O's Getting Serious About Sano?

[Lucky Jim]

Ok I'll give you that Strasburg is a once in a decade talent, but what about guys like Ackley, Green, Matzek and Wheeler? 1. Would you not pay them $3-5 mil bonuses because drafting them is all projection as well.

Scouts seem pretty optimistic about this one, as they usually are once or twice a year, Inoa was last year's. 2. But wouldn't you rather spend $4 mil on a chance to have a superstar SS, than $4 on a reliever or bench player you could easily replace within your system for one year? Especially when you aren't going to compete that year anyway?

Is it? Really? All projection?

It depends on what that "chance" is?

Do you pay $4m for a 10% chance? A 25% chance? A 33% chance? A 50% chance?

And hence my point: when you have a 16 year old - even a very good one - the way in which you assign that probability is going to be reliant on a serious amount of subjective projection. Thus teams are far more likely to have differing or disparate ideas of the likelihood of having a superstar SS (and he's more likely to be a 3B anyway), and on top of that, differing or disparate ideas of just what kind of star he might be (is he Pujols? Miguel Cabrera? Or Tejada?)

Because the blanks that need to be filled in will be filled in - almost necessarily - by different individuals w/ different valuations, the risk of someone swooping into snatch him with an outlandish bid are somewhat minimized.

[Sports Guy]

Is it? Really? All projection?

It depends on what that "chance" is?

Do you pay $4m for a 10% chance? A 25% chance? A 33% chance? A 50% chance?

And hence my point: when you have a 16 year old - even a very good one - the way in which you assign that probability is going to be reliant on a serious amount of subjective projection. Thus teams are far more likely to have differing or disparate ideas of the likelihood of having a superstar SS (and he's more likely to be a 3B anyway), and on top of that, differing or disparate ideas of just what kind of star he might be (is he Pujols? Miguel Cabrera? Or Tejada?)

Because the blanks that need to be filled in will be filled in - almost necessarily - by different individuals w/ different valuations, the risk of someone swooping into snatch him with an outlandish bid are somewhat minimized.

Would you give 5 million to Bryce Harper right now?

[Lucky Jim]

Would you give 5 million to Bryce Harper right now?

Tough call - I not only haven't scouted him, I'm not qualified to scout him.

Let's be clear, though - I'm not saying we shouldn't sign Sano at all, I'm just explaining why this might not be a case of a high-payroll team sweeping in to take him off the market w/ $$$.

My point was only that Sano's value right now consists of a much higher percentage of subjective projection. Which may be a barrier to entry for some teams.

[Sports Guy]

Tough call - I not only haven't scouted him, I'm not qualified to scout him.

Let's be clear, though - I'm not saying we shouldn't sign Sano at all, I'm just explaining why this might not be a case of a high-payroll team sweeping in to take him off the market w/ $$$.

My point was only that Sano's value right now consists of a much higher percentage of subjective projection. Which may be a barrier to entry for some teams.

Of course it is a monster risk...Just as giving 2+ million to Hobgood is a risk...Or giving a 5-8 year deal to a ML player...Its all a risk.

The question is, is the risk worth it?

Right now, it seems to me that Sano is worth the risk, juding by what scouts say about him.

But again, signing Koji was a risk but many feel it was worth just because we got our foot in the door in Asia...Why can't signing Sano be looked at the same way?

[allstar1579]

Is it? Really? All projection?

It depends on what that "chance" is?

Do you pay $4m for a 10% chance? A 25% chance? A 33% chance? A 50% chance?

And hence my point: when you have a 16 year old - even a very good one - the way in which you assign that probability is going to be reliant on a serious amount of subjective projection. Thus teams are far more likely to have differing or disparate ideas of the likelihood of having a superstar SS (and he's more likely to be a 3B anyway), and on top of that, differing or disparate ideas of just what kind of star he might be (is he Pujols? Miguel Cabrera? Or Tejada?)

Because the blanks that need to be filled in will be filled in - almost necessarily - by different individuals w/ different valuations, the risk of someone swooping into snatch him with an outlandish bid are somewhat minimized.

You might be right, someone might not swoop in with something too crazy, but if he's asking for $3-4 mil you wouldn't give it to him?

Yeah it pretty much is all projection. No draft pick is a guarantee. Are you saying you'd only like to take college guys because you get more time to look at them and see if they are going to miss, instead of taking a risk on a HS player? I know it's an extra two years of development, and I get the trepidation of saying he is only 16, how can you possibly think he's going to turn into this in a few years. But that is my point, if he is advanced enough at 16, (and they are saying he is) for people to put reputation on the line and compare him to such superstar players, he's gotta be something special.

Like SG said, Bryce Harper is in a similar situation. People are ready to tank every game this year for a chance to draft him (assuming he uses the loophole) and he's only 16, and will command more money than Sano. So where is the difference there?

And just for the record, don't take any of this the wrong way, I'm just enjoying debating projection with you.

[allstar1579]

Tough call - I not only haven't scouted him, I'm not qualified to scout him.

Let's be clear, though - I'm not saying we shouldn't sign Sano at all, I'm just explaining why this might not be a case of a high-payroll team sweeping in to take him off the market w/ $$$.

My point was only that Sano's value right now consists of a much higher percentage of subjective projection. Which may be a barrier to entry for some teams.

Ok, I get what you are saying now. I think when you are dealing with these players though, it's a matter of speed. Once word starts getting out on them it spreads quickly, and once the big boys get in on it, they can afford to gamble on much higher limit tables so to speak. While the Twins and Pirates might be sitting at the lunchtime $5 tables, the Yanks could decide to jump in at the $50 tables with a stack of chips anytime.

(Sorry for the Vegas analogy, I leave on Thursday)

[SrMeowMeow]

Let's not forget the sizeable risk of giving Strasburg a $60M contract...

[BaltimoreFan]

Let's not forget the sizeable risk of giving Strasburg a $60M contract...

Or the risk of giving $200 million to a guy going on 30 in Tex when your team is still a few years away from contention at best.

When put in context, giving $5 million to Sano isn't that big of a deal.

[bej6789]

An amusing quote about Sano from MLB Trade Rumors:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/12/sports/baseball/12yanknotes.html?_r=2

I laughed out loud with this one... I mean, seriously? Let me guess, if he were a pitcher -- he'd have Roy Halladay stuff, too.

Regarding the actual topic at hand, I'd sign him -- but I'm not in favor of just dishing out money with the logic of it's only 5 million that doesn't go to Wiggington or the logic of that nature. With situations like these, it speaks volumes to me that the larger revenue teams like the Yankees and Red Sox don't just sign up every single one of these players. There's a reason why these players aren't getting the seemingly small signing bonuses and what not that they apparently desire. I don't know what it is, but it goes beyond the simple price tag -- there's got to be something there. I feel like every season we have a discussion about one of these 'can't miss' players that come through the DR and every year they kind of fade into obscurity. He's a 16 year old kid, 6 years away from the bigs conservatively. Dishing out 5 million for that just seems weird to me. What kind of talent is he playing against in the Dominican Republic? Compared to this, Strasburgh should get every penny of his 50 million. Talk about a guy who hasn't done anything to prove something. Not an olympic team, not international competition -- nothing. Just an agent hyping him up to be the second coming of sliced bread. Forgive me, but this to me looks like it's hype hype hype.

[allstar1579]

I laughed out loud with this one... I mean, seriously? Let me guess, if he were a pitcher -- he'd have Roy Halladay stuff, too.

Regarding the actual topic at hand, I'd sign him -- but I'm not in favor of just dishing out money with the logic of it's only 5 million that doesn't go to Wiggington or the logic of that nature. With situations like these, it speaks volumes to me that the larger revenue teams like the Yankees and Red Sox don't just sign up every single one of these players. There's a reason why these players aren't getting the seemingly small signing bonuses and what not that they apparently desire. I don't know what it is, but it goes beyond the simple price tag -- there's got to be something there. I feel like every season we have a discussion about one of these 'can't miss' players that come through the DR and every year they kind of fade into obscurity. He's a 16 year old kid, 6 years away from the bigs conservatively. Dishing out 5 million for that just seems weird to me. What kind of talent is he playing against in the Dominican Republic? Compared to this, Strasburgh should get every penny of his 50 million. Talk about a guy who hasn't done anything to prove something. Not an olympic team, not international competition -- nothing. Just an agent hyping him up to be the second coming of sliced bread. Forgive me, but this to me looks like it's hype hype hype.

Yeah but falling into that trap would lead you to never draft anyone, because where do you draw the line on what level of competition is good enough, what rating on the 80 scale is good enough, and what age is old enough to deserve it?

It's not the agent that is saying these things, it is the team scouts that are working him out in the Dominican camps. These scouts have nothing to gain by hyping him up because their team would have to pay more money.

I think the great equalizer in these international signings is the relationships teams have with the communities and these player's mentors. Guys who know the scene round up these kids, take them to the camps to be discovered, and they get paid for it. They will take them places that they have "ins" and deal with people they are most comfortable. This is an area where I don't think it's about who's got the bigger wallet, it's more about who was designated the appropriate amount of resources to this country, which I guess does come back to the wallet.

[bej6789]

An amusing quote about Sano from MLB Trade Rumors:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/12/sports/baseball/12yanknotes.html?_r=2

Yeah but falling into that trap would lead you to never draft anyone, because where do you draw the line on what level of competition is good enough, what rating on the 80 scale is good enough, and what age is old enough to deserve it?

It's not the agent that is saying these things, it is the team scouts that are working him out in the Dominican camps. These scouts have nothing to gain by hyping him up because their team would have to pay more money.

I think the great equalizer in these international signings is the relationships teams have with the communities and these player's mentors. Guys who know the scene round up these kids, take them to the camps to be discovered, and they get paid for it. They will take them places that they have "ins" and deal with people they are most comfortable. This is an area where I don't think it's about who's got the bigger wallet, it's more about who was designated the appropriate amount of resources to this country, which I guess does come back to the wallet.

I don't dispute what you are saying, but I think there's a strong difference between the draft and the international signing situation. The difference, at least to me, is the draft is like the kiddy pool where everyone has no problem swimming compared to the deep part of the atlantic ocean as the foreign scouting department. It just seems to me as though every season there's another one of these can't miss stars, and every year I have no idea who that player was 5 weeks later. The process from the draft to the majors is a whole lot more streamlined in my opinion. There's no age questions, there's plenty of scouting tape available. There's plenty of information to analyze. With the international aspect -- there's more chances being taken, which is why I think you see teams not spending the $5 million on these players.

[freethebirds]

Didn't have a chance to read the whole thread, but I know Miguel Sano personally as he is a character in a documentary I am working called Pelotero, where we follow around 5 kids trying to get signed into a baseball academy. Check out some of our clips of him at www.peloterothemovie.com

[Pruke]

If he's for sure the next A-Rod / Hanley Ramirez / Albert Pujols, then $5MM is a deal. Fortunately, it sounds like they'll get a closer look for 2-3 days before making a call on what to throw out there. Sounds like we're at least serious.

[BaltimoreFan]

If he's for sure the next A-Rod / Hanley Ramirez / Albert Pujols, then $5MM is a deal. Fortunately, it sounds like they'll get a closer look for 2-3 days before making a call on what to throw out there. Sounds like we're at least serious.

How can anyone "for sure" be the next Albert Pujols?

It's a risk signing this guy for $5 million, but it's better than bringing in another 33 year old reliever this winter for $5 million.

[Anonymous]

How can anyone "for sure" be the next Albert Pujols?

It's a risk signing this guy for $5 million, but it's better than bringing in another 33 year old reliever this winter for $5 million.

You're hurting my brain, BFan. Is there a single poster, or a single member of the team's front office, who favors or is contemplating the idea of bringing in a 33 YO reliever this winter as an alternative to signing Sano? The answer, obviously, is no ... and the argument therefore is just silly. The question of whether to offer Sano $5 mil or higher or lower should be made based on other factors. If he's good enough to warrant such an offer, by all means let's go after him ... but not because we signed Walker, Bradford, Baez, and Williamson.