Menu

MLB Draft Breakdown: 2017

By: Austin Alexander - June 12-14, 2017

 

mlblogoIn a year that professional scouts will admit there was far less draftable prep talent in South Carolina than recent years, only - young men managed to have their names called over the three-day event!

 

The more you peer into this year's draft, the event itself took on a very different look due to drastic changes within the rules pertaining to signing players and by reducing the draft by ten rounds over past seasons, thus affecting who and how many in-state guys were selected.

 

The longer you follow the draft, the more you think you understand it. Just the opposite is true, however! Any baseball sage will tell you it is really a crapshoot.

 

Many variables come into play when you sit back and look at the picks, the rounds they fell in and the names that get passed over.

 

One term people must understand is “signability”. Especially near the top of the draft.

 

In many cases, most of the players selected in the first 4-7 Rounds are similar in ability. Maybe in the Top 15 Rounds? Conventional wisdom tells you that the first pick in the draft must be the best player and that the last pick is the -th best player in the country. Not so. A player’s signability can vault him near the top of the board; low signability can force that player to fall through the draft entirely.

 

Scouts often spend more time researching a player’s signability than they do evaluating their talent. We’ve all heard of clubs that take a kid in the top two rounds and cannot come to terms with him. Sometimes it is because the area scout has not done his due research or he should have known better than to select that player that high in the draft. But it has also happened before that a player and his family or advisor was not truthful as to their dollar figure. Sometimes a player’s "advisor" or his known desire to attend school will force his draft stock to fall, though he may be a first rounder ability-wise.

 

A couple of examples:

 

A few years ago, Florida University first baseman Matt LaPorta fell to the 15th round and 433rd pick of the draft. It was believed LaPorta was a sure-fire first-rounder but in the days before the draft he hired agent Scott Boras to represent him. Boras’ reputation with big-leaguers is well-earned as he has some of the top clients in the game. But, some big league organizations had begun a trend, however, of steering away from his players in recent drafts to avert expensive, drawn-out negotiations.

 

As high school seniors, South Carolina products Justin Smoak and Reese Havens were projected to go high in the draft. In the moments leading up to early picks for the Boston Red Sox, both were contacted once more in an attempt to agree to terms before they were selected. Both declined lucrative deals citing that their intention was to play college baseball. As a result, Smoak fell to the 16th round, Havens to the 29th. Both were later selected in 1st Round as college juniors out of USC.

 

In each case, though for opposite reasons, these players had a “low signability” tag, thus falling to lower rounds.

 

Clubs have until midnight of July 7th (up from first day of class once upon a time) to agree to terms with a draft pick. Some of the early rounders will forego the drama and sign quickly so they can begin their journey to the big leagues. Others will drag it out until the deadline in an attempt to drain every penny out of a club. Many players chosen will continue to be under the watchful eye of the organization that selected them in case they make a significant jump during the summer, in which the club may, then, offer a contract or "up the ante" in an attempt to sign the player.

 

Draft picks are made largely on a players present “tools” and how he “projects” down the road. Many selections will turn the heads of baseball people. More selections will blow the mind of casual fans because the layman only sees black or white, ie. base hit versus out, win versus loss.

 

Understand, just because a pitcher strikes out Bryce Teodosio does not automatically vault that arm to prospect status. If a good high school pitcher beats Easley High School with Logan Chapman on the mound, it does not mean he will see his name on a draft board. When a "punching judy" flairs one into the outfield off of Corey Stone, that does not guarentee that he will even play past high school. If a fast runner steals two bases off of Bo Taylor, it does not necessarily mean he has a future in professional baseball! See where I am going with this?

Scouting is not a science. Players do get over-scouted and some do get over-looked. By in large, however, these guys who scout for a living are good at what they do. VERY good, in fact! They run up tens of thousands of miles riding through the countryside away from their families looking for the next Clayton Kershaw and Mike Trout. Sure, they’ll miss on guys from time to time but they are still smarter than most of us and their eyes keener than you can imagine. Did they find the next MLB All-Star in our state in 2017? Only time will tell.

Below we have broken down the 2017 Draft:

*Note: Players accounted for either played high school or college baseball in South Carolina this spring.

Selected

+Day 1 (1-2 Rd)

+Day 2 (3-10 Rds)

Day 3 (11-40 Rds)

Total

SC Players

5

29

36

College players

2

5

26

 33

HS players

 3

Pitchers

3

19

24 

Catchers

0

0

 2

Infielders

3

3

Outfielders

5

7

Division I

2

19 

 25

Division II

0

1

3

Junior College

0

0

5

 NAIA

0

0

0

0

HS 5A

0

0

2

 2

HS 4A

 0

HS 3A

0

 1

HS 2A

0

0

HS 1A

0

0

0

0

SCISA

0

0

0

0

 

Rd

1-10

11-20

21-30

31-40

*

7

9

11

9

By College: 9-Clemson; 6-Coastal Carolina; 5-South Carolina, 3-Spartanburg Methodist, 2-USC-Aiken; 8 others with one apiece.

*Note: Players accounted for either played high school or college baseball in South Carolina this spring.

-2016 MLB Draft in Review-

Selected

Day 1 (1-2 Rd)

Day 2 (3-10 Rds)

Day 3 (11-40 Rds)

Total

SC Players

9

27

39

College players

1

27

36

HS players

Pitchers

3

16

19 

Catchers

1

0

5

Infielders

5

Outfielders

Division I

1

16 

25

Division II

0

0

Junior College

0

0

3

 NAIA

0

0

0

0

HS 4A

 2 

HS 3A

0

 1

HS 2A

0

0

HS 1A

0

0

0

0

SCISA

0

0

0

0

 

Rd

1-10

11-20

21-30

31-40

*

10

7

14 

By College: 7-South Carolina; 6-Clemson; 6-Coastal Carolina; 4-Lander; 3-Sptg Methodist; 2-College of Charleston, USC-Aiken, Wofford; Two others with one apiece.

-2015 MLB Draft in Review-

Selected

Day 1 (1-2 Rd)

Day 2 (3-10 Rds)

Day 3 (11-40 Rds)

Total

SC Players

14

15

29

College players

0

12 

14

26

HS players

Pitchers

7

10

17 

Catchers

1

1

Infielders

5

Outfielders

Division I

0

11 

10 

21

Division II

0

1

Junior College

0

0

1

 NAIA

0

0

0

0

HS 4A

 3 

HS 3A

0

 0

HS 2A

0

0

HS 1A

0

0

0

0

SCISA

0

0

0

0

 

Rd

1-10

11-20

21-30

31-40

*

14

5

By College: 7-Clemson; 3-Citadel, College of Charleston, South Carolina; 2-USC-Aiken, Wofford; Six others with one apiece.

-2014 MLB Draft in Review-

Selected

Day 1 (1-2 Rd)

Day 2 (3-10 Rds)

Day 3 (11-40 Rds)

Total

SC Players

10

28

40

College players

10 

27 

38 

HS players

Pitchers

4 

14 

20 

Catchers

1

Infielders

12 

Outfielders

Division I

19 

26 

Division II

0

2 

10 

Junior College

0

1

2 

 NAIA

0

0

0

0

HS 4A

 1 

HS 3A

0

 1 

HS 2A

0

0

HS 1A

0

0

0

0

SCISA

0

0

0

0

 

Rd

1-10

11-20

21-30

31-40

*

12

13

11 

By College: 6-South Carolina, Clemson; 4-USC-Aiken; 3-Lander, Coastal Carolina; 2-Citadel, Spartanburg Methodist, USC-Upstate, Charleston Southern, Furman; Five others with one apiece.

-2013 MLB Draft in Review-

Selected

Day 1 (1-2 Rd)

Day 2 (3-10 Rds)

Day 3 (11-40 Rds)

Total

SC Players

8

18

28

College players

0 

16

23 

HS players

Pitchers

4 

11 

16 

Catchers

1 

1

Infielders

Outfielders

Division I

0 

13 

18 

Division II

0

1

Junior College

0

0

0 

 NAIA

0

0

0

0

HS 4A

 4 

HS 3A

0

 2 

HS 2A

0

0

 

Rd

1-10

11-20

21-30

31-40

*

10

6

By College: 4-South Carolina, 3-Furman, 3-USC-Aiken, 2-Coastal Carolina, 2-Citadel, nine others with one apiece.

-2012 MLB Draft in Review-

Selected

Day 1 (1st Rd)

Day 2 (2-15 Rds)

Day 3 (16-40 Rds)

Total

SC Players

18

12

31 

College players

1

15 

11

27

HS players

Pitchers

10

6

16 

Catchers

0

2

Infielders

2

Outfielders

Division I

1

12 

19 

Division II

0

1

Junior College

0

1

 NAIA

 0

 1

 1

 2

HS 4A

HS 3A

0

1

HS 2A

0

2

Rd

1-10

11-20

21-30

31-40

*

15

8

By College: 7-Clemson, 5-South Carolina, 3-College of Charleston, 2-Coastal Carolina 2-Spartanburg Methodist, seven others with one apiece.

-2011 MLB Draft in Review-

Selected

Day 1 (1st Rd)

Day 2 (2-30 Rds)

Day 3 (31-50 Rds)

Total

SC Players

2

28

19

49

College players

1

23

13

37

HS players

1

5

6

12

Pitchers

1

14

10

25

Catchers

0

2

3

5

Infielders

0

8

2

10

Outfielders

1

4

4

9

Division I

1

20

12

33

Division II

0

1

0

1

Junior College

0

1

0

1

HS 4A

1

4

4

9

HS 3A

0

1

0

1

HS 2A

0

0

2

2

Rd

1-10

11-20

21-30

31-40

41-50

*

10

11

9

7

12

By College: 11-South Carolina, 8-Clemson, 5-Coastal Carolina, 4-College of Charleston, 2-Winthrop, six others with one apiece.

-2010 MLB Draft in Review-

Selected

Day 1 (1-3 rds)

Day 2 (4-30 rds)

Day 3 (31-50)

Total

SC Players

2

29

16

47

College players

2

24

12

38

HS players

0

5

6

11

Pitchers

1

16

12

29

Catchers

0

1

3

4

Infielders

0

7

1

8

Outfielders

1

5

2

8

Division I

2

21

8

31

Division II

0

2

3

5

Junior College

0

1

1

2

HS 4A

1

1

1

3

HS 3A

0

2

3

5

HS 2A

0

1

2

3

Rd

1-10

11-20

21-30

31-40

41-50

*

9

13

9

9

9

By College: 7-Coastal Carolina, 6-Clemson; 6-South Carolina, 5-College of Charleston, 3-Citadel, 3-Francis Marion, 2-Furman, Five others with one apiece.

-2009 MLB Draft in Review-

Selected

Day 1 (1-3 rds)

Day 2 (4-30 rds)

Day 3 (31-50)

Total

SC Players

2

25

16

43

College players

1

22

10

33

HS players

1

3

6

10

Pitchers

0

13

12

25

Catchers

0

3

0

3

Infielders

2

7

5

14

Outfielders

0

4

3

7

Division I

1

16

10

27

Division II

0

3

2

5

Junior College

0

3

3

6

Rd

1-10

11-20

21-30

31-40

41-50

*

13

8

8

10

11

By College: 9-Clemson; 6-South Carolina, 4-College of Charleston, 4-Citadel, 2-Coastal Carolina, 2-Winthrop, 2-Newberry, 2-USC Sumter, 2; Seven others with one apiece.