Draft Review: ’09 Over-Drafts

With the 2010 amateur draft less than a month away, it’s a perfect time for reflection. The ’09 draft featured some “over-drafts” in the first 10 picks that caused a little bit of controversy.

The first over-draft came with the fourth overall pick when the Pittsburgh Pirates nabbed Boston College catcher Tony Sanchez. The Baltimore Orioles then followed up with the fifth pick by taking California prep right-hander Matt Hobgood, leaving the likes of Zack Wheeler, Jacob Turner, Tyler Matzek, and Shelby Miller on the table. All four prep pitchers were considered to be more talented. The third shock of the Top 10 came with Atlanta’s selection of Vanderbilt lefty Mike Minor, an advanced arm with limited upside.

Just over 11 months have passed since the ’09 draft, so let’s have a look and see how the gambles are paying off.

Sanchez was the only catcher taken in the first round. The next backstop was taken by Seattle with the first pick of the supplemental first round (33rd overall) in Florida high schooler Steve Baron. With a brutal big league pitching staff in Pittsburgh in ’10, names like Mike Leake, Drew Storen, and Kyle Gibson are looking pretty good right now. Truth be told, though, there are few – if any – ’09 first round hitters performing better than Sanchez right now. The catcher has a triple-slash line of .310/.423/.491 in 116 at-bats in high-A ball. The (soon-to-be) 22-year-old Sanchez has been creaming right-handed pitching with a .338 average. He’s slowed in May after a scorching April, though, and has seen his OPS go from 1.082 to .692 this month. Defensively on the year, he’s thrown out just five runners in 35 attempts (14%).

Hobgood was initially perhaps the most perplexing selection. In fairness, though, the Baltimore organization redeemed itself later on by signing a number of promising picks to over-slot deals to sway them away from other commitments. Instead of spending all of its money on one high-risk, high-reward player, the re-building organization hedged its bet and spread the love around. Pitching in low-A in 2010, the 19-year-old Hobgood has allowed 33 hits and 17 walks in 36.2 innings of work. He’s struck out only 23 batters, but he’s given up just one homer and has a ground-ball rate of 54%. It will be a while before we truly know how the club made out with this selection, as we also monitor the development of Wheeler, Turner, Matzek, and Miller… as well as the players that Baltimore paid big money to later in the draft (like Cameron Coffey, Ryan Berry, and Michael Ohlman).

The Braves organization has a reputation for developing pitchers but the club historically takes prep arms. That hasn’t worked out so well in recent years, which could explain part of the rationale for taking Minor, 22. He had a rough start to his ’10 season with nine runs allowed in his first two starts (9.0 innings) but he’s been making the organization look smart lately. The “soft-tosser” is leading the double-A Southern League in strikeouts with 65 in 44.2 innings of work (13.24 K/9). He’s also given up just 32 hits. Minor may find even more success once he can get the ball down a little more consistently and get the ground-ball rate up over that 50% hump. The southpaw has been lights-out with the bases empty (.132 average) but he’s struggled with runners on and in scoring position (.320).

You Aren't a FanGraphs Member
It looks like you aren't yet a FanGraphs Member (or aren't logged in). We aren't mad, just disappointed.
We get it. You want to read this article. But before we let you get back to it, we'd like to point out a few of the good reasons why you should become a Member.
1. Ad Free viewing! We won't bug you with this ad, or any other.
2. Unlimited articles! Non-Members only get to read 10 free articles a month. Members never get cut off.
3. Dark mode and Classic mode!
4. Custom player page dashboards! Choose the player cards you want, in the order you want them.
5. One-click data exports! Export our projections and leaderboards for your personal projects.
6. Remove the photos on the home page! (Honestly, this doesn't sound so great to us, but some people wanted it, and we like to give our Members what they want.)
7. Even more Steamer projections! We have handedness, percentile, and context neutral projections available for Members only.
8. Get FanGraphs Walk-Off, a customized year end review! Find out exactly how you used FanGraphs this year, and how that compares to other Members. Don't be a victim of FOMO.
9. A weekly mailbag column, exclusively for Members.
10. Help support FanGraphs and our entire staff! Our Members provide us with critical resources to improve the site and deliver new features!
We hope you'll consider a Membership today, for yourself or as a gift! And we realize this has been an awfully long sales pitch, so we've also removed all the other ads in this article. We didn't want to overdo it.

It’s still very early, but all three players are holding their own in professional baseball. There was plenty of second guessing going on at the time (by myself included) but each MLB club spends a lot of time and money to make the best selections possible for themselves. It will be interesting to see who pops up unexpectedly in the Top 10 to 15 picks of the 2010 draft. It will also be fun to revisit the above trio at the end of the ’10 season.





Marc Hulet has been writing at FanGraphs since 2008. His work focuses on prospects and fantasy. Follow him on Twitter @marchulet.

14 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
200tang
16 years ago

He wasn’t in the top 10, but the Mariners second first round pick, HS SS Nick Franklin, was considered an overdraft and has responded by hitting .318/.346/.597 w/ 8HR, 32K:7BB, 4SB/3CS in the MWL.

I don’t think the power is quite at that level, but he could be a 15 HR guy at SS at the ML level. Also, the K:BB may look alarming, but Jason Churchill said that he’s putting himself in good counts and turning in good ABs so it’s not something to freak out about right now.

Doug
16 years ago

Minor is consistently hitting 95 mph….that is a soft tosser??? At least do some resarch before you print

john c
16 years ago
Reply to  Doug

Maybe that’s why soft tosser was in quotes? Either way, his velo is up. Even the bearest of the bears for Minor, Keith Law mentioned it recently (not without the caveat that his command is way down).

Alex
16 years ago
Reply to  Doug

Where do you see him hitting consistently 95 mph? Most scouting reports have him working around 88-92 mph. The one report with him throwing 95 mph was a fan’s report, not from a scout (http://www.forums.mlb.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=7&nav=messages&webtag=ml-braves&tid=136799).

Ben
16 years ago
Reply to  Alex

Those scouting reports are from last year. He’s been sitting in the 91-94 range this year. Hence the outrageous strikeout rate this year.

Marc Hulet
16 years ago

Yeah, that’s the quotes… I haven’t heard quite as high as 95 mph – perhaps the gun is hot in Mississippi – but he was considered a guy with Jeremy Sowers-like repertoire… From BA in ’09: “Minor has more pitchability than stuff, with a fastball in the 86-89 mph range.” Apparently the curve is making a big difference, too.

Joseph
16 years ago

I feel like Fuentes was an overdraft at 29 or wherever the Red Sox took him. Not a ridiculous one, but I think it’s a long shot that he turns out to be a high ceiling guy.

walklightwhite
16 years ago
Reply to  Joseph

Uh, no it wasn’t an overdraft. That’s the range he was expected to go and that’s where he went. If he was considered a late 2nd round talent and they took him where they did, THAT would be an overdraft. You might not like him as a prospect, but Fuentes was gone soon after if the Sox didn’t take him.

And I think you mean it’s a “long shot” that he reaches his ceiling. He’s already a “high ceiling” guy, the question mark with him is whether the Sox can turn his tools into skills.

JCA
16 years ago

Marc – You are guilty of extreme revisionist history if you are touting Drew Storen for the #4 pick or anywhere in the top half of the first round. He was regarded as an overdraft at #10. A pure signability pick, due to the fact that the Nats would lose the pick if they did not sign their compensation for Crow. As it turns out, Mike Rizzo might have known what he was doing when he targeted Storen. We’ll get a chance to see how he will do in the majors, probably sooner than any other high pick not named Leake.

Chris
16 years ago
Reply to  JCA

Or the Nats signed a guy that they knew exactly what he could do, and how he would fit in with the club with high impact. Storen was more than a sign ability pick and more of an impact pick. With him being called up last night to the MLB level after having dominated MiLB hitters, I gotta say that the Nats went for a guy who would be an immediate help. Storen is the Strassburg of closers.

JCA
16 years ago
Reply to  Chris

Chris – agree. My reference to a “Pure signability pick” was to the line you heard at the time about the pick. It is revisionist for just about anyone, other than Mike Rizzo, to say they were thinking that was a good pick at the time. The one group of experts who praised the pick were those who thought he could be converted to a starter (I think Goldstein said so at the time).

Kevin S.
16 years ago

Didn’t the Pirates take Tony Sanchez because they wanted to plow their money into the signability guys who fell in the draft?

Ben
16 years ago

I’m glad you mentioned that the O’s employed a Pirates-like approach even though the Pirates were the ones who got more attention at draft time. It’s certainly true that the Orioles redeemed themselves by selecting, and signing, Coffey, Ohlman, Berry, and Henry. In a vacuum, I don’t mind this approach at all, especially when the best value pick is in a HS arm. Those arms inherently carry a great deal of risk, so I like the strategy of saving a bit of cash to choose a guy who will sign for less while increasing your upside later in the draft.

That said, there is one big assumption here: that the two options were mutually exclusive. And as an Orioles fan, that is the source of my frustration. Again, I have no problem with the approach they took if it was an ‘either-or’ situation. But then they go out and give Garrett Atkins $4.5 million despite the fact that he’s regressed each of the last three years and doesn’t play 1B. How am I to believe that the O’s need to save money, and therefore pass on Turner, Wheeler, Matzek, or Miller, when they give away more than the difference between any of those arms and Hobgood to a guy who nobody in the world thought could be anything other than a below average player in the best case scenario? It just doesn’t make sense. You really have to wonder if besides all the SABR knowledge and advanced scouting whether there is simply a gap in understanding between some of the elite franchises and the lesser ones in basic economics.

Jayne S
14 years ago

Hi there, just browsed thru. Neat post. Cya.