2013 MLB Draft: Tyler Alamo Signs, Bryant in a Holding Pattern

In Commentary And Analysis, News And Rumors by GW20 Comments

Tyler tyler alamoAlamo Signs, Bryant Close?

Sunday we got word that Tyler Alamo, the Cubs’ 24th-rounder in the 2013 MLB draft had officially signed. Alamo was a high school catcher with a commitment to Cal State Fullerton, and speculation has been that he would require more than slot value to sign. Here’s what BA had to say about Alamo, who they ranked #348 in their top 500:

Alamo’s durable 6-foot-3, 200-pound frame has plenty of strength, but scouts use words like “rigid” and “stiff” to describe him behind the plate and in the batter’s box. His receiving skills have a long way to go to become passable. He has slightly above-average arm strength, but his footwork affects his accuracy, and he takes too long to unload the ball. He is an upright hitter whose grooved swing features an arm bar. He swings and misses too often, and scouts consider him a guess hitter. He does flash promising raw power. A team could take him around the back of the top 10 rounds and try to sign him away from Cal State Fullerton.

I don’t know completely what to make of this deal, to be honest, especially since his signing bonus figure was not released. The Cubs are in ongoing negotiations with second overall pick Kris Bryant, and last we heard the sides were far apart. The signing deadline is July 12th. As I mentioned in my last post on the topic, the last thing the Cubs want to do is put Bryant in a position in which he controls their #1 pick next year, meaning they need to stay under 105% of their pool allotment without Bryant. What this means is that the rest of their picks need to come in at no more than ~$192k overslot. Without Alamo, they were at $186,900 over, meaning Alamo could have signed for ~$105k without affecting the Bryant situation at all. It’s also possible that Bryant has lowered his asking price to a point that the Cubs feel comfortable exceeding that figure to some extent. Notably, Trevor Clifton has still not signed despite his obvious willingness, and the report of an general agreement in terms on draft day. I think it’s safe to say that the Cubs are still exercising prudence in the Bryant negotiations, not overcommitting and making sure that he is in the fold before finishing up with everyone else.

We haven’t had specifics lately on Bryant, but apparently negotiations are “in a holding pattern.” I think everyone expects him to sign, the only issue is price.

Don’t Blame Boras

There has been some chatter surrounding Bryant to the effect that this happens with every Boras client, and he’s clearly to blame. The obvious counter to this is Mark Appel, who was advised by Boras, and signed early and underslot (at least this year). Appel doesn’t have the option of returning to school, it’s true, but had he wanted to he could have taken the same tack as Bryant, putting a portion of the Astros’ remaining draft class in limbo. Had Appel waited until July 13th to sign, the Astros couldn’t have used the remainder of his slot to sign later picks.* Clearly Bryant himself has asked Boras to get him as much as possible, whereas Appel was less insistent this time around.

It’s hard to be critical of Bryant’s position. He doesn’t have much of a say in who his employer will be; the least he can do is try to get wages commensurate with his skill. What’s insidious about the draft process is that in trying for the best deal for himself, Bryant is directly affecting the Cubs’ ability to sign other draftees (in this case Alamo and Clifton). This system sets us as fans rooting for maximum acquisition of talent against the high profile pick right from the start. So selfish, hogging all the draft pool money. For example, say Bryant negotiated his way to an overslot deal, forcing Clifton to attend college. If Clifton were to excel, re-enter the draft in three years, and be picked by someone else as the next Stephen Strasburg, Bryant would be tied to the absence of Clifton for his entire career. Just depressing. Change the system.

/End Rant

*It’s true that the Astros are well under their allotted draft pool, but they would be slightly over had Appel not signed.

Share this Post

Comments

  1. EnricoPallazzo

    SVB wrote:

    Does Eloy really have that much better of a chance to be a Big Leaguer than some mid-level guy we sign for $300,000, like Johan Matos?

    to extrapolate out, what’s better, 150 players at $10k each or 1 guy at $1.5m? given that, again, since these kids are so young and therefore hard to accurately assess, i would guess that the odds are pretty good that one of the $10k guys will turn out much better than his initial ranking and also that the $1.5m guy will likely not end up performing at any sort of useful level.

    SVB, i think the sample size is too small to really address all of your questions (although i was too lazy to look this up and could definitely be wrong here). i also think that the variance involved with IFA performance relative to their ranking is pretty huge.

    (and yes, i realize the logistical issues that would apply to a strategy of drafting 150 IFAs. i’m just trying to add to SVB’s point.)

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  2. dmick89

    Here are the top 20 bonuses for IFAs up through the 2010 IFA signing period. http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/prospects/international-affairs/2011/2611342.html

    Many of them are so recent that it’s hard to reach to any conclusions. The more interesting question to me isn’t whether or not a $2.8 million guy has a better chance than 3 or 4 guys whose bonuses add up to that. I don’t know and there isn’t enough information to know one way or another.

    The best way to look at this isn’t to look at the international market, but look at the 14 and 15 year old kids here in the US. Unfortunately, there is little that is reported on them so we’d have to take the words of a few who pay attention. Their opinions would likely be biased because the kids that age being watched already are the best in the world at that age. There’s more money here in the US so I’m betting those kids have personal coaches by that time, which changes things considerably.

    Take, for example, the Little League World Series. Some of those 12 year olds look pretty awesome. Not many of them reach the big leagues. There’s obviously a big difference between 12 and 14 or 15, but there’s a bigger difference, I’d wager, between that age and 17 or 18. Especially between 20-21 like college aged players in the MLB Draft.

    I’m not saying there’s never a reason to sign someone for big money in the IFA. By all means, do so and do so as often as you can. Barring the Cubs going ape-shit wild and spending all the money on IFA in one year, I’d prefer to have consistently good years.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  3. dmick89

    With regards to Bryant, I like signing all the other guys and just telling Bryant this is what you can offer. Unless there’s someone who is ridiculously special, I don’t see the need to go overslot on a first round pick. Bryant isn’t that guy. I’d love for the Cubs to have the guy in their system, but if it’s losing next year’s pick or getting 2 first round picks next year, I’ll gladly take the 2 picks next year.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  17. SVB

    EnricoPallazzo wrote:

    (and yes, i realize the logistical issues that would apply to a strategy of drafting 150 IFAs. i’m just trying to add to SVB’s point.)

    Isn’t that what the fancy new digs in the DR are for?

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  19. SVB

    If Clifton were to excel, re-enter the draft in three years, and be picked by someone else as the next Stephen Strasburg, Bryant would be tied to the absence of Clifton for his entire career.

    Well, I doubt it, because most people would have forgotten about it. It would only be remembered at OV and 2 other of the 2 or 288 worst Cubs blogs around. Too long between now and Clifton’s potential arrival in the bigs. Definitely would not be remembered at BCB because Al can’t even remember what he thinks about Frenchy.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  20. Author
    GW

    arm-bar is when a hitter’s front arm becomes extended across is chest when
    loading his hands. This is similar to a golfer’s front arm as he loads up to drive
    a golf ball. This is a result of too much movement with the bottom hand when
    loading. This problem makes it difficult to execute a short approach and
    therefore leads to a bad swing-path.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

Leave a Comment