Would Wieters actually Accept a QO?

[SteveO]

There's downside either way, but I'd go with the fact that no player ever had accepted a QO, and take the risk that he'll be the first, rather than pass on a QO and lose the comp pick.

Caleb has been a godsend. I don't know if he will ever have another offensive year as good as this one, but he's certainly a worthy starting catcher.

If MW had a different agent then maybe I would be more concerned about him taking the QO.

Boras is not going to want to be the first agent whose client ended up taking the QO, a system that he vehemently hates.

[weams]

If MW had a different agent then maybe I would be more concerned about him taking the QO.

Boras is not going to want to be the first agent whose client ended up taking the QO, a system that he vehemently hates.

This is fact.

[24fps]

There's downside either way, but I'd go with the fact that no player ever had accepted a QO, and take the risk that he'll be the first, rather than pass on a QO and lose the comp pick.

Caleb has been a godsend. I don't know if he will ever have another offensive year as good as this one, but he's certainly a worthy starting catcher.

Whenever I want to sober up in a hurry, I go to BBRef and browse the historical record of first round draft picks to see who made any significant impact at the ML level. I would be the last person to scoff at the value of an organization drafting well but I think in this case there's no way a comp pick could ever be as valuable as an additional $15 million to the Orioles in 2016. Whenever you feel the urge to gamble I think it's always smart to first make sure you're prepared to lose. Losing in this case would consume roughly one-third of the available retooling budget for no appreciable upgrade over Caleb Joseph. A comp pick simply isn't sufficient reward for that level of risk.

[weams]

I think in this case there's no way a comp pick could ever be as valuable as an additional $15 million to the Orioles in 2016. Whenever you feel the urge to gamble I think it's always smart to first make sure you're prepared to lose. Losing in this case would consume roughly one-third of the available retooling budget for no appreciable upgrade over Caleb Joseph. A comp pick simply isn't sufficient reward for that level of risk.

Wieters would have some value to offset that 17 million. Maybe not 17 million worth.

[Larry18]

If he accepts the QO,then you trade him to the Twins for Alex Meyer.

[tntoriole]

Whenever I want to sober up in a hurry, I go to BBRef and browse the historical record of first round draft picks to see who made any significant impact at the ML level. I would be the last person to scoff at the value of an organization drafting well but I think in this case there's no way a comp pick could ever be as valuable as an additional $15 million to the Orioles in 2016. Whenever you feel the urge to gamble I think it's always smart to first make sure you're prepared to lose. Losing in this case would consume roughly one-third of the available retooling budget for no appreciable upgrade over Caleb Joseph. A comp pick simply isn't sufficient reward for that level of risk.

It would be GM malpractice to not offer Wieters a QO. You cannot let him walk away with absolutely NOTHING in return.

[SteveO]

If he accepts the QO,then you trade him to the Twins for Alex Meyer.

He won't accept it.

There is a better chance of Haley Berry knocking on my door and announcing herself as my love slave.

Boras is not letting a client of his take the QO unless it was offered to someone like Ryan Flaherty who could never see that type of money any other way.

The man literally goes on and on about the QO system every offseason. Anyone seriously think he would advocate that a client of his take it?

[SteveO]

It would be GM malpractice to not offer Wieters a QO. You cannot let him walk away with absolutely NOTHING in return.

This ^^^^^

Especially since we know he won't take it. Another agent it might deserve further consideration but even then you might be inclined to offer it.

[tntoriole]

This ^^^^^

Especially since we know he won't take it. Another agent it might deserve further consideration but even then you might be inclined to offer it.

If he takes it, (which he won't) you just hope then that the 1 year "showcase" does for Matt like it worked for Nelson Cruz. Either way, you can't just say no.

[24fps]

It would be GM malpractice to not offer Wieters a QO. You cannot let him walk away with absolutely NOTHING in return.

I think I was pretty clear in my reasoning. Do you have anything other than an assertion and perhaps a vague psychological conclusion about Scott Boras' future behavior diagnosed from afar? I would say that meaningless bravado and amateur psychology is the stuff of GM malpractice when eight figures of someone else's money is at risk.

[SteveO]

I think I was pretty clear in my reasoning. Do you have anything other than an assertion and perhaps a vague psychological conclusion about Scott Boras' future behavior diagnosed from afar? I would say that meaningless bravado and amateur psychology is the stuff of GM malpractice when eight figures of someone else's money is at risk.

This good enough for you....this what Boras said about the QO being offered to Kendry Morales and Stephen Drew. If you think he is letting MW, a guy who is actually far more marketable than either of those names at that time, your missing something. Not offering the QO to MW would be tantamount to malpractice by this GM...there is literally ZERO chance that Boras is letting a client of his take it. My guess that is understood when you sign on with him.

"Like any players, they want to play baseball. But they're also looking at the long-term aspect of their careers. This system has placed them not in free agency, but it's placed them in a jail."

"I started preparing these guys in November for what I knew was going to happen," Boras said. "Everybody talks about these players turning down these [one-year] qualifying offers like they're village idiots. The reason is, they don't want to be in the same position again next year. If I'm a good player, I'm going to take the prospect of free agency. "If I'm one of these players, I'm not on the train to free agency -- I'm on the Ferris wheel of multiple qualifying offers. It is circular. There is no escape hatch to the system."

Case closed.

http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/10607888/agent-scott-boras-says-kendrys-morales-stephen-drew-willing-wait-long-term-deals

[tntoriole]

I think I was pretty clear in my reasoning. Do you have anything other than an assertion and perhaps a vague psychological conclusion about Scott Boras' future behavior diagnosed from afar? I would say that meaningless bravado and amateur psychology is the stuff of GM malpractice when eight figures of someone else's money is at risk.

Yes, and how much money has been invested over the years in Matt Wieters that you would allow to just walk away with absolutely nothing because you are convinced that Scott Boras is going to let Matt Wieters be the first player EVER to take a QO? If you are so convinced that you are not going to offer him a QO, then trading him would have been the route to take. But Dan Duquette in every interview when asked about the pending free agents, ALWAYS emphasizes the importance to him of the compensation pick that comes back. But then, he is just the GM, as opposed to someone who apparently thinks those picks are not worth anything. We just disagree. We will find out soon enough.

[Nevermore]

Yes, and how much money has been invested over the years in Matt Wieters that you would allow to just walk away with absolutely nothing because you are convinced that Scott Boras is going to let Matt Wieters be the first player EVER to take a QO? If you are so convinced that you are not going to offer him a QO, then trading him would have been the route to take. But Dan Duquette in every interview when asked about the pending free agents, ALWAYS emphasizes the importance to him of the compensation pick that comes back. But then, he is just the GM, as opposed to someone who apparently thinks those picks are not worth anything. We just disagree. We will find out soon enough.

Let's offer him a QO and Boras will reject it. Then when Wieters signs somewhere else, we can get the comp pick. Caleb will do just fine as our regular catcher. I'd rather use Wieter's FA money to resign Wei-Yin Chen

[24fps]

This good enough for you....this what Boras said about the QO being offered to Kendry Morales and Stephen Drew. If you think he is letting MW, a guy who is actually far more marketable than either of those names at that time, your missing something. Not offering the QO to MW would be tantamount to malpractice by this GM...there is literally ZERO chance that Boras is letting a client of his take it. My guess that is understood when you sign on with him.

"Like any players, they want to play baseball. But they're also looking at the long-term aspect of their careers. This system has placed them not in free agency, but it's placed them in a jail."

"I started preparing these guys in November for what I knew was going to happen," Boras said. "Everybody talks about these players turning down these [one-year] qualifying offers like they're village idiots. The reason is, they don't want to be in the same position again next year. If I'm a good player, I'm going to take the prospect of free agency. "If I'm one of these players, I'm not on the train to free agency -- I'm on the Ferris wheel of multiple qualifying offers. It is circular. There is no escape hatch to the system."

Case closed.

http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/10607888/agent-scott-boras-says-kendrys-morales-stephen-drew-willing-wait-long-term-deals

Do you believe everything Scott Boras says for public consumption? Do you consider it possible that he might sometimes posture in the service of his own self interest? I do, but frankly it's beside the point. I'm only interested in what Scott Boras says or thinks or might think if I'm entertaining the thought of negotiating with him for the services of on of his clients, in this case Matt Wieters. I don't give a crap about Matt Wieters because the money I would have to spend on him is far better spent elsewhere in 2016 and to take Scott Boras' public pronouncements as gospel would not only be GM malpractice it would be certifiable insanity in all 50 states.

Your belief system seems to be based on the assumption that Scott Boras has told the truth when it comes to qualifying offers and furthermore he will be consistent in that behavior in the future. Think about that last part. Does he strike you as an overly principled guy? Personally I'm not comfortable trusting Scott Boras even though I also don't think he's the bogeyman. In this case I don't have to be comfortable with him. All I have to do is decide whether the long shot possibility that some 40th position draft pick might turn into something serviceable 3-4 years down the road is worth risking one-third of my 2016 retooling budget. Not enough upside compared to immediate needs. Dumb gamble, I'll pass.

[SteveO]

Lets not forget also, there will be a significant number of guys out there with the pick likely attached to them. Once you signed one, the second becomes easier much like signing Cruz was after we had already given up a pick for Ubaldo.