AM on Int'l spending

[Flosman]

I already said....they need to be spending about 2M more.

What did they spend?

[Flosman]

You didn't ask me, but I'd say a regular flow of talent into the system, and regular graduation of players to the majors, including the occasional star. And the real benchmark, not just progress over prior failure, would involve numbers of players coming to the majors and having success at a rate well above major league average.

The Orioles have to do that in multiple areas of amateur acquisition to have any chance in the AL East.

I agree with this completely, if they get two or three a year they are at or near the top. The real test for me is can they evaluate the lower tier kids and find the keepers with the occasional impact guy. I don't know if they can, but no one else on here does either. Heck the players in the high end can't even seem to do that consistently.

[quidam]

What did they spend?

Last year they spent 1.18M.

[Flosman]

Last year they spent 1.18M.

Seriously where did you get that info? I was looking for who spent what on who and I did not find it.

[quidam]

Seriously where did you get that info? I was looking for who spent what on who and I did not find it.

http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily/Issues/2011/03/Mar-9/Research-and-Ratings/MLB-bonuses.aspx

The front office has made it clear they don't see value in the big bonus guys, and you can argue statistics support this. So say you spend another 2M on international free agents. If you average 30K a player that means you have roughly 66 additional players to place somewhere in the system.

If we have more money to spend give me Daniel Norris in the amateur draft.

[DrungoHazewood]

http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily/Issues/2011/03/Mar-9/Research-and-Ratings/MLB-bonuses.aspx

The front office has made it clear they don't see value in the big bonus guys, and you can argue statistics support this. So say you spend another 2M on international free agents. If you average 30K a player that means you have roughly 66 additional players to place somewhere in the system.

If we have more money to spend give me Daniel Norris in the amateur draft.

I'm sure someone will chime in an remind me that there are separate budgets for amateur acquisition and MLB payroll. But the O's spent $1.18M on international free agents in 2010.

This year they're paying $25.58M to Gonzalez, Accardo, Vlad, Lee, Brendan Harris, and Izturis, for about 0 WAR.

Last year they paid about $22M to Lugo, Tejada, Atkins, Izturis, Ohman, Hendrickson, and Meredith.

In 2009 they paid $16M or $18M for Baez, Walker, Freel, Hendrickson, Moeller, Hill

Every single year they shell out $15, $20, $25M for a random assortment of stopgap free agents who'll total pretty close to zero wins. If they have a study that says the ROI isn't high enough to invest $3-4M extra in the international market, I wonder what a study would tell them about blowing $20M a year on absolutely nothing?

[Stotle]

I'm sure someone will chime in an remind me that there are separate budgets for amateur acquisition and MLB payroll. But the O's spent $1.18M on international free agents in 2010.

This year they're paying $25.58M to Gonzalez, Accardo, Vlad, Lee, Brendan Harris, and Izturis, for about 0 WAR.

Last year they paid about $22M to Lugo, Tejada, Atkins, Izturis, Ohman, Hendrickson, and Meredith.

In 2009 they paid $16M or $18M for Baez, Walker, Freel, Hendrickson, Moeller, Hill

Every single year they shell out $15, $20, $25M for a random assortment of stopgap free agents who'll total pretty close to zero wins. If they have a study that says the ROI isn't high enough to invest $3-4M extra in the international market, I wonder what a study would tell them about blowing $20M a year on absolutely nothing?

Maybe this sinks in now that people see it coming out of your mouth...

[Dwight Schrute]

I'm sure someone will chime in an remind me that there are separate budgets for amateur acquisition and MLB payroll. But the O's spent $1.18M on international free agents in 2010.

This year they're paying $25.58M to Gonzalez, Accardo, Vlad, Lee, Brendan Harris, and Izturis, for about 0 WAR.

Last year they paid about $22M to Lugo, Tejada, Atkins, Izturis, Ohman, Hendrickson, and Meredith.

In 2009 they paid $16M or $18M for Baez, Walker, Freel, Hendrickson, Moeller, Hill

Every single year they shell out $15, $20, $25M for a random assortment of stopgap free agents who'll total pretty close to zero wins. If they have a study that says the ROI isn't high enough to invest $3-4M extra in the international market, I wonder what a study would tell them about blowing $20M a year on absolutely nothing?

It would be amazing if someone could put this post on a billboard across the street from the warehouse.

[hoosiers]

The last 3 seasons there have been 53 international players make their debut in the MLs. So for the O's to be ahead of the game you would have produce only one player every year.

If the average team is producing one major league every year or every other year who was signed internationally, that would be a pretty high bar for the Os to make up ground in other areas of player acquisition to remain competitive. I expect the range of production of those international players making their debut is pretty wide, but those players make the minimum so assuming even average production puts the Os at a healthy deficit.

Anyway, despite the Os lack of participation at the top of the international market, there is definitely room to ramp up the $100k-$250+k signings. If our spend was near $1.2M this year, hopefully it will bump to north of $1.5M this year.

AM has definitely improved the Os internationally, but it is too early to conclude that he is building even a major league average effort or better.

[Flosman]

I'm sure someone will chime in an remind me that there are separate budgets for amateur acquisition and MLB payroll. But the O's spent $1.18M on international free agents in 2010.

This year they're paying $25.58M to Gonzalez, Accardo, Vlad, Lee, Brendan Harris, and Izturis, for about 0 WAR.

Last year they paid about $22M to Lugo, Tejada, Atkins, Izturis, Ohman, Hendrickson, and Meredith.

In 2009 they paid $16M or $18M for Baez, Walker, Freel, Hendrickson, Moeller, Hill

Every single year they shell out $15, $20, $25M for a random assortment of stopgap free agents who'll total pretty close to zero wins. If they have a study that says the ROI isn't high enough to invest $3-4M extra in the international market, I wonder what a study would tell them about blowing $20M a year on absolutely nothing?

Maybe I see things in a different way than most. I think Drungo has identified my biggest concern with the O's. It is not the money to me it is the complete inability to pick the right players in almost any market. I think we have had big scouting problems and have for a long time. We see it in really every place scouting comes in play.

[Frobby]

Good thing that we aren't just talking about spending high dollars on the top talent.

Bottom line, they aren't doing nearly enough. Apologize for them, make excuses or whatever...But just don't complain when they continue to be a joke or a franchise and nothing but a doormat to the rest of the league.

It just boggles my mind that anyone would make excuses for this team and give them any kind of the benefit of the doubt. How poor do they need to be for people to open their eyes on a consistent basis?

Sorry, but that is exactly what we were talking about. I am not making excuses for anyone. There is no way you can read my posts in this thread and come to that conclusion. Get off your high horse.

[Sports Guy]

What an excellent, thoughtful post. And again, I am not saying we are taking the right approach in the DR and elsewhere internationally, I just think that the knee-jerk reaction that failing to spend big on high-bonus DR guys must mean a lack of commitment to international players is off base. The situation is much more complicated and nuanced than that and there is no obvious correct answer. But when you have been a losing team for 14 years, people are going to assume your decisions are stupid until proven otherwise. And that's fair enough.

P.S. -- "you must spread some reputation around before giving it to Flosman again."

Sorry, but that is exactly what we were talking about. I am not making excuses for anyone. There is no way you can read my posts in this thread and come to that conclusion. Get off your high horse.

Maybe its what you and some were talking about but I read your post(knee jerk) as a broad stroke of everyone and you are dead wrong on that.

Its not just about the expensive players.

[flashjordnk]

I'm sure someone will chime in an remind me that there are separate budgets for amateur acquisition and MLB payroll. But the O's spent $1.18M on international free agents in 2010.

This year they're paying $25.58M to Gonzalez, Accardo, Vlad, Lee, Brendan Harris, and Izturis, for about 0 WAR.

Last year they paid about $22M to Lugo, Tejada, Atkins, Izturis, Ohman, Hendrickson, and Meredith.

In 2009 they paid $16M or $18M for Baez, Walker, Freel, Hendrickson, Moeller, Hill

Every single year they shell out $15, $20, $25M for a random assortment of stopgap free agents who'll total pretty close to zero wins. If they have a study that says the ROI isn't high enough to invest $3-4M extra in the international market, I wonder what a study would tell them about blowing $20M a year on absolutely nothing?

Right but this argument can also be used to say that we have to spend that 15-25 mill smarter in our own country. If we knew we were going to have 15-25 mill per year, we could commit that to prime age talent instead of washed up drek.

You can make the argument it's better spent in the international market. But it's not necessarily the only conclusion one has to draw here.

[DrungoHazewood]

Right but this argument can also be used to say that we have to spend that 15-25 mill smarter in our own country. If we knew we were going to have 15-25 mill per year, we could commit that to prime age talent instead of washed up drek.

You can make the argument it's better spent in the international market. But it's not necessarily the only conclusion one has to draw here.

Here's the problems I see with that:

a) There are only so many guys you can select in the Rule 4 draft, especially when you won't get creative with the compensation game. So unless you have the #1 overall pick and his name is Strasburg or Harper, it's almost impossible to spend much more than $10M a year on the draft.

b) You have to be really lucky or really good to get better value out of the middling free agents the O's choose to pursue. I think they'd be far better off giving most/all of those slots to Jon Knotts and JR Houses and the like, because you'd be getting similar value at cents on the dollar. Then you'd have an extra $15M a year to spend on something, and the most likely spot for much of that is international free agents.

[Frobby]

If the average team is producing one major league every year or every other year who was signed internationally, that would be a pretty high bar for the Os to make up ground in other areas of player acquisition to remain competitive. I expect the range of production of those international players making their debut is pretty wide, but those players make the minimum so assuming even average production puts the Os at a healthy deficit.

To put this into context, about 200 players debut in the majors every year. So, 53 of 600 over a 3-year period. Frankly, I am surprised to learn the percentage is that low, and I question whether it is accurate. According to the link below, in 2010 27.7% of major league players, and 48.0% of minor league players, were foreign-born. (I'm not sure if some of the "foreign born" players went to school in the U.S. and were subject to the draft, or whether they are all outside of the draft system.)

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/Percentage-of-foreignborn-players-dips-slightly-43693446