Jump to content
higgybaby

Rays are calling up MLB’s #1 prospect(Wander Franco). Will MLB’s #2 prospect(Adley) be next?

Recommended Posts

56 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

If they had an extra year of service time to hold over his head I wonder if they could have gotten him down to $320M. 

I wonder if he would have demanded 350M.

Share this post


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

What makes you so sure?   Just because the media is gabbing about it doesn’t necessarily mean it will change.  Not much in life is guaranteed.  

I have no faith in Tony Clark at all, he seems to be completely unsuited to his task.

Free Agency reform appears to be the most important issue, it is clearly understood and it could be modified fairly easily although not necessarily in a way that gives meaningful additional power to the players, and that’s what we will end up with. The most simple solution is to start the clock when a player is drafted and not when he debuts: X years from draft to FA for a College kid, X + 3-4 for a high school kid, and something similar for the 16-year old international guys. That completely eliminates any service time manipulation.

That way a 22 year old knows he’s hitting FA at about 30, when he still has a reasonable number of productive years left, instead of languishing in the minors until a call-up at 26 and hitting FA at 32. It also makes it more likely that the same kid will be amenable to a long term extension at 26-27. Lots of reasonable benefits from such a change, but the first of them will be no more service time manipulation.

Share this post


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

Now that he’s signed for 14/$340 mm, whatever advantage may have been gained by having him play some AAA before his promotion seems like rounding error in terms of the financial consequences.    And obviously, the guy proved he was ready for the majors.  

Forget the contract for a moment.  Tatis was brought up at age 20, with no AAA experience and for a team that wasn’t winning.  
 

Was that a mistake?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Philip said:

I have no faith in Tony Clark at all, he seems to be completely unsuited to his task.

Free Agency reform appears to be the most important issue, it is clearly understood and it could be modified fairly easily although not necessarily in a way that gives meaningful additional power to the players, and that’s what we will end up with. The most simple solution is to start the clock when a player is drafted and not when he debuts: X years from draft to FA for a College kid, X + 3-4 for a high school kid, and something similar for the 16-year old international guys. That completely eliminates any service time manipulation.

That way a 22 year old knows he’s hitting FA at about 30, when he still has a reasonable number of productive years left, instead of languishing in the minors until a call-up at 26 and hitting FA at 32. It also makes it more likely that the same kid will be amenable to a long term extension at 26-27. Lots of reasonable benefits from such a change, but the first of them will be no more service time manipulation.

Money is the most important issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Forget the contract for a moment.  Tatis was brought up at age 20, with no AAA experience and for a team that wasn’t winning.  
 

Was that a mistake?

This is revisionist history, the Padres hoped to be competitive that season.

Share this post


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

This is revisionist history, the Padres hoped to be competitive that season.

I don’t think they felt they were a contender at that point.

They may have felt they would be better than the record they ended up having but not a contender.  (At least not a legit one…I’m not saying some pie in the sky bs, we are saying this in public thing…I mean a true contender)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, wildcard said:

Money is the most important issue.

Yes, when is it not?

And the whole Free Agency thing is a fight over the big bag of money lying on the table. So your comment is correct but unproductive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Philip said:

Yes, when is it not?

And the whole Free Agency thing is a fight over the big bag of money lying on the table. So your comment is correct but unproductive.

We don't know where the  6 to 7 years before free agency ranks on the money list. It could be:

1.  Shares of the national TV revenue?

2. Expansion dollars - How much new owners would play for club and what share the players get?

3. Streaming rights shares by the players?

4. Minor league TV right now that MLB has control of  the minor leagues

5. And many other things. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Forget the contract for a moment.  Tatis was brought up at age 20, with no AAA experience and for a team that wasn’t winning.  
 

Was that a mistake?

From which perspective - performance or financial?   From a performance standpoint, I’d say clearly not a mistake.   From a financial perspective, probably not that wise.  (I’m not going to say “mistake” because they did it intentionally.)

Share this post


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

We don't know where the  6 to 7 years before free agency ranks on the money list. It could be:

1.  Shares of the national TV revenue?

2. Expansion dollars - How much new owners would play for club and what share the players get?

3. Streaming rights shares by the players?

4. Minor league TV right now that MLB has control of  the minor leagues

5. And many other things. 

 

 

1) none. The players get their salaries.

2) none. The players have nothing to do with expansion

3) if by streaming you mean watching GM on mobile devices I’m sure that will be addressed but the answer is none. The players get their salaries.

4) that’s an interesting question but the MLBPA doesn’t give a damn about minor leaguers because they aren’t part of the MLB CBA.

5) see 1) above.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

I don’t think they felt they were a contender at that point.

They may have felt they would be better than the record they ended up having but not a contender.  (At least not a legit one…I’m not saying some pie in the sky bs, we are saying this in public thing…I mean a true contender)

Maybe. But they could have thought (correctly if so as it turned out) that they would be truly competitive in 2020 and if everything fell right they could be in the conversation in 2019 (incorrectly as it turned out). If so, it follows that getting Tatis a full season in the Majors was the best thing for the team's competitive future, especially having just signed Machado to a $300 million deal. They wanted to give themselves the best chance to succeed in 2019, even if success wasn't highly likely.

And even though they didn't have a particularly good season, they still sold an additional 350,000 tickets in 2019 compared to 2018 and were a relevant Major League franchise for the first time since 1998.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

Maybe. But they could have thought (correctly if so as it turned out) that they would be truly competitive in 2020 and if everything fell right they could be in the conversation in 2019 (incorrectly as it turned out). If so, it follows that getting Tatis a full season in the Majors was the best thing for the team's competitive future, especially having just signed Machado to a $300 million deal. They wanted to give themselves the best chance to succeed in 2019, even if success wasn't highly likely.

And even though they didn't have a particularly good season, they still sold an additional 350,000 tickets in 2019 compared to 2018 and were a relevant Major League franchise for the first time since 1998.

Well they can’t contend this year but the Os could contend in 2022 if a lot of things go right and they spend money this year.

What if they bring up Adley this year, he plays enough and is dominant enough to win ROY and  the team plays better and ends up with 70 wins?  They could definitely take a big leap in 2022.

The Padres, on paper, were better but their pitching staff in 2019 wasn’t good enough to contend.  They brought up Tatis because they felt he was best SS in the organization and that he had earned it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



Orioles Information


Orioles News and Information

Daily Organizational Boxscores
News

Tony's Takes

Orioles Roster Resource

Orioles Prospect Information

2021 Minor League Depth Chart

2021 Prospect Power Rankings

2020 Top 30 Prospects List

Prospect Scouting Reports

Statistics

2020 Orioles Stats

2019 Orioles Minor League Stats

Baseball Savant Stats






  • Posts

    • Oh, I don’t agree with it, but after years of having arguments about “sunk costs” I’m left without any other impression.  In my mind, including Davis when the team was horrible, and now Severino or Franco, these guys are taking the roster spot of someone more deserving. Not always, but there’s a pretty good case for someone to take any of those spots.
    • Per MLB rules online, the ball is live if it is “unintentional interference.”
    • He was emptying the tank there.   The first inning or two, he was slower.   The first touch of 94-95 I noticed wasn't until a few innings along, on a 2 out 2 strike pitch.   But he really seemed to pick up steam in the middle. Hartford seemed kind of terrible, but at least he held serve, if not a little more.   On the Either/Or, I'd easily pick Rodriguez still.
    • It was Roth followed by Roth tonight in Delmarva.   I don’t recall that happening before with them.  
    • For the second time in a couple of weeks, an Orioles ball boy touched a fair ball that bounced in his direction tonight and the ball was ruled dead when he touched it. Unlike the other incident, this ball literally came right at the ball boy’s chair. He barely had to move his glove to a spot maybe 18 inches under his lap.  He was mightily embarrassed when he realized his mistake.   The other incident was more egregious, though neither was good and the the ball boy/girl supervisor really needs to call a meeting and let all these kids know it’s an unacceptable mistake.  (I saw another ball boy/girl do this in a recent O’s road game, I believe). That said, here’s my question.  Assume the kid jumps from his chair and the ball either rattles around under the chair or ricochets off one of the legs and back out.   In either instance, Is that a live ball? I think the kid is supposed to try to move the chair to avoid those scenarios, but I’m still curious what the ruling would  be.   By the way, a few innings later the same ball boy did a nice job of snagging a foul ball that had bounced off the side wall and was about to go into the field of play.   The fans sitting over there cheered him, something I doubt they would have done normally but they did it to, quite literally, “cheer him up” after his prior mistake.  Classy move.  
    • I don’t mind it much when the TV guys do it, since you can see the action.  It bothers me more on radio, where you’re dependent on the announcers to know what’s going on.   A skilled announcer can do an interview between the action but describe the game decently at the same time, and minimize the spillover.   
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...