Which player would you be most/least excited about?

[Sports Guy]

3 hours ago, 7Mo said:

Well, it's not "saved money". They spend it on someone else. Do you disagree with that?

And I know all about BPA. I've read your posts a few times. I'm just saying it's not "saved money".

Well it is and it’s not.  They have plenty of money to spend, especially if they go the allowed 4.9% over.

Last year, they saved money and kind of pissed it away

Also, you are saving money for players even more unlikely to make it.

They have plenty of money to spend to get Jones/Holliday and get multiple overslots later.

As I said before, the draft pool is like the NFL salary cap.  It’s real but lots of ways to get around it and use it to your advantage.

[Can_of_corn]

4 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

Give me a break.  I suppose they traded for the comp pick this year so they could spend less.

Give me a break.

A poster said they are not going to "save money".  All i did was point out that last year they did in fact not spend their full allotment.

 

And then you come out all pissy, because of course you do.

I didn't initiate the topic, I didn't make a big deal out of it, I just pointed out what happened.

[RZNJ]

1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:

Give me a break.

A poster said they are not going to "save money".  All i did was point out that last year they did in fact not spend their full allotment.

 

And then you come out all pissy, because of course you do.

I didn't initiate the topic, I didn't make a big deal out of it, I just pointed out what happened.

They had a total pool of 11.8M.  They spent 164K under that.  I'm not pissy. You're anal.

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, RZNJ said:

They had a total pool of 11.8M.  They spent 164K under that.  I'm not pissy. You're anal.

So 11.8M, 4.9% of that comes to 578,200.  Add 164,000 to that and you get 742,200.

Think maybe you could have picked up a better player someone down the draft with another 740K?

Why didn't they?

[Frobby]

10 hours ago, forphase1 said:

I don't think you can EVER afford to miss on a 1:1.  This is only our 3rd time in franchise history of getting to chose whatever player we want.  Shouldn't screw it up.  

The Astros missed on Appel.   Didn’t stop them from winning a WS and two other pennants - and counting.  

[RZNJ]

27 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

So 11.8M, 4.9% of that comes to 578,200.  Add 164,000 to that and you get 742,200.

Think maybe you could have picked up a better player someone down the draft with another 740K?

Why didn't they?

You're moving the goalposts like you always do. They spent all but 164K of their total pool money.  

This year they traded for a comp pick which probably, without checking, adds 1M to their pool money which again I'm sure they'll spend 99% of.

Why don't they go 5% over the pool?  Just so whiners like you will have something to complain about. 

I hear we left $50 of our International pool on the table. Cry me a river.

[Sports Guy]

7 hours ago, RZNJ said:

You're moving the goalposts like you always do. They spent all but 164K of their total pool money.  

This year they traded for a comp pick which probably, without checking, adds 1M to their pool money which again I'm sure they'll spend 99% of.

Why don't they go 5% over the pool?  Just so whiners like you will have something to complain about. 

I hear we left $50 of our International pool on the table. Cry me a river.

Well, the thing is, he’s right.  You may not want to hear it but he is.

Last year, 20 teams went over their budget.  This year, the Orioles have almost 850k more they can spend.  That’s a substantial amount.

That is the equivalent to about the 77th pick in this years draft.  That is money they can spend that is available to them, just as it was last year and in previous years.

They may have to pay a small penalty but so what?  Even the Pirates do it every year.  So yes, it’s extremely fair to point it out.

If the Orioles had the 77th pick in this years draft and decided not to spend the money and just passed on the pick, would you be ok with that?

[Moose Milligan]

I somehow think Collier could be the pick. I’ve had that sneaking suspicion over the last day or so. 

[RZNJ]

10 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Well, the thing is, he’s right.  You may not want to hear it but he is.

Last year, 20 teams went over their budget.  This year, the Orioles have almost 850k more they can spend.  That’s a substantial amount.

That is the equivalent to about the 77th pick in this years draft.  That is money they can spend that is available to them, just as it was last year and in previous years.

They may have to pay a small penalty but so what?  Even the Pirates do it every year.  So yes, it’s extremely fair to point it out.

If the Orioles had the 77th pick in this years draft and decided not to spend the money and just passed on the pick, would you be ok with that?

His original comment was about the Orioles not spending their entire draft pool and saving money.  In that context they "saved" 164K.  No big deal.  Would I like them to spend like the Pirates do?  Yes.

It's funny that you give me a hypothetical since when I do it to you, you don't seem to know what it is.

[Sports Guy]

2 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

His original comment was about the Orioles not spending their entire draft pool and saving money.  In that context they "saved" 164K.  No big deal.  Would I like them to spend like the Pirates do?  Yes.

It's funny that you give me a hypothetical since when I do it to you, you don't seem to know what it is.

 No I do..it’s just your hypotheticals are poorly done.

Asking me a question about a scout saying a player is LIKELY to put up, in essence, HOF numbers, is absurd.  No scout is going to do that and if they did, you can’t take him seriously because that’s a bit extreme.

Now, if you want to ask me a hypothetical that states, your scouts have a belief that player X stands a 30% of being a perennial AS and player Y stands a 40% chance of doing the same, is it worth the extra draft pool money for that 10%.

That’s a more realistic hypothetical and one that actual fosters a conversation.  But when your hypothetical isn’t even realistic, why bother?  It’s like me asking you, say a scout says Jones will be the next Trout, isn’t that worth paying him 9-10M?  Why is that even a question you would entertain?

[Sports Guy]

17 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

I somehow think Collier could be the pick. I’ve had that sneaking suspicion over the last day or so. 

I voted for Holliday but admittingly I’m worried it’s going to be Lee although I do think anyone saying it’s Lee are doing it based on a few recent draft developments by Elias, not because they actually know anything.

[RZNJ]

9 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

 No I do..it’s just your hypotheticals are poorly done.

Asking me a question about a scout saying a player is LIKELY to put up, in essence, HOF numbers, is absurd.  No scout is going to do that and if they did, you can’t take him seriously because that’s a bit extreme.

Now, if you want to ask me a hypothetical that states, your scouts have a belief that player X stands a 30% of being a perennial AS and player Y stands a 40% chance of doing the same, is it worth the extra draft pool money for that 10%.

That’s a more realistic hypothetical and one that actual fosters a conversation.  But when your hypothetical isn’t even realistic, why bother?  It’s like me asking you, say a scout says Jones will be the next Trout, isn’t that worth paying him 9-10M?  Why is that even a question you would entertain?

You are such a _______.

[Moose Milligan]

35 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

I voted for Holliday but admittingly I’m worried it’s going to be Lee although I do think anyone saying it’s Lee are doing it based on a few recent draft developments by Elias, not because they actually know anything.

It's really all over the place.  I hope it's not Lee, but I've not got that feeling it would be.  I thought Collier because he's the youngest one and he was part of the team that took Correa #1 when he was 17, too.  That, and he's competed against older JC competition this year, too.  

 

27 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

You are such a _______.

 

WTF is this, Mad Libs?

[Frobby]

A team’s job is to make good picks and sign everyone they pick, if possible.  If one team does a good job of negotiating and saves $200 k against its cap, and another team just caves to the players and spends $400 k over its cap, should I feel like the second team did a better job in the draft because they went over the cap?

Here’s what I care about: results at the major league level.   Literally nothing else.  

[SpOkane]

16 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

It's really all over the place.  I hope it's not Lee, but I've not got that feeling it would be.  I thought Collier because he's the youngest one and he was part of the team that took Correa #1 when he was 17, too.  That, and he's competed against older JC competition this year, too.  

 

 

WTF is this, Mad Libs?

Would you prefer multiple choice?

1) You are such a _______.

A) sweetheart

B) sage

C) ultracrepidarian

D) burro

E) model of conviviality