argument between drafting pitcher or hitter

[aso513]

You just can't pass on Harper if he is there, his upside is ridiculous even if he'll never be the Lebron of baseball.

[frieshoo]

You just can't pass on Harper if he is there, his upside is ridiculous even if he'll never be the Lebron of baseball.

I agree take Harper if the Nats pass on him.

I would take the next best bat if Harper is off the board.

[GoBucs21]

To me, this is always easy.  Take the best player available regardless of his position.

[Boston Corbett]

tallion will ask for too much

This should not enter the equation if the Pirates fell Tallion, or anyone, is the best player available at 1.2

I say no to Harper.  Not necessarily because he isn't a stud, but more because he doesn't fit our organizational needs.

Drafting for need should also not take precedent over talent.

[PMike]

To me, this is always easy.  Take the best player available regardless of his position.

GB21, you have said this over and over on these boards...and I agree every time you say it!

Mike

[Piratesprospects]

The Pirates can't worry about the "fast track" to the majors.  They need to select the best player worth their asking price. 

For a team to compete year in and year out, they need talent.  We can't just worry about the current team and what is needed.  Would you want the Pirates to select the best college SS, but pass on much better players? 

The Pirates do need left-handed power hitters too. 

The fast track to the majors comment was in reference to his bonus.  Matusz signed for slot value, but he signed a major league deal, which meant he was guaranteed to make it to the majors a few years after being drafted, no matter what happened.  I'd imagine it would cost more if he doesn't get the major league contract.  Don't read in to my comment anymore than that.  I share your view on the approach the Pirates should take.

[mouse]

What actually is the point of the major league contract? The sense I have is that the option years start to run right away, so he has to be on the major league roster by year four or he's (possibly) gone. Or is the issue something else altogether?

[Bloop and a Blast]

What actually is the point of the major league contract? The sense I have is that the option years start to run right away, so he has to be on the major league roster by year four or he's (possibly) gone. Or is the issue something else altogether?

The player would have to be added to the 40-man roster immediately as opposed to three years after his signing. Also, the team would have to begin using options to demote him from the majors to the minors earlier.

[Dale Berras Stash]

What actually is the point of the major league contract? The sense I have is that the option years start to run right away, so he has to be on the major league roster by year four or he's (possibly) gone. Or is the issue something else altogether?

The player would have to be added to the 40-man roster immediately as opposed to three years after his signing. Also, the team would have to begin using options to demote him from the majors to the minors earlier.

Right.  The ultimate point is to force the player to the majors on a quicker timeline and start accruing service time...therefore, the player will reach free agency quicker and theoretically in his prime years.

[Piratesprospects]

What actually is the point of the major league contract? The sense I have is that the option years start to run right away, so he has to be on the major league roster by year four or he's (possibly) gone. Or is the issue something else altogether?

A major league contract means the player is added to the 40-man roster, and his option years begin right away.

Take Moskos for example.  If he was given a major league contract, his option years would be:

2007: Option #1
2008: Option #2
2009: Option #3
2010: Option #4 (Players with less than five years in pro ball get a fourth option year if their first three are already used)
2011: Would have to be on the 25-man roster all year

Now with the contract he received, which was a minor league contract, the Pirates don't have to add him to the 40-man roster until November 20, 2010.  At that point he has three options remaining, which means the Pirates don't have to add him to the 25-man roster until 2014.

In hindsight, with Matusz, the contract didn't really matter.  However, in the event that he would have struggled in his minor league career, the major league contract would have been beneficial to him, as it would have provided him with the assurance that he would either be on the major league roster, or a free agent, by the 2011/2012 off-season.

[gamecckfn]

I say no to Harper.  Not necessarily because he isn't a stud, but more because he doesn't fit our organizational needs.  He is a lefty and will likely wind up being a 1b or RF and take 4 years to get to the majors.  I would rather have a RH power bat that can be here in 2 years.  Thats Brentz.

I agree with others that you do not draft for need, but even if you were, I am not sure how Harper would not fit in still.  You mentioned two positions he could play, Jones is the only guy I can think of for those two positions, and he is hardly a lock right now.  Tabata could play there, but he has no ABs in the majors.  It is not like we have established players at any spots in the OF or 1st.  And Harper will need a few years in the minors.

And we need lefty bats, which would tell me Harper is a need.

[mouse]

Thank you all for the option explanation. What a byzantine system. No wonder mistakes get made from time to time.

[Dale Berras Stash]

Baseball America had a story up today about options and contracts.  Oddly, even the author made two mistakes in the article (and corrected them in italics), so that shows you how difficult it can be sometimes.

http://www.baseballamerica.com/blog/prospects/?p=7744