Last week, we held an email Roundtable, discussing the first overall pick in the 2023 Draft, and the strategy the Pittsburgh Pirates could take. If you missed the first three parts, you can check out our breakdowns of Dylan Crews, Paul Skenes, and the rest of the first overall candidates.
Tim Williams – Moderator
John Dreker – Site Draft Expert
Anthony Murphy – System Depth View
Wilbur Miller – System Needs View
Jeff Reed – Resident Fan Expert
In the final part, everyone makes their picks and explains their strategy.
TIM WILLIAMS: It’s July 9th. [NOTE: It was actually July 2nd, and this was published July 7th.] You get to make the pick and direct the middle round strategy. Who is your first overall pick, and are you focused on just the quality of the first pick or overall strategy?
JOHN DREKER: My strategy would be similar to what we are hearing for the Pirates. If I can get Max Clark or Wyatt Langford for a lot less ($1M+) than someone else from the top five group, then I’m taking them. You need to get impact talent from the draft. Clark and Langford are both elite high impact talent, and then I’m going high upside on the next 3-4 picks too, whoever fits best in the budget among the top players. I’d rather throw away rounds 5-20 on low bonus guys than spread the remaining pool out among all of the picks after the first round. One high upside prospect is better than a large group of potential depth options. You’ll still get those guys for $50K-$100K if your scouts do a good job. Trust the scouts and go big early.
TIM: Anthony, same question.
ANTHONY MURPHY: For me I always want to maximize my investment as much as possible. Having the first overall pick comes with a certain caveat of wanting to get the ‘best player’, which is fair, one player isn’t going to make the ultimate difference at the major league level, it takes a team. It really comes down to what it will take to get each player signed. If there really isn’t as much of a difference between a Langford compared to Crews, and you can save even $500 K, it’s worth looking into. Michael Kennedy was signed for right at $500 K over slot. So, if Langford or even Max Clark can create that much of a savings, or more, it’d interest me.
Jeff does make a good point about how the Pirates are working with an incredibly big bonus pool, so it may not be necessary to take that kind of strategy in this draft, because even an overslot deal with Crews could leave you with enough to sign a big prep pitcher.
So my answer would be Crews, as I believe he is still the best player in the draft, just not as much as some people think. It would come with the stipulation that if Langford would truly create enough space to go big with another prep player, I’d go there. Going the prep route has worked too well for them to go away from it, and this is a deep draft there, so if the opportunity is there to maximize on it, that’s where I want to go.
TIM: Wilbur, who do you have?
WILBUR MILLER: I can’t see any other approach here apart from best-player-available. That’s either Crews or Skenes. I’m seeing Skenes referred to these days, pretty consistently, as a generational talent. Despite my usual aversion to first-round pitchers, I’d go with him.
I can’t buy into the idea that there are five impact talents, so it doesn’t matter which and go for the savings. The Pirates don’t need a guy who checks the box labeled “impact talent.” They need an impact player at the major league level. The chances of all five of these guys becoming impact major leaguers are zero. The Pirates’ job is to figure out which one has the best chance.
Jim Callis made a good point in a recent podcast. He noted there are 41 picks between the Pirates’ first two. A bunch of teams with large bonus pools have two, or even three, picks in that range. It won’t really be possible to “target” a particular player for an above-slot signing. In the end, instead of getting your player, you’ll get the guy the monetary maneuvering gives you. Of course, that’s unavoidable in the draft to some extent, except it’s totally avoidable when you’re picking 1-1. That’s the one pick in the draft that you can base entirely on baseball considerations.
The Pirates’ 2021 draft is hardly an argument for saving money at 1-1. If that draft turns out well, it’ll be due primarily to Henry Davis, but the Pirates have insisted that they had him as the best available. Of all the above-slot guys, the only one who’s made any mark at all so far is Anthony Solometo. Right now, the return from that draft doesn’t look any better than what the Pirates could have done without bothering with the “Davis strategy.” Pointing to Marcelo Mayer and Jordan Lawlar doesn’t accomplish much, either. Two years from now that could be Walker Jenkins and Max Clark.
After 1-1, there shouldn’t be any “strategy,” just BPA. The Pirates tried drafting for need in 2022 when they loaded up on college pitching to address the shortage of pitching depth in the system. So far, that hasn’t worked. Of course, there’s no way of knowing what sort of talent they passed over by drafting for need. When you start looking for something other than the best player you can get, your risk simply outsmarting yourself.
TIM: Jeff, I feel like you’ve already laid your pick out, but make it official for us. What’s your final strategy?
JEFF: To make it official, I’m going Dylan Crews with the first overall pick. Obviously the negotiating would be mostly done beforehand, and I’d max out at $9M. That clears Adley Rutschman’s record bonus by almost $600K. Paul Skenes or Wyatt Langford would likely still set records, but maybe closer to $8.6M, saving $400K.
As I’ve mentioned a couple of times, the Pirates have the budget pool to go big, not having to focus too much on savings. Slot amounts to me are really just to calculate the pool total and for talking points. The number that matters is the near $17M. Pick Dylan Crews, and then they can still go “best player available” for the next two to three picks. I’d really like it if they got their hands on at least one prep pitcher and one prep position player, then started filling out with upside college picks like Tre Morgan (yes another LSU kid), Kevin Sim, or pitchers like Will Sanders and Sean Sullivan 2.0.
With the number one pick and a sizable bonus pool, they shouldn’t get cute with it, swing for the fences.
TIM: I just want to say that you guys did an incredible job with this. I loved the perspectives.
Check back later today at PiratesProspects.com for my column breaking down the first pick.
Skenes. He’s rated better than Gerrit Cole and comes with a powerful bat ….
We’re getting two players, with this pick. An A+ pitcher, and an A batter
I’m going Crews, for a few reasons. One, he’s simply the best player. That should be enough but the MLB draft likes to be quirky and weird so here we are.
Two, I take him over Skenes because position player > pitcher every time, all else being equal (and I do think they’re very close to the same level of prospect). I’m sick of trying to win every game 2-1 like the Pirates clearly want to do, with their hyper focus on things like pitching matchups and catcher framing and defense. Scoring runs at will is the BEST way to give yourself a chance to win every single day, period. This is not even to mention the much higher likelihood of major injury for pitchers in this day and age.
Three, I shudder at the idea and precedent of letting Boras win. If an agent’s bogus scare tactics and demands are enough to scare you away from a player you want, that’s just loser behavior on an organizational scale, and it makes me sick to think about.
Four, the system as a whole right now seriously lacks true star power. This is an argument for Crews OR Skenes. BC’s “quantity over quality” approach to the rebuild isn’t producing superstar-potential players. Take one at the top, this isn’t the time to spread the wealth across the draft like 2021.
Five, Crews seemingly has a better chance to stick in CF than Langford, and CF is a gaping long-term hole. Suwinski is fine there for now, but his arm leaves a lot to be desired. Nobody else is anywhere close to being a lock in the whole system.
Six, a college player is a must for the timing of the window of contention, which should be seriously starting next year.
At this point one guess is as good as another. The one worry everyone should have, its the pirates and as such there is a much higher chance of failure regardless of whom they pick. This is a team that chose an college hitter with a number one pick but drafted him as a pitcher and the result was total failure and a wasted opportunity to improve. So lets wait and see and not get our hopes up.
Does the fact the Pirates seem to have their OF set with Reynolds, Suwinski, and Davis, for the foreseeable future affect Pirates thought process?
If Pirates management is looking for reasons to take Skenes over Crews & Langford, this certainly could be a determining factor.
Verrry much lean towards Wilbur’s skepticism here (although to my eye, there’s not any practical separation between Crews and Langford).
Arguably the current top HS prospect from that vaunted 2021 draft is Jackson Merril, who signed underslot for a million bucks less than the Pirates give Tony Solomento.
The current zeitgeist that says high schoolers are both too risky to take up top AND teams should craft their entire draft around caving to the leverage they have in college commitments makes no amount of sense to me. An exceptionally low-probability strategy.
Last 25 years 1-1 Pitchers’ Career WAR:
Mize: 2.8
Aiken: N/A
Appel: 0.3
Cole: 37.2 🔥
Strasburg: 32.3🔥
Price 40.3 🔥
Hochevar: 3.7
Bullington … sorry, too soon?
I would say 4 of 7 busts, Mize TBD.
But guess what? 1-1 batters bust rate right around same: https://www.mlb.com/news/every-no-1-overall-mlb-draft-pick
I think most of us feel same way: there is no way the Pirates can screw up Sunday if they draft & sign Crews, Skenes or Langford
mlb.com has an article up ranking Skenes the #2 pitching prospect in the draft era just behind Strasburg. What I found interesting is that almost all of the pitchers listed had their career write-ups in the article limited by injuries.
The other concern I have with Skenes (I have concerns with Crews and Langford too. It’s the pessimist in me.) is that he dominated the equivalent of A+ (maybe AA in the SEC and CWS) with two (superior) pitches. His 3rd pitch, his change, is rated a 50. We have a couple of power pitchers (Ortiz, Oviedo) who are two-pitch power pitchers. To be the ace we want, how good does Skenes’ change have to become?
Skenes has merely two years of pitching; he’s the very best, with hardly any wear on his physique
Other than that 127 pitch outing…
No doubt (though I don’t know the actual data), this reduces the injury risk factor some.
Skenes, although I like what Langford offers
i dont blame anyone here for thinking that actually sacrificing any tangible ability from the 1.1 pick in favor of having more to spend in rd 2/3 is dumb.
what i do implore everyone to consider is what makes Crews that much better than Langford to you. maybe you personally have plenty of reasons, but just take yourself thru that exercise. i personally think you need to make sure the reason is more than just “i saw Crews’ name online all year more”
is saving money for later picks dumb if Langford is 99 percent as good? 97 percent? of course it’s dumb if it’s 85 percent. maybe you blink and realize that you’d actually rather have him even if the bonuses are equal.
Langford is a really really good player, man.
IMO theres not really a great reason for Crews to have gotten more buzz “online” this year other than that Langford had his injury.
(also, they should probably take skenes. but im happy with any of the big 3 college guys. id be annoyed by Jenkins but accept it. im just not a Clark guy and would be a lil mad.)
You saw his name because he was the consensus best player coming into this season of college baseball. To me, this indicates that he has reached a plateau: a little earlier than most baseball players. I think his ceiling and floor are much clearer than anyone else’s and there is little mystery here. Langford probably has a higher ceiling than Crews as a hitter, but that is not certain, and Langford may not have the speed and arm to play LF at PNC. He may end up at 1B, and it seems a shame to take a guy without all the tools to play a tougher defensive position when someone who has them is available.. Skenes is just picking up pitching and no one is sure what his ceiling is because he is still just learning grips and experimenting with pitches. To me… all of this makes Skenes the guy. Upside… and tools… he has it all… the other two are lacking either upside or a tool.
Although I don’t necessarily agree with your assessment on Langford’s defense, I do feel Crews is kind of maxed out as far as upside.
I don’t know that I agree with my assessment of his defense because I have only seen him on a few Youtube videos, and I don’t trust many of they eyeball scouting reports on defense nor do I have confidence in metrics for guys without 3 or 4 seasons of data. My point is only that, with the options available to the Pirates, if there is a question mark there, they should consider that since they have several guys who merit being drafted first overall. If they have good data on Langford and are as certain as possible that he can play a corner OF position, then I would take him over Crews every time.
The whole “save $500K to spread around in rounds 2-3” is garbage. Most of those players don’t work out anyways. Bubba Chandler and Lonnie white are going to show that. Take Crews. They need impact bats in a bad ways. I like Skenes, but arms weren’t meant to sit 100 200 innings a year.
Hold please it’s Nolan Ryan on line 1 for you. And Randy Johnson on line 2. And Bob Gibson on line 3. And…
On rare occasions there are some who for whatever reason are gifted to do this. And maybe Skenes is one of those type dudes? And I for one am willing to gamble he is just that!
AMEN! I was just thinking the very same thing.
500+ at bats v 180+ innings, that’s the number that keeps playing in my head.
Bird in hand v gambling to see what’s available in later rounds…
I hope they take Crews.
There is anther way to look at this. Pitching 180 innings means you are facing at least 540 batters during the season. Given the hits & walks you will surrender, a 180 inning pitcher is more likely to face 600-650 batters per season. That might make him more valuable than a 500+ at bats hitter.
Dylan Crews. Take the Bat!!!!
This is easy. Every team can use starting pitching but these days quantity is at least as important quality because injuries happen and you have to have at least five of them. The Pirates need high level hitters and everyday players if they ever hope to score enough to compete.
Crews is the best hitter to come along in years and that’s been the opinion of scouts and other evaluators for a long time and remains so despite all the posturing by the celebrities on TV and the Internet. Check out his numbers over three years at LSU and find a way to say otherwise.
Everyone consistently chose him as the top pick for so long that it became predictable and boring so to draw attention to themselves they started choosing someone else and ran the gamut seemingly putting all of the top five #1 at some point. It worked too because they’re getting attention.
Meanwhile Crews continued to hit over .400 and played flawlessly in center field with less acclaim than before largely because he’d always done it. Skenes pitched in 4 national TV games in the college post season and became the darling of everyone while Crews hit .450 in all 13 of those games (and .500 in the finals against FL where Skenes never even made an appearance) and went largely unnoticed because that’s what he does.
Langford’s a very good player and I’m sure both high-schoolers are talented, but Crews is in a class by himself as far as talent and proven ability to perform at a superior level and is still the clear #1 pick.
What’s the value of being lucky enough to have gotten the #1 pick if you’re not going to draft the best player especially when he’s this good? It kills me that fans want to point out how much money it might take to sign him when those same fans complain that the Pirates never spend to get or keep good players. We all know that they have the money and are going to spend it somewhere in the draft.
Why take fliers on some unknown high-school players down the draft board when you know what you can get at the top? Crews will be an incredible bargain at whatever amount and for whatever team is smart enough to draft him. I can only hope it’s the Pirates.
Are these scout who are so high on Crews the same scouts that touted Temarr?
Do you understand FV, future value? E.g. Fangraphs rate Johnson current hitting tool as 25, so before he play a game as a pro they predicted that he would struggle, but believe that it will be 60 as he gets more reps, experience, etc…
I’m repeating a bit from my earlier post but the pirates have nearly 17 million to work with. GO FOR TWO HIGH IMPACT PLAYERS. Any of the top 3 would be stupid not to sign at 9.2 probably less. Use upto 4.5 on pick 42 on a deal if possible. That’s mid 1st round money. Go quality over quantity. It’s a deep draft you can save money from 67 to 140 in small amounts and get good prospects. Draft college seniors or player that will take big discounts after 140.
Granted the recent Kiley mock implied some inflation likely with new CBA, but looking over the most recent drafts, it appears the better prep hitters are around $1.5M-$2.5M and pitchers $2M-$3M. So, they should be able to get two high end prep picks with 2nd and 3rd selections for a combination in the whereabouts of $4M-$6M.
Totally agree with that, I was just putting a cap at 4.5 mil for a college junior if the pirates have them graded in the top 15. The high school kids I’d do like you said pick 42 and or 67, my plan B.
Offer Lowder $8M for the 1-1 pick, then convince Clark to drop to 42 for $8.5M lol
Still to big of a drop off from the top 3 for me, but it would be tempting. 500,000 for the next 9 picks hurts too much in this deep draft.
Alright, fine. Since Lowder is projected around 6th-7th, you can get away with $6.5M and he gets to be “first overall pick”
I do wonder that since lowder went to wake and got to use their pitching lab, he might be closer to his ceiling, or at least ceiling that can be aided with technology compared to other guys
That just makes me want Schanuel at 1 for 5.5 mil and get Clark at 42 for 8 mil and take Tredwell or Witt at 67 for 2 mil. lol
Im slowly resigning myself to the fact that probably wont swindle a comp A round pick before the draft 🙁 could make that 3 high impact players if they did
Me too
Crews or Skenes …pay them and deal with the rest of the draft as usual. Saving $$ to guess who may be available at 42, 67 or later when elite (maybe generational talents) are on the board is way too cute.
I strongly prefer Crews due to pitcher injury risks but can live with either.
Draft Max Clark and I will consider being done with these idiots.
For me it’s Crews or Skenes. F the idea of signing someone under slot for more HS kids later. The Prates need Quality not quantity.
the idea that langford doesnt belong in the inner circle of Crews/Skenes is a little overboard imo
I would take him too. Either of the 3 college guys. Not worried about saving money though.
I’m with Wilbur and Jeff on this one. Take BPA and get what you can out of the middle rounds.
Slot is 9.7 million, Torkelson’s bonus was the record at 8.4m. I don’t see how Crews/Skenes say no to 9-9.5m. Get BPA, save a couple 100k and grab 1-2 overslot kids in rounds 2-4.
Through the dark years, there was several times I’ve come close to giving up on the team. If they draft Max Clark just to save some money to sign additional HS guys it might be it for me. Is anyone else feeling this extreme or can talk me off the ledge?
I’d have to see him play in pro ball first, but he’s my least favorite of the 5. I have him Lowder and Teel as the next tier with Jenkins kinda of in-between the top 3.
You could probably guess but I have Schanuel in that tier as well.
I like Jeff’s approach which is really consistent with most of the writers. Throw away rounds 5 – 10 or 4 – 10 with scouted but well underslot players. Maybe we find a Stallings. I am excluding 11-20 because they don’t really help with the adding to the pool but you can draft a player or two who may take what is left of the pool. And then with reverse engineering you pick best player available as long as you think you can get the funds to sign them for rounds 1-4 or 1-3.
For the first pick my choice is still one of the three college players and the more I read the more I feel there is not a significant enough difference in their predicted outcomes that I would want to pay significantly more for any one of them. They all sound great and yes.. at least one will likely fail IMO. So if I am almost coin flipping the three I take the best deal – not as a sacrifice but as good business for the next 2 or 3 rounds. So with that I prefer Skenes over Langford as I am assuming Crews will cost significantly more and brings little certainty of a better outcome to make it worth it. But I respect where that opinion varies greatly amongst us. If Pirates think Crews is clearly 1-1 then I support them paying what it costs, I am just in the boat of those who don’t think 1-1 is that clear.
My approach to draft watching will be: See who goes 1.. probably walk away until we get in the 30s and then basically see what high schoolers (over slot candidates) have been passed over among the top 20 – 30 prospects. I am hoping there are 2 – 5 candidates for that 42nd pick.
Langford is the most davis-like pick, so that’s where i’m betting.
98 percent as good as crews, and likely to be at least somewhat less expensive.
There are zero rumors of WSN taking him. everyone knows WSN is going crews or skenes. So langford either goes 1,3, or 4.
slot at 3 is 8.3, and slot at 4 is 7.7.
theyre even floating the clark thing, which would push langford to 3rd to 5th. slot at 5 is 7.1.
Theyre cutting a deal with Langford for just over 8.3.
overall, given that i dont think theyll ever ever pay a real ace, i probably still lean toward preferring to give Skenes slot value at 1.1, but i’m happy with cutting a deal with langford as well, due to me thinking he’s just as good as crews. and langford is what i think will happen.
here’s hoping they buy some pitching this winter.
there’s also a pretty good argument to want to take the gamble on Langford’s louder bat and try to improve his defense, before you even think about the bonus games. you improve his defense a little bit, and he’ll be just as good a prospect as Crews.
we dont talk enough here about how langford has the louder hitting tools. well, at least according to Longenhagen. Keith law has also alluded to a higher offensive ceiling for Langford.
Not sure of this, but I think Langford is the only left handed batter, so going with him over Crew.
I think the decision is between Langford and Skenes. Leaning Langford for the record
Langford bats right handed
Langford does not hit left-handed.
Langford hits righty
Over Crews – typo
Oops, my bad. Any of the 4 bat lefty?
The high schoolers both do.
My preference is Skenes. I think the pirates should have a plan A with a quick fall back ro a plan B.
Plan A. Take the best player at pick 1 that comes at 9.2 million or less. (Should be any of the top 3) Pick 42 try and cut a deal with the best player you think should be a top 15 pick but isn’t. Allocate up to 4.5 million for the pick. Pick 67 through 140 if pick 42 goes to plan start targeting small savings in the next few picks with players that have high impact but come with risk. Picks after 140 go savings with college seniors or players that can be had at a discount. The 11 round pick a high school player you can sign depending on the room you have left in the pool.
Plan B. The pick you had targeted still gets drafted by another team. Go with best available on your board that is signable through round 10. Go for impact not safe picks though except for maybe a pitcher or two. Round 11 same as plan A.
They should really hire us for the war room
We could probably simplify their process with out over thinking it lol
Melkel is my go to.
Thanks
No problem. Enjoy your posts.
espn’s latest mock has the pirates taking skenes. but they also say that clark and langford had private workouts with the pirates.
McGonigle to Pirates at #42
PA guy. Looked up to Chase Utley. I’m down.
a plus hitter that can play around the diamond? i can dig it
I saw “old” attached to his name as a prep player, and my instant thought was Brett Baty, who was considered an “old” prep hitter.
Are we one of the orgs that has aged based models or nah? I dont think the few months that makes a player old vs young is anything but #fakenews
It’s more on physical and developmental projection, Colt Emerson has a similar profile but is almost a year younger with a larger frame and stronger arm. It’s who I’d target instead but I like McGonigle as well. Both Auburn recruits.
This makes much more sense to me than age so im glad that’s what the org does. Hoping someone floats, as if on the lazy river, all the way down to 42 for us
He has Schanuel going at 11 to the Angeles now.
Saw that, with their recent mantra of straight to Double-A and in majors as soon as possible.
Angels are the NFL of MLB
It’s kinda working with Joyce and Neto prior to the injury.
He’s a player that I feel should be in the tier after the top 5 but isn’t. I wouldn’t be shocked to see the A’s take him for 5.5 million and have the capitol to grab 3 first round talents by the time we pick at 42. Just really hoping he doesn’t end up in our division.
He would be one of the guys that fits my plan A, of course I want Schanuel but he’s not likely.
old?? he’ll still be 18 at the draft lol i hope people really don’t consider him old for a prep player
i’ve said it a dozen times here already, but i just have no time for taking someone with sub-50 power at #1 . i mean maybe some outlets give Clark 50 power – i have no idea – but the one i trust most, fangraphs, has him under 50.
I 100% agree with Wilbur. I will be really disappointed if we employ the “spread it around” strategy.
Cant go cheap on a 60/65FV at 1-1 with the hopes you find a pick at #42 who is an underrated 40/45FV
Prediction: slot savings only come into play if Crews or Skenes demands over slot. If you’re an agent representing a “generational talent” picked at 1-1, it’s going to be tough to sell an under slot deal with a team that has the highest bonus pool in the entire draft. These 1-1’s will be entitled to full slot. Pay them
there are just so many ways to think about all of this.
Who would i pick if i was in ben cherington’s shoes? (me? skenes or langford probably. i just really like both 99 percent as much as crews, and would gun for either savings or for the playoff-caliber pitcher. i also think langford has the louder bat and can improve the glove)
who would i pick if this was an OOTP universe? (crews, and i’d buy pitching in the winter)
Who SHOULD they pick, if they were running the team in good faith? (probably crews, with an eye at buying real pitching later)
Who SHOULD they pick, knowing that theyll never actually pay market rate for an ace, and given that pitching is more important in the playoffs? (skenes)
The Cincinnatti Reds won 2 World Series with Crews in my recent OOTP playthrough while I was rebuilding the As farm system from the ground up with mostly prep picks.
phewwww. who is the Reds rotation in OOTP lol? did they buy an ace?
Yeah… they got Trevor Bauer coming off his suspension and he won 2 Cy Youngs.
If we don’t draft Skenes, we should suck it up and sign Bauer.
lmao!
well, i’d love to see that strategy, aside from the specifics of it being ~trevor bauer~
They paid for it in karma. They went into “win now” mode, signed some over-priced veterans, traded most of their farm. Now their annual budget is -35 million, they have no farm, and their GM is constantly putting their best guys on the block.
Don’t overthink it.
overthinking is what i do
Analysis Paralysis? 😎😎
Word on the street it’s Clark at 7.7 8.0 million. Also Callis logic is faulty most picks between the end of the first round and the pirates pick in the 2nd round are have to sign picks ,which means a player probably a high schooler can turn down teams unless they meet his price. Their will be plenty of salary demand talent available at 42.
My street said something different.
VOTE OTHER.
For the record I said Dylan Crews above, but I’m starting to really lean Langford. In an all things equal world, Crews. But it’s just starting to feel like Boras will get in the way. I hate that narrative, and think he would/may ultimately bend the knee to $9M, but he’s also screwed over a lot of recent clients of his, or I guess the signing teams.
Kumar Rocker saga itself was wild. The Mets draft that lead to him not signing and going to independent ball, followed by signing with the Rangers in next draft only to go down with TJS. The Correa debacle, coincidentally involving the Mets again. Carlos Rodon is only just about to throw his first pitch for the Yankees since signing his huge FA deal.
Boras has an agenda, which is to make money for himself and make baseball a game in which all the teams only buy and sell players. His agenda is often at odds with his clients’ interests, since guaranteed money in hand on a long-term deal is often better than the future promise of a big free-agent contract. Guys get hurt… they lose their mojo… and so forth. Oftentimes it is in both the team’s and the player’s interest to sign a long-term deal for less value than free agency.
I want a hotter.
So we’re doing a “Hot or Not” draft?
I feel like the skenes stache hugely adds to the hot factor for him, plus 70FV team hot with both him and reynolds imposing their staches on opponents. Add in cutch with his charisma and swag, just need some good southern boy charm to round out the team
Those from a different generation would call it a ‘porn’ stache . 😹😹😹
Kemp Alderman has that southern boy charm.
I want the Pirates to draft Travinski later in the draft solely cause with his stache he already looks like a grizzled mid-30’s vet
If we could somehow pull tommy tanks next year, boy would we have some people all hot and bothered by the pure manliness displayed by the team
I want a hot hitter? 🙂
Aren’t typos fun sometimes?
In that case, the lady was a really big fan of Devin Burkes from Kentucky lol
OK Clark
Clark?
VOTE PAUL SKENES
VOTE DYLAN CREWS
For the commenters….I will list Crews, Skenes or Other. Pls like the one that you want. It will be interesting to see which of the three get the most likes.
Great idea Lee!