Talk:2015 Major League Baseball draft

Baseball Mid‑importance

	Baseball portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Baseball, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of baseball on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BaseballWikipedia:WikiProject BaseballTemplate:WikiProject BaseballBaseball articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Lists

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Players tied to compensation

Michael Cuddyer - leaves Colorado, signs with NY Mets
Pablo Sandoval - leaves SF, signs with Boston (protected first rounder)
Max Scherzer - TBD
Victor Martinez - stays in Detroit
Francisco Liriano - stays in Pittsburgh
Russell Martin - leaves Pittsburgh, signs with Toronto
Hanley Ramirez - leaves LA Dodgers, signs with Boston (protected first rounder)
Nelson Cruz - leaves Baltimore, signs with Seattle
James Shields - TBD
David Robertson - leaves NY Yankees, signs with Chicago White Sox (protected first rounder)
Melky Cabrera - TBD
Ervin Santana - TBD

[1] – Muboshgu (talk) 19:48, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Top Prospect References

The reference is there: the MLB.com top prospects lists, where each of those players is listed. That's what we did last year so I thought it would work. Didn't realize we had to cite each player individually. Mpejkrm (talk) 21:17, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not every line has to have a citation per se, I just hadn't noticed that section before and from past instances, it could wind up bloated with people adding random names. If they're all listed in that source (I haven't checked yet), then it's fine. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:04, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Other notable selections"

Where is this coming from? We've never done this before. Not sure if I like this idea.--Yankees10 17:42, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't get it. Why start now? What makes these guys notable? They slipped in the draft or are college performers? I say scrap it. Mpejkrm (talk) 18:01, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

They're notable because of the sources that make them notable. Why not include them? The draft is more than the first round. I believe I remember a consensus to add notable non-first rounders to other draft pages, I'll have to check for examples. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:06, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I randomly clicked on 2009 Major League Baseball Draft. It includes a list of non-first rounders to make the majors, and NFL players selected. In other words, notable non-first rounders. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:07, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes - none of these guys have made the majors yet. We can add them back when they do. Mpejkrm (talk) 18:07, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you have that arbitrary inclusion criteria, though? This article is about the entire draft, not just the first round. The individuals I'm adding are notable. I didn't add Tate Matheny, who is at this point a redirect. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:13, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Meh. I'm okay with it if they have their own article, personally. If they pass the criteria for notability, I don't see why we can't give a quick mention on the draft page. GlassCobra 21:00, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The notability of some of those guys is questionable. Does every darn pick get their own article these days? Its getting out of hand. Also, the older pages just had other guys to make the majors not just some random draftees. Spanneraol (talk) 21:12, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Some of them could be merged (after they sign, if they sign) or deleted, depending. As of now, there are 15 players in the post-first round grouping, out of more than 200 selections that have been made since the end of the first round. I don't see this as "out of hand". – Muboshgu (talk) 21:22, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think most of them should be merged into their organizational MiLB players article until they reach Top 100 prospect status. Mpejkrm (talk) 00:12, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Donny Everett

I don't think a top prospect who didn't sign is notable and frankly I don't think he should even have his own article since he's going to be a freshman college baseball player next year, and unless you're Bryce Harper or hitting .600 and winning the Golden Spikes Award I don't think you're notable as a freshman. Mpejkrm (talk) 23:23, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We don't know if he's going to sign or not. He was drafted and has an article. I think he's notable, so I added him. We can further consider deletions and merges as players sign, or don't. (Also he is a top prospect from the class, he likely fell because of his bonus demands and the strength of his Vandy commitment.) – Muboshgu (talk) 00:53, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well I think we should have waited till they actually signed before creating these guys as part of the minor league pages.. It is Crystal for you to be creating them prior to that on the basis of them possibly signing. Spanneraol (talk) 01:13, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't create Everett. I did create a few of the other ones though. Anyway, they shouldn't be created because they might be first round picks, but should be created if they have enough sourcing. Which, some of them do, some of them don't. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:37, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Traded Draft Picks

I noticed that the page seems to be missing any indication that compensation picks were traded (the Astros pick in the comp round came from Miami in the Marisnick deal for example). The 2014 Draft uses notes to discuss the trades, but the 2013 Draft uses a simpler, and unreferenced, annotation in the cell of the table. Obviously I think the 2014 version has greater clarity, but I thought I'd get the impressions from the active editors here on implementing it for the this page and updating 2013. Xsturmin8 (talk) 20:47, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for bringing this to our attention. It is an oversight. I like the 2014 method of doing it. I will try to get around to it soon, unless someone else wants to take it up. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:53, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]