It's Time - Mountcastle

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

As much as I like Mountcastle, I'm not buying out any free agency years until he has a year or two of success. Not sure what your hurry is. Let's also not forget that while no one likes to lose, getting back to back number one overall picks is a not  bad way to get back to sustained winning if the guys selected are the right guys. 

I'd be honestly shocked if Mountcastle comes up this year before September 1st.

My hurry is the longer you wait the more expensive it gets.

[Tony-OH]

Just now, Can_of_corn said:

My hurry is the longer you wait the more expensive it gets.

It's not the easy. You also have to measure out the risk. You would have paid Schoop big time after his big year and then we would have had an expensive below average 2B. It's all about the risk/reward.

[Philip]

3 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

Nunez is not getting DFA'd for anyone. He has value on the trade market before they would just DFA him.

Exactly my point. The only person whom Mountcastle could reasonably expected to replace is one of our few productive players this year.

[Can_of_corn]

4 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

It's not the easy. You also have to measure out the risk. You would have paid Schoop big time after his big year and then we would have had an expensive below average 2B. It's all about the risk/reward.

He doesn't look below average so far this season.  .5 rWAR, 125 OPS+.

Also I would have paid Schoop little time before he signed that deal to trade away a portion of his future earnings.  I'm about signing them early not after their fourth full season.

You sign them early and it limits your risk even if they bomb.

Basically you spread the risk over multiple prospects.  If even one hits big you are way ahead.

[Tony-OH]

3 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

He doesn't look below average so far this season.  .5 rWAR, 125 OPS+.

Also I would have paid Schoop little time before he signed that deal to trade away a portion of his future earnings.  I'm about signing them early not after their fourth full season.

You sign them early and it limits your risk even if they bomb.

Basically you spread the risk over multiple prospects.  If even one hits big you are way ahead.

Would you have paid Bundy before he even came up? How about a year or two after? It just comes down to it that unless a player is a once in a generation talent, there's too much risk to pay him before he's shown some ability at the major league level. Now Mountcastle comes up, hits, hits for power, EV is 90 or higher for two years, then I'm considering a long term deal.

[WarehouseChatter]

Keep him at AAA.  Absolutely no rush.  Let’s make sure we have guys like him, Diaz and our other top prospects at the big league level for as long as possible during our “contending period” which is still several years away.

[Can_of_corn]

6 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

Would you have paid Bundy before he even came up? How about a year or two after? It just comes down to it that unless a player is a once in a generation talent, there's too much risk to pay him before he's shown some ability at the major league level. Now Mountcastle comes up, hits, hits for power, EV is 90 or higher for two years, then I'm considering a long term deal.

Sure, if he price was low enough.  I don't think it would have been.  I don't think Bundy was interested in a team friendly deal back in 2012.

I'm not suggesting throwing big money at these kids, just the opposite.  It isn't too much risk.  For the price of one Trumbo contract you can get price certainly one a handful of these kids. 

Mountcastle comes up, hits, hits for power, EV is 90 or higher for two years then you have to pay him a multiple of what you could have signed him for.  Then you risk him deciding to go the arbitration route and being a non-tender in his last year as his arbitration cost will exceed his value.

[Tony-OH]

4 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Sure, if he price was low enough.  I don't think it would have been.  I don't think Bundy was interested in a team friendly deal back in 2012.

I'm not suggesting throwing big money at these kids, just the opposite.  It isn't too much risk.  For the price of one Trumbo contract you can get price certainly one a handful of these kids. 

Mountcastle comes up, hits, hits for power, EV is 90 or higher for two years then you have to pay him a multiple of what you could have signed him for.  Then you risk him deciding to go the arbitration route and being a non-tender in his last year as his arbitration cost will exceed his value.

We're just going to have to disagree. No one will ever be able to convince me that signing a kid past his free agent time while he's in the minors is a thing that should happen. Not only that, I'm not convince too many players would be willing to give up so much earning potential as well. 

[Frobby]

4 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Sure, if he price was low enough.  I don't think it would have been.  I don't think Bundy was interested in a team friendly deal back in 2012.

I'm not suggesting throwing big money at these kids, just the opposite.  It isn't too much risk.  For the price of one Trumbo contract you can get price certainly one a handful of these kids. 

Mountcastle comes up, hits, hits for power, EV is 90 or higher for two years then you have to pay him a multiple of what you could have signed him for.  Then you risk him deciding to go the arbitration route and being a non-tender in his last year as his arbitration cost will exceed his value.

It can work out great or poorly.   You’d better have a handle on the kid’s talent.    The “recent trend” is to lock kids up early, but we aren’t seeing many cases where they’ve been locked up before having at least some success in the majors.  

[mdbdotcom]

He'll be brought up after Nunez is traded to the Yankees (who will have run out of players by then).

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, Frobby said:

It can work out great or poorly.   You’d better have a handle on the kid’s talent.    The “recent trend” is to lock kids up early, but we aren’t seeing many cases where they’ve been locked up before having at least some success in the majors.  

It can't work out that poorly since you won't have a lot of money invested.  Worst case scenario you are paying a kid middle reliever money.

Recent trend or not this is an approach I've been advocating for years.

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, mdbdotcom said:

He'll be brought up after Nunez is traded to the Yankees (who will have run out of players by then).

Next week?

I heard yesterday that they are down to one position player in the minors that is on their 40.

[Can_of_corn]

7 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

We're just going to have to disagree. No one will ever be able to convince me that signing a kid past his free agent time while he's in the minors is a thing that should happen. Not only that, I'm not convince too many players would be willing to give up so much earning potential as well. 

I agree that sometimes you just won't be able to make a deal. 

As for extending them past their free agency, hopefully those would be team option years.

[jabba72]

I think the last thing Elias wants to do is bring up a 1B prospect in April. IMO, its unfortunate but Davis, Mancini and Nunez are also in the mix there, so Mountcastle is probably going to spend the year in Norfolk, unless he's hitting .350 or something in July. then, maybe they'll call him up and split the PA's. 

[oriole]

Can someone teach Mountcastle 2B please?