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.
2015-2016 International Signing Period
|
Post by jrffam05 on Jul 8, 2015 15:13:31 GMT -5
Jason Mastrodonato @jmastrodonato Red Sox acquired minor league RHP Ramses Rosario from Washington for an international bonus pool slot in the 2015-16 signing period Rosario is in his 3rd season with the DSL Nationals. He hasn't had great results so far. Slot was $327,700. What I don't get, is if you trade this to a team then went over their bonus pool, isn't it as good as a $320K check? We're not going to get Urias, but shouldn't it be worth someone who will get past the GCL? For context, how much did we pay Rockies for Morales?
|
|
|
Post by chavopepe2 on Jul 8, 2015 15:18:01 GMT -5
Jason Mastrodonato @jmastrodonato Red Sox acquired minor league RHP Ramses Rosario from Washington for an international bonus pool slot in the 2015-16 signing period Rosario is in his 3rd season with the DSL Nationals. He hasn't had great results so far. Slot was $327,700. What I don't get, is if you trade this to a team then went over their bonus pool, isn't it as good as a $320K check? We're not going to get Urias, but shouldn't it be worth someone who will get past the GCL? For context, how much did we pay Rockies for Morales? If the number of teams that are willing to trade a low slot value like that is high enough, the expected return would be very low. I suspect there are quite a few teams that are at the point where they know they will have excess slot money. You can't expect much in return when that is the case.
|
|
|
Post by ramireja on Jul 8, 2015 15:26:43 GMT -5
I guess so, but now we have more than a handful of other transactions to compare to from this year. The Rays turned $494K of slot value into a 2nd round pick from 2014, which seems like much better value than what we got.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Jul 8, 2015 15:33:26 GMT -5
I guess it's just counter intuitive to me, I see it as a $320K check for a player that you could find at your local legion game. I'm a financial analyst for a company that does the entire MLB's revenue over 10 times, and a $320K expense lever is nothing to sneeze at.
When a depth player (Morales, Carp, Leon) is traded for cash considerations, what is the dollar amount that typically goes back? Maybe that would give me better context.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jul 8, 2015 15:38:05 GMT -5
It looks like the Braves were giving way too much in value for slot money. They also traded Cody Martin for $388k and a couple more players for $249k. In comparison, the Rays traded an A-ball reliever for about $500k.
I think it comes down to teams are feeling out just what these are worth. The Braves in all added over $1.1M in three trades, so giving up value makes more sense for them than a team looking to add a little more to avoid going over the cap just to sign one guy for like $500k.
|
|
|
Post by chavopepe2 on Jul 8, 2015 15:45:20 GMT -5
I guess it's just counter intuitive to me, I see it as a $320K check for a player that you could find at your local legion game. I'm a financial analyst for a company that does the entire MLB's revenue over 10 times, and a $320K expense lever is nothing to sneeze at. When a depth player (Morales, Carp, Leon) is traded for cash considerations, what is the dollar amount that typically goes back? Maybe that would give me better context. It isn't just a $320K check though. That would imply that one side is losing $320K and the other side is gaining $320K. That isn't the case here. If the Red Sox weren't going to use that slot they are losing $0 and Washington is gaining $320K. If there are a dozen other teams where that is the case, the return will be minimal, because in an open market they will all - theoretically - bid each other down towards zero (since the cost to them is zero). I also would think the timing of the transactions is somewhat important. If I'm remembering correctly, a team can't trade for additional slot money after they have already signed the player. They must acquire the slot money prior to the signing happening. On that same note, teams would be less willing to trade slot values until they are more confident that they do not need the money. These two things (teams needing the money sooner to finalize the transaction and teams being less willing to deal the money to early in the process) would likely mean the return for trading slot money goes down with time.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 8, 2015 15:46:53 GMT -5
I wonder how much Rosario's original signing bonus was? I cannot find it anywhere on the web.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jul 8, 2015 15:50:37 GMT -5
I wonder how much Rosario's original signing bonus was? I cannot find it anywhere on the web. Can't imagine it was much based on the usage. And anyway, we're three years removed. Great point by Chavo on the timing. This was likely the Red Sox realizing they weren't going to need it and the Nats realizing late that they could use it.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Jul 8, 2015 16:07:29 GMT -5
I guess it's just counter intuitive to me, I see it as a $320K check for a player that you could find at your local legion game. I'm a financial analyst for a company that does the entire MLB's revenue over 10 times, and a $320K expense lever is nothing to sneeze at. When a depth player (Morales, Carp, Leon) is traded for cash considerations, what is the dollar amount that typically goes back? Maybe that would give me better context. It isn't just a $320K check though. That would imply that one side is losing $320K and the other side is gaining $320K. That isn't the case here. If the Red Sox weren't going to use that slot they are losing $0 and Washington is gaining $320K. If there are a dozen other teams where that is the case, the return will be minimal, because in an open market they will all - theoretically - bid each other down towards zero (since the cost to them is zero). It doesn't cost the Red Sox, but it is as good as cash to the Nationals. If any team over the limit has the opportunity to 12 $300K the equivalent of 12 DSL pitcher with no upside and they don't do this 12 times they are doing something very wrong. Hell they could just replace those players with 10K international signs. The savings is very real. I also would think the timing of the transactions is somewhat important. If I'm remembering correctly, a team can't trade for additional slot money after they have already signed the player. They must acquire the slot money prior to the signing happening. On that same note, teams would be less willing to trade slot values until they are more confident that they do not need the money. These two things (teams needing the money sooner to finalize the transaction and teams being less willing to deal the money to early in the process) would likely mean the return for trading slot money goes down with time. This may change things. Is it when terms are agreed to, or when the deal is actually finalized? Sorry for asking this three times, but could someone please give me some insight on how much cash goes back for a replacement level player? I'm having trouble finding any source of this.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 8, 2015 16:09:57 GMT -5
Sorry for asking this three times, but could someone please give me some insight on how much cash goes back for a replacement level player? I'm having trouble finding any source of this. I imagine it's different for every trade.
|
|
|
Post by chavopepe2 on Jul 8, 2015 18:57:57 GMT -5
It isn't just a $320K check though. That would imply that one side is losing $320K and the other side is gaining $320K. That isn't the case here. If the Red Sox weren't going to use that slot they are losing $0 and Washington is gaining $320K. If there are a dozen other teams where that is the case, the return will be minimal, because in an open market they will all - theoretically - bid each other down towards zero (since the cost to them is zero). It doesn't cost the Red Sox, but it is as good as cash to the Nationals. If any team over the limit has the opportunity to 12 $300K the equivalent of 12 DSL pitcher with no upside and they don't do this 12 times they are doing something very wrong. Hell they could just replace those players with 10K international signs. The savings is very real. Lets say you have a 1988 Spike Owen Topps card. The book value on that card is $1.25, but it is worth nothing to you. You're cleaning out your closet and planning to throw it away. Then you find out Joe Cardcollector is looking to purchase that card. You start to negotiate with him to get as close to the $1.25 as you can. Since it is worth $1.25 to Joe, and you are the only place he can get the card, you are likely to get the full $1.25 for the card, even though getting $0.01 would have been better than the alternative of throwing it in the trash. Now lets say John Doe comes along and he also has a Spike Owen card that he is planning to throw in the trash. He hears that Joe is looking to purchase the card and jumps in right before the two of you agree to terms and offers $0.75. You can walk away and throw your card in the trash or you can try to outbid John Doe. Naturally, you offer the card for $0.25 because heck, its better than the nothing you'd get for throwing in the trash. That is all this is. The slot value isn't cash. It is a thing. It is something that has variable value to different teams. At this stage in the international signing process, most of the top players have already signed or agreed to terms and there aren't many places left to allocate those funds. That makes the trade value of excess slots very low.
|
|
|
Post by mjammz on Jul 8, 2015 18:58:07 GMT -5
The fact MLB allows teams to trade International Bonus Slots, but still don't allow draft pick trades. Is that crazy to anyone else?
I know its only a matter of time before they allow picks to be traded, but if they are allowing bonus slots and comp picks to be traded, they should just get on with it already.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 8, 2015 19:11:26 GMT -5
That is all this is. The slot value isn't cash. It is a thing. It is something that has variable value to different teams. At this stage in the international signing process, most of the top players have already signed or agreed to terms and there aren't many places left to allocate those funds. That makes the trade value of excess slots very low. Even if this is true (which I mostly think it is, though I think you're exaggerating the magnitude-- the passage of a week hasn't caused the market value of int'l signing money to drop from what the Braves gave up a week ago to a guy who looks like a JAG in his third year in the DSL), I think it is fair to criticize the front office for waiting until now to trade international signing money when your argument suggests they could have sold sooner and gotten more in return. In other words, either way, it's a bad trade.
|
|
|
Post by okin15 on Jul 9, 2015 9:09:12 GMT -5
This is probably a stupid question, but are you all telling me that one week into the IFA signing period, all the top guys are signed or agreed with? Didn't the Sox get some other guys last year during the winter and Fall? When were Espinoza and Acosta signed? Plus obviously Moncada, but that's a special case. Won't there be a couple of guys who come out of the woodwork or finally get cleared in like Decemeber? Lastly, if all of these guys are agreed or signed, who did we get, and when will it be official?
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jul 9, 2015 9:16:01 GMT -5
This is probably a stupid question, but are you all telling me that one week into the IFA signing period, all the top guys are signed or agreed with? Didn't the Sox get some other guys last year during the winter and Fall? When were Espinoza and Acosta signed? Plus obviously Moncada, but that's a special case. Won't there be a couple of guys who come out of the woodwork or finally get cleared in like Decemeber? Lastly, if all of these guys are agreed or signed, who did we get, and when will it be official? The best players all sign on J2. The ones who don't sign on J2 aren't typically well regarded. They're usually either 1) not from traditional scouted countries (e.g., Taiwan, Australia, Aruba, etc.), 2) Cuban defectors who had to be cleared, or 3) guys who hadn't turned 16 yet on J2 (e.g., Yoan Aybar signing on July 3, 2013, his birthday; the Basabes signing on August 28, 2012, two days after their birthday). A look at the International Signings page here bears that out, as the VAST majority of guys who signed for significant money do so on J2, unless they fall into one of the technical exceptions I listed. You get occasional late-rising diamonds in the rough, but again, very rare. Especially today, with the draft cap on bonuses, there's incentive to hit the international market harder, so the guys are better scouted and more known to teams, so you don't have as many who slip through the cracks, I'd guess.
|
|
alnipper
Veteran
Living the dream
Posts: 619
|
Post by alnipper on Jul 9, 2015 10:00:27 GMT -5
I hope we spend big again in two years.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Jul 9, 2015 10:45:42 GMT -5
It doesn't cost the Red Sox, but it is as good as cash to the Nationals. If any team over the limit has the opportunity to 12 $300K the equivalent of 12 DSL pitcher with no upside and they don't do this 12 times they are doing something very wrong. Hell they could just replace those players with 10K international signs. The savings is very real. Lets say you have a 1988 Spike Owen Topps card. The book value on that card is $1.25, but it is worth nothing to you. You're cleaning out your closet and planning to throw it away. Then you find out Joe Cardcollector is looking to purchase that card. You start to negotiate with him to get as close to the $1.25 as you can. Since it is worth $1.25 to Joe, and you are the only place he can get the card, you are likely to get the full $1.25 for the card, even though getting $0.01 would have been better than the alternative of throwing it in the trash. Now lets say John Doe comes along and he also has a Spike Owen card that he is planning to throw in the trash. He hears that Joe is looking to purchase the card and jumps in right before the two of you agree to terms and offers $0.75. You can walk away and throw your card in the trash or you can try to outbid John Doe. Naturally, you offer the card for $0.25 because heck, its better than the nothing you'd get for throwing in the trash. That is all this is. The slot value isn't cash. It is a thing. It is something that has variable value to different teams. At this stage in the international signing process, most of the top players have already signed or agreed to terms and there aren't many places left to allocate those funds. That makes the trade value of excess slots very low. This does not relate, I'm not talking about supply and demand of baseball cards or players, this is essentially a tax credit. A slot bonus will reduce any teams tax liability by that amount, assuming they are over their draft pool and the slot bonus doesn't push them under their limit. That means that if everyone in the neighborhood had a tax credit worth $1.25, it would benefit Joe to buy ALL OF THEM for any price under $1.25. He would buy mine, yours, John Does, Janes Does, and any other imaginary person in the neighborhood, because it would benefit him every time. Here let's take the Dodgers in the Neighborhood example. Dodgers Spent ~ $20M Dodgers Bonus pool ~ $2M 100% Tax on overage $18M So it cost the Dodgers $38M total, but if they bought our draft slot it then moves down to $37.7M. Now if we do the math, and the Dodgers bought 10 $300K draft slots, they now only owe $35M. It would give them cash in their pocket directly every slot bonus they bought. Now.... What the real problem with this is, this rule I came across while typing this post. From BA www.baseballamerica.com/international/2015-international-bonus-pools-slots/So, my original assumption that teams could just keep buying these draft slots are wrong (this was not called out to me which is why I continued to argue the point) That also means that the only teams that could acquire our 1st round bonus are.... Arizona Diamondbacks $5,393,900 Colorado Rockies $4,966,300 Texas Rangers $4,586,600 Houston Astros $4,248,800 For any other team, the bonus is over 50% of their value. Sorry if this was already called out, I don't remember if it was already discussed.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jul 10, 2015 11:20:02 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by aboynamedkimandrew on Jul 10, 2015 16:12:21 GMT -5
The surprising thing is that the Dodgers traded all of their slots despite planning to go well over their pool. That means they valued the players they acquired at more than the nearly $2M in additional tax they will have to pay. Apparently some teams were willing to move significant assets for slots.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jul 10, 2015 16:51:32 GMT -5
The surprising thing is that the Dodgers traded all of their slots despite planning to go well over their pool. That means they valued the players they acquired at more than the nearly $2M in additional tax they will have to pay. Apparently some teams were willing to move significant assets for slots. Not necessarily. To a literal degree, you're absolutely correct, but the thing is, money is literally no object to the Dodgers, who also just ignore the CBT. If you don't care about paying tax and you're going over anyway, there's no reason not to trade all of your slots for value in additional players. So yeah, they valued the players at more than the money they'll pay in tax, but the thing is, the money they will pay in tax is worth nothing to them anyway. Am I saying that right? The Angels also immediately traded all of their slots.
|
|
|
Post by azblue on Aug 13, 2015 10:19:24 GMT -5
I have not seen an announcement of any international signings by the Red Sox since several days after July 2 this year. Baseball America shows the same 4 Boston signings that were released on or shortly after July 2. BA has not added any signings for any teams since around July 5. There have been no posts on this thread since July 10. Does anyone know if this is a matter f poor follow up by BA? It is hard to believe that no teams have signed international players during the past five weeks.
|
|
|
Post by vermontsox1 on Aug 13, 2015 10:31:41 GMT -5
I have not seen an announcement of any international signings by the Red Sox since several days after July 2 this year. Baseball America shows the same 4 Boston signings that were released on or shortly after July 2. BA has not added any signings for any teams since around July 5. There have been no posts on this thread since July 10. Does anyone know if this is a matter f poor follow up by BA? It is hard to believe that no teams have signed international players during the past five weeks. Pretty much all of the top-level guys signed on July 2. I'm sure there are other players that have signed, but it's hard to keep track of those lower-level guys. I certainly wouldn't call it poor follow-up on BA's part.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 13, 2015 10:45:45 GMT -5
Can't a reporter like Speier just ask the team? Why is it such a mystery?
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Aug 13, 2015 10:51:03 GMT -5
Can't a reporter like Speier just ask the team? Why is it such a mystery? Because the team sends out a release when they're ready to announce the signings. For whatever reason they haven't yet.
|
|
alnipper
Veteran
Living the dream
Posts: 619
|
Post by alnipper on Aug 17, 2015 11:22:42 GMT -5
I am a little surprised we have not heard of any additional signings. I have no idea if we would get any information on them anyways.
|
|
|