MLB Draft Signings 2012: Posturing of Top Draft Picks Is Tiring
As the July 13 deadline to sign prospects nears, we still have top draft picks posturing for the most money, as always.
It's no surprise that Mark Appel, the No. 8 overall pick of the 2012 MLB draft, hasn't been signed yet by the Pittsburgh Pirates, given the infamous Scott Boras is his agent.
There's also Kevin Gausman, the No. 4 overall pick, who is telling everyone that he may just go back to LSU for another year and potentially spurn the Baltimore Orioles, per the Times-Picayune.
The main reason Appel dropped in the draft, mind you, was because teams were fearing this very thing. They knew his agent was Boras, and they knew he probably wanted a lot of money.
Instead of signing for around $3.8 million (the most the Pirates can spend without future consequences), Appel apparently is "leaning against" making a jump to the big leagues, per CBSSports.com. Instead, the Stanford right-hander may return for his senior season (you know, to pursue a College World Series title, or something like that).
Appel's stance in particular doesn't make a lot of sense. He'll be one year older if he opts for the next draft, and there's no telling how Stanford's next season will unfold. Instead of being happy that he's a top-10 pick, Appel apparently may risk it all for a little more money.
Will Appel and Gausman eventually sign this year?
Gausman is still eligible for two more years of college ball, but, again, he got selected No. 4 overall. Sure, he could rise to No. 1 next season, but that's a lot of risk for a few draft spots.
Of course, Appel and Gausman could simply be gunning for more money this year. But, given the new draft cap system, it's not like teams can do much more anyway. The Pirates could offer Appel a little over $4 million, but that costs them a 2013 draft pick and a few hundred thousand dollars, per CBSSports.com.
Another summer, another display of top MLB draft picks being greedy.
Follow me on Twitter. We can talk about baseball together.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?