Jump to content
Luke-OH

The Victor Victor Mesa/Sandy Gaston thread

Recommended Posts

Just now, Can_of_corn said:

Miami has spent too much money to match the O's if the O's reached their capped amount.

So the Mesa brothers would be waiting until July.

Miami can spend whatever they want. They'd just take a penalty no? If they can trade for 20M in slot space they could couldn't they?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Malike said:

Miami can spend whatever they want. They'd just take a penalty no? If they can trade for 20M in slot space they could couldn't they?

No.

There is a hard cap in place.

If there wasn't why wouldn't the regular suspects be in on them?

Work with me here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, stef said:

So, . . . what do you think of Gaston?

Nobody says, "no" to Gaston
 

No one's slick as Gaston
No one's quick as Gaston
No one's neck's as incredibly thick as Gaston
For there's no man in town half as manly
Perfect, a pure paragon
You can ask any Tom, Dick or Stanley
And they'll tell you whose team they prefer to be on

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

No.

There is a hard cap in place.

If there wasn't why wouldn't the regular suspects be in on them?

Work with me here.

This part of the CBA is what confused me - One difference in the new CBA is that teams will now be allowed to trade for additional pool space even if they have already spent their full pool allotment. Under the previous system, a team's bonus pool consisted of four individual slot values, and trading pool space required trading those slot values. The new system is just a straight bonus pool with no individual slot values, so that should make things simpler with regards to trades.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Malike said:

Miami can spend whatever they want. They'd just take a penalty no? If they can trade for 20M in slot space they could couldn't they?

https://www.mlb.com/news/2018-19-international-signing-bonus-pools/c-269965184

"Teams are allowed to trade as much of their international pool money as they would like, but can only acquire 75 percent of a team's initial pool amount. Additionally, signing bonuses of $10,000 or less do not count toward a club's bonus pool, and foreign professional players who are at least 25 and have played as in a foreign league for at least six season are also exempt."

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

No.

There is a hard cap in place.

If there wasn't why wouldn't the regular suspects be in on them?

Work with me here.

As to the regular suspects not being involved, I think you know the answer as well as I do. - Teams that went over their bonus pools in previous signing periods to incur penalties will have those penalties carry over into the new CBA. So teams like the Padres, Astros and Braves that are over their current 2016-17 signing pool will be unable to sign a player for more than $300,000 in the 2017-18 and 2018-19 signing period, though they are still able to spend their full pool allotment or trade it away.

My question was to the first reply to your quote about teams spending all of their money being allowed to acquire more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Aristotelian said:

Who can we trade to get more slot money quick? Givens? Villar?

Givens is the one I was thinking of, but I don't think they make that deal just for slot money. And as well as Villar played for us, I don't think he has a ton of value in a trade scenario just yet.

I think we would have to trade a prospect of some sort to gain some more slot money. The teams that still have slot money are in a great position; they can gain a valuable player for something they likely were not going to spend anyways. Us however, I don't feel like we are in a good spot at all.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, lovetoaster said:

Givens is the one I was thinking of, but I don't think they make that deal just for slot money. And as well as Villar played for us, I don't think he has a ton of value in a trade scenario just yet.

I think we would have to trade a prospect of some sort to gain some more slot money. The teams that still have slot money are in a great position; they can gain a valuable player for something they likely were not going to spend anyways. Us however, I don't feel like we are in a good spot at all.   

No, and I don't know that we should. We are pretty much down to controlled players who actually have value to us. To give one of them up for an unproven prospect seems like treading water or possibly going backwards.

  • Upvote 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, VaBird1 said:

They signed?

Those three have not signed (to my knowledge) but it's pretty clear what's going on.  While I still very much want the Orioles to sign V2 I don't see any real chance of it.  So, there's all this money, and we use it to... do... what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Redskins Rick said:

I think from day 1 when their names first popped up and we was mentioned to be in the market, I gave the odds 50-50.

Part of me felt they was only in, as a PR move to appease the fan base.

But, trading away players and putting themselves in the market and the top dawg with the most money to spend.

I think the odds are more like 75-25.

I know Miami has a vast Cuban history for them, and hard to complete against that, but the team itself stinks and doesn't give them an advantage over another poor team.

But, I dont drink the kool-aid, if we dont get the guys either.

Interesting. I was the opposite, more or less. I thought we had a 75% chance of signing VVM before. Now, I think it has dropped to 25%. Has something happened to give you more confidence in a VVM signing now, versus before?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Ripken said:

Those three have not signed (to my knowledge) but it's pretty clear what's going on.  While I still very much want the Orioles to sign V2 I don't see any real chance of it.  So, there's all this money, and we use it to... do... what?

I think this organization is screwed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

Orioles Information


Orioles News and Information

Daily Organizational Boxscores

News

Tony's Takes

Orioles Roster Resource

Orioles Prospect Information

2018 End of Season Top 30 Prospects List

Prospect Scouting Reports

Statistics

2019 Orioles Stats

2019 Orioles Minor League Stats

Baseball Savant Stats







  • Posts

    • The part of this no one (at least that I've seen) talks about is what is the impact of sign stealing?  Of course we have no real data whatsoever.  No double-blind studies of how Jose Altuve would hit with and without knowing what's coming.  We have no idea how often he got the signs.  We have some apples-to-pears data from home/road games, but home/road splits are going to be different anyway.  And the data is mixed; Altuve had a big home split last year, but an equally big away split in 2018. It's like PEDs.  No really good data on anything, so the assumption is that it takes an average dude and turns him into an MVP.  But the reality is almost certainly much messier, much less clear cut.  Some people did it all the time, some rarely, some never.  The benefits were almost certainly all over the place from negative impacts from side effects to massive performance gains.  But we're just guessing.  Same thing with sign stealing.  Some will assume that this is worth 25 wins to the Astros, but we have no idea if it's even a significant thing.  For all we know it's like corking your bat; the benefits of that over legal bats are usually zero or worse.  Sign stealing has been so prevalent over the years we've all heard the stories of batters who didn't want to know.  It messes with their approach and their heads if they're tipped off to what's probably coming. In the end we can probably make the assumption that stealing signs helps the average batter somewhat.  But we have no idea of the actual impact.
    • I think “otherworldly” is a huge overstatement of what he’d need to be offensively to compensate for his defense.      Last year he was worth 0.1 rWAR, -0.2 fWAR, so basically replacement level.   He was 48th of 68 catchers who had at least 100 plate appearances in fWAR, so that places him solidly in the middle of second string catchers in overall value.    With a decent improvement in his offense, he’d be above average overall for a backup catcher.     Somewhere between .750-.775 OPS would take him off the cusp, IMO.   I don’t consider that “otherworldly.” By the way, I’m using WAR because it’s available, but I don’t completely trust it for catchers.    
    • Yes, but we have out performed them in the offseason getting rid of Villar and Bundy. 
    • This one slipped by me until Roch mentioned it today in his blog.   He was signed on Jan 10th. This looks like a Wojo signing to me.    Long time minor league starter,  who has had a cup of coffee in the majors. From the Dominican. Between AAA and the winter league his stats this past season are: 19-3,    2.01 ERA,  29 S,   188.1 IP,  171 H,   162 SO,  1.019 WHIP He played with Houston at AAA in 2016 going 12-1, 3.12 ERA in the PCL.   So Elias knows  him well. Valdez doesn't look like someone that is ticketed for the AAA rotation that already has 6 starters in it.   If he shows something in ST he could be in the O's rotation or long relief.  If he doesn't show enough in ST he is probably gone. https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.fcgi?id=valdez001ces
    • The Super Bowl is going to be hard to pick. Need a few days.
    • Caleb signed a minor league contract with the Toronto Blue Jays.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...