AM on Int'l spending

[sbauer]

Only you would think that a 16 YO athlete is less risky than a 28 YO guy with 4 ML season with an OPS over 750 and one full season over 950. Where he should have spent the money is a valid question. But Sano's SO rate gives pause to consider AM's position. Even including his time in the DRSL he Ks 28% of the time. His numbers this season in the APPY league are only encouraging through the SSS glasses. Remember even Rowell tore up that league.

No, he's not the only one.

[Dr. FLK]

I'll never understand why you just dismiss Angelos and his input.

It's like he's not even there.

Well, dealing with PA is part of the job...isn't it? If AM is unable to operate under the conditions (which aren't likely to change), then he's not the right man...is he? AM seems all too wiling to go along with PA in many instances.

[Stotle]

Pretty words. Hard to argue with on the surface.

Of course, in the AL East, if you're not outspending the competition, you'd better be outthinking and outworking them. Neither seems to be the case with the Orioles under AM on the international front.

They really are quite easy to argue with. Evaluators in the Dominican Republic set up a prospect league that specifically revolves around the DR prospects playing against each other in game action once to twice a week over like three months. When this league was set up and in its inaugural season, I posted a link here to an article wherein one of the league organizers stated Baltimore was one of a few teams that did not regularly participate in the league as an observer.

Sorry, I don't buy Mr. MacPhail's explanation as a blanket reason for avoiding the Dominican Republic. I do think he has very valid concerns, but believe those concerns should drive the organization to find their own "way" there without sacrificing agressiveness. To me, that means making use of avenues such as the Dominican Prospect League.

As an aside, the DPL is a HUGE boon for talent evaluators, in my opinion. DR prospects are elgible to sign July 2nd once they are 16. The amount of growth and improvement that can occur for a prospect between 16, 17 and 18 is significant. The DPL allows those "eligible to sign players" that have not yet signed to show their tool sets in game action AND to show improvement over periods of time. There are lots of kids getting signed out of this league, and I think it most likely makes sense for Baltimore to be involved.

As a bonus, these kids are not generally the kids that are asking for millions of dollars -- if they were, they would have been signed already. But that doesn't mean there isn't real talent to be mined.

[waroriole]

I have to think that AM is saying these things to try to get an International Draft in place. I'm not sure how the talks are going, but I could imagine that is one of the issues being discussed.

[carolinaoriole]

We should not pay these buscones anything.

[Flosman]

Atkins was on a serious decline and had little chance of even being league average...Yes, he was riskier than Sano.

And Sano could be used in a trade...He is depth...quality depth. One of the top 100 prospects in baseball heading into the season.

Just another example where the Orioles spent money poorly when they could have been smarter about it...But for some fans, they will always find the excuses for them.

This is completely wrong for anyone who understands the definition of risk. Sano has to prove he can ever play in the majors. Atkins had already past this hurdle and was in his prime. I state this even though I didn't like the signing. His trends showed a guy that had collapsed. He was a really strange case, IMO. But you are failing to understand that Sano's value is on the reward side and is discounted for the obvious risk. AMs position is that he is not willing to pay big money without even being able to see the guy play.

It is funny you use his his prospect ratings to prove his lack of risk. Do you think Sano will get his rating to the level Rowell's was at his peak???? He hasn't yet just to let you know.

[Sports Guy]

This is completely wrong for anyone who understands the definition of risk. Sano has to prove he can ever play in the majors. Atkins had already past this hurdle and was in his prime. I state this even though I didn't like the signing. His trends showed a guy that had collapsed. He was a really strange case, IMO. But you are failing to understand that Sano's value is on the reward side and is discounted for the obvious risk. AMs position is that he is not willing to pay big money without even being able to see the guy play.

It is funny you use his his prospect ratings to prove his lack of risk. Do you think Sano will get his rating to the level Rowell's was at his peak???? He hasn't yet just to let you know.

I love the apologists on here. Always find ways to justify stupidity.

Atkins was never going to be good..Sano has a chance to be very good and, at the very least, provide us good depth in case we want to make a trade. He was abetter way to spend money and there really isn't any question about that.

[carolinaoriole]

Most GMs do not know what they are doing,we are lucky that AM does.

[Hank Scorpio]

Atkins was on a serious decline and had little chance of even being league average...Yes, he was riskier than Sano.

And Sano could be used in a trade...He is depth...quality depth. One of the top 100 prospects in baseball heading into the season.

Just another example where the Orioles spent money poorly when they could have been smarter about it...But for some fans, they will always find the excuses for them.

I wouldn't so far as to call him quality depth quite yet, he's a rich 18 year old kid in rookie ball.

***not arguing that he's less of a risk than Atkins.

[Hank Scorpio]

I love the apologists on here. Always find ways to justify stupidity.

Atkins was never going to be good..Sano has a chance to be very good and, at the very least, provide us good depth in case we want to make a trade. He was abetter way to spend money and there really isn't any question about that.

Uh.... no.

At the "very least" he never gets out of rookie ball, looks overmatched and falls off the prospect map.

[El Gordo]

They really are quite easy to argue with. Evaluators in the Dominican Republic set up a prospect league that specifically revolves around the DR prospects playing against each other in game action once to twice a week over like three months. When this league was set up and in its inaugural season, I posted a link here to an article wherein one of the league organizers stated Baltimore was one of a few teams that did not regularly participate in the league as an observer.

Sorry, I don't buy Mr. MacPhail's explanation as a blanket reason for avoiding the Dominican Republic. I do think he has very valid concerns, but believe those concerns should drive the organization to find their own "way" there without sacrificing agressiveness. To me, that means making use of avenues such as the Dominican Prospect League.

As an aside, the DPL is a HUGE boon for talent evaluators, in my opinion. DR prospects are elgible to sign July 2nd once they are 16. The amount of growth and improvement that can occur for a prospect between 16, 17 and 18 is significant. The DPL allows those "eligible to sign players" that have not yet signed to show their tool sets in game action AND to show improvement over periods of time. There are lots of kids getting signed out of this league, and I think it most likely makes sense for Baltimore to be involved.

As a bonus, these kids are not generally the kids that are asking for millions of dollars -- if they were, they would have been signed already. But that doesn't mean there isn't real talent to be mined.

So am I to understand that these kids are developed at Buscon camps, and when they reach 16 they play competive games for 3 months, before they are signed? How many years do they play in this prospect league? It seems to me that I would prefer a kid who started playing baseball at age 8 and by the time he was 16 had played in Babe Ruth leagues, high school ball, etc. for 8 years, even if he costs a bit more.

[Sports Guy]

Uh.... no.

At the "very least" he never gets out of rookie ball, looks overmatched and falls off the prospect map.

But at age 19 or 20, even if he is still struggling some, he still has trade value in a package deal.

[Stotle]

Uh.... no.

At the "very least" he never gets out of rookie ball, looks overmatched and falls off the prospect map.

I think this is true, but only true if you are also willing to say the same of Machado, Bundy, etc.

[Hank Scorpio]

I think this is true, but only true if you are also willing to say the same of Machado, Bundy, etc.

Of course. But I'm sure JJ didn't draft those two thinking, "organizational depth."

I think I misunderstood SG's point of "trade depth" as opposed to actual depth. You don't go signing 17 year old Dominican kids as trade depth, you do it because you think they're going to be the shortstop for your ML club.

[Stotle]

So am I to understand that these kids are developed at Buscon camps, and when they reach 16 they play competive games for 3 months, before they are signed? How many years do they play in this prospect league? It seems to me that I would prefer a kid who started playing baseball at age 8 and by the time he was 16 had played in Babe Ruth leagues, high school ball, etc. for 8 years, even if he costs a bit more.

I don't think it's one or the other. I mean, the kids play the game. It isn't like they are manufactured at Buscone Corp. set foot on a field for the first time once the reach the Dominican Summer League for their ML org. My understanding of Mr. MacPhail's comments (and I agree with the critiques to an extent) are that once these kids are old enough and good enough to be pegged as "prospects" they get scooped up and "showcased" to ML clubs. There isn't a HS league or college league or whatever for them to play in, as the primary source of evaluation. Rather, it's workouts.

To me, the concern is AGE and not game views. Let's be honest, for the top kids in HS ball here in the states, HS leagues are a joke. The difference is that these kids also play on traveling teams and at several scouting events that include game play. But I do not think for one second that these top players wouldn't stand out every bit as much in a showcase/workout setting as they do in travel team action. I mean, I attend these events. They are useful. Getting 60 times, watching BP, watching a bullpen session, are all excellent ways to get an idea of what a player can do.

But the age is an issue. If ML teams were forced to make decisions about US kids at age 16, there would be a lot more "expensive flops" as well. That's what happens when you are projecting out four, five, six years. The fact that Dylan Bundy got to carve up overmatched HSers added little to his evaluation that couldn't have otherwise been observed with him throwing a simulated game, or a bullpen session (the additions would be presence, his ability to deal with a bad call/error/bad pitch/etc., to the extent he ran into those situations against shoddy competition).

Don't get me wrong -- games are great, and they are very useful in evaluating. Ideally you get workouts and a game. If having to choose between one or the other, I don't know what I'd pick. I've had plenty of fruitless games attended where a kid I was sitting on went 0-1 with two walks and a HBP and had one ball hit to him. That isn't particularly useful, and unless you are making it out to every game your looks are probably going to be inconsistent.

The DPL was set up 1) to provide game opportunity to view the best prospects playing against each other (like a World Wood Bat Association tournament here in the states -- top wood bat travel teams play against each other and usually include some of the best HSers), and 2) to provide extended looks at players who haven't yet signed with a ML team.

The way the situation has been explained to me, the top kids are identified, stick out in workouts (perhaps games, as well) and are usually pursued by multiple suitors and signed at some point after the July 2 deadline but reasonably so (like within a month or so -- depending on if draft signing deadline takes focus away from the int'l front, momentarily for some orgs). There are a lot of kids that are clearly good ballplayers, but are not deemed ready for pro ball or are holding out for more money than a team wants to pay. Those kids can sign with anyone at anytime, moving forward. The DPL gives them a league to play in and an avenue for evaluators to follow the kids outside of that top tier of bonus baby int'l prospects. It might mean finding a 17 year old with some projection that shows some workable pitches (maybe signs for 50,000), or it might be a 16 or 17 year old that hit a growth spurt or velo bump and is now a much better prospect than he was back in July.

Evaluating teenagers is a fluid process, and their development is almost never linear. So, in my opinion, the idea of a League providing an avenue to monitor this progress can only be a good thing.