Roch Article-Wieters

[rolliefingers]

Huh? McPhail was not with the team when we drafted him. Angelos obviously approved the pick. I assume McPhail will spend as much as Angelos will allow to sign this guy. Are you telling me that Angelos has said he can go higher, and McPhail is refusing to do so?

I don't see how it can be McPhail's fault, at least until we find out what went on during the negotiations that caused them to break down.

See the NY Times piece above. MacPhail was one of the main architects of the slotting system, and he and Angelos are tight. Just speculation, but I feel as though McP is trying to convince Angelos "to hold the line against Boras" or some such nonsense.

[RShack]

I hadn't realized that MacPhail had worked directly on the slotting system; that really makes me worried that we're not going to get this done.

I think it's probably safe to say that MacPhail does not want to be the FIRST guy to blow by the slotting guidelines. Since he worked on them, doing that would make him look like he has no integrity. But if a few other teams blow the slotting guidelines first, then his butt is covered: He can simply tell all the other owners, "He you guys *made* me do it!" And he'd be right too.

This whole slotting thing is like OPEC trying to set oil prices. It requires that they all play along to some degree. The only owner who has a history of telling the others to screw themselves is Steinbrenner. The rest of them want to at least look like they're playing along. So, part of this might be a game of chicken among the owners, seeing who will be the first one to go over the line and bust up their goofy little agreement.

No way MacPhail wants to be the first one over the line...

.

[rolliefingers]

I think it's probably safe to say that MacPhail does not want to be the FIRST guy to blow by the slotting guidelines. Since he worked on them, doing that would make him look like he has no integrity.

But if a few other teams blow the slotting guidelines first, then his butt is covered: He can simply tell all the other owners, "He you guys *made* me do it!" And he'd be right too.

But no way he wants to be the first one over the line...

Good points. I think Price will really be the litmus test for Wieters.

[Why Not?]

“The slotting system itself is arbitrary and subjective,” he added. “For it to be a true system, you have to be assured the best talents are being chosen first. The clubs base their selections on signability, not on talent. Where clubs use economic criteria for selection, the system becomes an arbitrary and capricious practice.”

I find this a little telling. Baseball management causes these problems because they can't for whatever reason, legislate. Therefore they are left with the art of suggestion. That is great if all follow the suggestion. Teams like Boston and New York do not. If it is true, that MacPhail help craft this arbitrary system, then you can bet he is going to enforce it. Sort of looks like a hypocrite of he doesn't. Why doesn't baseball pass a rule that says every rookie signing is capped, or team must have salary caps if that is what they want? I am somewhat ignorant as to the workings of MLB. Can anyone tell me why MLB can not do the very thing that other professional sports do?

That is something that would have to be negotiated with the players' union. The MLB players association is much stronger than the unions in other sports. I wouldn't expect the players to "give" this concession to the owners anytime soon.

The above quote, by the way, is from Scott Boros.

[Why Not?]

I think it's probably safe to say that MacPhail does not want to be the FIRST guy to blow by the slotting guidelines. Since he worked on them, doing that would make him look like he has no integrity. But if a few other teams blow the slotting guidelines first, then his butt is covered: He can simply tell all the other owners, "He you guys *made* me do it!" And he'd be right too.

This whole slotting thing is like OPEC trying to set oil prices. It requires that they all play along to some degree. The only owner who has a history of telling the others to screw themselves is Steinbrenner. The rest of them want to at least look like they're playing along. So, part of this might be a game of chicken among the owners, seeing who will be the first one to go over the line and bust up their goofy little agreement.

No way MacPhail wants to be the first one over the line...

.

Good analogy. There might be additional issues with Wieters since he "slipped" down to the No. 5 spot. I suspect Boros is asking for No. 1 overall pick money.

Though obviously I don't know what the numbers are, I don't see how Wieters signs without somebody taking a significant step down or up from their negotiating stance.

[Mad Mark]

“The slotting system itself is arbitrary and subjective,” he added. “For it to be a true system, you have to be assured the best talents are being chosen first. The clubs base their selections on signability, not on talent. Where clubs use economic criteria for selection, the system becomes an arbitrary and capricious practice.”

I find this a little telling. Baseball management causes these problems because they can't for whatever reason, legislate. Therefore they are left with the art of suggestion. That is great if all follow the suggestion. Teams like Boston and New York do not. If it is true, that MacPhail help craft this arbitrary system, then you can bet he is going to enforce it. Sort of looks like a hypocrite of he doesn't. Why doesn't baseball pass a rule that says every rookie signing is capped, or team must have salary caps if that is what they want? I am somewhat ignorant as to the workings of MLB. Can anyone tell me why MLB can not do the very thing that other professional sports do?

Baseball just can't be persuaded to give up it's 19th Century economic system, and winds up with a system that resembles Fenway Park: a rundown old piece of crap with a bunch of new stuff jury built on top of it. MLB is still 30 boats rowing in 30 different directions, and the only ones left out are the fans, and those players who don't make it to free agency. Crazy.

[66-70-83-??]

That is something that would have to be negotiated with the players' union. The MLB players association is much stronger than the unions in other sports. I wouldn't expect the players to "give" this concession to the owners anytime soon.

The above quote, by the way, is from Scott Boros.

Unless the money given (signing bonuses) to the draftees gets really high in the future.

Then the rank and file of the MLBPA will demand a rookie cap.

The players union in the NBA was the driving force in that sport. The vets started getting angry/jealous that unproven rookies were getting too much of the action ($$$$) and demanded change.

“The slotting system itself is arbitrary and subjective,” he added. “For it to be a true system, you have to be assured the best talents are being chosen first. The clubs base their selections on signability, not on talent. Where clubs use economic criteria for selection, the system becomes an arbitrary and capricious practice.” -Scott Boras

But, that too (talent evaluation) is very subjective, especially in baseball.

Signability is a key factor, though. Especially with kids who are high school players with scholarship offers to consider.

Boras (and his pre-draft exaggerated claims about his clients value and potential) is a big reason why teams let his clients drop down slots in the draft.

[Hutman]

I'm trying to keep my head about this. Only one if the top 5 has signed so far Moskos at # 4 for 2.4M who was considered a reach. Here is the write up from Porcello's signing. Should make for an interesting day tomorrow.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2974338

[JTrea81]

No way MacPhail wants to be the first one over the line...

He's not...

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2974338

[Wingman]

“The slotting system itself is arbitrary and subjective,” he added. “For it to be a true system, you have to be assured the best talents are being chosen first. The clubs base their selections on signability, not on talent. Where clubs use economic criteria for selection, the system becomes an arbitrary and capricious practice.”

I find this a little telling. Baseball management causes these problems because they can't for whatever reason, legislate. Therefore they are left with the art of suggestion. That is great if all follow the suggestion. Teams like Boston and New York do not. If it is true, that MacPhail help craft this arbitrary system, then you can bet he is going to enforce it. Sort of looks like a hypocrite of he doesn't. Why doesn't baseball pass a rule that says every rookie signing is capped, or team must have salary caps if that is what they want? I am somewhat ignorant as to the workings of MLB. Can anyone tell me why MLB can not do the very thing that other professional sports do?

You've touched on a point that I brought up in a thread that got accidently erased this morning... That being that the biggest villain in this whole situation isn't Boras, isn't McPhail... It's MLB for having such a bass-ackward draft system... If the draft is supposed to allow weaker teams to draft first, (and offset talent/money differentials in the league) then really enpower these teams to sign these players. If not, just make all incoming players free agents. Don't lie to the fans and the teams about the nature of the draft...

As you've touched on, other sports have draft systems that work it's really amazing that the people in charge of MLB (and the Union) could be so incompetent and asinine.

The only good thing I can see is that after tomorrow's deadline and if there are still 10 first round picks didn't get signed maybe it will be the catalyst to get MLB and the players union to sit down and fix this...

[hoosiers]

Boras (and his pre-draft exaggerated claims about his clients value and potential) is a big reason why teams let his clients drop down slots in the draft.

But what if Boras' clients justify the $ spent on them? Such that if teams took them in the proper order and laid out the cash that the return would be there ....

Then it is really the fault of the teams for letting the players slide ... and not so much the fault of Mr. Boras.

[geschinger]

But what if Boras' clients justify the $ spent on them? Such that if teams took them in the proper order and laid out the cash that the return would be there ....

Then it is really the fault of the teams for letting the players slide ... and not so much the fault of Mr. Boras.

They don't though, for every Jered Weaver there is a Bobby Brownlie. As a whole I don't think the Boras clients are any better investments than the non Boras clients.

[66-70-83-??]

They don't though, for every Jered Weaver there is a Bobby Brownlie. As a whole I don't think the Boras clients are any better investments than the non Boras clients.

Correct !

He is just a better salesman than the other players agents.

And when he negotiates a bigger bonus/contract- he gets a bigger commission.

Boras is all about (over)selling his clients worth and potential. Not that there is anything wrong about it, but that is what it is.

[66-70-83-??]

But what if Boras' clients justify the $ spent on them? Such that if teams took them in the proper order and laid out the cash that the return would be there ....

Then it is really the fault of the teams for letting the players slide ... and not so much the fault of Mr. Boras.

But, there is zero evidence to prove that is the case. Baseball draft is a crapshoot. Boras clients aren't sure things anymore than any other agents players.

So it is a hypothetical.

Part of the value equation is the probability of signing the player that you drafted. No one wants to left high and dry without a top prospect to show for all their scouts hard work.

[hoosiers]

They don't though, for every Jered Weaver there is a Bobby Brownlie. As a whole I don't think the Boras clients are any better investments than the non Boras clients.

I would not be so sure, G. I don't know the answer, but I doubt the return on Boras clients is that out of line with comparable picks.

As much animosity as there is towards Mr. Boras, I imagine any writer who researched the payoff of his picks relative to similar talents would be extremely quick to publish a result that indicated a real lack of return. It would be an interesting study, no?