Blue Jays sign 16 of their picks
The Blue Jays signed 16 of the 40 players selected from the 2013 First Year Player Draft and five from the top 10 rounds on Thursday. Terms of the deals were not disclosed but should leak out over the coming days.
Here is the list of players who signed:
3rd rounder — Murphy, Patrick Hamilton HS (AZ) RHP R/R HS 6’04” 195lbs
4th rounder — Smith, Evan Mary G Montgomery HS (AL) LHP R/L HS 6’05” 190lbs
5th rounder — Lietz, Daniel Heartland CC (IL) LHP L/L J1 6’02” 200lbs
7th rounder — Greene, Conner Santa Monica HS (CA) RHP R/R HS 6’03” 165lbs
10th rounder — Custons, Garrett Air Force (CO) C R/R SR 6’00” 200lbs
12th rounder — Mayza, Tim Millersville University (PA) LHP L/L JR 6’03” 205lbs
13th rounder — Locastro, Timothy Ithaca College (NY) IF R/R JR 6’01” 175lbs
15th rounder — Davis, Jonathan Central Arkansas (AR) OF R/R JR 5’08” 188lbs
16th rounder – Jansen, Danny Appleton A West (WI) C R/R HS 6’02” 215lbs
21st rounder — Reeves, Mike Florida Gulf Coast University (FL) C L/R SR
23rd rounder — Kalfus, Brendan St. Marys (CA) OF S/R SR 5’11” 180lbs
24th rounder — Hurley, Sean Central Arizona College (AZ) OF R/R J2 6’03” 225lbs
27th rounder — Florides, Andrew Holy Cross HS (NY) IF R/R HS 6’01” 170lbs
29th rounder — Pickens, Garrett Delta State (MS) RHP R/R 5S 6’01” 185lbs
36th rounder — Harris, David Southern Arkansas University (AR) IF/OF R/R SR 6’01”
37th rounder — Barber, Brett Ohio University (OH) RHP R/R SR 6’01” 180lbs
Also, there was a media scrum with Blue Jays director of amateur scouting Brian Parker earlier this week. There have been a couple of articles on the main site but I didn’t have a chance to post the full Q+A until now. Since the signings happened, might as well get it up now. Enjoy.
Value guys that slipped…
“We took the approach this year that we were trying to get a few of those guys. I think we’re hoping to save some money in the top 10 to give us some flexibility later. Brentz is someone we hope to talk to this summer, Lauer is another one, Tewes is a third one. Those are three kind of high school pitchers that we have some interest depending on what happens for us in the top 10 those would be some guys we’d look at.”
On going in with a set plan or with multiple ones…
“A little bit of both. You go in with a plan and then you adjust. I think it’s obvious one of our plans was to target pitching. We’ve traded a lot of pitchers in the last year and we weren’t going to pass on position players if they were better but it just so happened we were able to get some of the arms we liked and had interest in. It was a focus to try to add as much pitching as we could so we were able to do that.”
On high number of high school arms that were taken…
“I think that’s just how it played out on the board. We had some college guys we liked but when it came our time to pick the best one was the high school guy. We didn’t go all high school because that’s what we wanted to do. We wanted to mix it up, it just so happened it ended up going to high school. There were some college guys that we were very high on and would have considered in a lot of the higher round spots.”
Lots of high school arms in the system as well…
“It’s one thing we do well. When you do something well, it’s try to get as many of those types of guys as we can. Dane Johnson our pitching coordinator and our Minor League staff in general has done a pretty good job of developing those types of guys, whether it’s high school or college, we’re looking for a certain type of thing and those are the types of guys we got.”
Lack of diversity in the portfolio concerning?
“We took some college arms that we like a little bit later. Matt Boyd and Graveman that we took in the top 10, they’re college seniors but they’re actually very successful college seniors at big time baseball programs. Those are two college starters that we like and we think can mix in with the high school guys. They’re both pitching in the Super Regionals this week and they might be in the college World Series next week. I think we mixed some of those guys in a little bit later. When you’re at the top of the Draft you don’t want to pass on a better player or a better talent because we’ve already taken three high school guys and we don’t want to take another. We just wanted to get as many guys as we could.”
Sign quick part of drafting strategy?
“Absolutely. I think the sooner we can get these guys, especially the high school kids, the sooner they get into our system and get going the better. If our guys can get their hands on them Day 1, that’s better not only for what they can do this year but where they can go next year. It helps them this year but more importantly it gives them a jump start on where they’re going to be placed next year too.”
Confident in advance of Bickford in signability…
“I think it’s one of those things, especially higher in the Draft, the top few rounds, you really need to know on that kind of stuff before you take a kid. We did our research, we did our background on him and the other guys at the top of the Draft and we feel good, we started talking to him and his adviser, we feel good but obviously things happen. It’s of those things where we feel with where we’re going.”
On strategy of going underslot on some guys early to pay guys after 10th round…
“It’s more case by case. If we were able to get a guy for a little less than we could use that money later. In some cases, we might pay a later guy more than an earlier guy but it’s more in relation to the top 10 rounds. That’s where the money is counted by MLB and that sort of thing. Without the extra picks, we had to see what was there when it came our time to pick. I know they had a lot of the comp picks early last year, we didn’t have that, we had to just wait and see who was there when we picked.”
Also some leftovers from a scrum with Alex Anthopoulos…
Balance between selecting pitching/position players.
“There is. We didn’t set out to take nine arms in the first nine picks. But we didn’t want to force it. A lot of times you sit there going ‘well, do we need a shortstop? Do we need a third baseman?’ There’s so many failures in the draft. If you start trying to draft by needs, other than when you’re filling you’re organization, that’s where you make mistakes. You really have to take the best player available.
“Position players are tough, and not that many teams have success with it. And that’s why you’ll see most position players come in the first two round of the draft. There was a position player we would’ve loved to have, but he didn’t fall to us… There’s always players that we like. All of our draft picks in the past, I don’t think we’ve been able to select the first player on out board, but you do have to take the best player available. It worked out that way. …it just fell that way.”
Allocation of resources same as 2012…
“No. This year it seemed like there were fewer signability players that we were very high on. There were two players that would’ve been well over slot deals. Guys we would’ve loved to have. One of them we would’ve strongly considered with our tenth pick. He just wanted to go to school. Another one we would’ve strongly considered with the 47th pick, same thing, wanted to go to school.
“We would’ve paid them, especially the 47th pick, well above slot. They just didn’t want to play in any capacity. You look at Smoral last year there was a price point to forgo him going to school. … It was all reflective on what talent was available at the draft. We did feel like that with the 10 pick we’d get a good player, but we didn’t think the depth was there that had been there in the past.”
“We’re not concerned about it. … with all that being said there’s no guarantees. We’ll try hard to sign him. We believe he wants to play pro. I say this each year, you can lift all my quotes for the first two or three years. The same ones apply. We’re optimist, we’re going to do our best, and we hope to get him signed.”
Seniors signed 6-10, strategy?
“There was some strategy to that. Last year, I think we went on a round 3-10, 4-10, and I think last year they were all $1,000 seniors. Here, the talent level was close. There was a bunch of players that we felt, because of the way the draft is set up and the pool of money would not go into the top 10, although they were top 10 to us, so there was added upside to save that pool money on 6-10, and be able to take them after the 10th round. But it gave us flexibility. …Now that the money has been saved in those top 10 rounds, that’s the key. You can reallocate however you want after the 10th.”
Anyone in particular?
“Plenty. There’s players that we took 11-30 that we would’ve taken in the fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth. There was questions on their signability. They were a little vague on what the dollars would be. So we had a good sense they would slide. And now we have the ability to move around. We still took players that we liked. There’s no question that the fact they there were seniors were a huge part of them being selected.”
High number of school picks…
“We looked at a lot of college players as well. At the 47th pick we had a college player lined up, got taken a few picks ahead of us, so we went with the high school player. It just worked itself out that way. We didn’t go into it saying high school or college. There’s certainly some college players that went ahead of 10 that we would’ve loved to have at our pick at 10. It just worked out this way. Everyone says the same thing, best player available, you factor in the risk. But, that’s just the way it worked out for us.”