Roch: Iglesias Option Picked up

[HowAboutThat]

I don’t understand why this was ever a worry. The team doesn’t want to waste money, but they are happy to spend wisely.
Iglesias will be very valuable to the guys who don’t sign Simmons, and he may be traded before spring.

(hard pass on the Korean guy, btw)

[Roll Tide]

20 minutes ago, BohKnowsBmore said:

See, this is why I never understood the preemptive consternation. If the budgetary constraints are as tight as has been suggested, these are the types of moves that NEED to be made.

Yes he overperformed career batting numbers in the shortened season, but even despite that he's been a reliable 1-3 WAR player since 2013. He's an absolute bargain on his current contract. Whether it's beating the EV for budget in 2021 or leveraging this in-the-money contract/asset in trade, these are the types of things the club needs to do to move forward in the rebuild and it would be nonsensical to not pick it up.

I don’t know what portion of the TV money was paid to the teams. So it’s hard. To argue what they can/can’t afford. But in a normal year they should have 150 million to spend minimum on payroll. Our payroll is no where near that and since the players are only getting partial payments the contract will decrease with the lost games. That’s not counting any revenue from sponsors, tickets, food ,  souvenirs etc. 
 

Thats 155 million per the tv deal per Forbes and 54 million in local tv money per Fangraphs. BTW, They have. The. Nationals local TV money at $77 million and ours at $54 million. Seems odd considering the Orioles are supposed to have the better end of the arrangement. 
 

But for arguments sake....155 million on payroll would leave $54 million for everything else including lining the pockets of MRS. Angelos and her two sons.

[Roll Tide]

9 minutes ago, Philip said:

I don’t understand why this was ever a worry. The team doesn’t want to waste money, but they are happy to spend wisely.
Iglesias will be very valuable to the guys who don’t sign Simmons, and he may be traded before spring.

(hard pass on the Korean guy, btw)

Far better option than spending millions on 17-19 year old kids from the DR. We aren’t signing the expensive ones...just the middle tier guys which lowers your success rate imo. 
 

The Korean guy is in his prime and ready. IMO it’s a very low risk move. And the 5 million or so per year is nothing with our current payroll so low. It’s. A small price to add a talented kid to your team without giving. Up prospects. 

[Sports Guy]

1 hour ago, Roll Tide said:

Far better option than spending millions on 17-19 year old kids from the DR. We aren’t signing the expensive ones...just the middle tier guys which lowers your success rate imo. 
 

The Korean guy is in his prime and ready. IMO it’s a very low risk move. And the 5 million or so per year is nothing with our current payroll so low. It’s. A small price to add a talented kid to your team without giving. Up prospects. 

There is no proof that signing the expensive IFA is a better way to do it than signing the cheaper ones.

 

[Roll Tide]

27 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

There is no proof that signing the expensive IFA is a better way to do it than signing the cheaper ones.

 

Surely there is data that proves that a player that is MLB has a higher hit success rate over signing a 17 year old kid tools kid. I’m not saying that they all fail but most will. 

[HowAboutThat]

1 hour ago, Roll Tide said:

Far better option than spending millions on 17-19 year old kids from the DR. We aren’t signing the expensive ones...just the middle tier guys which lowers your success rate imo. 
 

The Korean guy is in his prime and ready. IMO it’s a very low risk move. And the 5 million or so per year is nothing with our current payroll so low. It’s. A small price to add a talented kid to your team without giving. Up prospects. 

The problem with the Korean guy is that he has been successful in a league that is the equivalent of our AA? Maybe AAA? And a significant number of Koreans who have come over here havent done well.

there is a reason that failed pitching hopefuls go over to Korea and have success. I’d be happy to give the guy a try for one year and 3 million or so, but that would be on top of the $10 million posting fee, for a total cost of $13 million, and that’s a hard pass.

[Sports Guy]

1 hour ago, Roll Tide said:

Surely there is data that proves that a player that is MLB has a higher hit success rate over signing a 17 year old kid tools kid. I’m not saying that they all fail but most will. 

I think I misread your post.

Still, signing middle 25 y/o players that whose stats translate to mediocrity over here isn’t a good use of money..much rather buy the lottery tickets.