Mariners Sign Danny Hultzen, Brad Miller
by Jeff Sullivan on Aug 15, 2011 9:37 PM PDT
in Seattle Mariners Transactions
Email
PrintIt all came down to the very end, like it pretty much always does, but now we have the official news. The Mariners have:
- Signed first-round pick Danny Hultzen
- Signed second-round pick Brad Miller
- Not signed third-round pick Kevin Cron
Cron - a big beast of a man out of Arizona - will attend TCU. He'd already checked into his dorm in advance of tonight's signing deadline, which was a bad indication, and sure enough, the M's couldn't get anything done. Kevin Cron's brother, C.J. Cron, is a prospect in the Angels' system who recently dislocated his kneecap, so for those of you poor souls who wish ill upon the unsigned, almost.
Miller is a shortstop out of Clemson who has a polished collegiate eye at the plate. I'm not going to go back over his scouting report, and what's really important here is that the Mariners liked him enough to draft him in the second round, and now they have him inked to a contract. That's what we want. We want these guys signed. Miller signed. So simple!
Finally, Hultzen. Hultzen signed right at the deadline, and here are the details:
Hultzen gets five-year major-league deal. Guaranteed $8.5M. $6.35M signing bonus. Max value $10.6M
The part that probably sticks out to you is "major-league deal." Don't freak out. What that means is that Hultzen is immediately placed on the 40-man roster, and he uses an option when he's sent to the minors. A five-year major league deal does not mean that the Mariners only control Hultzen for five years - the control situation is the same as it is with anyone else. He'll just have to negotiate a new contract when the five years are up.
You'll remember that the Mariners signed Dustin Ackley to a five-year major league contract, too. The Mariners saw Ackley as a fast mover, and they see Hultzen as a fast mover. If things go as the Mariners hope they go, Hultzen shouldn't be in the minors for long.
As far as the actual money is concerned, whatever. I don't really care what these guys get paid so long as they get signed, since I figure the Mariners wouldn't commit more than they can afford. So Danny Hultzen has a lot more money today than he had yesterday. Good for him. I hope he got one of those giant checks. You can't take those anywhere!
The Mariners also signed their eighth- and ninth-round picks tonight, and signed 43 of their 51 picks overall. It would've been nice to get Cron, but all the other high picks are officially members of the Seattle Mariners organization. Not bad.
310 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
What an awful overpay
They chose Hultzen over Bauer because of signability issues, then give him the BIGGEST CONTRACT of all the draftees.
Just awful, terrible drafting/negotiations by Jack Z.
by ManifestDestiny on Aug 15, 2011 9:43 PM PDT reply actions
Only if you actually think they chose him for signability reasons
I’ve never seen any reason to believe that’s the case.
I think they really, really like Hultzen. My guess is we’re all going to love him.
by dnc on Aug 15, 2011 9:45 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
This is what every argument about draft picks seems to come down to
“I hate that pick.”
“The GM knows more about the players than you.”
“You’re gay.”
There were people that had Hultzen as the second best pitcher behind Cole. I think the M’s liked his talent and liked that he would be in the majors before Felix’s contract was up. Good enough for me.
by short on Aug 15, 2011 9:51 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Ok, now I'm going to contradict myself a bit
I loved Bubba Starling but was sure he wouldn’t sign. He just did. And for only $7.5 million. I like Hultzen but Starling looks like a generational talent. I’ll take comfort that the hometown Royals may have been the only team he would have signed with.
3 year deal for a highschooler
No thanks, he struggles at all I expect him to be playing football in 2015
Like nearly everyone else
I’m just going off of what’s being said about him. But like a lot of people I thought the M’s should go position player this year, and even as a high schooler, Starling sounded like a player who would move relatively quickly through the system.
Like all draftees he could flame out or, in his case, go to college. If the M’s had picked him there’s a really good chance he’d have gone to Nebraska and to be king for four years. I’m happy with Hultzen.
Strasburg and Harper.
They actually are generational talents.
Why does it matter that he got the biggest contract.
He had leverage, get over it.
You know they signed Hultzen over Bauer because of how likely he was to sign?
That sounds like speculation.
...and not particularly well informed speculation, at that.
Just awful, terrible ranting by ManifestDestiny.
by rtang on Aug 15, 2011 9:48 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I have to have a personal stake to criticize a team I root for?
by ManifestDestiny on Aug 15, 2011 9:52 PM PDT up reply actions
No...
just explain how giving DH this contact somehow hurts they future prospect.
Less money available? Missing out on better, more talented prospects?
by ManifestDestiny on Aug 15, 2011 9:54 PM PDT up reply actions
Every dollar they spend is "less money available"
Nobody has any idea how much the Mariners have to spend on talent, or how funds are allocated. So whining about draft pick contracts is useless.
RIP Dave Niehaus.
Like who?
You do realize that DH is a really, really good prospect, right?
Bauer, Rendon, Bradley, Starling...
Yes, I do realize he’s good, but he’s not Most Money In The Draft Good
by ManifestDestiny on Aug 15, 2011 9:57 PM PDT up reply actions
Can't sign those guys...
other people drafted them.
Yes, I realize that, that's what I meant by better prospects
The M’s missed more talented people by drafting Hultzen
by ManifestDestiny on Aug 15, 2011 9:59 PM PDT up reply actions
Stop saying that its wrong
he didn’t get the most money in the draft
by Bearskin Rugburn on Aug 15, 2011 10:01 PM PDT up reply actions
Who got more?
Cole (#1 pick) got $8 mil, Hultzen $8.5mil, poss. $10+ mil
by ManifestDestiny on Aug 15, 2011 10:03 PM PDT up reply actions
Hultzen's deal is for 5 years, including salary each season
Starling got $7.5M over 3 years.
Cole got $8M but no one knows if that is bonus or bonus and salary.
More talented according to who?
You? Get over yourself. Move on.
by CMC_Stags on Aug 15, 2011 9:57 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I would have rather had Bauer too, but I would almost guarantee that is not why they signed Hultzen.
...and now I'm here
In fact, I will guarantee that is not why they picked Hultzen.
...and now I'm here
Hultzen was reported to be asking for 13 million dollars because of a will that gave him that much if he became a doctor.
It wasn’t a signability pick.
So wait,
he had 20 million sitting around for him if he went to med school and became a doctor?
Sober and happy!
Yeah? We were all talking about it for a while.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
Somehow I missed that whole thing.
What an odd situation to be in for this kid. Millions to stay in school, millions to leave school and play ball…
Sober and happy!
He can do both right?
Go finish school in the offseason and get his 20 mill and doctorate.
by Craptastic-J on Aug 16, 2011 1:37 PM PDT up reply actions
Yah, he probably couldn't go back to school in subsequent offseasons.
Or he could do it when he retires, or blows out his elbow. I think it’s more feasible to do the baseball thing first than vice versa, if he’s really desperate to cash both paychecks that is.
by Craptastic-J on Aug 16, 2011 3:35 PM PDT up reply actions
Inquiry ended.
Possibility retracted.
Hopefully he will be happy with his 10 million and 5 World Series Rings.
by Craptastic-J on Aug 16, 2011 3:45 PM PDT up reply actions
The main concern of Hultzen was signability
That, and it’s been how long since the draft? Grow up.
And, for the love of all things holy, realize that your ‘keen’ scouting eye is probably worse than the dozens the Mariners have employed. Trust theirs over yours.
Yes.
Leader of Drew Vettleson fanclub
by Marinerfanjake on Aug 15, 2011 10:20 PM PDT up reply actions
So, this is a good chance to ask how exactly the ML deals work out
Hultzen’s bonus is 6.3M, and the contract has a 8.5-10.6 value. Does this mean that if he comes up for 2013 and stays in the majors, thiis contract covers his ML salary for his first four years in the majors? Because if yes this is fine, just fine.
by Bearskin Rugburn on Aug 15, 2011 9:51 PM PDT reply actions
I could be wrong, but...
I believe it’s 6.3M up front and the other 2.2 spread over 5 years at 440k/yr (roughly the ML minimum) and the other 2.1 is incentives that can be earned based on how quickly reaches the ML roster.
by andrewgolfsalot on Aug 15, 2011 9:55 PM PDT up reply actions
Might be worth learning from the Ackley situation
by Jeff Sullivan on Aug 15, 2011 10:12 PM PDT up reply actions
Thanks, its as I thought
Looks like it’s a fine deal if he makes the team by 2014, less so if he flops.
by Bearskin Rugburn on Aug 15, 2011 10:24 PM PDT up reply actions
I love how the amateur player draft and signing deadline brings out the reactionary idiotic side in Ms fans
it’s probably the aspect of baseball that we, as fans, have the least credibility on and yet everyone becomes an expert.
by Bearskin Rugburn on Aug 15, 2011 9:54 PM PDT reply actions
Well said.
The dire pronouncements by fans who have looked at a mock draft or two are absolutely hilarious.
Do we have to have a PhD or inside sources before commenting?
Sorry, I didn’t know there was a prerequisite to commenting
by ManifestDestiny on Aug 15, 2011 9:58 PM PDT up reply actions
I think his statement is aimed more at the people who use strong vitriolic "end of the world" language
to deride the pick.
Agreed
Overblown verbiage is a tad unnecessary. Now, on-point criticism, that’s totally fine
by ManifestDestiny on Aug 15, 2011 10:02 PM PDT up reply actions
The idea that they picked him for signability is very likely wrong, and thus not on point.
...and now I'm here
by CapSea on Aug 15, 2011 10:05 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Where do you see where it's wrong? Haven't seen any denials.
by ManifestDestiny on Aug 15, 2011 10:06 PM PDT up reply actions
You are the one making assertions.
It is your job to find sources that back up your statements.
I'm stating a known fact
It’s up to you to disprove it
by ManifestDestiny on Aug 15, 2011 10:10 PM PDT up reply actions
It was speculated that it was a signability pick
Which never seemed reasonable, given Hultzen’s bonus demands. That’s not the same as a fact.
by Graham MacAree on Aug 15, 2011 10:13 PM PDT up reply actions
I don't think it was a "signability pick" in the sense that term is usually used
But I think they felt better about the chances of being able to sign Hultzen if they were willing to spend the money, as opposed to someone like Starling who could have been so committed to football that no amount of money would be enough.
There is also the fast moving aspect.
A cynic might more reasonably speculate that Z wanted to make an impact sooner rather than later on the MLB team.
I don't buy that. Hey could've picked Figgins replacement in Rendon, who would be ready by 2013 in all likelihood.
I think they just liked Hultzen the most.
Post injury it doesn't make sense, in my opinion, to think that Rendon will be an above average third baseman by 2013.
And you certainly don’t hold on to Figgins waiting for Rendon to pan out. They have to replace him this upcoming year anyway.
...and now I'm here
Right but my point is that it would make a splash to say "Hey, we got the guy most people said was the best player in the draft to be Figgins' replacement"
or at least spin it in a PR-type way like that. Figgins probably the biggest sources of anger against Z for the general fanbase and it would really good to people that hate Figgins to be able to say “help is on the way.” Whether that would cut it with the Mariners owners who actually determine Z’s job security is something I’m less certain about.
If anything, this would be my guess.
If you believe Hultzen will help out soonest, and you also believe your team needs someone to help soon, then Hultzen makes sense.
...and now I'm here
And this is how I see it.
Leader of Drew Vettleson fanclub
by Marinerfanjake on Aug 15, 2011 10:41 PM PDT up reply actions
Well, I still think teams were underrating Bauer, and I think Bauer made way more sense even for this reasoning.
But again, that’s why not picking him upsets me a lot. I don’t see how one can value Hultzen over Bauer based on what we now know about statistics, mixing pitches, etc. I do not think Hultzen was the right choice, but to say that it was a signability pick is ludicrous.
...and now I'm here
I think Bauer might've been underrated is because
he didn’t really get on anyones radar until this season and most teams already seemed to have a firm understanding of the players they wanted.
Leader of Drew Vettleson fanclub
by Marinerfanjake on Aug 15, 2011 10:50 PM PDT up reply actions
What are you talking about?
A few pundits speculated that it was a signability pick. How the hell does this even begin to approach “known fact”?
Am a missing something here? Pray tell.
Known fact
Does not mean what you think it means
Well this is a load of shit
...and now I'm here
by CapSea on Aug 15, 2011 10:29 PM PDT up reply actions 4 recs
It pains me how wrong you are about this.
I don’t like the Hultzen pick. In fact, I’ve discussed this a great deal in the game thread today. But what you’re stating isn’t fact, there has been no evidence of all of that craziness you’ve said, and you, not us, need to be the one to back up your belief. It’s not our job to find evidence against your ridiculous assertion.
...and now I'm here
by CapSea on Aug 15, 2011 10:37 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
And why would you be more angry about the FO making the wrong decision
based of signabilty, when it could have been based on bad scouting and analysis. Too little talent for the slot is a good enough reason not to like the pick, if you think that is the case.
All cats are blue and horses walk on two legs.
Until I see some definitive proof contradicting this, I’m going with this as a stated fact.
BTW, you don’t need any advanced degrees but check out the posting rules, especially when sourcing information. The difference between stating your opinion and stating a fact is drastic. (Sorry about the long link – I’m mobile but it seemed necessary to post! I also understand the irony of policing and following with a long link.)
http://www.lookoutlanding.com/2011/6/4/2205761/spring-cleaning-lookout-landings-posting-guidelines
by TripleAvery on Aug 15, 2011 10:42 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions 6 recs
The people who act like reactionary idiots are...
And there are a lot of those
by SebastianPruiti on Aug 15, 2011 10:01 PM PDT up reply actions
I didn't say that
all the same, we are far less equipped to make the judgements that the FO makes.
by Bearskin Rugburn on Aug 15, 2011 10:03 PM PDT up reply actions
There are plenty of smart people that don't work for the Mariners' organization
Lots of them think that Hultzen was an overdraft.
Yes, but they do not work in the Ms FO and do not know the process that went into the decision
Im not saying it was the riight thing to do, Im saying that for any of us to say ‘this was a terrible move, Zduriencik is a bad negotiator’ is utterly ridiculous.
by Bearskin Rugburn on Aug 15, 2011 10:13 PM PDT up reply actions
So was it ridiculous for us to chastise the Silva signing, because we don't know about the details?
by ManifestDestiny on Aug 15, 2011 10:14 PM PDT up reply actions
You can't say some areas are worthy of commenting while others are not
We, as fans, know next to zilch about pretty much everything. It’s a given. It can’t apply more in one situation than another. Saying that fans can’t criticize the draft because they lack insider knowledge is utterly ridiculous
by ManifestDestiny on Aug 15, 2011 10:17 PM PDT up reply actions
We, as fans know a team's payroll budget and have access to tons of ML stats which are predictive and meaningful
we do not have access to professional scouting reports and know next to nothing about the organizations minor league operation.
by Bearskin Rugburn on Aug 15, 2011 10:18 PM PDT up reply actions
We do, however, know how much other draft picks signed for
There is no way, for example, that anyone could possibly think Hultzen is a better bet than Purke plus Rendon.
by Graham MacAree on Aug 15, 2011 10:20 PM PDT up reply actions
Hultzen's not getting paid what Purke plus Rendon are
Unless I missed something. Purke’s getting 4.5M and Rendon’s getting like $7 or $7.5.
Total. That's including bonus+contract
Hultzen’s could be $10mil+
by ManifestDestiny on Aug 15, 2011 10:21 PM PDT up reply actions
Oh. Why are you adding up two different players' signings?
by ManifestDestiny on Aug 15, 2011 10:25 PM PDT up reply actions
Because that's what Graham was doing
Unless I misunderstood him
Rendon's getting more like $6.5M
And if you want to quibble over that leftover $400k, I guess that’s your prerogative, but that seems odd.
by Graham MacAree on Aug 15, 2011 10:25 PM PDT up reply actions
Looks like he's getting $7.2M
And I would think it’s fair to assume that he would have gotten paid more had he been the #2 pick. Perhaps not more than Hultzen (probably not), but more than he got at 6.
Rendon is getting $7.2M guaranteed
Hultzen is getting $8.5M guaranteed
Seems like the gap is closer to 3M than 400k, plus comparing the National’s first two picks to the Mariner’s one isn’t really logical
Hultzen is on a contract with a huge maximum value
Why are we just looking at guarantees? And we can compare the two because Hultzen’s ridiculous money precluded the Mariners from drafting anyone much above slot the rest of the way.
The only sane way to evaluate the draft is to look at how much the teams spent and the talent they got in return. This isn’t rocket science.
by Graham MacAree on Aug 15, 2011 10:36 PM PDT up reply actions
Of course.
He’s a very good player. I’m just irked that out of all the good players they could have landed, they got the one that more or less precluded them from swiping the over-slot players down the road.
by Graham MacAree on Aug 15, 2011 10:46 PM PDT up reply actions
I don't think we had a particularly good draft
Losing Cron sucked, and it wasn’t great to begin with
by Graham MacAree on Aug 15, 2011 10:49 PM PDT up reply actions
Going off of what Jay said about our picks' reputations, it does seem pretty underwhelming draft.
I’ll keep an open mind about it, but I didn’t feel great about our 1-10 picks. It felt like we left the best players on the board a lot, especially tracking the BPAs that Baseball American and tarheels would list at the end of each round. Hopefully someone will go all Mike Trout on us.
So is Marlette.
And Smith. Miller was relatively high on some lists too (No. 68 on BA’s list)
by Coach Owens on Aug 15, 2011 10:55 PM PDT up reply actions
I agree
Why did we take Brad Miller over Anthony Meo?
I like but don't love the draft
Hultzen is not the guy I’d have taken at 2 but he’s perfectly defensible, in my opinion. I’m not upset about it. I’m not a big Miller fan, and missing out on Cron stinks.
But from there on, I love most everything about the draft. Marlette looks like a steal based on multiple ranking services, Capps looked great on the Cape and is already missing bats in Clinton, Cohoes intrigues the hell out of me, Proscia and Hicks were in a lot of top 200 lists, Smith seems like a pretty safe bet to reach the bigs, and my favorite of all was snagging Jack Marder for $200,000.
This draft may not be as amazing as last year’s for the M’s, but that would be asking a lot. I think they did pretty well, outside of the 2nd and 3rd rounds. But going overslot to snag Marlette, Capps, Cohoes and Marder makes up for that, for me.
He didn't sign.
--------------------------------
Just North of Wrigley Field
by jameslcrockett on Aug 15, 2011 11:03 PM PDT up reply actions
Oh right.
I thought Capps was a third rounder. My bad
He kinda was...
the team is guaranteed to be the dominant winner of the Supplemental 3rd round.
--------------------------------
Just North of Wrigley Field
by jameslcrockett on Aug 15, 2011 11:08 PM PDT up reply actions
If Marder is a catcher I really like the pick
But from what I’ve heard, maybe that’s not a great bet.
Yeah,
sounds like they’re trying him all over the place.
by Coach Owens on Aug 15, 2011 11:05 PM PDT up reply actions
Marlette and Hicks make me not care so much.
--------------------------------
Just North of Wrigley Field
by jameslcrockett on Aug 15, 2011 11:06 PM PDT up reply actions
If he's a 2B it's a worthwhile gamble
If he’s a catcher it’s a steal. Based on what I’ve seen and heard, he’s a catcher. My only real concern for him is injuries. He was racking up HBPs before he hit the DL. He’ll need to stop being so scrappy and stay on the field.
Yeah, it seems like we took a lot of talented guys in the lower rounds
And then payed the overslot deals necessary to sign them
There are two things about this that I'd like to throw in.
One is that I think our scouting department has earned some benefit of doubt here. They were on Walker, and Walker is amazing. They were on Franklin, Franklin is amazing when healthy. Catricala, Seager, Vasquez, Carraway, Snow… I could go on. There are a lot of guys that weren’t even high round picks by us that have just rocketed through the system or turned into far superior prospects from how they were initially perceived. That we weren’t selecting what BA had as the BPA is not damning in and of itself.
The second consideration is that, while the top few picks generated mixed reactions, there were a lot of picks later on that far exceeded the talents of others drafted in the same round, and we managed to bring them aboard. Marlette, Smith, Cohoes, maybe Paolini, definitely Marder, Valenza, maybe Guarnaccia, White, Saquilon, and Scammell were all guys what I didn’t know whether or not we’d be able to bring them in. They were mostly college recruits that stood a great chance of improving their stock with another year or three in college, and all of them signed with us. That’s a huge boon right there.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Aug 15, 2011 11:38 PM PDT up reply actions 39 recs
I'm also not sure it's safe to assume that Rendon and Hultzen get the same deal if Rendon is 2 and Hultzen is lower
Being drafted second gives you significantly more leverage. If we took Rendon second, he likely would have gotten more, possibly very close to what Hultzen got.
Rendon would have gotten more as the second overall pick
I don’t see anything that would lead me to believe he’d have made very much more. Draft order doesn’t matter as much as you’d think with the elite prospects.
by Graham MacAree on Aug 15, 2011 10:48 PM PDT up reply actions
I don't think he would have gotten much more either. Probably half a mil at most and more likely to be basically the same.
But some people sound like they think Rendon would have gotten a lot less. That’s not right.
No, he'd have gotten less than Hultzen
I’m saying #2 Rendon doesn’t get a lot more than #6 Rendon
by Graham MacAree on Aug 15, 2011 10:50 PM PDT up reply actions
Pure speculation either way
It’s very possible that the extra four teams passing over him gave the Nats some ammunition. It’s certainly possible it didn’t. I don’t think we can just safely assume the M’s could have had Rendon for that price.
And to be clear, I’d have taken Rendon over anyone in the draft.
Yet that isn't what you are doing
Each team had around 50 picks, yet you compare the National’s first two picks to the Mariner’s top pick. Yes I agree that I would rather have Rendon and Purke than Hultzen, all things being equal. That argument doesn’t make sense though.
Ok
I’ll compare the Nationals top two picks to the Mariners top two picks. Rendon and Purke vs. Hultzen and Miller. This is fun, isn’t it?
by Graham MacAree on Aug 15, 2011 10:45 PM PDT up reply actions
Purke wasn't their second pick
And the Nats had three picks long before the Mariners second rounder.
If your point is that the Nats had the best draft, congrats, everyone agrees. There’s no reason to believe the M’s could have done anything close to what the Nats did in the draft though.
Having three picks in the top 34 is just a completely different situation.
Also, no way in hell I pay Purke $4.5M
I am as dumfounded by that bonus as you are by Hultzen’s. I wouldn’t touch him for that money.
I'd rather have had, say, Bauer and Bell
Rendon and Purke just came to mind as an interesting pairing.
by Graham MacAree on Aug 15, 2011 10:51 PM PDT up reply actions
A lot of money.
But he was a first round talent.
Bell wasn't an option for the M's
Went before their second pick
I would rather have Rendon and Purke
Is that what you were originally trying to prove? Because that isn’t how I read it. Seems like your original argument was that Purke and Rendon combined are better than Hultzen
Well I'm glad I could clarify the argument for you
by Graham MacAree on Aug 15, 2011 10:50 PM PDT up reply actions
Me too
Attempting to read through this subthread is giving me a headache
We don't have nearly the resources they do for a draft prospect, though.
We can judge the signing of a major league player fairly easily because almost all game are recorded on TV as well as all of them being recorded with pitch effects/BIP info.
Especially when the top 6 picks or so are bunched so tightly at the top, I'm not going to completely defer to the people in charge
But they do have a lot more resources, and I’ll defer judgment until things shake out a bit more. If they had chosen someone well outside the top few guys I would be a bit quicker to pass judgment, but with guys this close it’s hard to know. Not saying people can’t like the pick, but I’m not sure I get vehemently disliking it when all these guys are so close in talent.
Hultzen was as high as 1 and as low as 7 on most mocks I can find (until the Pirates essentially confirmed Cole). Generally he was in the top 5.
It's not like the signing itself is a bad move
By drafting Hultzen, the mariners locked themselves into paying a crazy amount for him. Which is ok, but when you look at, say, Pittsburg’s or Washington’s hauls, doesn’t seem to have been very wise.
by Graham MacAree on Aug 15, 2011 10:15 PM PDT up reply actions
What the hell is this reasonableness
Stop being reasonable! We’re supposed to be reactionary idiots here, ok?
by ManifestDestiny on Aug 15, 2011 10:18 PM PDT up reply actions
I am furious at the pick
Absolutely seething, an the amount they’ve spent to sign him doesn’t make it any better. However, expressing that here would be pointless.
by Graham MacAree on Aug 15, 2011 10:19 PM PDT up reply actions
Why are you furious about the pick, by curiosity?
What do you think the Mariners should have done instead?
They should have drafted someone who wasn't going to take a ludicrous amount of money to sign
Unless they thought that Hultzen was far and away the best player on the board at #2, which would be odd, considering nobody else did, the pick never made any sense to me.
by Graham MacAree on Aug 15, 2011 10:23 PM PDT up reply actions
I think they thought he was the most polished and would require the least amount of time in the minors.
That’s just me though.
Leader of Drew Vettleson fanclub
by Marinerfanjake on Aug 15, 2011 10:25 PM PDT up reply actions
...........
considering nobody else did
I definitely see your viewpoint, but a question I have concerns how much can we really trust the “everybody else.” It seems most of us here are relying upon draft punditry to judge the teams’ decisions. How reliable are these sources of information? Aren’t these pundits relying on a limited pool of scouts/sources?
There is nothing particularly unique about this type of information
You look at the track record of your sources.
Baseball talent evaluation isn’t some arcane black art.
Isn't it fair to say that the pool of scouting information
available to the general public is more limited with respect to the draft? It seems that teams have an unusually high vested interest to not let their own scouting department’s judgements on draft-eligible players be released.
Sure, but there's usually enough information out there on the high-profile guys
To reach reasonable conclusions about them. Again, choose your sources carefully.
Bauer and Bundy would also have been perfectly reasonable picks
I’d have avoided Starling.
by Graham MacAree on Aug 15, 2011 10:40 PM PDT up reply actions
I don't know, but I really like his talent
Plus cheerleaders aren’t that hard to get when you’re a millionaire.
I would’ve taken the chance.
I think if the Royals didn't sign him he wouldn't go to school.
How much of a difference the Royals make? He’ll take at least three years to make it to the majors, and even with their great prospects,who wants to play for the Royals
If someone took him with a higher pick and offerede him more money, would he really say no?
I know this makes me sound like a loser, but none of the draft experts really thought he would be much of a signing issue, if he got his money. I don’t think we should have taken him but i think he would sign anywhere. He was never really serious about Nebraska, anyways.
I'm not exactly thrilled about Hultzen
but I am also deferring to the Ms FO since Zduriencik has a solid draft track record in Milwaukee and his one draft here has already given us two Major Leaguers plus Franklin, Paxton and Walker. Walker, but the way, was also seen as a ‘signability pick’.
by Bearskin Rugburn on Aug 15, 2011 10:22 PM PDT up reply actions
...at 33, if I recall. At 2, you should be going for best talent
Which I, and many others, feel like they didn’t, either for signability or closer-to-majors considerations
by ManifestDestiny on Aug 15, 2011 10:24 PM PDT up reply actions
You missed my point
Walker’s our second best pitching prospects and perhaps a top 100 talent. He doesnt look anything like a signability pick right now, and there is a non zero chance that Hultzen is the same.
by Bearskin Rugburn on Aug 15, 2011 10:29 PM PDT up reply actions
Hutlzen is a great player and I'm glad we have him
That doesn’t mean I like the pick.
by Graham MacAree on Aug 15, 2011 10:30 PM PDT up reply actions
You can defer to their overall expertise while still not liking individual moves
I just cannot possibly imagine a piece of insider information that could exist that would make me applaud this pick.
Again, Im not saying people shouldnt disagree
I just think it’s silly to make BURN THE TREE comments based on a process we know so little about.
by Bearskin Rugburn on Aug 15, 2011 10:27 PM PDT up reply actions
Well, hyperbole is stupid in either direction
But let’s not pretend everyone defending the pick, either on draft day or today, were taking the high ground. There was lots of silliness on both sides.
And the Mariners have also made some screwups in drafting
They could easily have made one here, despite all of their expertise and hard work.
by Graham MacAree on Aug 15, 2011 10:31 PM PDT up reply actions
I think Jay said a little while back that Taijuan wasn't a signability pick.
Rather, he was a reach at #43 because most lists had him in the 70s or so (or at least BA’s did)
Also correct!
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
My only question about Hultzen being an overdraft is "how much"
Before the draft, I’ve read that Hultzen would likely go within the top 5 or 6 picks. Now, I haven’t read EVERY draft prediction sheet out there, but if what I read was true, then the overreactions some people have over this pick is just stupid.
by Aaroniero Arruruerie on Aug 15, 2011 10:14 PM PDT up reply actions
It's not a HUGE overdraft
But in a draft as stacked as this one was at the top, you have to think about the opportunity cost of not getting a Rendon, Starling, or whoever.
My take on the pick at the time was this
There were three position players that looked like top picks: Rendon (injured), Starling (unlimited sex with Nebraska cheeleaders), Lindor (really young, might not be a shorstop). I think they got the best talent they could be pretty sure would actually play for the Seattle Mariners.
I don’t know about the other available pitchers, but Hultzen looks like a good player to me.
I easily could have
if I had known about it. I never heard that mentioned when we drafted him. And wasn’t reading about pitchers before the draft. I’m glad I didn’t because then I would have been madder.
To be fair, I hadn't heard about it until draft day myself
Jay probably knew about it when Hultzen was born
In a comment that will be overlooked...
We can bemoan or applaud draft picks today and tomorrow and until we’re blue in the face, but the uncertainty of young talent is the only thing we know for certain. Half the first rounders are going to flame out. A lower pick will be a better pro than a higher pick, and lots of young kids just became overpaid. Not sure exactly where to bury this comment but it belongs on this subthread somewhere.
by TripleAvery on Aug 15, 2011 10:36 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions 6 recs
He was drafted by Cleveland?
So it would be hard to sign him. Cleveland did sign him though.
by ManifestDestiny on Aug 15, 2011 10:01 PM PDT up reply actions
Or Rendon :(
Leader of Drew Vettleson fanclub
by Marinerfanjake on Aug 15, 2011 10:02 PM PDT up reply actions
When we saw how many teams passed on Rendon after us, I figured it was probably a pretty good idea that we didn't draft him.
And that the medical concerns might be somewhat legit.
RIP Dave Niehaus.
Actually, everyone was wrong
I don’t remember anyone forecasting that the M’s would take Hultzen.
Do we get a compensation pick for failing to sign Cron?
We got the Capps pick when we failed to sign Stanek, so I was wondering if they still give out comp picks for 3rd rounders.
No. Only 1st and 2nd round picks that go unsigned earn comp picks.
by andrewgolfsalot on Aug 15, 2011 10:06 PM PDT up reply actions
Yea, I was too quick in posting. 1st and 2nd earn a pick immediately after the pick from year n-1, 3rd round picks earn picks at the end of the 3rd round in year n+1
by andrewgolfsalot on Aug 15, 2011 10:10 PM PDT up reply actions
Rules must have changed, because the Adam Jones pick was in the 30s
and was compensation for failure to sign John Mayberry Jr., a pick which was in the 20s.
I believe they'll get a compensation pick between the third and fourth rounds next year?
Might be wrong
by Jeff Sullivan on Aug 15, 2011 10:06 PM PDT up reply actions
This must be right, considering the Stanek --> Capps situation.
I’m guessing the compensation pick is unprotected so they can’t make too much of a splash with it and take chances.
correct!
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Aug 15, 2011 10:12 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
I think that the way they handle those sorts of things is to agree to them but not implement in the same year.
But then again, they are talking slots….
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
Larry Stone is quoting Z that Hultzen will get a shot at the rotation next year
Have to believe this is one reason they liked him.
Hopefully for servicer time we'll stash him away in the minors to start the season
and polish ’em up. No Brandon Morrow situation please.
He's certainly got the talent and the polish to be on the big league club soon
I think he’ll start at AA, but I’d actually be surprised if he started anywhere lower (except maybe for a start or two).
So, I suck at linking, but the BA guys are saying we paid Cohoes 7 figures
Back end of the 1st round money for a 9th round pick!
Shortstop of the future???
Meanwhile we paid Brad Miller, the 2nd round SS significantly less than Cohoes
Off the top of my head, Tyler Marlette, Cavan Cohoes and Carter Capps are the picks that the Mariners paid significantly overslot for (not including Hultzen, since the 2nd overall pick usually never gets slot money)
Frustration has been mentioned multiple times.
Sounds like Danny drove a hard bargain.
Something tells me Danny had very little to do with it
by Jeff Sullivan on Aug 15, 2011 10:22 PM PDT up reply actions
Hultzen has an agent
Agents handle these things
by Jeff Sullivan on Aug 15, 2011 10:24 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, I didn't think he was literally doing the negotiation.
Unless he has another will that says he has to study law on the side.
If Hultzen was negotiating this contract he might want to consider quitting baseball and becoming an agent right now
by Jeff Sullivan on Aug 15, 2011 10:29 PM PDT up reply actions
He should bet his bonus on a risky financial transaction.
Maybe a merger deal, make millions, buy the Mariners, and pay his own signing bonus.
Wait, did i say millions?
I meant billions.
A million dollars isn't cool, you know what's cool?
A billion dollars.
by Patrick Stites on Aug 16, 2011 2:19 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
When in doubt...
quote Sorkin.
--------------------------------
Just North of Wrigley Field
by jameslcrockett on Aug 16, 2011 1:21 PM PDT up reply actions
Another pitcher...
Hard to be too excited about that when we have Felix,Pineda,Vargas,Paxton,T.Walker and guys like Beavan and Erasmro Ramirez in the system. I wish we took Rendon but this was probably a safer pick.
Yeah,
That’s why i think we should trade Pineda, but Zdurencik would probably get fired if he did that now.
He traded Fister instead
Which was the right thing to do given the situation the M’s are in. All that talent in the minors is likely in the near future to replace Fister’s production as a pitcher.
I bet not all of those pitchers will be sustainably healthy and good
by Jeff Sullivan on Aug 15, 2011 10:27 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Still.
We have no big time prospect bats and it would be nice to change that. Jeff Francis gets two million dollars a year. It is a lot easier to fill out a decent rotation that pitches in a pitchers park half of the time, then someone that can hit in it.
They just traded for like seventy outfielders at the deadline
Be patient
by Jeff Sullivan on Aug 15, 2011 10:34 PM PDT up reply actions 3 recs
Case in point
Guys we got for pitchers just went 8 for 15 with 3 HR, 3 2B, and 4 RBI.
Ok, we also traded Luis Valbuena for a couple of ’em.
I loved the Fister and Bedard trades.
Even if we did draft a pitcher. Why not Trevor Bauer?
I'm trying my best.
I’m definitely a Jack Z fan ( or Pedro Grifol fan, for this matter), i just don’t know if this was the right pick
Adding talent is a good thing.
Having lots of pitching talent means we can trade some of it for hitting talent. (see Casper Wells)
One (or more) of those pitchers will probably be dealt for hitter
Or at least, that’s what I’d like to think so.
by Aaroniero Arruruerie on Aug 15, 2011 10:31 PM PDT up reply actions
Pitchers never get injured
And evidently your feam’s offense is supposed to be at least replacement level.
One of our writers wrote a detailed Hultzen scouting report
Perhaps it is of interest:
http://orioles-nation.com/2011/04/23/danny-hultzen-scouting-report/
by Jordan Tuwiner on Aug 15, 2011 10:51 PM PDT reply actions
God I hope Hultzen gets to start for the AquaSox in the next two days.
That would mean I’d get to see him in Eugene.
(It’s never going to happen in a million years, sadly.)
I've read every comment in this thread...
And I’m way lost on what everybody’s arguing about. So I’ll just have myself a Snapple™ and eject.
Fans are typically idiots.
by The Typical Idiot Fan on Aug 15, 2011 10:57 PM PDT reply actions 9 recs
It baffles me as well.
So Hultzen got marginally more in total possible value than Dustin Ackley. Second round picks get a ton of money. Not exactly a shocker.
Second overall, you mean.
Unless you’re referring to Josh Bell because holy shit.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
$1.5m?
I don’t know what the offer was. The whole situation with Cron was weird and he moved into the TCU dorms early in parts because the M’s had put forth so little effort in keeping tabs on him and talking to him. Jeremy Null, the 37th-rounder who didn’t even sign, said that he had been pretty much in constant communication with the M’s since draft day. It could be that Cron’s college commitment was a lot more legit than they initially thought.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
I thought I saw somewhere that they had offered him that much.
I can’t find it now though. 1.5 seems doable given their willingness to go over on the others.
I'm just throwing a figure out there, I have no idea.
Like I said, all the stuff I was reading said that the M’s barely tried with him. It seems weird.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
Considering Capps, maybe Z just wants another valuable 3rd round pick.
Lord knows the Seahawks can’t hang onto theirs… they’re important!
Fans are typically idiots.
by The Typical Idiot Fan on Aug 16, 2011 3:10 AM PDT up reply actions
Z claimed that they made him a good offer and Cron just decided to go to TCU instead.
Have to take that with a grain of salt of course.
by Coach Owens on Aug 16, 2011 12:18 AM PDT up reply actions
Larry Stone with Hultzen's agent
Hultzen advisor: Negotiations were complex
Asked if he ever feared that the Mariners might lose Hultzen, McNamara said, “I spent Friday with him, and I asked him if he wanted to be a Seattle Mariner. He said he did. Leave it at that.”
If only negotiations were that simple.
DO YOU WANT TO BE A SEATTLE MARINER? [ ] YES [ ] NO
"Do you like me? []Yes [] No"
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Aug 15, 2011 11:58 PM PDT up reply actions 6 recs
I like his comment.
“The guys that really want to play are going to sign”. I can understand wanting (and usually getting) good money and all, but personally I’d be more inclined to thank the club for giving me an opportunity and bust my ass to repay that faith.
Yeah I know it’s not that simple in real life but a man can dream.
by Aussie Mariner on Aug 16, 2011 2:04 AM PDT up reply actions
I'm not one to criticize another person's use of their time...
But if McNamara spent all of Friday with him and the only thing he asked Hultzen was one question…
Fans are typically idiots.
by The Typical Idiot Fan on Aug 16, 2011 3:11 AM PDT up reply actions
Not sure where to put this comment,
seeing as there are like three different versions of the argument going around. Maybe the Mariners picked Hultzen because they thought he was the best talent and wanted to draft the best talent with their pick. Just an idea.
Doug Fister is Dexter. R.I.P. Dave Niehaus
by SeaKoala on Aug 16, 2011 3:56 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
I wish we had signed Cron.
His brother played at Utah and developed into a good player and said in an interview that his younger brother has a great work ethic and will be even better than he.
Nah.
If he hit with any regularity, we’d have to put up with Cron Job puns.
by philosofool on Aug 16, 2011 10:50 AM PDT up reply actions
USSM commentors are already trying to give Hultzen a nickname.
Don’t.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Aug 16, 2011 10:37 AM PDT reply actions 3 recs
Your second comment in this thread that can't be rec'd enough.
Sober and happy!
I like Meltdown actually
but yeah, no point in nicknaming a player we haven’t had on the team yet
King Felix disagrees
though that nickname was appropriate, organic and awesome
You should start a thread soliciting nicknames for next years first round pick, whoever he may be
by Bearskin Rugburn on Aug 16, 2011 12:44 PM PDT up reply actions
Charlton Heston
But it only works if you say complete, no shortening it up with Charlie or Charles.
But what if draft a black guy?
Better go with Sambo.
by Bearskin Rugburn on Aug 16, 2011 1:11 PM PDT up reply actions
Actually, I'm pretty guilty of this myself.
I nicknamed him “Moonlight” way back after we drafted him. I apologize if this caused any trouble.
Fans are typically idiots.
by The Typical Idiot Fan on Aug 16, 2011 7:05 PM PDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- College player makes impossible over the fence catch to save tournament game (Video)
- Security!: Camden Yards guard collides with Royals’ Mike Moustakas
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
