2012 Draft - Giants assigned the 6th lowest amount of all 30 teams to sign it's first 10 picks
by Fla-Giant on Feb 20, 2012 4:26 PM PST
Email
PrintUnder the new CBA rules, each pick in the first 10 rounds are assigned a hard slot number by the MLB draft office. For the 2012 draft the #1 pick's slot has been assigned a $7.2M weighting, and each slot after that has a successively smaller amount assigned - down to $125K for the last pick in the 10th round (#300 overall). For each team, the slot assigned to their individual picks is not important, rather it's the sum total of the slots assigned to each of their picks in the top 10 rounds. In other words, a team will not be penalized if they pay a specific draft pick in the first 10 rounds an overslot signing bonus, but it will be penalized if the sum total of all the signing bonuses they pay their top 10 round picks is more than the sum total of all the slot numbers that the MLB draft office assigned to those picks.
The Giants have no comp picks this year, but they do have all of their own picks in each of the first 10 rounds. The sum total that the MLB draft office has assigned to the Giants picks is $4,076,400. Only the Braves, Rays, D'backs, Tigers and Angles have a smaller pool than the Giants. The Tigers (1st round) and Angels (1st and 2nd round) both lost at least their 1st round due to signing a Type A free agent.
BA.com has an article up with the aggregate numbers for all 30 teams, as well as a more in-depth explanation of the rules:
This FanPost is reader-generated, and it does not necessarily reflect the views of McCovey Chronicles. If the author uses filler to achieve the minimum word requirement, a moderator may edit the FanPost for his or her own amusement.
71 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
The penalties for overspending your limit are very severe:
Any team that exceeds its bonus pool by 0-5 percent must pay a 75 percent tax on the overage. The penalties escalate, with a 75 percent tax and the loss of a first-round pick for a 5-10 percent overage; a 100 percent tax and the loss of first- and second-rounders for a 10-15 percent overage; and a 100 percent tax and the loss of two first-rounders for an overage of 15 percent or more.
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
For the Giants, that specifically means:
1st 10 picks <= $4,076,400 = No Penalty
1st 10 picks = $4,076,401 to $4,280,220 = Penalty of $0.75 to $152,865
1st 10 picks = $4,280,221 to $4,484,040 = Loss of 2013 1st rd. pick AND penalty of $152,865.75 to $305,730
1st 10 picks = $4,484,041 to $4,687,860 = Loss of 2013 1st & 2nd rd. picks AND penalty of $407,641 to $611,460
1st 10 picks = $4,687,861 to infiniti = Loss of 2013 & 2014 1st rd. picks AND penalty of $611,461 to infinti
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
By my calculations. the Giants would have lost lost their 1st and 2nd rd. draft picks in 2012 and been fined more than $400K if the 2012 rules had been applied to their 2011 signing bonuses And the Gaints were nowhere near the biggest overslot spenders in the 2011 draft. My rough calculations show me that at least 20 of the 30 teams would have lost at least 1 first round draft pick and been fined a significant amount of $$$ under the new rules.
You can see what I’ve meant when I’ve been commenting on how significantly the new rulse are going to affect the 2012 draft. Many teams wouldn’t mind paying the $100K+ fines, but when it comes to losing future 1st and 2nd round draft picks you’re not likely to get any team to spend enough to fall into that category.
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
… when it comes to losing future 1st and 2nd round draft picks you’re not likely to get any team to spend enough to fall into that category.
Not so sure about that.
Let’s say a consensus top 5 talent drops all the way to the Yankees at pick 24.
Let’s say his bonus demands were something like $6MM, guaranteed to blow everyone’s budget.
If you were the Yankees would you trade your 2013 and 2014 first round picks, both expected to be in the #25-30 range to sign the top 5 talent, and the continued opportunity to splurg on each and every draft pick in 2012? They can constantly pick BPA and way overslot deals.
In fact, in that vein, if we consistently see mid to high first round talent falling to the second round due to the cap, a team could just plan to overspend each and every year on slots 2-10, continually forfeiting their first round pick but picking up first round talent in the second round, essentially circumventing the rules.
If you were the Yankees would you trade your 2013 and 2014 first round picks, both expected to be in the #25-30 range to sign the top 5 talent, and the continued opportunity to splurg on each and every draft pick in 2012? They can constantly pick BPA and way overslot deals.
It would be pretty neat to watch big revenue clubs smash apart this new slot rule.
Bye Travis and thanks for 2010! Good luck with the Brewers!
In fact, in that vein, if we consistently see mid to high first round talent falling to the second round due to the cap, a team could just plan to overspend each and every year on slots 2-10, continually forfeiting their first round pick but picking up first round talent in the second round, essentially circumventing the rules.
That’s a very risky plan. Even these days, the First Round talent who drop are usually not so much from bonus demands only, but because of some serious concerns, be it things like injury or red flags in the scouting.
It’ll be a new world, for sure, but assuming 29 other teams will be cheap enough to let real talent fall does not sound like a promising drafting plan to me.
"The knowledge of the game is inversely proportional to the price of the seat." ---Bill Veeck. •Read My Blarrrgh...er, um....Comic. That doesn't really come across so well when said sarcastically. The Lunatic Fringe•
by BruteSentiment on Feb 21, 2012 7:26 PM PST up reply actions
Doesn't necessarily have to be cheapness...
Just has to be bullheadedness on the part of prospects or their agents.
If this were instituted a year earlier, there would have been more top prospects than there is cap money in the first round. Some prospects would’ve either had to settle for a lower bonus, or play hardball and hope some team says screw the cap and signs them anyways.
All it takes is one team to say, “screw the cap, we’ll forfeit future first round draft picks and pay you what you’re worth” for agents to start telling teams, “I don’t care if you’ll be over the cap, we won’t negotiate any lower.”
If that happens, elite talent will drop to the back end of the rounds due to signability where teams like the Yankees draft.
“what you’re worth” is however, a fluid concept, and artificially drying up the available funds is certainly something that will have an affect on what that worth is, just as what players who are drafted are “worth” is substantially different from kids in other countries who are international free agents. Frankly, it makes less sense for players to drop to the lower part of the first round in this system because as we see, those team’s at the bottom have substantially less money to work with. And really, I have a hard time thinking you’re going to see team’s go over the 5% mark — not because of the money, but because using up two first round picks on one players is a very bad player acquisition strategy under any but the most extreme circumstances.
Again, I'm saying the possibility exists for those extreme circumstances.
What’s better? 3 Joe Panik’s or 1 Josh Bell?
What if it was 1 Josh Bell + the ability to splurge on overslot pickups across rounds 3-10?
If the Yankees decide it’s worth it, then they pay the 100% penalty and sign Bell and a lot of other prospects who fall, sacrificing their 2013 and 2014 first round picks.
Then what happens in year 2013? Well, if another Josh Bell drops, then they’re looking at losing only one pick, 2015, for signing him. At that point it’s a no-brainer.
As long as one first round pick falls to the second round due to signability concerns each year, they can pick up first round talent and pay overslot everywhere else. Yes, they end up with only 9 picks in the first 10 rounds each year, but I believe the overslot talent makes up for it.
I think pretty clearly that 3 Joe Paniks are better than 1 Josh Bell. Without a doubt. Without any question at all. Also, according to the CBA forfeiting picks is an automatic punishment for going over 5% but the not the only one, though others are unspecified. Also, I think you underestimate the forms of influence that MLB has at its disposal to punish teams (for one, nearly all teams, I believe including the Yankees, owe MLB a LOT of money).
I think Brian Sabean agrees with you. Loves to spread out the talent. Most of the time I agree with this, just not with sweet Vladdy the Impaler.
That’s a different issue though. With veteran major league players you can have a very clear understanding of what their near term value is likely to be. Draftees are way too much of a crapshoot to weigh things the same way. Take the example given. I very much wanted the Giants to take Josh Bell with their second round pick, but I think the high bonus demands have obscured perception of Bell the prospect. At no point in time did I ever see anybody suggest he was one of the top 5 or so players in the draft last year. Most mocks had him going off the board in the teens. He very likely could bust. Three Joe Paniks is three chances to avoid that outcome, which is always a somewhat likely occurance for a draftee.
Better to spread out the money in the international market as well. Chasing the most hyped guys there has a terrible percentage of success.
"I like baseball, movies, good clothes, whiskey, fast cars ... and you. What else you need to know?"
Demondre The Giant Has A Posse
International FA's have been capped
At $5m total spent per year. What I recall reading, implied that it was limited to players from the Dominican, Venezuela, etc. What was odd was that by omission, it seemed to say that there was no “cap” set on signing players from Asia or their transfer fees. I wonder if smart agents are going to find ways for top amateurs players to “move” to Japan, Korea, etc.
Down in Front Meat!
by homerdrew415 on Feb 29, 2012 9:55 AM PST via mobile up reply actions
I’m not sure I’m reading your last point right, but the rule is if you forfeit a pick you also forfeit the amount of slot money assigned to that pick, so if teams didn’t sign a first rounder they would lose a significant amount of their slot money pool.
If that is the case
Teams will just draft college seniors in the first round, who are extremely sign-able, and offer them well below slot money. The rules provide opportunity for increased creativity and we may see fewer players with college eligibility drafted in the first round.
There's a significant drawback to that, though
Impact talent very, very rarely falls past the first half of the first round – the WAR per draft slot graph is rather unkind even to the back half of the first round. So getting an under-slot signing there and then trying to use that money in later rounds is at least as much of a problem as trying to get multiple under-slot players in later rounds. One presents a cap issues, the other a talent issue, and I’d rather deal with paying the tax than getting subpar talent.
I’d say the best teams will spread the money out like the slot guidelines intend, the second tier will be teams who go over-slot in the first round on a guy that falls and pay the tax and/or sign players to below-slot deals in later rounds, and the last tier will be teams who try to use the first-round slot money on later round players.
Lorenzo Mendoza's name almost rhymes. It's so close he can taste it. Sometimes it keeps him up nights.
Giants baseball: We're stupid enough to WIN that (TM)
The last point just says "screw the cap,"
So slot bonuses don’t matter.
It would only work if there’s consistent talent available in rounds 2-10 that drop due to sign ability issues. Josh Bell, for instance.
Where does the tax go?
Does it go to the rest of the teams that do not go over the tax meaning the Giants would not only pay the tax but not get the tax income from those that do? This is how the NBA works I think. It’s like the net penalty is double.
I think the new international FA cap will have a far bigger effect on that than draft slotting.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see the DR pipeline dwindle down to a shadow of itself in 10-15 years.
VAE PVTO DEVS FIO
Do you think that DR kids should be entered into the first year player draft instead?
by krukkuipandclint on Feb 20, 2012 6:43 PM PST up reply actions
I think they should be entered into their own draft
The current system is damn broken, even worse than the regular draft ever was.
"The knowledge of the game is inversely proportional to the price of the seat." ---Bill Veeck. •Read My Blarrrgh...er, um....Comic. That doesn't really come across so well when said sarcastically. The Lunatic Fringe•
by BruteSentiment on Feb 20, 2012 7:26 PM PST up reply actions
Except that most evaluators feel that the draft has kept American talent out of pro ball – not to mention that most also feel that instituting the draft for Puerto Rico killed severely hurt that market. The current IFA rules greatly favors the players, that’s why the teams wanted to put a hard cap on it.
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
Favoring the players isn't necessarily all that's good
A market that unfairly favors players and unreasonable demands hurts teams that are unwilling or able to pay as much into a player acquisition fund as a major league payroll.
And as for players heading to other sports…most physical specimens that would actually make it in pro football are not built for baseball anyway, and are unlikely to get the big paydays unless they’re a top football talent anyway. And the recent instability in basketball has not done anything to help push amateur talent to that sport.
When it comes to latin American markets, there are other factors as well. Not the least of which is a level of corruption that makes the American Presidential Primary system look like…wait, I can’t think of anything not corrupt or childish anymore. But it’s bad. The system there favors the ‘agents’ and the ‘schools’, which exploit the players terribly and take the vast majority of the bonuses these players get anyway.
A draft wouldn’t eliminate that, but a better regulation and oversight to protect the players would help, and a draft would be a start to eliminate the payroll free-for-all every July 2nd.
"The knowledge of the game is inversely proportional to the price of the seat." ---Bill Veeck. •Read My Blarrrgh...er, um....Comic. That doesn't really come across so well when said sarcastically. The Lunatic Fringe•
by BruteSentiment on Feb 20, 2012 11:35 PM PST up reply actions
Agreed
One other drawback of the current IFA system is that teams are not willing to sign Caribbean players once they get past the age of 18 or 19 – for any amount of money. The late-bloomers have been pretty effectively shut out of the market. Instituting a draft would help cure that somewhat.
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
Late bloomers
have just been falsifying their birth certificates to get around this. Sigh. Draft is always better than chaos and corruption.
Corruption is underrated
The draft works well in the US because there’s a fairly robust system of amateur player development, little league through college with plenty of parents who can afford (ridiculous overpriced) professional coaching. It creates a situation where the talent comes to the teams, who can essentially sit back and watch until they choose their favorites on draft day.
In places like the DR, eliminating the corruption also eliminates most of the impetus for independent player development. In a system lacking a robust structure, corruption is often one of the few ways to get things done. Imposing a draft wouldn’t create that robust structure either, it would just break everything because the underlying system can’t operate effectively without the corruption.
VAE PVTO DEVS FIO
Don’t forget that teams can trade cap money in the IFA market. If one team wants to spend more in the IFA market than the hard cap and another team pans on spending less then they can work out a trade to transfer cap money from the second team to the first team.
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
They can, but it's the total that's the problem, but that's hardly a solution.
The less money there is to be skimmed by third parties, the less effort is going to be put into finding and developing those players. And once team start having to depend on chancy trades to gather enough money to sign the guys they want, they’re going to be less likely to invest in academies and develop a talent pipeline.
VAE PVTO DEVS FIO
That isn’t much cabbage to work with. I’m almost done with my college OF profile. I’ll bet a friendly wager one of these guys is plucked up in the value rounds.
No way the Giants go above $4,280,220 in the first year. I guess its time to get realistic and stop dreaming of top 10 guys falling.
I mean, there will be a couple of top 10 guys that fall. They’ll just keep falling right past us.
Follow me on Twitter
My boy Shawn Payne takes his walks and his VROOM to Augusta this season.
by free f.p. #14 on Feb 20, 2012 7:26 PM PST up reply actions
Right past us to LSU. I’m going to adopt the LSU incoming class instead of a Giant at this rate in the adopt-a-giant draft. Nice grab of my boy Shawn Payne btw.
Love Payne’s skillset. fapWALKSfapSPEEDfapDEFENSEfapfapfap.
Follow me on Twitter
My boy Shawn Payne takes his walks and his VROOM to Augusta this season.
by free f.p. #14 on Feb 20, 2012 9:15 PM PST up reply actions
If he’s fapping that much on the field I don’t think his career is going to get very far. Frankly I’m surprised he hasn’t been released or at least fined.
Lorenzo Mendoza's name almost rhymes. It's so close he can taste it. Sometimes it keeps him up nights.
Giants baseball: We're stupid enough to WIN that (TM)
I’m not overly worried about any of this because every other team in the draft is going to be limited like this.
It’s a game-changer in how teams draft. Oh well. It’s new rules to exploit. The teams that adapt faster will get the advantage.
What it comes down to: find the underrated. Look out for the new Brandon Belts. Where are the Brian Wilsons? The team that knows how to find underside talent, especially in college players, and bring out the best in them, will be the ones who succeed in the new order. And they’ll have the budget flexibility to look for dropping players.
I worry more about teams at the top of the draft than the bottom. They’ll be the ones the agents try to extort the budgets out of.
"The knowledge of the game is inversely proportional to the price of the seat." ---Bill Veeck. •Read My Blarrrgh...er, um....Comic. That doesn't really come across so well when said sarcastically. The Lunatic Fringe•
I didn’t mean to imply that I’m worried that the Gaints are getting the short end of the stick here. In fact, and I’ve made this comment back in December, I believe that the new rules will gratly favor the teams that have the best scouting departments and get the most value in the draft without depending on throwing money at the draft. I beleive that the Giants have shown that they are one of the best teams in getting slot value from the draft since John Barr took over and Sabes started putting more emphasis on drafting.
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
Is it wrong that the first thing I thought of was that this seems like an easy way for Sabean to Michaeltucker a first round pick?
But if you lose a pick by signing a FA then you also lose the cap money. That’s why the Angels are so low; they signed Wilson and Pujols so they lost their first and second round picks and the cap money that went with them.
Lorenzo Mendoza's name almost rhymes. It's so close he can taste it. Sometimes it keeps him up nights.
Giants baseball: We're stupid enough to WIN that (TM)
If the point of Tuckering a pick is to save money....
…but Tuckering a pick also costs money, as it does here…
Then, I don’t think it is.
"The knowledge of the game is inversely proportional to the price of the seat." ---Bill Veeck. •Read My Blarrrgh...er, um....Comic. That doesn't really come across so well when said sarcastically. The Lunatic Fringe•
by BruteSentiment on Feb 20, 2012 11:37 PM PST up reply actions
So after the first 10 rounds there are no penalties? Is that correct?
Might as well be safe in the first 10 rounds and then take a bunch of chances later on.
by Nnamdi Asomugha on Feb 21, 2012 4:48 AM PST reply actions
Good question
In the past, teams would often try to pad their drafts by picking high-upside high school kids that fell past the first 10 rounds due to college commitments, bonus demands or injuries and then sign them to very large overslot deals.
Teh short answer to your question is no. Going overslot after the 10th round will also cost a team under the new CBA rules. Here’s how it works.
1. Every pick after the 10th round is assigned a slot cap of $100K
2. Any amount over $125K will be added to the teams total bonus payments for the first 10 rounds. For example, if the Giants were to spend $4M signing their 10 picks in the first 10 rounds and then signed a pick in the 15th round for $200K, then their cap total would be end up as $4.1M ($4M + ($200K – $100K)).
Because of this, you’re not going to see teams being able to draft and sign a HS kid for much over $300K after the 10th round. Needless to say, high school kids lost a ton of leverage under the new CBA rules. That’s hardly a surprise. The history of unions is that they almost always sacrifice benefits and $$$ for new members to protect the earning power and benefits of current members. There’s a lot of jealousy by major league players when a hot-shot high school kid gets a multi-million $$$ signing bonus.
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
One more fly in the ointment
I left out one important new rule.
If a team fails to sign a draftee in the first 10 rounds then the slot amount asssigned by the MLB draft office for that pick is subtracted from the team’s overall cap total for that year’s draft. For example, let’s say that the Giants draft a hard-to-sign high school kid with their 2nd round pick, but end up not being able to sign him. Let’s also assume that the slot number for that pick was set at $500K. That means that the Giants new signing bonus cap limit would drop from:
$4,076,400 to $3,576,400.
Any amount over $3,576,400 would be then penalized as I explained above.
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
Looks like Darth Seligilia thought it through a fair amount. There goes the strategy of going overslot on your 1st round and punting the 2-10.
It seems like the only way to game the system is to convince draftees to sign for underslot. But there are also new rules in place with regards to 40-man/MLB deals, so you can’t get extra money to draftees in that fashion like the Giants did with Conor G.
I’m curious if the new rules will lead to a cry for sophomore draft eligibility in college.
Here's my predictions
1. After the 2012 draft, a significant number of high school prospects that get drafted after the first 25 picks, or so, are going to hold out until the last minute in hopes of gettting a large overslot bonus, but end up getting nothing and heading to college.
2. Starting with the 2013 draft, draftees will start signing their deals a lot quicker than they have been doing in past years. Basically, teams will be able to tell all of their draftees, “We’re only willing to go up to 5% over our assigned total draft cap number, so we only have a set amount of overslot money for any specific pick. The first few guys that sign are likely to get the overslot money, whtile the guys who wait are going to be relegated to underslot bonuses.”
3. Players that give teams solid assurances on the exact amount of money or, even better, the slot # that they’d be willing to be drafted at, will actually be in higher demand and will tend to get drafted sooner than they might have been under the old rules.
4. Players that seem willing to sign for underslot (mostly college Seniors and Juiors) will be in greater demand, so their bonuses will pradoxically rise a bit, on average, over what they were getting under the old rules – and they will tend to be drafted sooner than they would have been drafted under the old rules..
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
Aren't those exactly the things Selig wants it to do?
It sounds like it finds a way to force both players, agents, and teams to accept the hardened slots, with an added bonus of strengthening the college game if a kid doesn’t sign. It creates greater cost certainty and decreases the financial advantage inherent to larger markets, thus (theoretically) increasing top-to-bottom competitiveness. And it seems to have thought of and closed a lot of potential loopholes.
2012 marks 10 years since Game Six, 50 since Game Seven, and 100 since Game Eight.
But only two since Game Five.
Say hey!
by WhereThere'sAWillieThere'sAMays on Feb 27, 2012 10:34 AM PST up reply actions
You’re correct in stating that Selig and most of the owners want to tamp down on big bonuses in the draft. They don’t give a damn about the college game. However, you’re not correct in saying that the new system helps the low-revenue teams, while the old system hurt them. As several low-revenue teams proved over the last 10-15 years, the old system actually helped them compete against the big-revenue teams. The Twins and Rays are the 2 main examples. The new system actually puts a bigger advantage on the ability to sign free agents.
My son, Adalberto Mejia. He's got the goods - he just needs a cool nickname.
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
That strategy still works.
There goes the strategy of going overslot on your 1st round and punting the 2-10.
You can punt 2-10 by drafting safe, signable, talent projected to go in rounds 21+.
You still end up spending around $250-$500k, but that’s close to punting rounds 2-10.
Teams won’t go over budget unless they go all in. It just makes no sense to give up a first round pick (s) unless you are getting a huge prospect. I think it would be an extraordinary effort to find 9 potential draftees who would accept 25K-50K signing bonuses to go early. You can target them easier as the risk of some other team drafting them is slight, but I just don’t see that many volunteers to be lame duck high draft picks. It would obviously be frowned on by Selig’s office, you’d be getting a stern talking to at the minimum. Is that worth the headache? For Sabean & crew, who don’t have the rep for manipulations or gaming, can’t see that happening.
I think in the end the money they can spend is still going to be enough to entice most of the HS players. It’s still good money and it still puts them on a quicker track to making better money. The fact that there’s an effective cap on what exactly their bonus demands can be isn’t necessarily going to make the end choice different. Fla’s scenario above where a bunch of HS players get left out in the cold the first year and then things adjust is certainly a plausible one to me.
I would also add that for teams to consider going far enough over total slot that they would lose a first round pick, or a 1st + a 2nd, or 2 firsts, they would have to be incredibly certain that they could actually sign the kid at the overslot amount. A kid is not likely to fall very far if his bonus demands are only 5-10% overslot – he’d have to be really adamant about being way overslot. The Pirates were willing to take a shot on Josh Bell this year, because they knew that if he wouldn’t sign:
1. they would get a comp pick for him in the 2012 draft.
2. they could take the money set aside for Bell and use it to sign other high-upside draftees that they took a flier on in the later rounds.
Under the new rules, teams will still be compensated with a new draft pick in the following year’s draft if a draftee from the first 3 rounds ends up not signing, BUT they will no longer have excess money to spend on another draftee.
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
I am not real wild about any of these new rules but this one bugs me as a baseball fan. Let us say your team is like the 09 Pirates – a whole lot of nothing on the 40 man and in the upper levels of your farm. You should be able to punt and spread the money among the other 9 rounds. To me this means once team is bad it will more likely to stay bad for longer. I am not fan of that.
It would seem to increase the pressure cycle non big market teams have to move a talented player ( say 3+ WAR that season) early enough to get return to hope the have enough talent on the farm to later have a big enough wave of developed talent on the mlb squad to make pennant run. Again I am not too wild about that.
I am not trying to sound doom and gloom. Some teams will figure it out and work the system. But this really seems taylor made to the franchise that don’t give fig about competing and the guys on top that want more talent in the midseason trade market. I hope I am wrong.
Just trying to gruntle my Giants baseball Jones in the least destructive way available.
2010 was just a dream.can I have another please?
Not that I disagree with the general sentiments of your comments, but the one big thing that I didn’t post is that 6 small-revenue market teams will be given a “free” draft pick at the end of the 1st round (and before the 1-S round starts) each year beginning with the 2013 draft. That should help some of the perennial mediocre teams to compete with the big money boys. The other thing that I want to point out is that the new system really rewards teams that can identify good prospects in the draft beyond the top 15 to 20 top talents each year. As the Rays have shown over the past 6-8 years, you don’t need a wad of cash if you’ve got a good draft and development team assembled.
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
by Fla-Giant on Feb 21, 2012 9:46 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
Thanks for the cheering up. I know a smart team will still prosper it. It is the teams that don’t seem to be motivated try and win or don’t hit the timing right and keep getting stuck in say 1 82 win season and 4 seasons way under that. I truly do n’t want a system that gives the former a built in out and later terminal baseball hell. Their fans deserve move, and baseball as sport deserves more.
Just trying to gruntle my Giants baseball Jones in the least destructive way available.
2010 was just a dream.can I have another please?
I don’t know about that. There are always ways to get good. Remember in the Pirates 20 years of being a bad organization now, they’ve operated under several different CBA operating rules and managed to fail pretty conclusively under all of them. If they stay bad for the next 5 years I wouldn’t blame it on the rules.
Pirates have some very nice pitching prospects, OF prospects and a potential superstar to build around as well as a scrappy 2B character guy. They might be good in a couple years. Or Los Gigantes might just swoop on McCutch.
They have some pieces. I wouldn’t say they have a lot or that the timing of them is going to come together in any meaningful way.
Put it this way: since 2006 the worst draft position they’ve had is the #4 pick. They’ve had two #4s, a #3, two #2s, and a #1. Four of those six guys at this point appear to be total busts (Brad Lincoln, Daniel Moskos, Pedro Alvarez, Tony Sanchez). Consider that Giants out of those same drafts have gotten between 30-35 wins from their picks while picking significantly lower. That’s not unfair rules, that’s bad scouting, bad evaluation, and bad player development.
Of the two guys who we don’t yet have a pretty good picture how they’re going to turn out, one is a long way away, and the other guy is considered by some people to be the third best pitcher in his draft class and they grabbed with the 1-1.
When I was going over the Lefty starting pitchers I did mini draft reviews. One thing I noticed was Baltimore, Pittsburgh and KC come up again and again on the busts. KC appears to have cleaned up their act but has yet to really put all these highly rated guys on the field together and done anything with it. Baltimore is a total mess. And as you stated, Pittsburgh has a whole series of problems as well.
With all the recent history (Bonds, Schmidt, to a lesser extent Freddy Sanchez and Javy Lopez) I like to joke that the Pirates are our AAA club. I would love to poach McCutchen in a blockbuster in the next 2 years. I agree that their timing doesn’t look very good for getting everybody up to match with the pieces that have proved out.
Yes, the Pirates are a lot of front office fail from ~1990 tell recently. What I suspect though is a franchise as empty of talent as 2009 Pirates was had to climb out of that pit with the new rules such a team would need 2-3 waves of successful graduates ( say 2 WAR or better and each wave have say 3 or more players … or say 8+ WAR to amongst 3 players ) being above successfully flipped before they have enough talent in the franchise to real make run in August & September of a season.
Just trying to gruntle my Giants baseball Jones in the least destructive way available.
2010 was just a dream.can I have another please?
What an awful system.
Cash rules everything around me
C.R.E.A.M.
Get the money
Dollar dollar bill y'all
sig test
Adalberto Mejia. My son's got the goods - he just needs a catchy nickname."
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
The name is a mouthful. You’re missing a "
"I like baseball, movies, good clothes, whiskey, fast cars ... and you. What else you need to know?"
Demondre The Giant Has A Posse
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Get a grip: Reds’ Todd Frazier loses bat, still connects for home run (Video)
- Eric Hosmer redefines the Baltimore chop with infield double (Video)
- College player makes impossible over the fence catch to save tournament game (Video)
- Security!: Camden Yards guard collides with Royals’ Mike Moustakas
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
