It’s been nearly five years since the 2009 Major League Baseball Draft. For college draftees, it’s been plenty of time to determine with hindsight whether or not they warranted their selection. For high school picks, at the very least it’s safe to say the baseball world has a very good idea what kind of value they carry. In light of the previous two declarations, let’s see what the first natural round (30 picks) of the 2009 Draft might look like if we could use said 20-20 hindsight goggles.
A few notes first:
1. I did not consider signing bonus money or the team that owns the selections when making each pick
2. I considered value already provided in the big leagues as well as potential future value. As a result, some of the selections have not, at present, provided the most value among the players available for selection
3. I did consider players that did not sign, and a few of those appear below. Each of those went onto college and were drafted much higher the second time around, but since we’re using those awesome goggles…
4. There were just eight players chosen in the first round of the 2009 Draft that made the ReDraft. It can easily be argued that a handful more are worthy, however. It simply depends on what’s valued most and in the instances of players that have yet to crack the big leagues, how the beholder — yours truly — projects that player moving forward. There were a few picks I made because I was willing to risk passing on a quality player, such a Brian Dozier, to go for the higher upside, such as Mark Appel.
5. In many cases there is an argument that a player belongs higher or lower, even after utilizing a multi-tiered tie-breaker system that includes dozens of factors. It can be convincingly argued, in my opinion, that picks 3-5 should be No. 2, for example. I left out original pick No. 7 due to low upside and injuries, instead reaching for more long-term impact and overall value. Original pick No. 2, Dustin Ackley, fell to the end of the comp round and therefore does not appear below. I did try to continue to treat these players as draftees, considering a little more about what’s to come than what’s already happened. I’d say the formula was more 55-45 than 50-50 or 80-20.
6. The original picks are listed under the ‘Original’ column below, and, obviously, the ReDrafted choices under that column. The ‘Player’ column offers the round and overall spot that player was selected in 2009
7. Picks No. 11, 14, 15 and 26 did not sign. Pick 11 was drafted again n 2010 and signed. Picks 14 and 15 were drafted again in 2012 and signed. Pick 26 was drafted again in 2012, failed to sign once more, then finally signed after being drafted again in 2013
8. This exercise is in no way intended to suggest any club failed or succeeded in the 2009 draft; one round is not nearly enough data to complete such an assessment. It is interesting, however, that three third-round picks were selected in the top 22 and 10 players that were picked after Round 9 appear in the first round of the ReDraft
Jason A. Churchill
Latest posts by Jason A. Churchill (see all)
- Mariners Starting Pitching: 2018 vs. 2017 - September 4, 2018
- Top 40 Prospect Rankings — Post-Deadline Update - August 5, 2018
- We’re About To Learn How Committed To Winning This New Mariners Ownership Is - July 15, 2018
- Mariners Should Consider Trading for Leonys Martin … or a Player Like Him - July 10, 2018