How can you guys not be talking more about Sano?

[crawdad]

I'm sure a mathematician could break this down in pretty simple terms. Every player has some range of value and some probability of reaching different levels within that range, determined based on scouting. Teams have to determine a value for each player based on their ceiling and probabilities of reaching a certain status within that range. The players at the top of that value chart see their costs go up exponentially. On the other hand, none will ever be paid anywhere near their highest possible value. Sano won't get paid anything close to his ceiling value.

What Trea is advocating is essentially that 1.) a standard valuation won't ever net us this talent, so we should be willing to pay a premium, and 2.) we should be willing to pay a higher premium on top of our standard valuation for premium talent to make sure we can get this guy. I get the feeling that Trea wants us to do this in almost every case, and that's where I disagree, but I would like the O's to splurge every now and then for elite talent.

This isn't exactly out of the main stream. How many Yankees fans liked it when they swooped in and signed all of Sabathia, Burnett and Teixeira? How many Skins fans liked it when they signed Haynesworth, Portis, etc? How many Royals fans liked it when they paid too much for Meche?

How many people on this board wanted us to pony up a little more cash for Carlos Lee, Vlad Guerrero and Tex?

A lot.

That is the easy part. The hard part is figuring out what the values are.

[Tx Oriole]

From BaseballAmerica.com (you'll need a subscription)...

One international scouting director on Dominican shortstop Miguel Sano, who spent the last three days working out for the Orioles: "To me, his swing is better than Miguel Cabrera's. Mechanically, it's better. In terms of pitch recognition, Sano seems to have that, for a 16-year-old kid. He's going to go out there and get confused sometimes, but he's going to make adjustments..."

With the signing period starting July 2nd, it's exciting to think that we are 'in' on Sano. Getting Sano would be a real serious indication of the Orioles' intentions in the international markets... and continue an impressive organizational shift in Andy MacPhail's short reign.

I do hope he signs with the O's.

[jerios55]

From BaseballAmerica.com (you'll need a subscription)...

One international scouting director on Dominican shortstop Miguel Sano, who spent the last three days working out for the Orioles: "To me, his swing is better than Miguel Cabrera's. Mechanically, it's better. In terms of pitch recognition, Sano seems to have that, for a 16-year-old kid. He's going to go out there and get confused sometimes, but he's going to make adjustments..."

With the signing period starting July 2nd, it's exciting to think that we are 'in' on Sano. Getting Sano would be a real serious indication of the Orioles' intentions in the international markets... and continue an impressive organizational shift in Andy MacPhail's short reign.

A few years ago we spent 6mil for Weiters and everyone was excited because of how good be was supposed to be. If the Orioles spent 3-days scouting this kid, JJ et al. must really think something of this guy. That alone is enough for me.

I must agree with Stotle on this case. There should be an evaluation of a players worth and then some "willingness range" of how much higher you will go to get that player. People pay a 0.10-0.20 cents premium on gasoline depending on the car they drive and why? Better performance over time.

Either way, I hope they get this guy. It says more then we got another guy for the system. We have made a international FA signing this year, we have boosted our minor league system and gone very pitcher happy. Getting a bonus baby, that also happens to be a big bat would make a statement.

[Lucky Jim]

Then how are we saying anything different? Can you distinguish how what you are saying differs from my initial post (which was directed towards your absolute ceiling comment)? It seems like you can counter Trea's exaggerated "whatever it takes" stance with something closer to what I put forth. Do you actually disagree with what I said?

No. That's what I've been trying to say. All along your response has been - primarily - tbased on semantics (my "not a penny more" and "hard ceiling"). That's my fault for poorly framing and phrasing my point. Perhaps the only difference is that I think that the negotiable ceiling should be determined beforehand, and that I think budging beyond that can end up a slippery slope.

As for the ex ante wiggled room, it would go something like : here's what we think X is worth to us, and here's what we acknowledge X may think he's worth. And here's our wiggle room.

In that case, you can say Harris is worth $250K, we acknowledge that Harris thinks he's worth $325K, and in the end we're willing to go as high as $290K.

My original calculus really just internalized that. Now, if you've defined $250k as his worth, and allowed yourself $290, do you go to $325k? Perhaps context determines that. But you surely don't go to $400K if Harris asks.

That was my point with Trea - the O's may value Sano at $3m and be willing to go to $3.5 or even $4m. But having determined that they want him, that he's good, and that he's worth $3-4m does not mean that he's worth $6m or that they should bid that much for him. Trea was saying that you pay whatever it takes once you determine you want something. I was saying that we need to be guided by our valuation at all times.

He's worth to the O's what he's worth. And some continuously escalating value based on nothing more than a "must-have" decision-making process is ridiculous.

I imagine we differ on just how staunchly a team should stand behind their valuation. But I'm pretty pragmatic, overall, and would be somewhat loath to lose value based on some hardcore fidelity to a subjective valuation.

[Stotle]

No. That's what I've been trying to say. All along your response has to what I'm saying has been based on semantics (my "not a penny more" and "hard ceiling"). Perhaps the only difference is that I think that the negotiable ceiling should be determined before hand, and that I think budging beyond that can end up a slippery slope.

As for the ex ante wiggled room, it would go something like : here's what we think X is worth to us, and here's what we acknowledge X may think he's worth. And here's our wiggle room.

In that case, you can say Harris is worth $250K, we acknowledge that Harris thinks he's worth $325K, and in the end we're willing to go as high as $290K.

My original calculus really just internalized that. Now, if you've defined $250k as his worth, and allowed yourself $290, do you go to $325k? Perhaps context determines that. But you surely don't go to $400K if Harris asks.

That was my point with Trea - the O's may value Sano at $3m and be willing to go to $3.5 or even $4m. But having determined that they want him, that he's good, and that he's worth $3-4m does not mean that he's worth $6m or that they should bid that much for him. Trea was saying that you pay whatever it takes once you determine you want something. I was saying that we need to be guided by our valuation at all times.

He's worth to the O's what he's worth. And some continuously escalating value based on nothing more than a "must-have" decision-making process is ridiculous.

I imagine we differ on just how staunchly a team should stand behind their valuation. But I'm pretty pragmatic, overall, and would be somewhat loath to lose value based on some hardcore fidelity to a subjective valuation.

I think this is where we end up, then. I'd love to never lose out on value. However, as a pragmatist myself I realize that the most elite talent will often times take you into that territory, and I don't think Baltimore should always shy away from that. There is a responsible manner in which to build an organization that can account for an occasional dip into the over-valued bin. Indeed, I'd wager it will be a necessity if Tampa and Boston continue to show a willingness to spend in the draft and New York continues to show a willingness to spend in free agency.

[Lucky Jim]

I think this is where we end up, then. I'd love to never lose out on value. However, as a pragmatist myself I realize that the most elite talent will often times take you into that territory, and I don't think Baltimore should always shy away from that. There is a responsible manner in which to build an organization that can account for an occasional did into the over-valued bin. Indeed, I'd wager it will be a necessity if Tampa and Boston continue to show a willingness to spend in the draft and New York continues to show a willingness to spend in free agency.

Agreed. As I noted before, I think this makes sense - you're someone who is focused on evaluating amateur talent, and thus feel like the information is good enough to make case-by-case decisions.

My approach is far more satisficing: I find amateur talent to be a pretty speculative game (though not entirely, and no disrespect intended to your field), and would lean a bit harder on something like a bright line rule as a means of curbing the costs and risks of the case-by-case assessment.

[Moose Milligan]

I don't have concrete proof, it's just my opinion based on the way MacPhail has operated with the Cubs and what he has said in interviews. IMO the guy just does not want to take any risks and as a result doesn't go all in after premium guys because he'd rather as Stotle put it "buy a whole bunch of good players" instead of investing in one or two premium guys. He wants to minimize the risk in an investment in all his transactions and that's not always a good thing. The Red Sox even before they had the cash flow they do now, did not worry about taking risks if it improved their ballclub. The Cubs wallowed under MacPhail for the majority of the time when he was the CEO because he refused to spend money to take the club to the next level. And now that he's gone the Cubs are suddenly in the playoffs 2 years in a row because they decided to finally spend some money to improve their club. Hendry isn't afraid to use his club's resources and take a risk or two and his club has reaped the benefit of that.

You don't have to agree with it, but that's the way I feel.

Hopefully Sano might be a sign that he's finally willing to take a significant risk and spend some money on one premium guy to improve the ballclub.

You need to clarify your opinions better like I said earlier. If you're going to speak in absolutes, you need to have evidence to back it up. Instead of saying "I have no doubt..." say something like "I think" or "MacPhail might..."

I think your second statement about risk is a bit flawed. You say he refuses to spend money on guys who are high risk. Well, premium talent isn't perceived as high risk compared to the guys who aren't premium talent.

For another example, you wanted Smoak last year because you love you some slugging first basemen. Smoak was probably the less riskier pick than Matusz, since Matusz is a pitcher and could develop arm problems and never make the majors, (knock on wood).

Similar to this year, you were all about Matzek and we went with Hobgood. Matzek, as we all know by now, was ranked higher by practically every publication...yet MacPhail and Jordan went with a risk and picked Hobgood, perceived as a riskier pick.

Giving a 16 year old a few million is a risk any way you cut it, I'll agree to that. But if this kid is the real deal the risk with him isn't as large as someone like Stassi, Krol or Malm who weren't even sure bets to sign with the team that drafted them.

MacPhail takes risks, its just not the risks you'd like him to take.

[Dr. FLK]

This is, once again, ridiculous. They shouldn't pay a penny more than they think he is worth. You don't top someone who is overpaying.

In theory I agree with you. But if you employed this tactic in real life, you would never sign a top talent. Their is always someone willing to overpay. If you value a player high enough - and think he has the potential to be a transformative addition to your organization - then you have to be prepared to overpay for him IMO.

[Lucky Jim]

In theory I agree with you. But if you employed this tactic in real life, you would never sign a top talent. Their is always someone willing to overpay. If you value a player high enough - and think he has the potential to be a transformative addition to your organization - then you have to be prepared to overpay for him IMO.

That was Stotle's argument above.

I think this is highly context dependent, and think that a valuation of a player should include what you think he is worth on-field, what you think HE thinks he's worth, and what the market makes him worth. Nonetheless, you need to have some ceiling to that.

[Dr. FLK]

That was Stotle's argument above.

I think this is highly context dependent, and think that a valuation of a player should include what you think he is worth on-field, what you think HE thinks he's worth, and what the market makes him worth. Nonetheless, you need to have some ceiling to that.

(Sorry, I didn't read the entire thread.)

I agree with that completely. I think you need to establish what you think he is worth, but then generate a "ceiling" as you said for the negotiations (knowing that someone will overpay). That sounds like a good strategy to me.

[Moose Milligan]

That was Stotle's argument above.

I think this is highly context dependent, and think that a valuation of a player should include what you think he is worth on-field, what you think HE thinks he's worth, and what the market makes him worth. Nonetheless, you need to have some ceiling to that.

I think there's a soft ceiling there, somewhere.

If you're at 4 million and the team that he's looking at is offering 4.5, do you jump up? If they're offering 5 million, do you jump up to 5.5?

Obviously there's a point where you walk away but I don't think that point is set in stone before the negotiations and bidding begins.

[Lucky Jim]

(Sorry, I didn't read the entire thread.)

I agree with that completely. I think you need to establish what you think he is worth, but then generate a "ceiling" as you said for the negotiations (knowing that someone will overpay). That sounds like a good strategy to me.

Yeah - the real problem, and the genesis of this digression - is that I responded to JT's craziness w/ a far more rigid definition than I would actually use in real negotiations.

In other words, I got sucked into the crazy.

[Dr. FLK]

Yeah - the real problem, and the genesis of this digression - is that I responded to JT's craziness w/ a far more rigid definition than I would actually use in real negotiations.

In other words, I got sucked into the crazy.

That's what message boards are for!

[Khaezh12]

While I do agree that there needs to be a limit to how much you spent on an unproven player, if Sano really does have a ceiling of an ARod type player (granted this assesment is more that likely incredibley biased, but just for the sake of argument, let's go with it), do you break the bank for him initially in hopes that he reaches his full potential?

I say yes, assuming that "break the bank" means slightly higher than Inoa last year.

[Lucky Jim]

I think there's a soft ceiling there, somewhere.

If you're at 4 million and the team that he's looking at is offering 4.5, do you jump up? If they're offering 5 million, do you jump up to 5.5?

Obviously there's a point where you walk away but I don't think that point is set in stone before the negotiations and bidding begins.

See, this is where we differ - I do think the point should be set in stone before negotiations begin, because that way you don't get caught up in the irrationality of other folks bidding. In other words, you can determine everything beforehand, valuation-wise, and then say "we're willing to up this 10% if it looks like it's necessary to win."

I think you need to take a serious look at present and prospective value and set what you think someone is worth. If it looks like you can win the bid within that range, you may bump up a bit to pull it off.

But the minute the bidding surpasses what you've estimated Sano is worth to you, you pack up and head out.