harfman77 Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 QUOTE (ptatc @ Apr 21, 2017 -> 11:49 AM) Absolutely. However, with the wide difference of opinions of the "experts" I don't think this is a given. There was also a scout quoted on mlbtr saying that Robert is the baseball player in the world, right now. I think its a safe assumption that Robert would be a top 20 prospect in baseball, he would hands down be the #1 pick in this years draft. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JUSTgottaBELIEVE Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 Some have stated Robert would be a potential 1-1 pick in this year's draft. Also, it has been stated that he is the top international prospect currently available and a potential top 25 prospect in MLB upon signing. So what is that worth on the open market? A few points of reference: - The last two 1-1 picks have signed for an average of $6.3MM (understood that this number is heavily skewed because of the cap rules) - The top international prospect in 2016 and #29 ranked per MLB pipeline Kevin Maitan signed for $4.25MM - The top international prospect in 2015 and #14 ranked in Rays org per MLB pipeline Lucius Fox signed for $6MM Based on some of the reference points above, I don't see it taking more than a $13MM signing bonus to land Robert. But are the White Sox willing to pony up $25MM (including tax) to sign him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 (edited) QUOTE (JUSTgottaBELIEVE @ Apr 21, 2017 -> 12:30 PM) Some have stated Robert would be a potential 1-1 pick in this year's draft. Also, it has been stated that he is the top international prospect currently available and a potential top 25 prospect in MLB upon signing. So what is that worth on the open market? A few points of reference: - The last two 1-1 picks have signed for an average of $6.3MM (understood that this number is heavily skewed because of the cap rules) - The top international prospect in 2016 and #29 ranked per MLB pipeline Kevin Maitan signed for $4.25MM - The top international prospect in 2015 and #14 ranked in Rays org per MLB pipeline Lucius Fox signed for $6MM Based on some of the reference points above, I don't see it taking more than a $13MM signing bonus to land Robert. But are the White Sox willing to pony up $25MM (including tax) to sign him? When Moncada became available late in the signing period, he got $31.5 mill from the Red Sox (who I believe were already over). That should probably factor into your estimate and skew the number up more a bit. Edited April 21, 2017 by soxfan2014 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JUSTgottaBELIEVE Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 (edited) QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Apr 21, 2017 -> 12:33 PM) When Moncada became available late in the signing period, he got $31.5 mill from the Red Sox (who I believe were already over). That should probably factor into your estimate and skew the number up more a bit. I did not use Moncada's number for three reasons; One, the typical big spenders on international free agency aren't even in the running for Robert (Boston, LA, CHC, NYY, etc). I don't think this can be minimized. Two, I believe Moncada was generally more highly regarded than Robert. Three, Moncada is the current #1 prospect in MLB and has basically been top 5 since signing. While Robert has the potential to get there, he's not there yet in most people's eyes. Edited April 21, 2017 by JUSTgottaBELIEVE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 QUOTE (IowaSoxFan @ Apr 21, 2017 -> 12:15 PM) Per this article, the Red Sox have already paid off Moncada over his first three years - http://www.12up.com/posts/4228270-report-w...hris-sale-trade The Red Sox are paying the remaining tax as part of the deal. And this one states both... lol. https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2016/12/red-...chris-sale.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 QUOTE (JUSTgottaBELIEVE @ Apr 21, 2017 -> 12:43 PM) I did not use Moncada's number for three reasons; One, the typical big spenders on international free agency aren't even in the running for Robert (Boston, LA, CHC, NYY, etc). I don't think this can be minimized. Two, I believe Moncada was generally more highly regarded than Robert. Three, Moncada is the current #1 prospect in MLB and has basically been top 5 since signing. While Robert has the potential to get there, he's not there yet in most people's eyes. Moncada having big success so far is only going to embolden teams to spend, not lessen it. Plus this being the last chance to spend big money both before rule changes and before the deadline for about half a dozen teams is going to enhance the urgency and intensify the bidding IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2Jimmy0 Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 Sox could acquire some bonus pool money. It will be small but help. They have like almost $1 million still. Lets say they trade for $2 million in pool money. Then pay Robert $20 million. They'd pay a tax of $17 million. Does that make sense? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Apr 21, 2017 -> 01:22 PM) Sox could acquire some bonus pool money. It will be small but help. They have like almost $1 million still. Lets say they trade for $2 million in pool money. Then pay Robert $20 million. They'd pay a tax of $17 million. Does that make sense? I wonder if there are teams with that much left. That is excellent leverage for some cheap arms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 QUOTE (bmags @ Apr 21, 2017 -> 01:24 PM) I wonder if there are teams with that much left. That is excellent leverage for some cheap arms. Teams that are not able to spend over $300k on players have to have some room left. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2Jimmy0 Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 21, 2017 -> 01:32 PM) Teams that are not able to spend over $300k on players have to have some room left. This is true. Those teams can trade all of their slots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 21, 2017 -> 01:32 PM) Teams that are not able to spend over $300k on players have to have some room left. Yeah I believe Cubs traded allotment in the off-season if I'm not mistaken. Makes no sense for them to not deal it away since they can't spend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptatc Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Apr 21, 2017 -> 01:36 PM) This is true. Those teams can trade all of their slots. These would be teams that had to pay the penalty for the previous year, correct? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 QUOTE (ptatc @ Apr 21, 2017 -> 01:40 PM) These would be teams that had to pay the penalty for the previous year, correct? Year or two, yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 21, 2017 -> 01:32 PM) Teams that are not able to spend over $300k on players have to have some room left. Ah, that's cool. I guess I didn't translate that they are still given a slot, it is just individual signings capped. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 QUOTE (bmags @ Apr 21, 2017 -> 01:54 PM) Ah, that's cool. I guess I didn't translate that they are still given a slot, it is just individual signings capped. Yes, they still get their allotment. It is just about impossible to spend it with the restrictions in place. So somewhere in the neighborhood of 10 teams fall into this spot at this time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
credezcrew24 Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 The has got to be a rule prohibiting trading cash for a teams bonus pool. That would be a ridiculous if the White Sox could trade cash for a teams unused allotments to save on the tax Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 QUOTE (credezcrew24 @ Apr 21, 2017 -> 02:25 PM) The has got to be a rule prohibiting trading cash for a teams bonus pool. That would be a ridiculous if the White Sox could trade cash for a teams unused allotments to save on the tax I don't know about cash, but nothing to stop you from trading players to do so. For example, the Sox have a future considerations deal in place with Tampa Bay for Burjos. No reason that deal couldn't be for one or more of the Latin American slots which Tampa can't use because they are in the penalty phase in Latin America. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2Jimmy0 Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 QUOTE (credezcrew24 @ Apr 21, 2017 -> 02:25 PM) The has got to be a rule prohibiting trading cash for a teams bonus pool. That would be a ridiculous if the White Sox could trade cash for a teams unused allotments to save on the tax They wouldn't actually receive cash. They'd just receive the slot which gives them the bigger pool of their own money to spend. It keeps them from paying a bigger penalty. It's all money though so it's kind of semantics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
credezcrew24 Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Apr 21, 2017 -> 12:33 PM) They wouldn't actually receive cash. They'd just receive the slot which gives them the bigger pool of their own money to spend. It keeps them from paying a bigger penalty. It's all money though so it's kind of semantics. I understand that. I'm saying there must be a rule to stop a team like the White Sox from giving a team 300k in cash for a bonus slot worth 1 million they wouldn't otherwise use. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 QUOTE (credezcrew24 @ Apr 21, 2017 -> 03:18 PM) I understand that. I'm saying there must be a rule to stop a team like the White Sox from giving a team 300k in cash for a bonus slot worth 1 million they wouldn't otherwise use. So you're saying the Sox would trade cash considerations for a team's bonus slot? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Apr 21, 2017 -> 03:21 PM) So you're saying the Sox would trade cash considerations for a team's bonus slot? Not sure where the rules fall on that or not, but I do know that any deal with a million dollars or more in cash requires approval from MLB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 21, 2017 -> 03:25 PM) Not sure where the rules fall on that or not, but I do know that any deal with a million dollars or more in cash requires approval from MLB. Yeah I get that. I was trying to figure out what he was saying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 QUOTE (Two-Gun Pete @ Apr 21, 2017 -> 09:56 AM) All of the successful int'l FAs cited here were either veteran players (Ramirez, Abreu) or were not highly-regarded by the industry (Viciedo). All of the highly-desired and young int'l FAs that involved a competitve process to sign (Soler, Tanaka) ended up signing elsewhere. Given that Robert seems to be the latter type of int'l FA (young, highly-regarded, and with many suitors), I expect Robert to sign elsewhere. I don't believe it is a "cheapness" issue, so much as it is a risk-averse issue. And no where have I posted otherwise. I'll guess the "we tried to sign Robert, but look at the other guys we signed" press conference will be on June 15th. Try again with your Viciedo comment... https://www.yahoo.com/news/viciedo-delightf...00539--mlb.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 QUOTE (credezcrew24 @ Apr 21, 2017 -> 03:18 PM) I understand that. I'm saying there must be a rule to stop a team like the White Sox from giving a team 300k in cash for a bonus slot worth 1 million they wouldn't otherwise use. I don't understand why that behavior is bad though. It's no different than NBA teams trading for trade exceptions so that they can accept a more expensive player in the future. The receiving team gets something they can use (cash) the seller gives something valuable (allotted space) That said, I doubt a cash trade would be a likely scenario. A player with a small likelihood to succeed is probably still more valuable to a team than 300k. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptatc Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 QUOTE (bmags @ Apr 21, 2017 -> 04:28 PM) I don't understand why that behavior is bad though. It's no different than NBA teams trading for trade exceptions so that they can accept a more expensive player in the future. The receiving team gets something they can use (cash) the seller gives something valuable (allotted space) That said, I doubt a cash trade would be a likely scenario. A player with a small likelihood to succeed is probably still more valuable to a team than 300k. I think it's because you're getting back to the "he with the most money wins." A team could just go around and buy everyone's slot space. All of these rules are to prevent that scenario. Assets need to be traded not money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.