I hope after Sickles is finished with the Jays ranking that the system will get some respect. It does take time to change people's minds about this. Lot's of people still think Anaheim has the best system still. I just can't wait until next year to see how Ken Wilson fares. Him and Jackson have been my favorite picks at the time of the draft. The scouting department has definitely been making better choices (since KLaw left?).

Last, sign up now to be able to post at Sickels' site because there is a delay (for me it said 24 hours) before you can comment!

I HATE it when sites make you click on the next page to advance the list. Just show us a page with the whole dang list and hot-linked names if we want to read summaries.

Increase the click-through rate and punch up the number of hits on a page, and you can increase the ad sales revenue. Pretty standard Internet fare.

Even if he can be a .500 pitcher with ERA between 4.00 and 4.20 Ill take it at the back end.

The AL ERA was 4.36 in 2008 which means that starting pitchers likely had a collective ERA of over 4.50. An ERA of 4.00-4.20 puts you a lot closer to the #2 spot in the rotation than it does to the back end.

An ERA of 4.00-4.20 puts you a lot closer to the #2 spot in the rotation than it does to the back end.

I think he meant he'd take it in the back end....meaning he'd be very happy.  Sorry, I've spent too much time at DJF.

BA has Alcides Escobar as one of the top 10 prospects in baseball?

I don't think BA does have him in their top ten. The above rankings are from milb.com who don't seem to be the best at ranking prospects. Having Josh Vitters in the top 10 as was guessed by Dave would have been something comical though.

Can someone please confirm that the Jays own the 19th overall pick - as per http://draft.mlblogs.com/archives/2008/08/2009_draft_order.html

Also, I understand that when it comes to suplementary picks that the 1st 15 picks are protected.  Does this mean that the best a team could hope for is that thier Type A free agent (i.e. Burnett) is signed by the 16th placed team - the Dodgers?  Would such a signing give the team  losing this player the 17th overall selection.  I say 17th instead of 16th since Washington gets a pick sandwiched between #9 and #10 for not signing Aaron Crow?   I also understand that if a team sign two Type A players then the team who lost the higher ranked player gets the better pick.  That said where does Burnett rank in comparison to other Type A players? 

Considering everything above is correct (otherwise base your answer on the correct info.), which team signing Burnett do you think would be best for the Jays draft order?  Considering the Yankees have the 21st pick, would it be best for the Jays draft order for the Evil empire to sign him?  I say no since I assume NYY will also sign one of Teixera or Sabathia and I assume both are higher ranked than Burnett.  My guess is the Dodgers or Phillies would be best for the Jays.

I realize now that my prior posting had an old link.  Any way the question still applies as before with the correct order via Baseball America found here: http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/prospects/ask-ba/2008/266992.html

Thanks W.

Very good analysis - thanks for that link.  So based on your analysis, can we assume that the Dodgers would be unlikely to sign a Type A player seeing that they are the owners of the first unprotected pick - #16.  I figure that's a decent prospect to give away for nothing (even if they do receive compensation from another team signing Manny).  Maybe the Dodgers will get into the mix for Burnett if they are happy with the compensation they get for Lowe (though it seems like that will be #30 at best - Boston). 

One thing I am still a bit confused about is why the Jays would get #28 and #37 if the Philies signed AJ.  Wouldn't they just get #28?  As for the Jays, it's interesting to note that they own the highest unprotected AL pick.

The death of Ted Rogers likely hit Tanenbaum hard: Rogers was his Forest Hill neighbour and a friend. But the reality is that the death of the Rogers Communications empire founder has likely put the Toronto Blue Jays into play, if not immediately, then in the near future.

Very good analysis - thanks for that link.  So based on your analysis, can we assume that the Dodgers would be unlikely to sign a Type A player seeing that they are the owners of the first unprotected pick - #16.

I doubt it would matter. Remember, if you sign an "A" you lose your first rounder (if you are the Dodgers) BUT if you lose Manny or Lowe (or both) you gain a first rounder AND a sandwich pick. In any case, teams routinely disregard the loss of a pick to make a signing - the Giants have been known to do so ON PURPOSE.

  I figure that's a decent prospect to give away for nothing (even if they do receive compensation from another team signing Manny).  Maybe the Dodgers will get into the mix for Burnett if they are happy with the compensation they get for Lowe (though it seems like that will be #30 at best - Boston). 

AJ's agent has said he intends to sign with a team within driving distance of Baltimore. Apparently he is not at liberty to sign further west.

One thing I am still a bit confused about is why the Jays would get #28 and #37 if the Philies signed AJ.  Wouldn't they just get #28?  As for the Jays, it's interesting to note that they own the highest unprotected AL pick.

In my examples, "#37" is the sandwich pich which the Jays will get regardless of who signs him. Type A free agents are compensated by both a lost pick from the signing team AND a sandwich pick created between the first and second round (i.e. the pick doesn't exist until the player switches teams and a final draft order isn't set until all the Type A and Type B free agents who were offered arbitration are signed.

like the Padres cheaping out with the first overall pick and taking Matt Bush, or the Pirates cheaping out a few years back and not taking Weiters

Or when the Twins cheaped out and took Mauer over Prior.  Wait, what?

But seriously, I agree with you....

Nicely said Will.  Draft picks will be hit and miss, when evaluating a GM you have to look at his record as a whole.

Adams, Hill, Purcey, and Romero were Ricciardi's first four 1st round picks. Any way you want to sugarcoat it, that's bad. An average offensive 2B who has trouble hitting RHP is the best 1st round pick the Jays have produced from 2002-05. Just because other GM's make mistakes too doesn't really make me feel a whole lot better.

Thank goodness for Snider.

Adams, Hill, Purcey, and Romero were Ricciardi's first four 1st round picks. Any way you want to sugarcoat it, that's bad.

First of all, Hill was a good pick - a top defender at 2B that provides at least average production for the position.  If Purcey didn't disqualify himself from prospect status this season - he'd be a Top 100 Prospect.  A good comparable for him is Jeff Neimann and many have him in their Top 100.  Neimann is actually 9 months older and was putting up worse numbers in AAA than Purcey.  I think they're comparable in the sense they were first round draft picks in the same year, had initial success, then struggled through injury and control problems before finally finding consistency.  Adams was a flat out bust.  Romero is following the Purcey path and is two years younger.  Is it bad?  That's relative.  I'm not going to study the other teams - it is what it is.

Secondly, Snider, Ahrens, Arencibia and Cooper - how do you want to slice that??  If you're going to condemn JP, do it for what he's done lately or what he's done over his whole tenure, but don't single out what he did from 2002 to 2005.  That's called living in the past.

Rick Porcello came in 4th in the milb.com prospect rankings, and was there for the taking for any club willing to shell out the dough

That 5.2 K/9 in A ball has a lot of people concerned.  In hindsight, everybody would have passed on him (not just 26 teams) at the price he commanded.

First of all, Hill was a good pick - a top defender at 2B that provides at least average production for the position.  If Purcey didn't disqualify himself from prospect status this season - he'd be a Top 100 Prospect.  A good comparable for him is Jeff Neimann and many have him in their Top 100.  Neimann is actually 9 months older and was putting up worse numbers in AAA than Purcey.  I think they're comparable in the sense they were first round draft picks in the same year, had initial success, then struggled through injury and control problems before finally finding consistency.  Adams was a flat out bust.  Romero is following the Purcey path and is two years younger.  Is it bad?  That's relative.  I'm not going to study the other teams - it is what it is.

Secondly, Snider, Ahrens, Arencibia and Cooper - how do you want to slice that??  If you're going to condemn JP, do it for what he's done lately or what he's done over his whole tenure, but don't single out what he did from 2002 to 2005.  That's called living in the past.

"Good" is up for interpretation. Hill is a good defensive player, but his offense is replaceable (has trouble against RHP). I don't think the Jays saw any drop-off with the 2008 version of Inglett.

OPS rank for MLB 2B
2006: 16th out of 24
2007: 13th out of 26
2008: 16th out of 17 (if he qualified)

So in his best season to this point, Hill was dead center mediocre versus the rest of the league's 2B. That's in his BEST season. Could he improve? Certainly. Until I see it, I am not going to call it any other way. The numbers don't lie.

I rank draft picks based on perceived value as well. Cameron Maybin may end up crapping the bed as an MLB player, but his value as a prospect/asset was high enough to be the centerpiece in acquiring a young Manny Ramirez (Cabrera). Romero even if he pans out couldn't fetch a player with half of Cabrera's talent as the main player in a deal. So that's part one. Part two is how that player actually performs. If Purcey pans out, for example, then my opinion will change because I was given a reason to change it. However, can the Jays trade Romero or Purcey today and end up with an impact talent in return? How about Hill and Adams a few years ago? My guess...no.

From an asset and performance standpoint, how would you like me to objectively rate Ricciardi's picks from 02-05? Like I said, Snider is the exception. I'm not sold on Ahrens or Arencibia, and it's too early to tell with Cooper. On paper, they look much better than 2002-05, which is at least a step up.

You're right to point out JP's excellent acquisition of cheap talent in Joe Inglett.

Sadly, Inglett hit better against RHP in 2008 (.767 OPS) than Hill has at any point in his entire MLB career.

A couple of points:

Joe Inglett's seasonal age when he posted his .767 OPS against righties was 30. Joey also posted an OPS+ for the year of 103.

In Hill's last full year (2007, and I don't think this is an unrealistic decision to make so we can compare apples to apples..) where his OPS was .753 (albeit more slg oriented) his OPS+ was 107. His seasonal age was only 25. This is a considerable difference from Inglett.  The numbers do not lie.

Hill is younger and has yet to enter what are commonly thought of his athletic peak years, 27 - 29. Also, without question, Hill has shown himself to be a considerably superior defensive player at 2B then Inglett. 

If every year you drafted a player who would be your regular everyday player at that position, would be average offensively for that position, and a supreme defender to boot, you would have a championship team within a few years.  And this is going by the premise that Hill doesn't improve, he simply reverts and holds steady at his last established level of production. By all accounts, he should improve.  By the same token, suggesting Inglett will get any better would be a stretch. Holding steady would be a pleasant surprise.  And I understand that yes, drafting a starting 2B is never going to be as difficult as drafting a starting SS, you still need to have every piece of the puzzle to complete it. Hill is one of these pieces. He is a part of the "core".

1.2m more than it took to get Romero

I'm tired of rehashing this but for the interests of accuracy here it goes.  Yes the bonus was only $1.2M more but the actual value of the deal was a guaranteed $7M+ or about $5M more than Romero got since Porcello is receiving about $1M a year to play in the minors.  In addition,  he was put on the Tigers' 40-man roster immediately.  By the age of 22 he will be out of options.  Ready or not he will make the Tigers ML roster at 22 or else risk being put on waivers in order to send him to the minors.

It's hard to argue with Sickels' list, but I thought I'd see Fuenmayor in the top 20.  He's still young and maybe when he starts playing at a higher level he'll climb quickly up the prospect ladder.

Mike Green,

what do you know about Thames?  How does he project as a big leaguer?

It's also quite possible that 2007 was a power fluke year for Hill. He hit 17 HRs in 608 ABs and the rest of his career he has hit 9 in 1112. Maybe he will develop into a pretty good hitter, but he might just as easily be a 85-95 OPS+ guy.

Drafting players like Halladay, Wells, Rios, and potentially Snider (if he pans out) is going to impact a big league club.

Identifying the Halladay's, Wellses and Sniders of any given first round is less than a 50/50 proposition.  They don't grow on trees.  I'd say Hill is easily one of the top 10 players drafted in the first round of 2003.  It's too bad we didn't pick Quentin,  but if that's your expectation, you'll never be satisfied with a GM.....unless he's got a great big horseshoe stuck up his arse.

For those who think that Hill was a mediocre pick, here are the previous 10 13th overall picks.

• 1993  Matt Drews
• 1994  Paul Konerko
• 1995  Mark Redman
• 1996  Robert Stratton
• 1997  Kyle Peterson
• 1998  J.M. Gold
• 1999  Mike Paradis
• 2000  Shaun Boyd
• 2001  Casey Kotchman
• 2002  Khalil Greene

And it's also clearly behind Tampa, Baltimore and Boston.

On the other hand, at BA, John Manual feels the Jays' Top 10 is the second strongest in the division.  He likes it better than both Baltimore's and Boston's (NYY's didn't enter the conversation).

Wow there is a lot of talk over Aaron Hill. Really, if one player simply has to be defended that much (a la Paul Godfrey on Off The Record), I think it just tells you how poor JP's draft record from 02-05 actually was. And let's not forget that JP was ridiculously college heavy and until the 2007 season when Marcum/Janssen/Litsch broke out to varying degrees, how many of JP's college picks were making meaningful contributions OUTSIDE of Aaron Hill? And Hill was nothing special until his breakout 2007 season and still only looks like an above average (but replacable) player if he doesn't keep improving. One of the main ideas behind taking college players is that they should develop quickly; if they don't then that is a huge negative regardless of the value they provide for their 0-6 years.

I fully believe R Romero's already has a black mark against his 0-6 years BECAUSE he has not arrived as quickly as advertised. R Romero could have battled for a job in 07/08 and we might not have to focus on pitching as much as we have the last couple of offseasons if Romero was already the number 3 innings eater that he was supposed to be when he was drafted in '05. Even if he becomes an all-star he has not provided value the last 2 years based on how long he has taken to develop and his trade value is not great, which also is a black mark against his actual value to the organization.

Remember when JP was talking about a Halladay, Burnett, Lilly, Meche and Chacin rotation a couple of years ago? Would Marcum/Litsch be worth anything right now if he had signed those guys? For all those people that try to argue that Marcum/Litsch provide as much value as Hughes/Chamberlain without the hype, let's not forget that hype is associated with high ceiling players. High ceiling players are what teams want in trade. Marcum/Litsch had very little trade value in the minors and this relates to JP's inability to trade prospects for major leaguers and this is why he needs to build teams through free agency.

Why did JP attempt to spend $10 mill/year on Lilly/Meche (which would have given him 4 starters making over $10 mill/yr)? Because his college arms (and he drafted plenty of them) did nothing until 2007. And as much as Marcum/Janssen/Lind look like solid value picks in the 3rd/4th round, let's not forget that Banks, Thigpen et al. were 2nd round picks that have been fairly worthless. Instead of drafting a bunch of Marcum/Janssen types in those rounds, drafting a few Yovani Gallardo types would have been far more useful (Gollardo is just an example of a 2nd round player - whether or not the Jays actually could have drafted him is irrelevant).

Glaus/Rolen//Burnett/Overbay/Ryan et al are all guys that had to be acquired BECAUSE of JP's poor 02-05 drafting. I personally think JP is a slightly above average GM at the moment, but arguing that his 02-05 drafting was "not horrible" by isolating value picks like Marcum/Litsch is pretty parochial. And defending Aaron Hill as a symbol of JP's "not horrible" 02-05 drafting is pretty shortsighted as well...

Identifying the Halladay's, Wellses and Sniders of any given first round is less than a 50/50 proposition.  They don't grow on trees.  I'd say Hill is easily one of the top 10 players drafted in the first round of 2003.  It's too bad we didn't pick Quentin,  but if that's your expectation, you'll never be satisfied with a GM.....unless he's got a great big horseshoe stuck up his arse.

Aaron Hill should be a "meh" first round pick for a team, not the best one of the lot. Even if the player a GM picks ends up being a bust (like Felipe Lopez for example), at least take a chance on a player with both real and perceived upside. That way that player can potentially be traded for something decent. I'm not expecting a GM to hit a home run with every first round pick. Just be good enough to where drafting mediocre middle infielders in the first round is not only the exception, but also considered a disappointment from an organizational standpoint. The fact that Hill is being celebrated is embarrassing to me.

Aaron Hill was a very good selection.  In 06-07, he was a slightly above average hitter and a well above average fielder at a premium defensive position.  BP has him at 14 wins over replacement for those two years.  That figure may be high, but even so he was likely the 2nd best player on the club behind Halladay during those 2 years.

In 2007 he ranked 13th in OPS out of 26 eligible 2B in baseball. So in his best year offensively he was right down the middle in terms of his position. If he was the 2nd best player on this team behind Halladay in 06-07 (which is ridiculous since Rios, Wells, Glaus, Burnett, etc, played much bigger roles), then that's a shame.

I'm a huge fan. Tools, makeup, good position, versatile . . . he's everything you could ask for in a first-round pick.