Braves Draft Pick Situation Not That Bad

by gondeee on Dec 18, 2009 10:52 AM EST Comment 57 comments

There were some groans from Atlanta Braves fans when the Baltimore Orioles signed Mike Gonzalez earlier this week. Groans because that was our last chance to get a first round draft pick in 2010. The Orioles first-round pick is protected, which means we get their second-round pick (along with a supplemental first round pick). This may not be such a bad thing, though.

As it stands now, the Braves will have three of the top-75 picks in next June's draft. We will get the 35th pick (compensation in the supplemental first round for Gonzalez), the 56th pick (the Orioles 2nd round pick as compensation for Gonzalez), and the 72nd pick (our standard 2nd round pick). All of this is assuming we don't sign any more type-A free agents, in which case we would also forfeit our second-round pick (73 overall).

We had similar picks in 2008 when we took a trio of strong young pitchers -- Brett DeVall, Tyler Stovall, and Zeke Spruill -- two of whom are considered by many to be two of our top-10 prospects. While first round picks are coveted, the Braves have done well with their second round picks. Players such as Freddie Freeman, Jeff Locke, Yunel Escobar, Jo-Jo Reyes, and Brian McCann were all second round picks by the Braves in the last decade. The Braves have actually done a better job of holding onto their second round picks of the last decade than their first round picks.

The point is that there is a lot of talent in the second round of the draft and the Braves will be able to take full advantage of that. By not having a first rounder, they also free up draft money to possibly take some chances and pay some above slot bonuses to guys in the lower rounds who were projected to go higher but didn't. The Braves have generally had good luck with these types of players in the past.

It would have been nice to have two more picks had Rafael Soriano not accepted arbitration, but we're still in good shape for next year's draft.

0 recs | Comment 57 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

How did you come up with those pick numbers?

I had the Braves getting #37, #56 and #72. Methodology…http://mvn.com/chopnchange/2009/12/17/thursday-thinking-maddux-gonzo-nady-jones.html

by tgthree on Dec 18, 2009 11:01 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

PW keeps a consistent listing of supplemental order here, which I trust. I believe some of the guys listed ahead of Gonzo signed with their former team. You’re right about 72, though, I’ll change that. I was counting on the BA draft list site for their first round order, but they have an extra guy in there for the Rangers.

by gondeee on Dec 18, 2009 11:18 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

PW is right. I for some reason had thought the Elias rankings of the players determined the supplemental round order, but he’s right: it’s in reverse order of the teams’ standing from the previous season. Consider my post edited.

by tgthree on Dec 18, 2009 12:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I origionally thought that, too.

Mike Axisa (the draft guru at River Avenue Blues) helped me out on my methodology.

As it stands now, unless Jose Valverde signs a minor-league deal, goes to Japan, re-signs with the Astros, retires, or sits out until late June (or something even more unlikely), the Braves get pick number 35 in the supplemental round.

The second rounder is a function of how many compensated FA’s sign with a new team. Right now, 8 compensated FA’s have signed (Gonzo, Scutaro, Lyon, Lackey, Wagner, Figgins, Zaun, Pudge), so the lowest that pick will be is 44 (James Paxton’s pick also counts). There are 12 more (Valverde, Holliday, Bay, Duchscherer, Barajas, Shouse, Beltre, Byrd, DeRosa, Marquis, Rodney, Pineiro) that could potentially sign with a new team, so 56 is the lowest we’d pick with the Orioles’ 2nd rounder.

Another thing of note. If the Orioles sign Matt Holliday, Jose Valverde, or Jason Bay, the Braves don’t get that 2nd rounder, they get a 3rd rounder.

The Braves pick 16 spots after the Orioles, so worst-case scenario, they pick 72nd in the 2nd round. Best-case, they pick 60th.

So here’s where the Braves stand.

Supplemental round: 34-35

2nd round: From O’s: 44-56, their own: 60-72

http://www.capitolavenueclub.com/

by PWHjort on Dec 18, 2009 12:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't consider any of that very likely...

Braves won’t lose any ground, since I don’t think the Orioles are in on Holliday, Bay, or Valverde. Their second-round picks might move up a slot or two if one of the Type A or Bs signs with his old team, but otherwise I think it’s pretty set at 35, 56 and 72. Really not a bad haul of picks.

by tgthree on Dec 18, 2009 1:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Right.

This was an academic exercise, exploring all the possibilities.

Smart money’s on 35, 56, and 72.

http://www.capitolavenueclub.com/

by PWHjort on Dec 18, 2009 3:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

The lastest from River Ave is 34-44-60-92.

The Angels are loading up with 5 picks in the first 37 and 8 in 106. That will restock the system and cost a lot of money with that many high picks.

by braves99 on Dec 19, 2009 1:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Those are best-case scenario.

http://www.capitolavenueclub.com/

by PWHjort on Dec 19, 2009 6:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

We will have see what the NEW scouting team will focus on in the next draft in June. HS types with highupside, JCOs, or 4 yr college types….it will be interesting how FW buddies from his O’s days will do and how the $$ will be used to get the BEST player available when we draft rather than a simple signability issue… Wait and see approach….

by Hanson-Ace on Dec 18, 2009 11:36 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

The MLB draft is so deep and so unpredictable, does it really matter? I think less than half of the first-round picks ever go on to have enough Major League appearances to consider it a career. For every Chipper there’s probably half a dozen duds. On the other hand, stars do rise out of the deep rounds and there are so many rounds I’m sure we’ll still get someone good. So we pass on a Cod League attitude that thinks he needs a multi-million signing bonus, and has a 50/50 shot of being a career minor leaguer. Big Loss.

49th State Hardball
Fan Blog of the Alaska Baseball League

by Sweatsack on Dec 18, 2009 11:41 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Totally Agree

I mean just to throw a few names out there:

Mike Piazza – 62nd Round
Tommy Hanson – 22nd Round
Albert Pujols – 13th Round

Obviously the list could go on and on, but I think this illustrates the point.

by whunt13 on Dec 18, 2009 12:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I disagree to an extent

Yes, there is talent to be found throughout the draft. Some players, like Piazza, are unexpectedly good—-he was only drafted because he connection to Lasorda. Many others have surprised like he did. Some are drafted in low rounds because they are expected to go to college and not sign and then unexpectedly sign. Those guys are a bit different because they would have been high draft picks if teams thought they would sign.

That all being said, first round picks pan out, on average, a lot more often than second round picks, and so on. So it is good to have as many high picks as possible. True, there are some busts, but the draft is the most cost effective way to obtain talent—-while there are plenty of busts, the huge value that comes from drafting great players and having them cheaply before they are eligible for free agency more than makes up for the busts.

The Braves aren’t in bad shape with the picks that they have. We could have been in better shape if Soriano hadn’t accepted arbitration (nothing the Braves could do about that), if we hadn’t signed Wagner or if we had offered arbitration to LaRoche (still don’t understand why we didn’t do that—-I assume if he would sign for $9 million for one year, we’d do that in a heartbeat).

So, yes, I think it matters, but no we are not in that bad shape. We could be in better shape, but it is not horrible by any means.

by cavebird on Dec 18, 2009 12:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Tommy Hanson was a draft and follow

Completely different animal.

http://www.capitolavenueclub.com/

by PWHjort on Dec 18, 2009 12:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

You can’t argue that these guys are the rule. They are much more the exception. Like in the NFL, yes Tom Brady was a 6th round pick. It doesn’t mean I’d rather have a 6th round pick than a first rounder

by eaheckman10 on Dec 18, 2009 12:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

This. Look at the percentages of the % of 1st/2nd round picks panning out vs. the % of later round picks. Sure great names can be cherry picked, but that not anywhere close to the reality of the situation.

by soup du jour on Dec 18, 2009 6:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Steroids
Jesus
Steroids.

MATT DIAZ IS THE F**K*NG MAN.
They made me change my signature...

by nick9314 on Dec 18, 2009 12:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

That sounds like a good name for a band. ;)

And c’mon, Pujols is not steroids. He’s HGH.

by cavebird on Dec 18, 2009 1:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

aight. same concept

MATT DIAZ IS THE F**K*NG MAN.
They made me change my signature...

by nick9314 on Dec 18, 2009 1:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

jo jo reyes?

Listen, yes there is going to be some value in the 2nd and even in later rounds. But a rational agent would always rather have first rounders, at least for the reason that by definition you can get any of those 2nd rounders plus others in the 1st round.

It’s easier to just assume that Wren and Co are always right – it helps you sleep at night – but the fallout from this soriano/wagner F up has negative consequences. The Braves would have gotten the O’s 2nd rounder had the closer thing not been mismanaged.

by jerryclore on Dec 18, 2009 1:46 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

i like the idea that saving on a 1st round pick...

may allow us to take a few “signability” guys in later rounds and pay them what they’d want.

by Mr. Sanchez on Dec 18, 2009 2:08 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Not That Bad, You're Kidding!

By your line of reasoning, we should be thrilled to give up a first for Wagner and secure a second for Gonzalez. Yes you can find stars in the later rounds but you find more stars in the first round! It hasn’t been explained why we feel a broken down Wagner who was awefull his last two years in New York is a better closer option than Gonzalez at virtually the same salary WITHOUT giving up a pick!

by franklinjerry on Dec 18, 2009 2:20 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Billy Wagner is better than Gonzo

a simple look at stats would tell you that. And, Wagner can close, Gonzo was only like 10 for 17 in save opportunities.

And what do you mean Wagner’s last two years in New York were awful? Have you even looked at his stats? In 2007 he had a 1.13 WHIP and a 2.63 ERA, and in 2008 he was even better with an outstanding 0.89 WHIP and a 2.30 ERA.

"Sometimes I wonder what'd it be like to be outside and not hear the birds chirping...I think it'd be kind of nice."

by alligatorimpersonator on Dec 18, 2009 2:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

He was 10-13 in save situations

Four of his blown saves were in the 8th inning, therefore, not save situations.

Gonzo is better than he usually gets credit for. K rates are comparable, both are injury risks, but Gonzalez is younger. Wagner’s usually giving up fewer walks, but given the age difference, he’s not far and away the better option.

by Bronn on Dec 18, 2009 3:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

not far and away

but better none-the-less.

and if baseball is about getting better, what’s your argument again?

by apoxonbothyourhouses on Dec 18, 2009 3:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

how can you blow a save...

if it’s not a “save situation”?

by Mr. Sanchez on Dec 18, 2009 5:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

It's a silly stat the way it is done.

Middle relievers always have horrible save percentage numbers. If they come on in the eighth or seventh or sixth and would theoretically get a save if they finished the game, that is a “save situation.” They won’t be allowed to finish the game, so they don’t get the save if they pitch well (they get a hold), but any time they surrender the lead, that is a blown save. The only fair way to judge someone who has spent time in middle relief is the save/hold percentage: saves + holds/saves+holds+blown saves.

by cavebird on Dec 19, 2009 7:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Then again...

If they were so fantastic, why aren’t they closing?

Overheard in press box, from local reporter: 'If this Moore kid was any good, they'd be up 31-0 right now.'
--Darin Gantt, on CAR@NE

by MichaelProcton on Dec 21, 2009 8:27 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Gonzo had fringy command.

Period. Exclamation point.

He had nasty stuff and was a good pitcher, but I can’t say I’m disappointed I never have to watch him struggle to find the zone again.

http://www.capitolavenueclub.com/

by PWHjort on Dec 18, 2009 5:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

You can find about as many stars on the international free agent market as you can in the first round, so chill.

I wrote a novel, it's about baseball, you should buy it: https://www.createspace.com/3407939
www.dropoutproductions.com

by cbwilk on Dec 18, 2009 4:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

weak

a dismissive comment and no evidence. can this now be called pulling a “cbwilk”?

by jerryclore on Dec 18, 2009 5:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Who are you and why is your goal for everyone to hate you?

I wrote a novel, it's about baseball, you should buy it: https://www.createspace.com/3407939
www.dropoutproductions.com

by cbwilk on Dec 18, 2009 10:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

hahahaha

"Sometimes I wonder what'd it be like to be outside and not hear the birds chirping...I think it'd be kind of nice."

by alligatorimpersonator on Dec 18, 2009 11:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Alright cheif, I can never turn down a good challenge. So here’s what I did: I looked at this year’s All-Star rosters. Granted, they aren’t the perfect measure of what constitutes a star, but they’re good enough for a cursory glance to attempt to prove my theory. I looked at how the players (72 total) were originally acquired and here’s what I came up with:
1st round picks: 22
Supplemental 1st round picks: 3
2nd round: 8
3rd round: 2
4th round: 4
5th round: 2
6th round: 5
8th round: 2
11th round: 3
13th round: 3
20th round: 1
22nd round: 1
23rd round: 2
25th round: 1
36th round: 1
38th round: 1
43rd round: 1
American Amateur free agent: 1
International Amateur free agent: 10

This method clearly has it’s flaws, since it’s only one year and you can’t really make any definitive claims off the data, but my guess is these numbers would pan out pretty close in any given year. They certainly wouldn’t be exact but they probably wouldn’t be wildly different either.
What we see is that clearly the 1st round garners the most talent, (31% of the rosters) but immediately following that is International free agents (14% of the rosters). So, while my original claim that you can get “about as many stars on the international free agent market as you can in the first round” was way off, by over 50%, it was still partially valid in that the international free agent market appears to be the next best way to acquire star players.

I wrote a novel, it's about baseball, you should buy it: https://www.createspace.com/3407939
www.dropoutproductions.com

by cbwilk on Dec 18, 2009 11:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

everyone must hate me!!

While I wouldn’t argue that some stars can be found from the international free agent market, saying about as many as in the 1st round of the first year player’s draft is a strong overstatement. And not something that should be thrown around without support, as you demonstrated.

by jerryclore on Dec 19, 2009 2:18 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Great chief, I just showed you were right. So, you know, long walk, short pier, all that.

I wrote a novel, it's about baseball, you should buy it: https://www.createspace.com/3407939
www.dropoutproductions.com

by cbwilk on Dec 19, 2009 2:47 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

There are discussions that the next agreement will include international amateurs in the draft. That would really strengthen the first few rounds and prevent the big money guys from going after the best ones. Higher round picks would gain a great deal more importance.

by braves99 on Dec 19, 2009 12:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I looked at drafts for the past 10 years. Obviously the last couple haven’t had time but the previous ones, I was lucky to find 4/5 names I’d ever heard of and many of those were Braves picks because I look for those. Its the biggest crap shoot in pro sports. I would would be very happy with a good number of 3-5 round picks. Good chance for quality at a better price.

by braves99 on Dec 19, 2009 1:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Nice talking point.

A comment on top-10 picks from a previous discussion:

Of the 30 top-10 picks from 2005-2007, 22 (73.33%) have made it to the majors:

David Price
Matt Wieters
Ross Detwiler
Matt LaPorta
Madison Bumgarner
Luke Hochevar
Evan Longoria
Greg Reynolds
Brandon Morrow
Jeff Clement
Andrew Miller
Clayton Kershaw
Drew Stubbs
Tim Lincecum
Justin Upton
Alex Gordon
Ryan Zimmerman
Ryan Braun
Ricky Romero
Troy Tulowitzki
Mike Pelfrey
Cameron Maybin

The list that hasn’t made it includes:

Brad Lincoln
Jarrod Parker
Mike Moustakas
Josh Vitters

All of whom have pretty damn good chances of making it to the majors.

27 of the next 39 (69.23%) top-10 picks who signed with their drafting teams (drafts 2001-2004, Wade Townsend didn’t sign in after being drafted top-10 in 2004, flamed out after being drafted top-10 and signing in 2005, instead) have made it to the majors:

Justin Verlander
Phil Humber
Jeff Niemann
Jeremy Sowers
Homer Bailey
Delmon Young
Rickie Weeks
Nick Markakis
Paul Maholm
John Danks
Ian Stewart
Tim Stauffer
B.J. Upton
Zach Greinke
Prince Fielder
Jeff Francis
Drew Meyer
Scott Moore
Adam Loewen
Bryan Bullington
Joe Mauer
Mark Prior
Gavin Floyd
Mark Teixeira
Chris Burke
John Van Benschoten
Dewon Brazelton

Over 70% of the top-10 draft picks from 2001-2008 have made it to the majors. Some crappy players like Chris Burke and Ross Detwiler. Some studs like Mark Teixeira and Tim Lincecum.[…]

It’s not a crap shoot. There is a failure rate, but it’s not a crap shoot. If you’re smart and diligent, you can make the draft extremely productive and predictable. It’s only a crap shoot if you’re a lazy, cheap, or dumb organization.

http://www.capitolavenueclub.com/

by PWHjort on Dec 19, 2009 6:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Dewon Brazelton. Haha, saw him at an independent league game this year. He’s much less of a douche now that he’s a complete failure.

I wrote a novel, it's about baseball, you should buy it: https://www.createspace.com/3407939
www.dropoutproductions.com

by cbwilk on Dec 19, 2009 6:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

lol, that’s some tasty humble pie.

by soup du jour on Dec 20, 2009 1:25 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

First time I ever met him was in ST 2002, the year after he got drafted. I was in ST Pete hanging out outside the stadium getting autographs of guys as they came into the park and he came in with Victor Zambrano (who is a real a-hole himself). Zambrano stops and signs for me and the other two guys that are there and Brazelton is just looking at us with disgust. He’s like, “What the hell are you people doing here? Don’t you have jobs?” I usually don’t tell a player off, no matter how much he upsets me, but the fact that this punk nobody mouthed off to us when nobody was even bothering him was too much. “Yeah,” I told him, “I do have a job. And on my vacation I chose to come to Florida and watch baseball and see if I could get autographs from players who might be nice enough to sign for me. Having some jackass bonus baby give me shit is just an unfortunate side effect.” The funny thing was he didn’t have a comeback, he just kind of muttered and walked off. And he never remembered me the twenty times I saw him while he was sucking for Durham for three years.

I wrote a novel, it's about baseball, you should buy it: https://www.createspace.com/3407939
www.dropoutproductions.com

by cbwilk on Dec 20, 2009 2:12 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Fixed

And he ~~never remembered~~ pretended to have forgotten me the twenty times I saw him while he was sucking for Durham for three years

Overheard in press box, from local reporter: 'If this Moore kid was any good, they'd be up 31-0 right now.'
--Darin Gantt, on CAR@NE

by MichaelProcton on Dec 21, 2009 8:36 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

thanks for compiling that PWH...

I remember when you first put that up. I am still amazed the hit rate is so high. I expected 40% at best.

by Mr. Sanchez on Dec 19, 2009 9:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

So how often have we had a top-10 pick.

I don’t really see how that’s relevant to our franchise.

Overheard in press box, from local reporter: 'If this Moore kid was any good, they'd be up 31-0 right now.'
--Darin Gantt, on CAR@NE

by MichaelProcton on Dec 21, 2009 8:34 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Awful, really?

Since ‘07, Wagner is 61-73 in saves (a very solid 84%.) Compare that to Gonzalez, who was 26-35 (74%), and lost more than one opportunity to be the primary closer to Soriano. Wagner also had a 179 ERA+, while Gonzo only had a 149. WHIP tells the same story: 1.03 for Wagner, 1.22 for Gonzalez. Maybe you like Gonzalez’ ability to strike out batters. But he only had 10.6 K/9, and Wagner had a 10.9. K:BB is another pro-Wagner stat: 3.95 to 2.67. And for all the concerns about Wagner’s durability, he’s pitched more since ‘07 than Gonzalez has: 131 to 125. And in six less appearances, at that. And finally, Wagner gives up fewer HRs: .8/9 compared to Gonzalez’ .9/9.

Overheard in press box, from local reporter: 'If this Moore kid was any good, they'd be up 31-0 right now.'
--Darin Gantt, on CAR@NE

by MichaelProcton on Dec 21, 2009 8:25 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Not buying it.

You’re just trying to justify what we do have rather than what we COULD have.

I think Wren has done a good, borderline-great job for us, but he clearly botched this situation by not waiting to sign Wagner. With the Soriano acceptance (and not trading him), we would have our first round pick, the supplemental, the O’s 2nd, and our own 2nd.

I agree that its not THAT terrible, but it didn’t have to turn out this way with a little patience shown on the part of Wren.

by soup du jour on Dec 18, 2009 6:16 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Seems to me that Wren preferred Wagner, which is why he went ahead and signed him.

I wrote a novel, it's about baseball, you should buy it: https://www.createspace.com/3407939
www.dropoutproductions.com

by cbwilk on Dec 18, 2009 10:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

agreed

by jerryclore on Dec 19, 2009 2:19 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

We are not privy to inside info. The way this was handled, make sme think that someone else was ready to move on Wagner and Wren had to move quick or lose out. Same with Saitio. He is a pretty much a bargin at his price. I can see several teams wanting him. I’d rather reserve judgement because we don’t know everything going on behind the scenes. He took a risk on Soriano and it backfired but we’ll never know if it cost us or not. The kid we got for him has above average potential and may turn out better than the draft pick.

by braves99 on Dec 19, 2009 12:06 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs

This.

Overheard in press box, from local reporter: 'If this Moore kid was any good, they'd be up 31-0 right now.'
--Darin Gantt, on CAR@NE

by MichaelProcton on Dec 21, 2009 8:40 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

...or Wagner, his preferred choice, could have been signed by somebody else.

Overheard in press box, from local reporter: 'If this Moore kid was any good, they'd be up 31-0 right now.'
--Darin Gantt, on CAR@NE

by MichaelProcton on Dec 21, 2009 8:39 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

People that are complaining need to stop thinking about what COULD have happened but rather the reality of the situation. Ideally we walk away with 4 picks from our two relievers and only have to give up one for Wagner but the reality is that we still got an extra pick (from the orioles) for moving down ~15 spots. Given the volatile nature of selecting players, I’d rather have multiple early round chances to “hit” rather than one high pick that still has close to the same potential as the second rounder. Reality is we had one first and one second, now we have one comp and two seconds. That’s an improvement. Also as was said we can attempt to go after signability guys this year just like Oakland did with a guy like Max Stassi last year

by McCann's the Man on Dec 18, 2009 6:21 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Wha? Why would I stop thinking about what COULD have happened when what DID happen was so avoidable? Ideally we walk away with Soriano as our closer and 4 1st/2nd round picks.

by soup du jour on Dec 18, 2009 6:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

And ideally, Soriano doesn't get hurt in 2010...

…in that scenario, but he has gotten hurt in 3 of the past eight years, so that’s a big question mark going into a season with him as closer and no back-up option like Gonzo available.

by cavebird on Dec 19, 2009 7:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Well, you could say the same about Wagner since he had TJ surgery. But yes, the whole “We don’t have all the information” comes into play here cause maybe Wagner had another option burning a hole in his pocket so Wren had to pull the trigger. But I still don’t see Wagner as the type of guy that you need to be that antsy over.

by soup du jour on Dec 20, 2009 1:25 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

The injury risk is an interesting comparison.

Wagner is older and coming off TJ surgery, while Soriano is coming off a healthy season and younger. On the other hand, Wagner has had a relatively healthy career—-the TJ surgery was his first major injury while Soriano has been injured often.

by cavebird on Dec 20, 2009 9:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

For what it is worth...

….the side has a link to an interesting post regarding the value of a second round pick from the Orioles SB Nation website. Not particularly scientific, but lots of interesting stuff. Of course, they are looking at it from the was it worth it to sign Gonzo perspective.

And if anyone here is an SB Nation guy (or knows them) can they pass along this suggestion: allow users on any site to post on any site. I would love to hear ideas from fans of other related teams regarding trades and free agent signings.

by cavebird on Dec 19, 2009 8:17 PM EST reply actions 0 recs