Update: Orioles sign 17 international players highlighted by Basallo and Hernandez

[Just Regular]

28 minutes ago, Philip said:

My previous question was just an aside my real Comment is that at the moment, I think casting a very wide net is best, and I hope we’re not just in Latin America. I wonder if we have any scouts in Scandinavia? Or in Germany, or wherever they’re big strong guys who can throw 90 miles an hour?

Its part feeling and part hope, but I think Baseball Yao Ming is alive.   He's going to be uploading his pitching vid sometime this decade.

I think if Bryce Harper was a J15 kid in this year's class, he probably would have put on a batting practice show about three years ago, and MLB teams may not have seen much since then.

[LTO's]

I swear I've seen dozens of thorough explanations here of how the int'l signing process works and there are a few who still don't get it.  Same few who were incensed after the O's didn't outbid the Marlins and drop 7 mil on the Mesa brothers, both of whom are almost complete non-prospects at this point. Teams, especially with a capped amount of money, are not going to come in and throw an extra million dollars at a 16 year old prospect who is spoken for just because. 

[Can_of_corn]

5 minutes ago, LTO's said:

I swear I've seen dozens of thorough explanations here of how the int'l signing process works and there are a few who still don't get it.  Same few who were incensed after the O's didn't outbid the Marlins and drop 7 mil on the Mesa brothers, both of whom are almost complete non-prospects at this point. Teams, especially with a capped amount of money, are not going to come in and throw an extra million dollars at a 16 year old prospect who is spoken for just because. 

In most circumstances a million dollars isn't much to spend on a player.  Look at what the Dodgers spent on Diaz for example.

If you have the cap room, which the Orioles did, why is it unreasonable to think a team would spend the premium on someone like Mesa?  (for the record I don't think the O's made anything close to a comparable offer)

They wouldn't be doing it "just because" they would be doing it because they aren't going to spend the cap room on anything and trading slots doesn't bring much in return.

If you hit on one of these guys the payoff can be immense.

 

[LTO's]

1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:

If you have the cap room, which the Orioles did, why is it unreasonable to think a team would spend the premium on someone like Mesa? 

 

Because in the market today, the Mesa brothers are not worth anything close to what they received. The Os made a correct determination on their value and I'm glad they did. Possibly the dumbest thing this FO could do is throw stupid money at teenagers that far exceeds their value based on prospect rankings that are basically worthless.

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, LTO's said:

Because in the market today, the Mesa brothers are not worth anything close to what they received. The Os made a correct determination on their value and I'm glad they did. Possibly the dumbest thing this FO could do is throw stupid money at teenagers that far exceeds their value based on prospect rankings that are basically worthless.

I don't think they made a determination on their value at all.  I just don't think they were willing to cut a big check at the same time they were slashing payroll.

That being said I don't agree with you on the market. 

Yes in a normal situation they would not have been worth what they received, but the specific market they found themselves in wasn't the normal market.  You had Oriole and Marlin teams with pool money to spend and both teams desperately in need of young talent.  With few other avenues for spending the money the Mesa market was warped.

Day one of the International market isn't the same as day 300.

[Frobby]

2 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I don't think they made a determination on their value at all.  I just don't think they were willing to cut a big check at the same time they were slashing payroll.

That is what you choose to believe.   I think it’s pretty unlikely that they didn’t make a determination whether these particular players were worth the bonus money.    But for both of us, we don’t actually know what the thought process was.   

[Jammer7]

11 hours ago, Roll Tide said:

It’s already been pointed out. I’m a moron, have no credibility, and am clueless. 
 

 

I had not read the rest of the thread until after my response. My comments were a little less critical, but poking a little fun. Easy mistake.

[Jammer7]

Teams get commitments from the top guys at 14-15 years of age for X amount of bonus. A big portion of that money goes to the buscones. The buscones have contracts with the kids that outlines their payment %. In return, the buscones house, feed, coach, school, cloth and basically parent the kids for a few years. Some buscones have relationships with particular teams and more money from other teams does not sway the kids as they will be easily influenced by what the buscones want them to do. 

So the idea of we should just throw money around and sign as many “top rated” kids as possible will not work, and honestly is foolish. Great scouting and the ability to develop relationships with the buscones and the kids is where this effort pays off initially. It is like college recruiting. Then, they have to actually prove they can develop the talent to MLB. 

@Sports Guy has a good point that he has made several times. Often the best players are later bloomers and sign for lesser bonus amounts. Often, kids peak early and never really get better for whatever reason. Judging kids at 14-15 as to what they will become is really tough. I do not envy scouts on that job. 

[Can_of_corn]

On 1/4/2021 at 12:29 PM, Sports Guy said:

But here we are again, relying on some publications ranking.  The difference between the 13th guy and the 29th guy is minimal, especially when you are talking about 16-18 year old kids.  You have zero idea how they will develop.  
 

We really have to stop basing all opinions on rankings.  Most of them suck, are wrong or are meaningless.

So we should just not have opinions or base them on the totally non-biased comments the O's make after they sign a guy?

 

[Sports Guy]

6 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

So we should just not have opinions or base them on the totally non-biased comments the O's make after they sign a guy?

 

No, of course you should/can.

But understand that most of the time, the rankings are bs and sometimes, very biased.

Don’t get so wrapped up in them and act as if you don’t follow them, you have somehow made a big mistake. 

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, Sports Guy said:

No, of course you should/can.

But understand that most of the time, the rankings are bs and sometimes, very biased.

Don’t get so wrapped up in them and act as if you don’t follow them, you have somehow made a big mistake. 

Well if they are "bs" then they are worthless and shouldn't be referenced.

I think they are imperfect tools worked on by folks that are doing the best that they can.

I think dismissing them as "bs" is insulting to the work that is put in.

I don't think anyone on this board is taking prospect rankings as the be all end of of player evaluation.  When you have a game in which a college senior can go 1-1, not have any significant injuries and still be a complete bust no one in their right mind is going to take something written about a 16 year old as the gospel truth.

[Sports Guy]

25 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Well if they are "bs" then they are worthless and shouldn't be referenced.

I think they are imperfect tools worked on by folks that are doing the best that they can.

I think dismissing them as "bs" is insulting to the work that is put in.

I don't think anyone on this board is taking prospect rankings as the be all end of of player evaluation.  When you have a game in which a college senior can go 1-1, not have any significant injuries and still be a complete bust no one in their right mind is going to take something written about a 16 year old as the gospel truth.

People do good work..it’s still a guessing game where people are largely wrong despite their good work.

[Jammer7]

23 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

No, of course you should/can.

But understand that most of the time, the rankings are bs and sometimes, very biased.

Don’t get so wrapped up in them and act as if you don’t follow them, you have somehow made a big mistake. 

I agree, in general, with what you have said in these threads I do not think the lists are complete BS, but to be taken with a grain of salt. These lists are for fans, public consumption, not for industry professionals. Once you get past the top group of elite guys, everything else is based on projection. Certainly, personal bias plays a role. 

Badler and Sanchez are pretty well-connected and seem to put out solid lists these past few years. They both go to events and talk with scouts. I have personally seen Ben Badler at events here in the US, talking with scouts. As to what or how much he is told, IDK. 

I will say that it seems like the bonus amounts sometimes dictate or greatly influence rankings. Maybe there is a little something to that, depending on the team and their evaluation process. If the Dodgers or Rays give a kid $2 million, it is more credible to me than if it is the Brewers, Mets, or many others. 

[Can_of_corn]

6 minutes ago, Jammer7 said:

I agree, in general, with what you have said in these threads I do not think the lists are complete BS, but to be taken with a grain of salt. These lists are for fans, public consumption, not for industry professionals. Once you get past the top group of elite guys, everything else is based on projection. Certainly, personal bias plays a role. 

Badler and Sanchez are pretty well-connected and seem to put out solid lists these past few years. They both go to events and talk with scouts. I have personally seen Ben Badler at events here in the US, talking with scouts. As to what or how much he is told, IDK. 

I will say that it seems like the bonus amounts sometimes dictate or greatly influence rankings. Maybe there is a little something to that, depending on the team and their evaluation process. If the Dodgers or Rays give a kid $2 million, it is more credible to me than if it is the Brewers, Mets, or many others. 

If Coby Mayo had signed for slot (565K) would Tony have ranked him #15 in the prospect list?

[Sports Guy]

4 minutes ago, Jammer7 said:

I agree, in general, with what you have said in these threads I do not think the lists are complete BS, but to be taken with a grain of salt. These lists are for fans, public consumption, not for industry professionals. Once you get past the top group of elite guys, everything else is based on projection. Certainly, personal bias plays a role. 

Badler and Sanchez are pretty well-connected and seem to put out solid lists these past few years. They both go to events and talk with scouts. I have personally seen Ben Badler at events here in the US, talking with scouts. As to what or how much he is told, IDK. 

I will say that it seems like the bonus amounts sometimes dictate or greatly influence rankings. Maybe there is a little something to that, depending on the team and their evaluation process. If the Dodgers or Rays give a kid $2 million, it is more credible to me than if it is the Brewers, Mets, or many others. 

I don’t really mean to dismiss their views. 
 

A guy like Badler is ranking guys based off of what he is told but I’m betting that some of what hears are also from agents (going along with your bonus point you made) and agents know that they can influence things.  
 

But more than that, this is really all about the idea these players are so unpredictable that no matter how good of a scout you are, you can’t see into the future.

Like you said, the top guys are usually consensus but even those guys flop a lot.  Once you get past the top 20ish players, the lists really start to change.  
 

Look at the OH rankings.  Most publications have Diaz in the top 7..Tony has him 13th.  He’s the same player that each are ranking but everyone looks at things differently.  DL Hall is a top 60ish guy and Tony almost put him behind Baumann, who isn’t even in consideration for top 100 lists.  That doesn’t mean Tony is wrong, it’s just what he sees and what he hears.

 

Its largely a crapshoot and saying this is a failure or that is a failure because of where BA ranks them is just wrong.