Connolly: Elias does not have approval to take on salary to add prospects in a trade

[Satyr3206]

1 hour ago, 7Mo said:

Maybe you saw different quotes or know more but I'd question based on what looks like Elias spoke with Boras and a member of the Boras group and they want to "make sure they're coordinated".

Executive vice president/general manager Mike Elias confirmed this afternoon that he spoke last week with Boras and “a member of his team that’s sort of health and player performance oriented for their group and we just want to make sure we’re coordinated in the plan for him this winter and making sure that Chris and the Boras Corporation and the Orioles all have an understanding of what we want to get accomplished.”

“So this is one area where teams and agents are on the same page, keeping them healthy and having them play well and so yeah, this is something we do. But the Boras Corporation is a large agency, they’ve got a lot resources at their disposal and they’re good in this area, so it makes sense to plug in with them.”

https://www.masnsports.com/school-of-roch/2019/12/elias-on-davis-contracts-stewart-mountcastle-and-more.html

As far as Davis goes the health part is a given. The performance part, not so much.

[Dark Helmet]

This is pure speculation by Connolly. I seriously doubt the Angel's would have dealt a highly touted prospect just to get rid of Cozart. Then Connolly uses his speculation, to try and make a case for something that isn't there. I see no evidence the Angel's would give up a top draft pick to get rid of Cozart. I also see no evidence the Orioles wouldn't take on money to get a prospect, if that prospect was indeed available.

 

Seems Connolly has taken a playbook from Ken Rosenthal. If nothing's there...make something up.

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, Dark Helmet said:

This is pure speculation by Connolly. I seriously doubt the Angel's would have dealt a highly touted prospect just to get rid of Cozart. Then Connolly uses his speculation, to try and make a case for something that isn't there. I see no evidence the Angel's would give up a top draft pick to get rid of Cozart. I also see no evidence the Orioles wouldn't take on money to get a prospect, if that prospect was indeed available.

 

Seems Connolly has taken a playbook from Ken Rosenthal. If nothing's there...make something up.

So the Angels trading Cozart and 2019 first round pick Will Willson to the Giants isn't enough evidence for you?

[Dark Helmet]

1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:

So the Angels trading Cozart and 2019 first round pick Will Willson to the Giants isn't enough evidence for you?

I actually didn't know that trade went down. I have a life.

[Dark Helmet]

4 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

So the Angels trading Cozart and 2019 first round pick Will Willson to the Giants isn't enough evidence for you?

And it proves nothing anyhow. It still doesn't prove the Orioles wouldn't take on money for the right prospect. Do you personally know how Elias views Wilson as a prospect?

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, Dark Helmet said:

I actually didn't know that trade went down. I have a life.

Are you trying to insult me after you messed up?   

Classy!

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, Dark Helmet said:

And it proves nothing anyhow. It still doesn't prove the Orioles wouldn't take on money for the right prospect. Do you personally know how Elias views Wilson as a prospect?

I didn't say anything that.  

[Dark Helmet]

1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:

Are you trying to insult me after you messed up?   

Classy!

No I'm not. I haven't had time to keep up with baseball. If I wanted to insult you I'd say something like " You don't matter enough to me to worry about what you have to say".

And unlike you would do, I admitted I was wrong. So go bark up another tree.

[Dark Helmet]

 

8 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Are you trying to insult me after you messed up?   

Classy!

And please don't say your original response wasn't intended to be snarky. You could have just simply pointed out the trade. 

[Can_of_corn]

5 minutes ago, Dark Helmet said:

 

And please don't say your original response wasn't intended to be snarky. You could have just simply pointed out the trade. 

Shark isn't the same as insulting.  I read your comment as a shot at me.  Still do actually.

[Frobby]

4 hours ago, weams said:

Or felt that spending 12.8 for a guy who signed for 5 ish was cool.

The reason the guy only cost $5 mm is that MLB artificially constrains what can be paid to draftees.    I think I read on here that Fangraphs values that pick at $18 mm.

[weams]

39 minutes ago, Frobby said:

The reason the guy only cost $5 mm is that MLB artificially constrains what can be paid to draftees.    I think I read on here that Fangraphs values that pick at $18 mm.

Well good point then. 

[hoosiers]

The piece almost feels like a hatchet job by Connelly.  How many GMs have rubber-stamp authority to increase payroll by $10M to obtain a quality prospect?  I would like to see our GM have the ability to take such options to the owners and see how that goes, and Elias said he would be comfortable doing that on a case by case basis.  How much more should we expect than that?  Not much IMO, but Connelly seems to paint all of this in such a black light. 

Connelly doesn't even dwell on what type of regard our front office has regarding the prospect's value.  Maybe our FO didn't value the prospect very high or at least worth eating Cozart's salary for.

Not a great article IMO.

[Luke-OH]

3 hours ago, Frobby said:

The reason the guy only cost $5 mm is that MLB artificially constrains what can be paid to draftees.    I think I read on here that Fangraphs values that pick at $18 mm.

18M and that is with the cost of the signing bonus already subtracted out. So pretty much 22M in expected future value for 12.7M in certain present savings. It’s a pretty high discount rate, but not totally crazy if it lets the Angels acquire another win now piece.

[Roll Tide]

3 hours ago, Luke-OH said:

18M and that is with the cost of the signing bonus already subtracted out. So pretty much 22M in expected future value for 12.7M in certain present savings. It’s a pretty high discount rate, but not totally crazy if it lets the Angels acquire another win now piece.

Wow ...I was looking at Cozart's stats on BBREF, He was a .933 OPS in 2017 then fell off the Chris Davis cliff.

Looks like a shoulder injury. I don't know what Arthroscopic Debribement is but it sounds pretty serious.

plus and I know it's a risk but Cozart is a pretty good player if he can rebound. Maybe they Giants can deal him mid season for more.

 

Arthroscopic debridement (AD) involves using instruments to remove damaged cartilage or bone. Often the doctor will start the procedure by using a tool to spray jets of fluid to wash and suck out all debris around the joint. This is called lavage or washout.

https://www.rotoworld.com/baseball/mlb/player/19109/zack-cozart