It might be collusion, but for just one year, I'd love to see all the owners get together, and agree not to draft anyone represented by Scott Boras. Like most agents, the man is a scumbag leech with no useful talent of his own, who has to make his living off the skills of others. Of course, that's just my opinion. :-)

The best-available player strategy makes sense, but I think you definitely do have to take signability in as a major consideration. That's especially the case now, where you get very little compensation for failure to sign [if we don't get Scherzer, I think we'll end up with #64 this year, way below what we originally had].

Interesting comment from William K over on DBBP: "For the past few years, the D-backs have gone college-heavy but with a young team in the Majors and several prospects still in the farm, I think it's time for them to roll the dice and pick some high-risk, high-ceiling high school kids. Maybe not the first round pick, you pick the best talent at no. 9 regardless of position there, but for the supplemental, 2nd and 3rd rounds." This makes sense: with most of our positions apparently filled for the next few years, we don't have many immediate needs, and can take a gamble on younger players, with the hope a couple will become serious studs.

The question of whether we sign Scherzer or not will likely also affect who we go with. There's a number of Boras clients likely to be available in the first round, but if we've paid out a large sum to Scherzer, there might not be a lot left in the piggy-bank for another high-paid client this year.