backed up by absolutely no data whatsoever) is that by the 5th/6th rounds, the likelihood of a player becoming a ML impact player is probably fairly small, and that they wouldn’t have that much greater chance at stardom than a 10th or 15th rounder would (more random).
So, my thoughts would be that you secure your picks in the first few critical rounds, then the rest of your picks (round 5 through 50 or whatever) are essentially rolls of the dice, and that spending a lot on games of chance might not be a good use of $$$.
What would be very interesting would be a breakdown of picks by round over the years, and their % of ML success. It exists somewhere……..
People are talking about the top 10 rounds specifically like you mentioned 5-10 because that’s where guys who would have been a top 3 start to fall because of sign-ability factor.
Guy who have 1st-3rd round talent that have full rides to top schools would take more money to sign, so teams pass on them to get guys who they know they can sign at a price. So guys like Matz fell to the mets where he was a 1st round talent, because teams didn’t want to have to over pay to sign him.
This is where the over-slot stuff comes into play. I believe typically it’s rounds 10+ not 5+ where the cut-off comes from. But teams like the Pirates were paying 20th rounders 1.8 million, so i could be completely off my rocker.
This is a question for ALL those who claim the Mets are too cheap in their drafts –
Who in this year’s draft did they pass over due to slotting issues who they should have signed?
Please give names. This way we can revisit this thread in a year and see just who was right. The fans who think these players were worth breaking slot for? Or the Mets who thought for one reason or another they weren’t worth drafting.
So far we have:
–Stassi
–Pedro Beato (from 2005)
And Beato has turned out to be nothing special at all.
You wont get any response because no one has info to back their claim up.
And if anyone knows a free source with historical detailed draft info by round and with dollar figures, please let me know.
I’ll be happy to prove those who think the Mets are cheap in the draft WRONG.
What I mean is that over the time the Wilpons have been the sole owners of the Mets, they have spent on par with other big market teams according to rounds/positions.
Or if anyone is willing to share login information with BA that would be great too.
i’m with the majority here. sure we weren’t set up to be big spenders with such a low pick but i really feel that we should have spent more than at least a third of baseball given our big market status. yet another season of sticking to slot (for the most part) to save short-term money at the expense of the long-term picture.
fans, our team is going straight into the crapper.