Draft Q&A with Jim Callis
May 19, 2010
Jim Callis is the Executive Editor of Baseball America, the nation's leading publication on all things amateur baseball. He seems not to sleep in the weeks preceding the draft, but he still took the time to chat with us. We appreciate it.
College Splits: Your 2005 mock draft is the stuff of legend. How much work goes into putting your final mock together? Was there a point around the middle of the '05 first round where even you simply couldn't believe you kept nailing teams' picks?
Jim Callis: I spent mostly every waking hour in the 3-4 days before the draft, communicating via phone, text or email, trying to find out what's going on. I'll usually keep going until about 2 a.m. the night before the draft, then sit down and spill all the info into the writeup. I enjoy trying to find out what's going to happen, but the funny thing is that I feel like I work harder every year and I know I'll never nail the first 18 picks in a row like I did in 2005. Most of the time, for picks in the top half of the draft, I'll find out 3-4 scenarios that could happen, and one of them usually will.
In 2005, I felt pretty good about the first seven picks, and I had nailed the first seven in 2004. I couldn't pin down who the Rays were taking at 8, but I knew Wade Townsend had to go somewhere, wasn't hearing him with other clubs, so I guessed on Townsend. When Tampa Bay took him, I started to realize things might really fall into place.
The highlight for me was at No. 17, where most people had the Yankees taking Craig Hansen. I had pretty good info the Yankees would take C.J. Henry. When that pick came up, I got an IM from a Yankees employee who told me my streak was over, and another IM from a scout who told me a Yankees scout had just told him the same thing. And then New York took Henry—-that was awesome. I knew I wasn't going to get the Rangers at 19 (they were on Chris Volstad, but I found out late the night before the Marlins would take Volstad), but I had a Rangers scout later tell me the team took heat in a local paper for not following my lead like the other 18 clubs had.
Of course, I haven't had more than four in a row correct at the top of the draft since then. With the draft at night now, it's gotten harder, because teams have more time the day of the draft to alter their plans.
CS: You're the father of four children. Is a love of the game something you hope to instill in them?
JC: I've exposed them all to baseball, and they know my work involves baseball, but I've let them determine their own interest. My oldest son loves baseball, played spring/summer/fall every year (I coached most of those teams) until he got to high school, now umpires and still plans on playing summer ball. He's a huge fan, too, very much into the game. He'll break out the 20-80 scouting scale from time to time. My second oldest, my second son, is more of a casual fan. He didn't enjoy playing as much (too much downtime) and prefers to play lacrosse. He'll ask some interesting questions about the game, but doesn't live and die with it.
My third oldest, my oldest daughter, is even more casual, but my youngest daughter knows a few players and is currently trying to decide whether she wants to switch from softball to baseball. I take my sons to the College World Series every year and it's our favorite vacation, both for the baseball and for everything else Omaha has to offer. My daughters and wife came out on the train and met us for the end of the 2007 CWS, and the whole family is going this year.
CS: Are you ever able to let your BA guard down and watch a college, minor league, or MLB game as a fan alone, or is there a part of you who's always keeping a mental scouting notebook on every guy you see?
JC: I am, mostly after the draft and before the Aug. 15 signing deadline, when the workload is less hectic. Only really with big league games, because the college and minor leaguers are all on the prospect radar. And even with the big league games, I'll start thinking about when the players were prospects, or why a guy has developed better or worse than expected. Hmmm. I guess the answer is I do keep the mental scouting notebook handy at all times.
CS: Getting to the draft...what are the perceived strengths and weaknesses of this year's talent?
JC: Pitching is the strength of this draft, particularly righthanded pitching. There are a number of quality arms in the college and high school crops, but not a lot of lefty depth, especially on the high school side. Scouts are disappointed in the college position player crop, though that's a chronic complaint because many of the top athletes and bats are signed out of high school. The high school hitting class is nothing special and not very deep either. Because of the scarcity of position players, they'll get pushed up draft boards and taken higher than we might expect.
CS: On a related note, *next* year's draft class seems to already be getting quite a bit of hype. Is it justified? Why?
JC: It is justified. If you were grading these drafts on the 20-80 scale, 2010 would be a 40-45 and 2011 would be a 60-65. Rice third baseman Anthony Rendon might be the No. 1 pick this year if he were available. UCLA's Gerrit Cole, Texas' Taylor Jungmann and LHP Matt Purke would probably be the first three college pitchers taken this year if available. The talent at the top of the 2011 crop is that much better, and the overall position player depth is better too.
CS: How does the top draft-eligible talent compare to what can be found in this July's international free agent market?
JC: My knowledge of the international market is limited, so I ran this question by BA's Ben Badler. He said there's no clear elite talent this year, no Michael Ynoa or Miguel Sano, some interesting guys but not a banner year. Even if in a banner year for international talent, there's so much more risk involved. With the draft, you have so much more history with players, you see them against so much better competition and in game situations, you have a much better idea of their makeup.
CS: To what extent might teams consider the impact of a new CBA when preparing for this season's draft?
JC: I don't think they will at all. I do think significant rule changes could come in the next CBA and be in effect for the 2012 or 2013 draft, most notably the possible mandating of bonus limits for every draft slot. But so often over the last two decades, proposed draft changes have not come to pass, so there's no point in bracing for them now. Mandating slotting won't affect this draft anyway. If a team can't realize the worth of spending for talent with a potential high rate of return, possible draft changes won't wake them up.
CS: Toronto has a score of picks in the early rounds, and they seem to be signaling a real commitment to exploiting that opportunity. What other teams out there do you see impacting the flow of the first few rounds, either due to the sheer number of picks early on, or talk of their willingness to spend big this year?
JC: Every team that has a new regime talks about building from within. The Blue Jays have nine picks in the first three rounds, but are they going to be aggressive and go over slot? Or just sign slot guys? Or have to make some budgetary choices so they can sign all their picks? Those different approaches can lead to vastly different results. The Angels, Astros, Rangers, Rays and Red Sox also have early extra picks, and those clubs run the spectrum from the most passive drafting team over the last few years (Astros) to the most aggressive (Red Sox).
No one wants to risk the ire of the commissioner's office by coming out and stating their intention to spend a lot of money in the draft, so haven't heard anything on that front. The two biggest spenders in the 2008-09 drafts were the Pirates and the Royals, and the draft is the one arena where they can compete on an even playing field with the higher-revenue clubs. I'd expect them to do more of the same this year.
CS: A lot of "signability" discussion focuses on guys who might slide due to their demands. But, what about the guys on the opposite side of that question this year; who do you see climbing up draft boards on their sheer willingness to sign for slot alone?
JC: Anyone who's willing to sign for slot is going to climb because there are a lot of clubs who won't take anyone who's making noise about wanting more than slot money. It's too early to pinpoint signability, but the guys who jump to mind are college guys like Ohio State righthander Alex Wimmers, Ball State second baseman Kolbrin Vitek and Middle Tennessee State outfielder Bryce Brentz. BA rates them in the 21-30 range, but assuming they'll sign for slot, you could see them go in the 11-15 range, maybe even the top 10. I've heard that Canadian high school catcher Kellin Deglan may cut a deal that lands him in the first round. We'll see a few of those, too.
CS: Everybody loves a good sleeper pick. Who's yours?
JC: I've been focusing a lot on the Midwest, so I have that region on my mind. Excluding guys BA has rated as top-three-round talents, my gut-feel guy is Texas righthander Cole Green. He's no better than the fourth-best prospect on a loaded Longhorns pitching staff, and he doesn't light up radar guns, but he has very good command of three solid pitches. If you had to win a game today and could pick any Texas pitcher, Green would be the guy. He'll pitch in the big leagues. Another guy I really like is Michigan righty Tyler Burgoon. He's only 5-foot-10 and 160 pounds, so he'll be a reliever, but that's fine. He sits at 92-93 mph with his sinker and has a wipeout slider, and he maintains his stuff even when used heavily.