Jump to content

July 2nd (2015) prospects


ChiliIrishHammock24

Recommended Posts

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 23, 2015 -> 10:34 PM)
But you're willing to throw all that away to sign a single guy?

 

now we are getting into the intangibles that hasn't been discussed. there are those that need be taken into consideration, but if you are saying as a int'l fa and all things being equal...... then yes i would. someone Moncada will be worth the risk.

 

now let me flip this, are you saying you would not, b/c the money is too much, then when would you spend the money to sign a player?? there are risk in everything. the best way is to weigh that risk with other factors, in this case scouting rpts, and you hope those scouting rpt is correct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 203
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 23, 2015 -> 10:34 PM)
But you're willing to throw all that away to sign a single guy?

i am making a separate post for this, if you do not mind. in a mlb draft, let say from

2000-2010 how many draft picks made it, and how many became superstars for the

sox???

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (LDF @ Jan 23, 2015 -> 06:16 PM)
i am making a separate post for this, if you do not mind. in a mlb draft, let say from

2000-2010 how many draft picks made it, and how many became superstars for the

sox???

When you say "became superstars for the Sox" you've already excluded some people because KW had that habit of trading guys away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 24, 2015 -> 12:35 AM)
When you say "became superstars for the Sox" you've already excluded some people because KW had that habit of trading guys away.

 

sorry for the ill attempt at a joke. so i didn't realize the bad spot i put you in. let say for this discussion, use those drafted by the sox and traded. i want to use the whole draft history of the sox, regardless of trade.

 

i want to show that there is still a difference of those players drafted and making it, versus signing a int'l player. i think a lot of it has to do with scouting them for months.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 23, 2015 -> 02:44 PM)
But the $20 million will stop us from spending. Remember, even last year with the #3 pick in the draft we spent less than $15 million on all of our draft players AND the international players... combined. The Sox are not that team. If they spent that kind of money on Moncada, they would take the money either out of future budgets or out of the major league team budget.

 

Would you trade all of the guys that we signed in the July 2 class this season for Byron Buxton? That is the closest equivalent I think you can find to Moncada, both are projected to be future stars and have some elements of their games that are major league ready but neither are a sure thing.

 

Personally I would do that, as with an advanced prospect like Moncada there is less projection and more skill which you can make an evaluation of. The Sox are going to get shut out of the major guys in the July 2 class now that you have the alternating teams breaking the limits to grab up the top talent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (IowaSoxFan @ Jan 28, 2015 -> 02:08 PM)
Would you trade all of the guys that we signed in the July 2 class this season for Byron Buxton? That is the closest equivalent I think you can find to Moncada, both are projected to be future stars and have some elements of their games that are major league ready but neither are a sure thing.

 

Personally I would do that, as with an advanced prospect like Moncada there is less projection and more skill which you can make an evaluation of. The Sox are going to get shut out of the major guys in the July 2 class now that you have the alternating teams breaking the limits to grab up the top talent.

 

Not just one year, but two years, plus probably not signing anyone else this year either. Of course Moncada is the same age as Dayan Viciedo was when we signed him...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 28, 2015 -> 02:16 PM)
Not just one year, but two years, plus probably not signing anyone else this year either. Of course Moncada is the same age as Dayan Viciedo was when we signed him...

 

We can still sign players, just not for more than $250K each.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (IowaSoxFan @ Jan 28, 2015 -> 02:08 PM)
Would you trade all of the guys that we signed in the July 2 class this season for Byron Buxton? That is the closest equivalent I think you can find to Moncada, both are projected to be future stars and have some elements of their games that are major league ready but neither are a sure thing.

 

Personally I would do that, as with an advanced prospect like Moncada there is less projection and more skill which you can make an evaluation of. The Sox are going to get shut out of the major guys in the July 2 class now that you have the alternating teams breaking the limits to grab up the top talent.

 

These aren't perfect parallels though. Byron Buxton cost $6 million to sign. By all accounts, Moncada is going to cost $75-80 million, taxes included. That money has to come from somewhere, and that means you are likely trading away anybody that has money, and that doesn't seem like a good idea. The signing bonus itself can be split into payments over 3 years, but the taxes have to be paid immediately.

 

It's not going to happen, even if he is a great prospect.

 

QUOTE (IowaSoxFan @ Jan 28, 2015 -> 02:24 PM)
We can still sign players, just not for more than $250K each.

 

$300K, but the point remains, you technically can still sign players, but you won't get the cream of those crops.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 28, 2015 -> 02:56 PM)
These aren't perfect parallels though. Byron Buxton cost $6 million to sign. By all accounts, Moncada is going to cost $75-80 million, taxes included. That money has to come from somewhere, and that means you are likely trading away anybody that has money, and that doesn't seem like a good idea. The signing bonus itself can be split into payments over 3 years, but the taxes have to be paid immediately.

 

It's not going to happen, even if he is a great prospect.

 

 

 

$300K, but the point remains, you technically can still sign players, but you won't get the cream of those crops.

 

Buxton cost $6M to sign in the draft because there is a closed market, if he were a FA today what would he sign for? Moncada is going to be expensive, but I remember last year Badler mentioned in an article that numbers like these can get floated around by GM's to try and intimidate other teams from getting involved, that may not be the case but since then I take those estimates with a grain of salt.

 

Yes, I understand at this point it is not going to happen, the money that could have been used to sign him went to win now moves this offseason in sign LaRoche and Cabrera. I would have personally preferred to hold off on those moves for another season and spent one more year building the foundation finding out what you have in M. Johnson and Rodon, but I don't really fault the moves that were made either.

 

The Sox are back to being minor players in international free agency anyway as they are not willing to bust through the limits to chase the top guys the way that quite a few other teams have, that leaves them battling for the left overs especially as more and more teams take the over the pool approach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (IowaSoxFan @ Feb 5, 2015 -> 10:37 AM)
Buxton cost $6M to sign in the draft because there is a closed market, if he were a FA today what would he sign for? Moncada is going to be expensive, but I remember last year Badler mentioned in an article that numbers like these can get floated around by GM's to try and intimidate other teams from getting involved, that may not be the case but since then I take those estimates with a grain of salt.

 

Yes, I understand at this point it is not going to happen, the money that could have been used to sign him went to win now moves this offseason in sign LaRoche and Cabrera. I would have personally preferred to hold off on those moves for another season and spent one more year building the foundation finding out what you have in M. Johnson and Rodon, but I don't really fault the moves that were made either.

 

The Sox are back to being minor players in international free agency anyway as they are not willing to bust through the limits to chase the top guys the way that quite a few other teams have, that leaves them battling for the left overs especially as more and more teams take the over the pool approach.

 

I believe the Sox are willing to overspend the limits if it's justifiable. When asked specifically about that, Hahn didn't shoot the idea down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's important to note that the penalty money form this MUST be paid within 30 days. So the team that signs him is going to have to write a check for $30-40m within a MONTH. This takes more teams out of the running than would normally be down for $75-80m for a free agent or something that can be paid gradually over several years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Feb 5, 2015 -> 04:35 PM)
It's important to note that the penalty money form this MUST be paid within 30 days. So the team that signs him is going to have to write a check for $30-40m within a MONTH. This takes more teams out of the running than would normally be down for $75-80m for a free agent or something that can be paid gradually over several years.

 

This is reason #1 I don't see the Sox as realistic here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 6, 2015 -> 10:55 AM)
This will turn into an international draft soon enough.

I hope you are correct, but then I don't know what you mean by 'soon enough'. The next collective bargaining agreement? When is that? Next year or two, I believe. MLB has had the issue on the table twice before, and they always capitulated. Let's face it, the Players' negotiators are smarter than the Owners' negotiators. At least, they are more effective. They will fight hard on this issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (oldsox @ Feb 7, 2015 -> 07:16 AM)
I hope you are correct, but then I don't know what you mean by 'soon enough'. The next collective bargaining agreement? When is that? Next year or two, I believe. MLB has had the issue on the table twice before, and they always capitulated. Let's face it, the Players' negotiators are smarter than the Owners' negotiators. At least, they are more effective. They will fight hard on this issue.

 

I think it has more to do with PR than the players unions. The LA countries really do not want a draft as it will hurt a very lucrative business run by the buscados.

 

The players have little incentive to fight the issue because the more money spent in LA, the less that is available for ML rosters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (IowaSoxFan @ Feb 10, 2015 -> 03:13 PM)
I think it has more to do with PR than the players unions. The LA countries really do not want a draft as it will hurt a very lucrative business run by the buscados.

 

The players have little incentive to fight the issue because the more money spent in LA, the less that is available for ML rosters.

 

 

Bingo. The MLB players will give up the draft stuff in exchange for not giving up concessions that they deal with. For MLB owners it is all dollars, so they don't care where it comes from.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (raBBit @ Feb 11, 2015 -> 12:08 AM)
It is in MLB's and the commissioner's best interest to get the international draft started. I think our team has been operating within the constraints of what is deemed acceptable by the commissioner for some time and it has only been a detriment to the team. I sure hope the MLB levels the playing field internationally so JR can take the leash off of his executives who would prefer not to play ball on his behalf.

 

i was with you, until you brought JR into the equation. JR wants to find a way to not spend money but to make it and at every one expense. look at what i been spouting about since the offseason began and later proven right. with the TV money. the team salary this yr is +/- 140 million and the TV deal is 190 million. a net profit so far of 50+ millions. yet the sox FO said they needed the fans support to delve deeper into the FA..... well where is those additional players we were lead to beleive.... oh i forgot, players not on the 40 man roster....

 

the int't FA is needed so it can establish some kind of order. not for financial reason. TV deals nation wide has been expose, the SAN TV deal, Marlins TV deal is helping them to dive into the FA pool. Philly who is eating huge salary, why, b/c of their TV deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (raBBit @ Feb 10, 2015 -> 05:08 PM)
It is in MLB's and the commissioner's best interest to get the international draft started. I think our team has been operating within the constraints of what is deemed acceptable by the commissioner for some time and it has only been a detriment to the team. I sure hope the MLB levels the playing field internationally so JR can take the leash off of his executives who would prefer not to play ball on his behalf.

 

I am opposed to an international draft but I do want stricter rules when it comes to spending money and harsher penalties when those rules are broken. It shouldn't be allowed that a team can just have the INTL that the Yankees did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (raBBit @ Feb 10, 2015 -> 05:08 PM)
It is in MLB's and the commissioner's best interest to get the international draft started. I think our team has been operating within the constraints of what is deemed acceptable by the commissioner for some time and it has only been a detriment to the team. I sure hope the MLB levels the playing field internationally so JR can take the leash off of his executives who would prefer not to play ball on his behalf.

 

I am not sure that is true. It would definitely be in the best interest of the White Sox and similarly situated teams, but allowing your "brand name" teams to scoop up a larger share of talent may be in the overall best interest of promoting those brands - at the expense of the competitive balance. If there was a lot of support from the owners to have a draft in place they would already have one, but I get the sense that there is a division among ownership about the overall effects of the draft.

 

Then the next question becomes, what is the real value of having two drafts? How will the sixteen yo LA kids stack up against the more polished kids that go in the current draft? Will it have such a significant impact on the economics of baseball in LA that those countries will attempt to do something radical? Perhaps funnel talent to Japan instead to try and maintain the system they have created? There are a lot of unknowns and a lot of potential stumbling blocks to getting an international draft implemented.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Joshua Strong @ Feb 11, 2015 -> 12:29 AM)
I am opposed to an international draft but I do want stricter rules when it comes to spending money and harsher penalties when those rules are broken. It shouldn't be allowed that a team can just have the INTL that the Yankees did.

Why do you not want an Int'l draft?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...