I Disagree with Boswell on Strasburg

Posted by Jeff Bergin on Mar. 24, 2009 at 10:32 PM
There are 4 comments | Add yours

Let me first say, that I thought Boswell made some great points in this article, mainly stating that drafting hitters with the #1 or Top 5 pick has a higher success rate than pitchers.  I would not disagree with the facts surrounding that statement, but, looking at it through that lens is a little misleading.  Without going into a thesis on the history of the MLB draft and the growing trend to draft college-ready players, I will merely state two points as to why the Nationals should draft Strasburg:

1. He is the best talent on the board, and fits a need for the Nationals, and that is what you do in drafts
2. They will end this nonsense of the slotting system and taking players for signability.

On this first point of talent:

By all accounts, Strasburg is the best player in this draft.  Keith Law on ESPN wrote today about his talents, and said he should skip the minors because he would already be the best pitcher on the team that possesses some good front of the rotation starters. If you have the first pick, or the first couple of picks, you take the best player that fits your needs.  If you think your team can challenge, you take a college-seasoned player that you can plug in a short time frame.

The immediate successes in the past 5-6 years have nearly ALL been college seasoned players (like Strasburg) who have faced stiff competition and have come to the bigs with the conditioning and savvy to jump in and play. Our own Ryan Zimmerman (UVA), Troy Tulowitzki (Long Beach State), Ryan Braun (Miami), Mike Pelfrey (Wichita St) were all picked in 2005, and have played key roles on their team (two ROY's) with one (Tulo) taking his team to the World Series. The high schoolers in that draft? Justin Upton (oozes potential, but still hits .240), Jay Bruce (almost there), Cameron Maybin (almost there), Andrew McCuctheon (almost, but not really almost there).

On the second, and most infuriating point for me, the signability issues:

(When LeBron James was the consensus #1 pick, the Cavs didnt hesitate because they were a small market team; that is because there is a salary cap and a rookie contract. Remember that as we go through this)

I reviewed the list today of #1 picks, and I thought it as pathetic as Boz must have as well.  Then I think of the last ten picks, and I remember names like Luke Hovechar.  Really?!?! He iS NOT a #1 pick, he was the #1 pick because of signability issues.  That draft included: Andrew Miller, Evan Longoria, Clayton Kershaw, Brendan Morrow, TIM LINCECUM!!!! Up until the day of the draft, Hovechar was not considered the #1 pick.

The MLB draft has devolved into who can be signed and not who is the best talent/fit.  The Nationals inability to sign Crow cost them a top ten pick and left their minor league system bereft of talent that it needed.  Teams cannot take that risk, so rather than signing the best player, they sign a player who they know they can bring to camp.  See the strange case of Matt Bush for San Diego, the shortstop turned felon, turned pitcher back to felon.  He was taken #1 over Justin Verlander. 

If the Nationals pass on Strasburg, they will be perpetuating the stereotype of the MLB draft - the best players do not go #1, because the top teams cannot afford the risk.  It is a vicious cycle, and do you know what happens? Those top talents end up going #'s 8, 12, 15, 31 for big money to big money teams who say "screw it" and sign Joba Chamberlain, Clay Buchholz, Cameron Maybin and Rick Porocello, and bulld a farm system that works. 

So in closing, imagine the Nationals do the right thing, and draft Strasburg. Imagine him on the Nationals.  Front-line starter to pair with Jordan Zimmerman, Ross Detwiler, Sharon Martis and either Cory Van Allen, Balester or Josh Smoker.  That is a pitching staff that could challenge any in the league, and in the short run could contend for a title. 

Maybe 15 years down the road, we will look at Strasburg and say, "what a bum, flamed out when he was 32, never as good as they said, only won 18 twice and only took a team to the playoffs three times, but .500 pitcher."  Maybe they will say he was no better than Prior.  Maybe the contract would be too big. But, Prior took the Cubs to the brink of the World Series in 2003, and for a season gave everyone in that stadium hope in their team. When the season is all said and done, would you rather say, "Well it was a .500 season, but at least we had a team full of frugal contracts and we stood up to that Scott Boras"

I am hoping not.