It's July 2- Internationale!

[Can_of_corn]

3 minutes ago, Nevermore said:

I don't even know what these "vague platitudes" are.  Could some one please explain? Is it a matter of budget or political beliefs or neither or both?

A couple of the theories I have heard:

Ownership doesn't like giving large sums of money to 16 year olds who perform in showcases instead of older players that the scouts can see in actual games.

 

Ownership (with an assist from Andy) doesn't approve of the way the Buscone system works and doesn't want to feed it.

 

I think that in general ownership would rather pay for proven talent (even if it is over the hill) over unproven talent.

[Nevermore]

4 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

A couple of the theories I have heard:

Ownership doesn't like giving large sums of money to 16 year olds who perform in showcases instead of older players that the scouts can see in actual games.

 

Ownership (with an assist from Andy) doesn't approve of the way the Buscone system works and doesn't want to feed it.

 

I think that in general ownership would rather pay for proven talent (even if it is over the hill) over unproven talent.

And another dumb question.  Who is Buscone and what is his system? 

[Can_of_corn]

4 minutes ago, Nevermore said:

And another dumb question.  Who is Buscone and what is his system? 

What not who.

There are better sources but this is the first one I found.

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/buscones-street-agents-shape-young-baseball-talent-price-article-1.465231

Basically they are "agents" who develop and profit off of these young players.

[Nevermore]

12 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

What not who.

There are better sources but this is the first one I found.

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/buscones-street-agents-shape-young-baseball-talent-price-article-1.465231

Basically they are "agents" who develop and profit off of these young players.

Oh now I understand. It's"buscone" not "Buscone "

[hoosiers]

22 hours ago, TradeAngelos said:

I knew this was coming, only took 5 posts. 

Maybe one day people will realize that Dan has a BOSS, who tells him what to do and how to operate. Novel concept I know. 

Bosses don't exist in secret or hide in far off steel cages.  They are generally not stupid.  I never had difficulty taking new proposals to any of my bosses - no matter how obtuse any might have been.

At this point, the way the industry works, the failure to convince the owner of the benefits of spending internationally is on the GM.  The GM with a $150M major league budget can find a couple $M for the international market.

I understand this is a new spending source, that the owner has seen multiple costly and embarrassing fraud issues in the international market in his tenure ranging from fake age issues, scouts offering excess $ to mediocre prospects for kickbacks, and other fraud issues (since Reds and Jim Bowden).  This is 2017, however, and MLB has done a lot to verify ages and eliminate fraud.  The times have changed. 

It should not be a Herculean effort to gather the investment returns teams are generating in the international market to show the owner we need to play in that sandbox too.

[Frobby]

48 minutes ago, hoosiers said:

It should not be a Herculean effort to gather the investment returns teams are generating in the international market to show the owner we need to play in that sandbox too.

A couple of points:

1.   During the MacPhail years, the O's brought in a consultant to study the international market, and the study concluded that larger investments in the international market weren't warranted.    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.camdenchat.com/platform/amp/2011/5/11/2165462/q-a-with-matt-klentak-orioles-director-baseball-operations.  

2.   Obviously, we don't know what the quality of that study was, or exactly what it concluded.     But it's not like Angelos just decided on a whim not to spend internationally.

3.   The market has changed significantly since the study was done, due to (1) caps on spending on the draft and the "slot" system, (2) caps on international spending and the "slot" system there, and (3) continuing increases in major league payrolls.    Therefore, whatever the conclusions of the study were, and even if you assume their legitimacy at the time, they may not apply under the changed market conditions.

4.   We have no idea whether the Orioles have taken the changes in the market into account, or have done any further studies of the issue.    

[Can_of_corn]

If you click on the link you will see that only one team has yet to sign anyone.

But I'm sure it's the other 29 teams that are wrong.

 

[Moose Milligan]

10 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

If you click on the link you will see that only one team has yet to sign anyone.

But I'm sure it's the other 29 teams that are wrong.

 

Absolutely pathetic.

In regards Frobby's well written post above, I agree on all points.  However, the counter argument to whatever Angelos and other FO execs have said and not done is just a simple "everyone else is doing it."  It's not anything like smoking weed during lunch with the cool kids in high school...no, like, everyone is doing it.  Successful teams are doing it and aren't being hurt by it.  Take a hit, Peter and Dan, you might open up your mind and relax a little.  

That, and....it's a lot easier and not as expensive to roll the dice on, say, 4 international prospects at 2-3 million each rather than giving a first baseman a 150 million contract over several years.  It's like playing blackjack at the 2 dollar table instead of it at the 20 dollar table.  Lose 5 hands at the 2 dollar table, you'll be fine.  Lose 5 hands at the 20 dollar table, you're probably going home early.

With MLB getting their hands around this more it's monumentally stupid that we're the only team that hasn't signed anyone.  

[weams]

17 hours ago, Frobby said:

A couple of points:

1.   During the MacPhail years, the O's brought in a consultant to study the international market, and the study concluded that larger investments in the international market weren't warranted.    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.camdenchat.com/platform/amp/2011/5/11/2165462/q-a-with-matt-klentak-orioles-director-baseball-operations.  

2.   Obviously, we don't know what the quality of that study was, or exactly what it concluded.     But it's not like Angelos just decided on a whim not to spend internationally.

3.   The market has changed significantly since the study was done, due to (1) caps on spending on the draft and the "slot" system, (2) caps on international spending and the "slot" system there, and (3) continuing increases in major league payrolls.    Therefore, whatever the conclusions of the study were, and even if you assume their legitimacy at the time, they may not apply under the changed market conditions.

4.   We have no idea whether the Orioles have taken the changes in the market into account, or have done any further studies of the issue.    

Andy MacPhail also ran the MLB investigation into the abuses of the athlete in the Dominican Republic by the Buscones and the prevalence of PED abuse there. 

He shared his experiences with his new boss, Peter Angelos. 

[Frobby]

What have the Phillies been doing on international spending since Andy took over?

[OriolesMagic83]

2 minutes ago, weams said:

Andy MacPhail also ran the MLB investigation into the abuses of the athlete in the Dominican Republic by the Buscones and the prevalence of PED abuse there. 

He shared his experiences with his new boss, Peter Angelos. 

The O's need to have a new study about the effectiveness of signing 4th and 5th starters to multi-year deals and signing multiple players who's best position is DH. 

[Moose Milligan]

Just now, Frobby said:

What have the Phillies been doing on international spending since Andy took over?

More than us.  *rimshot*

This year alone:

Philadelphia Phillies
Luis Garcia, ss, Dominican Republic (No. 12 prospect), $2.5 million
Carlos Vargas, rhp, Colombia (No. 25 prospect), $525,000
Carlos Betancourt, rhp, Venezuela (No. 41 prospect)
Cesar Rodriguez, c, Venezuela (No. 42 prospect)
Israel Puello, rhp, Dominican Republic, $460,0000.
Oscar Gonzalez, c, Venezuela
Cristian Hernandez, rhp, Venezuela
Alberto Torres, lhp, Colombia
Read more at http://www.baseballamerica.com/international/2017-team-team-international-signing-trackers/#f6Ew4ZuC4oCsoIFU.99

 

 

[Moose Milligan]

I'm going to assume that the 41 and 42 guys cost in the neighborhood of 500,000, and I think that's being generous.  Also, I like round numbers, it's easier to add.

So... for 4.25 million Sweater Vest has added some talent with a lot of upside to his system.  He could do that every year for 5 years and it still wouldn't eclipse what we're paying for ONE year of Chris Davis. 

 

[Frobby]

11 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

I'm going to assume that the 41 and 42 guys cost in the neighborhood of 500,000, and I think that's being generous.  Also, I like round numbers, it's easier to add.

So... for 4.25 million Sweater Vest has added some talent with a lot of upside to his system.  He could do that every year for 5 years and it still wouldn't eclipse what we're paying for ONE year of Chris Davis. 

 

So, my question was a good one. It shows that Andy and Klentak have moved on from whatever the situation was in 2011 or before, and are investing in international players.     The Orioles have not moved on, and I have to believe that's on Peter Angelos, not Dan Duquette.

[Moose Milligan]

Just now, Frobby said:

So, my question was a good one. It shows that Andy and Klentak have moved on from whatever the situation was in 2011 or before, and are investing in international players.     The Orioles have not moved on, and I have to believe that's on Peter Angelos, not Dan Duquette.

I agree, it was a good one.  Wouldn't have thought to have asked that.  

Curious, why do you believe it's on PA and not DD?