SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Fixing the qualifying offer
|
|
Post by greatscottcooper on Mar 24, 2014 21:48:18 GMT -5
I think mid-range players are going to jump all over the QO next season. That's what teams have to be wary of. I thought this too. I think it will be an evolution. Players got a look at how hard it can be to land a job if they are in that mid tier of free agency, however I think this can work both ways. Next year perhaps more players are inclined to accept 1 year deals, which inevitably will lead to teams being less inclined to extend some offers unless they absolutely would want that player for 1 year at appx 15 million.
I happen to think this system would reach some kind of equilibrium, but then again this system is a good bet to get some kind of overhaul in several years. It's still a team friendly system, but some guys could actually get paid pretty nicely if they manage to stay healthy and perform.
|
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Mar 24, 2014 21:59:03 GMT -5
This is a slight tangent, and obviously a lot is still up in the air, but here are some mid-range guys I think might receive QOs next year who would seriously consider accepting:
-Russell Martin
-J.J. Hardy
-Asdrubal Cabrera
-Jed Lowrie
-Torii Hunter
-Colby Rasmus
-Victor Martinez
-Ervin Santana
-Jake Peavy
-Brian Wilson
-Guys like Josh Johnson, Jorge De La Rosa, and Corey Hart might play themselves into this class with a great year; guys like Chase Headley or Justin Masterson might fall into this class with a bad year.
(By the way, the FA class next year is really, really bad, except for shortstops.)
|
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Mar 24, 2014 22:06:20 GMT -5
Even more reason to have made a run at top guys this year. But we didn't go there and are going to roll the dice with player development, an enhanced TB Rays apparoach. At some point that is doomed for failure but hopefully we will adjust before that happens.
A strong case could be made that this year and next were not the times to shoot our wad. Hopefully it will be in 2016.
At some point Ortiz is going to fade badly. Will we be ready, in advance of that happening? At some point I'd like to see them sign a hitting stud ala Cabrera or Chris Davis.
|
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Mar 25, 2014 0:38:24 GMT -5
If Drew had a $14 mil, one year deal on the table right now he would have taken it. He's holding out for the bucks. It's a business. No, it's a market, one that's only two years old and still evolving. Boras made it work for Bourne last year, but the market has already mutated. I believe there is another element to this also. It probably isn't lost on teams that the Sox won the World Series and kept all their prospects. They may very wary of cutting them any more more slack. Why feed the monster with yet another draft pick? |
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Mar 25, 2014 1:11:16 GMT -5
Even more reason to have made a run at top guys this year. But we didn't go there and are going to roll the dice with player development, an enhanced TB Rays apparoach. At some point that is doomed for failure but hopefully we will adjust before that happens. A strong case could be made that this year and next were not the times to shoot our wad. Hopefully it will be in 2016. At some point Ortiz is going to fade badly. Will we be ready, in advance of that happening? At some point I'd like to see them sign a hitting stud ala Cabrera or Chris Davis. You have got to be kidding. The best teams are built from a range of talent to meet specific needs, build depth, and plan for the the future. That's what the Sox were last year, one of the best teams. That's despite the fact that we heard the same absurd calls for them to bring the Josh Hamilton's of the world into the fold after the disastrous spending spree that landed them in the gutter to begin with. I can't even figure out who you would put in that category of "top guys" so why don't you give us a few names? And do the arithmetic, please. The team has a mountain of cash and if they want to make a run at someone I have no doubt they will. But throwing money out there this year just for the hell of it is a losers game. The marketplace is overpaying for talent because it can and because there's such a lack of it. That's deadly. |
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Mar 25, 2014 5:33:00 GMT -5
Even more reason to have made a run at top guys this year. But we didn't go there and are going to roll the dice with player development, an enhanced TB Rays apparoach. At some point that is doomed for failure but hopefully we will adjust before that happens. A strong case could be made that this year and next were not the times to shoot our wad. Hopefully it will be in 2016. At some point Ortiz is going to fade badly. Will we be ready, in advance of that happening? At some point I'd like to see them sign a hitting stud ala Cabrera or Chris Davis. Yeah, I can't wait to sign the next Pujols or Prince Fielder. It's kinda funny actually that the Red Sox took the bargain route last year with Napoli who out-WARed both of them put together for less than 1/3rd the money and they don't even have to pay him for the next 10+ years of decline. |
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Mar 25, 2014 8:14:36 GMT -5
This is a slight tangent, and obviously a lot is still up in the air, but here are some mid-range guys I think might receive QOs next year who would seriously consider accepting: -Russell Martin -J.J. Hardy -Asdrubal Cabrera -Jed Lowrie -Torii Hunter -Colby Rasmus -Victor Martinez -Ervin Santana -Jake Peavy -Brian Wilson -Guys like Josh Johnson, Jorge De La Rosa, and Corey Hart might play themselves into this class with a great year; guys like Chase Headley or Justin Masterson might fall into this class with a bad year. (By the way, the FA class next year is really, really bad, except for shortstops.) You think peavy would get a QO? |
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Mar 25, 2014 8:32:29 GMT -5
Remember last offseason when the Sox went cheap and won the WS? Every offseason is different, teams and systems e olve. I have no doubt that when the need arises, they will use their assets to fill them. You can do that when you have prospects, young cost controlled players and pay roll flexibility. Why give any of that up, for a speculative need, when you are currently a WS caliber team? Chris Davis and Miggy would be nice, but they aren't free agents or available via trade. I want Mike Trout too, let's make up a story as to why the Angels should trade him before losing him and then complain that the Red Sox aren't going after him. (Sarcasm)
|
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Mar 25, 2014 8:44:31 GMT -5
This is a slight tangent, and obviously a lot is still up in the air, but here are some mid-range guys I think might receive QOs next year who would seriously consider accepting: -Russell Martin -J.J. Hardy -Asdrubal Cabrera -Jed Lowrie -Torii Hunter -Colby Rasmus -Victor Martinez -Ervin Santana -Jake Peavy -Brian Wilson -Guys like Josh Johnson, Jorge De La Rosa, and Corey Hart might play themselves into this class with a great year; guys like Chase Headley or Justin Masterson might fall into this class with a bad year. (By the way, the FA class next year is really, really bad, except for shortstops.) I wouldn't call Scherzer, Masterson, Sheilds, Peavy and potentially Lester really, really bad. ADD: I would also consider the high probability trades, Heyward, Stanton, Price, Cargo, Tulo as being a potential blockbuster off-season for the Sox next year. (Sizemore is still a wild card there). |
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Mar 25, 2014 8:45:26 GMT -5
Jmei, I agree with you, but hesitate on the pitchers. They've all worked out to some degree so far so I'm not sure they've learned any lessons yet.
I know you have to compare baseball to baseball, but is it really so bad that Kendry Morales or Stephen Drew could have been grossly overpaid for a year, then again and again as long as they actually perform and stay on the field. Owners take all the risk in any other contract.
A couple recommended tweaks. The cost of a second QO should go up like a franchise tag in football. The round value of the pick should also be tiered based on service time. It's supposed to help teams keep their own players. Drew wasn't a long time Red Sox, his QO should carry a lower round tag then a guy like Ellsbury who's been with the team for a long time. For example Drew was only with the team for a year so maybe you start at a 5th rd pick and work backwards a round per year.
Cost of acquiring team:
1 yr = 5th rd
2 yr = 4th rd
3 yr = 3rd rd
4 yr = 2nd rd
5+yr = 1st rd
The team giving up the player can still receive a supplemental first or you can tier that too.
|
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Mar 25, 2014 9:22:47 GMT -5
I don't see any need for changing the compensation side of the equation, only the lost pick side. You could for example, have the Sox getting a pick for Drew without the signing team having to lose a pick. There's really no reason to tie a gained pick to a lost pick.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Mar 25, 2014 9:24:44 GMT -5
Jmei, I agree with you, but hesitate on the pitchers. They've all worked out to some degree so far so I'm not sure they've learned any lessons yet. I know you have to compare baseball to baseball, but is it really so bad that Kendry Morales or Stephen Drew could have been grossly overpaid for a year, then again and again as long as they actually perform and stay on the field. Owners take all the risk in any other contract. A couple recommended tweaks. The cost of a second QO should go up like a franchise tag in football. The round value of the pick should also be tiered based on service time. It's supposed to help teams keep their own players. Drew wasn't a long time Red Sox, his QO should carry a lower round tag then a guy like Ellsbury who's been with the team for a long time. For example Drew was only with the team for a year so maybe you start at a 5th rd pick and work backwards a round per year. Cost of acquiring team: 1 yr = 5th rd 2 yr = 4th rd 3 yr = 3rd rd 4 yr = 2nd rd 5+yr = 1st rd The team giving up the player can still receive a supplemental first or you can tier that too. That's an interesting scenario. Maybe they could even tier the QO themselves. $20m 1st round, $15m 2nd round, $10m 3rd round... That way, the guys who you know are going to sign for $100m+ like Ellsbury, Cano, Choo, McCann are worth 1st round (comp picks) and that's it. |
|
|
|
Post by okin15 on Mar 25, 2014 9:47:42 GMT -5
Sure there is. The goal is partially a deterrent for teams to sign good players away from their "home town" team, as well as an incentive for players to take the QO and stay with the home team.
I still think there ought to be a tiered system like in the NFL and that a first round pick should be more like an $18 or $20 million offer while a second round pick is more like $12 or $14.
ADD: sorry for jumping on your thunder jimed
|
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Mar 25, 2014 10:48:20 GMT -5
Even more reason to have made a run at top guys this year. But we didn't go there and are going to roll the dice with player development, an enhanced TB Rays apparoach. At some point that is doomed for failure but hopefully we will adjust before that happens. A strong case could be made that this year and next were not the times to shoot our wad. Hopefully it will be in 2016. At some point Ortiz is going to fade badly. Will we be ready, in advance of that happening? At some point I'd like to see them sign a hitting stud ala Cabrera or Chris Davis. You have got to be kidding. The best teams are built from a range of talent to meet specific needs, build depth, and plan for the the future. That's what the Sox were last year, one of the best teams. That's despite the fact that we heard the same absurd calls for them to bring the Josh Hamilton's of the world into the fold after the disastrous spending spree that landed them in the gutter to begin with. I can't even figure out who you would put in that category of "top guys" so why don't you give us a few names? And do the arithmetic, please. The team has a mountain of cash and if they want to make a run at someone I have no doubt they will. But throwing money out there this year just for the hell of it is a losers game. The marketplace is overpaying for talent because it can and because there's such a lack of it. That's deadly. I'm convinced that people here just want to be polemical. Look at the bold part. I'm effing agreeing with you. Which is the case half the time I have arguments with people here, more agreement than disagreement. People just miss the details. It was too expensive last year to do any of the top deals except maybe Kuroda. At the beginning of last winter I advocated letting all our FA go and try to sign 1) EITHER Kuroda or Tanaka and 2) Choo and possibly trade a starting pitcher plus a Nava or someone like him ( Carp ) for Billy Butler as they were shopping him and he cost $1o mil and they would have liked the salary relief. Choo and Tanaka turned out to be too expensive and everyone knew it was going to be tough to get Kuroda from the Yanks but I wanted to at least try. It didn't work out so we passed and so be it. It was too high a mountain to climb. We will not have good FA opportunities next year either so we will have missed the boat and are relying on what we have, and probably for good reason. We didn't have a ton of salary space this year and I think the team is competitive as is. The overall point though is we will need to pull the trigger on some star players in the future. And if Ortiz declines rapidly we will be wishing we could have done it sooner. |
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Mar 25, 2014 10:54:11 GMT -5
Then you are arguing with yourself when you say "Even more reason to have made a run at top guys this year."
|
|
|
|
Post by elguapo on Mar 25, 2014 13:10:15 GMT -5
End it.
|
|
|
|
Post by raftsox on Mar 25, 2014 13:54:46 GMT -5
I don't see any need for changing the compensation side of the equation, only the lost pick side. You could for example, have the Sox getting a pick for Drew without the signing team having to lose a pick. There's really no reason to tie a gained pick to a lost pick. Then you would have a very similar system to the Type A/B one. This is still a flawed system, but that would only exacerbate it. The rich teams would still make QOs to their mid-tier free agents while the poor teams would only make them to their top-teir free agents just like it is now. The only difference would be that you could almost guarantee that all free agents would sign elsewhere because there wouldn't be a cost to signing them. The MLBPA would approve while the Commish's office wouldn't. You could try to tie previous season's record to the lost draft picks. Worst 10 = no lost pick Middle 10 = lost 2nd round pick + Best 10 = lost 1st round pick + Thus allowing the bad teams to improve their farm and major league system simultaneously while doing the opposite for the top teams. I don't have a problem with the way the teams are awarded picks. |
|
|
|
Post by bigpupp on Mar 25, 2014 14:14:49 GMT -5
What I don't like is that the first 15 picks in the old system were protected picks but now it's only the first 10. I would change it so that teams that don't make the playoffs have their first pick protected and teams that don't make the postseason don't. Not perfect, but it would help.
|
|
|
|
Post by pedroelgrande on Mar 25, 2014 14:18:33 GMT -5
I think they should scrap the compensation system and just let teams spend whatever they want on the draft, that's enough compensation.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Mar 25, 2014 14:19:35 GMT -5
I think they should scrap the compensation system and just let teams spend whatever they want on the draft, that's enough compensation. lol And lower the age of free agency to 23. |
|
|
|
Post by pedroelgrande on Mar 25, 2014 14:24:23 GMT -5
Why 23? Make it they can elect free agency whenever they want.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Mar 25, 2014 14:26:38 GMT -5
Why 23? Make it they can elect free agency whenever they want. Get rid of the draft too. |
|
|
|
Post by raftsox on Mar 25, 2014 14:30:49 GMT -5
Why 23? Make it they can elect free agency whenever they want. Not necessarily a set age, but what about 4 years of ML control. Reduce the # of options to 2. You'd have a lot more movement of young major league ready talent. However, a year on the DL wouldn't count as service time or an option year. |
|
|
|
Post by pedroelgrande on Mar 25, 2014 14:33:04 GMT -5
Why 23? Make it they can elect free agency whenever they want. Get rid of the draft too. And make it only the Red Sox can sign anyone good. |
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Mar 25, 2014 14:36:09 GMT -5
Get rid of the draft too. And make it only the Red Sox can sign anyone good. It'll be just like me playing OOTP Baseball in Commissioner mode. |
|
|
