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.
2021-22 International Signing Period
|
Post by GyIantosca on Jan 19, 2022 11:38:13 GMT -5
The publications always gas up the MFY’s talent . It’s just noise to me now. They been wrong so many times on there talent.
|
|
|
Post by freddysthefuture2003 on Jan 19, 2022 11:44:01 GMT -5
The publications always gas up the MFY’s talent . It’s just noise to me now. They been wrong so many times on there talent. These international lists come out before the teams sign them, no?
|
|
|
Post by prospectlove on Jan 19, 2022 14:45:25 GMT -5
I also understand what the sox are doing with international money. And it's claimed they have a great program (having read it several places and some within this site definitely are a fan of how they allocate their resources). HOWEVER, I sure would rather go after the Rafael Devers (high end signing), Vlad, Wander Franco with most of our money. Then sign the below the radar guys after that. NOW I'll gladly say time will tell which choice is the correct one. But since Devers (and Xander) we really haven't had many high end great international guys come through OR for that matter be ranked high in the top 100. Rafael Devers 3B Dominican $1,500,000 Xander Bogaerts SS Aruba $410,000 Michael Ynoa 2008 RHP Athletics Dominican Republic $4.25M Adonys Cardona 2010 RHP Blue Jays Venezuela $2.8M Just so we are clear, Rafael Devers was 3rd highest player that year and in fact one of top 2 highest rated hitters. Exactly the type of player I am arguing we should pursue. I also agree Xander was a mid level that we have pursued lately. He was a hit no doubt about it. Those other two players we didn't sign, others did. My argument is that we aren't (to my knowledge) targeting the higher end guys anymore (like Devers). I will be interested in seeing if our current philosophy works. I read an article yesterday on our top international guys in our system per rankings. Non of them really screamed exciting top level prospect (and I could be wrong). Before we had Devers and Anderson Espinosa and even the catcher that died had high rankings initially. Espinosa hasn't worked out, but he still got us a nice piece in trade (at that time a higher rated player on trade market). So he had value to the team. I will be interested to see if any of our current international guys with what I feel is a new philosophy performs the same.
|
|
|
Post by prospectlove on Jan 19, 2022 14:56:19 GMT -5
People talk about the great international signings by the Yankees but really, what have they gained ? Last year's big name was Dominguez and he's been dropping like a rock, apparently a slow learner. Right now it's Volpe but he's A+ and has a lot to prove. I'll be impressed when I see something more concrete that Gary Sanchez. Most of their trades last year were international guys in the deals. So they gained Joey Gallo and Taillon among others. Dominguez could be put into a trade for a high end player right this second and be centerpiece of that deal. I would in fact argue Dominguez gets you Max last year. You also are forgetting their plethora of pitchers in their rankings and their other star shortstop (Volpe might not even be their shortstop due to Pereza). So it's not just about performance, but what opportunity cost does a player give you at some point in their career. Right now, I don't see much opportunity cost by the international guys in the Red Sox system, short of a throw in with other prospects. (non will headline a deal to get you a star player). Not right now anyways. Hopefully that changes. I agree with a statement Chris made. I realize their is high risk with paying so much of your money to one player (you would be left finding minimum signings after, which we have been able to do). BUT I wonder if that one star player gives you more opportunity cost than what we currently have. I personally would rather swing for the fences on a Sota, Wander, Vlad, or even Dominguez than get 25 maybes who might do something maybe hopefully and at end of say be spending the same amount of money (we get same amount as Yankees do). This thought process could be proven absolutely wrong. I'm simply wondering if the top 1-5 players every year (where I argue the stars might be found more) are much better than a few seconds and third or fourth rouders. Time will tell and I understand the number arguments but right now I don't see it. Give me 5 Devers in 7 years and I'll be super excited for our international system.
|
|
|
Post by prospectlove on Jan 19, 2022 15:02:41 GMT -5
Going to give the benefit of the doubt that it was a typo. Anyway, same exercise as last night with the updated BA Top 100: 2. Julio Rodriguez, $1.75M 7. Gabriel Moreno, $25,000 11. Keibert Ruiz, $140,000 13. Francisco Alvarez, $2.7M 14. Oneil Cruz, $950,000 17. Marco Luciano, $6M 18. Noelvi Marte, $1.55M 23. Diego Cartaya, $2.5M 33. Jose Barrero, $5M 40. Miguel Vargas, $300,000 48. Eury Perez, $200,000 53. Luis Campusano, $1.3M 55. Oswald Peraza, $175,000 56. Vidal Brujan, $15,000 64. Sixto Sanchez, $35,000 66. Brayan Rocchio, $125,000 68. George Valera, $1.3M 69. Edward Cabrera, $100,000 73. Luis Matos, $725,000 75. Orelvis Martinez, $3.5M 77. Elly De La Cruz, $65,000 78. Liover Peguero, $475,000 80. Yoansy Contreras, $250,000 81. Cristian Hernandez, $3M 87. Jasson Dominguez, $5.1M 89. Geraldo Perdomo, $70,000 92. Ronny Mauricio, $2.1M 100. Gabriel Arias, $1.9M <$100k: 5 $100k-<$500k: 8 $500k-<$1M: 2 $1M-<$2M: 5 >$2M: 8 So the surest way to get a Top 100 prospect is certainly to hand out a big bonus (figuring there are far fewer such players), but I don't think we can look at this and say with any certainty that staying away from such players in most instances, especially with a hard cap and therefore opportunity cost, is a poor strategy given how many IFAs are on this list who didn't get those huge bonuses. Organized another way: 17. Marco Luciano, $6M 87. Jasson Dominguez, $5.1M 33. Jose Barrero, $5M 75. Orelvis Martinez, $3.5M 81. Cristian Hernandez, $3M 13. Francisco Alvarez, $2.7M 23. Diego Cartaya, $2.5M 92. Ronny Mauricio, $2.1M 100. Gabriel Arias, $1.9M 2. Julio Rodriguez, $1.75M 18. Noelvi Marte, $1.55M 53. Luis Campusano, $1.3M 68. George Valera, $1.3M 14. Oneil Cruz, $950,000 73. Luis Matos, $725,000 78. Liover Peguero, $475,000 40. Miguel Vargas, $300,000 80. Yoansy Contreras, $250,000 48. Eury Perez, $200,000 55. Oswald Peraza, $175,000 11. Keibert Ruiz, $140,000 66. Brayan Rocchio, $125,000 69. Edward Cabrera, $100,000 89. Geraldo Perdomo, $70,000 77. Elly De La Cruz, $65,000 64. Sixto Sanchez, $35,000 7. Gabriel Moreno, $25,000 56. Vidal Brujan, $15,000 One thing we are forgetting is this: If we hand out a super high bonus to say a top 1-5 talent (one we identify as worth it after scouting). We still could afford the Brujans, Sanchez, Moreno, Perdoma, Cabrera, Rocchio etc. Almost up to the $250-$300k range. So we aren't taking them out of the equation UNLESS we spend all our money on one player. Yankess I believe signed the top prospect for $4 million leaving them another $1.2 plus to sign others. So we aren't talking about not signing just one player (even at the very top). Even Dominguez allows us to sign others where scouting matters a lot. I just feel we aren't targeting those players and willing to spend that money, and I hope the results pay out a LOT better than currently have (again Devers can't be counted as he's exactly the player I want to target).
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Jan 19, 2022 15:13:09 GMT -5
<$100k: 5 $100k-<$500k: 8 $500k-<$1M: 2 $1M-<$2M: 5 >$2M: 8 So the surest way to get a Top 100 prospect is certainly to hand out a big bonus (figuring there are far fewer such players), but I don't think we can look at this and say with any certainty that staying away from such players in most instances, especially with a hard cap and therefore opportunity cost, is a poor strategy given how many IFAs are on this list who didn't get those huge bonuses. What's the denominator on each of those buckets, though? That's the other piece of information we need to judge the strategy.
In other words: 13 of these guys signed for more than $1 million and 13 signed for less than $500K. But if 50 guys overall signed for >$1 million and 1000 guys overall signed for <$500K, then the former group is 20x more likely to make a top prospect list; i.e., you'd need to sign 20 guys for less than $500K to be worth one guy who signs for over a million. Those are hypothetical (and unrealistic) numbers, but you get the idea.
|
|
|
Post by vermontsox1 on Jan 19, 2022 15:23:23 GMT -5
People talk about the great international signings by the Yankees but really, what have they gained ? Last year's big name was Dominguez and he's been dropping like a rock, apparently a slow learner. Right now it's Volpe but he's A+ and has a lot to prove. I'll be impressed when I see something more concrete that Gary Sanchez. Most of their trades last year were international guys in the deals. So they gained Joey Gallo and Taillon among others. Dominguez could be put into a trade for a high end player right this second and be centerpiece of that deal. I would in fact argue Dominguez gets you Max last year. You also are forgetting their plethora of pitchers in their rankings and their other star shortstop (Volpe might not even be their shortstop due to Pereza). So it's not just about performance, but what opportunity cost does a player give you at some point in their career. Right now, I don't see much opportunity cost by the international guys in the Red Sox system, short of a throw in with other prospects. (non will headline a deal to get you a star player). Not right now anyways. Hopefully that changes. I agree with a statement Chris made. I realize their is high risk with paying so much of your money to one player (you would be left finding minimum signings after, which we have been able to do). BUT I wonder if that one star player gives you more opportunity cost than what we currently have. I personally would rather swing for the fences on a Sota, Wander, Vlad, or even Dominguez than get 25 maybes who might do something maybe hopefully and at end of say be spending the same amount of money (we get same amount as Yankees do). This thought process could be proven absolutely wrong. I'm simply wondering if the top 1-5 players every year (where I argue the stars might be found more) are much better than a few seconds and third or fourth rouders. Time will tell and I understand the number arguments but right now I don't see it. Give me 5 Devers in 7 years and I'll be super excited for our international system. I mean, sure. Every organization would spend on one of those guys if they knew what they're getting. But international scouting is often a crapshoot (or at least highly unpredictable) and for every Soto, Wander, or Vlads there are hundreds of busts. By the way, Soto got $1.5m (same bonus as Bleis last year) and wasn't seen as one of the top few players in his class. Same note on your Devers comment - obviously the team would take 5 Devers-type players if they could guarantee that.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jan 19, 2022 15:32:23 GMT -5
<$100k: 5 $100k-<$500k: 8 $500k-<$1M: 2 $1M-<$2M: 5 >$2M: 8 So the surest way to get a Top 100 prospect is certainly to hand out a big bonus (figuring there are far fewer such players), but I don't think we can look at this and say with any certainty that staying away from such players in most instances, especially with a hard cap and therefore opportunity cost, is a poor strategy given how many IFAs are on this list who didn't get those huge bonuses. What's the denominator on each of those buckets, though? That's the other piece of information we need to judge the strategy. In other words: 13 of these guys signed for more than $1 million and 13 signed for less than $500K. But if 50 guys overall signed for >$1 million and 1000 guys overall signed for <$500K, then the former group is 20x more likely to make a top prospect list; i.e., you'd need to sign 20 guys for less than $500K to be worth one guy who signs for over a million. Those are hypothetical (and unrealistic) numbers, but you get the idea.
100% agree and almost said it in basically those terms, but that's what I was referring to with "fewer such players" and saying that the big bonus pool guys are the ones who certainly give you the highest upside.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jan 19, 2022 15:33:26 GMT -5
Most of their trades last year were international guys in the deals. So they gained Joey Gallo and Taillon among others. Dominguez could be put into a trade for a high end player right this second and be centerpiece of that deal. I would in fact argue Dominguez gets you Max last year. You also are forgetting their plethora of pitchers in their rankings and their other star shortstop (Volpe might not even be their shortstop due to Pereza). So it's not just about performance, but what opportunity cost does a player give you at some point in their career. Right now, I don't see much opportunity cost by the international guys in the Red Sox system, short of a throw in with other prospects. (non will headline a deal to get you a star player). Not right now anyways. Hopefully that changes. I agree with a statement Chris made. I realize their is high risk with paying so much of your money to one player (you would be left finding minimum signings after, which we have been able to do). BUT I wonder if that one star player gives you more opportunity cost than what we currently have. I personally would rather swing for the fences on a Sota, Wander, Vlad, or even Dominguez than get 25 maybes who might do something maybe hopefully and at end of say be spending the same amount of money (we get same amount as Yankees do). This thought process could be proven absolutely wrong. I'm simply wondering if the top 1-5 players every year (where I argue the stars might be found more) are much better than a few seconds and third or fourth rouders. Time will tell and I understand the number arguments but right now I don't see it. Give me 5 Devers in 7 years and I'll be super excited for our international system. I mean, sure. Every organization would spend on one of those guys if they knew what they're getting. But international scouting is often a crapshoot (or at least highly unpredictable) and for every Soto, Wander, or Vlads there are hundreds of busts. By the way, Soto got $1.5m (same bonus as Bleis last year) and wasn't seen as one of the top few players in his class. Same note on your Devers comment - obviously the team would take 5 Devers-type players if they could guarantee that. I mean, Devers only got $1.5. And he agreed to sign with the Red Sox for less than he was being offered by other teams.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jan 19, 2022 15:42:59 GMT -5
One thing we are forgetting is this: If we hand out a super high bonus to say a top 1-5 talent (one we identify as worth it after scouting). We still could afford the Brujans, Sanchez, Moreno, Perdoma, Cabrera, Rocchio etc. Almost up to the $250-$300k range. So we aren't taking them out of the equation UNLESS we spend all our money on one player. Yankess I believe signed the top prospect for $4 million leaving them another $1.2 plus to sign others. So we aren't talking about not signing just one player (even at the very top). Even Dominguez allows us to sign others where scouting matters a lot. I just feel we aren't targeting those players and willing to spend that money, and I hope the results pay out a LOT better than currently have (again Devers can't be counted as he's exactly the player I want to target). I don't think anyone is forgetting that. The thing is you cannot sign as many of them. This year, the Red Sox have spent $4.15M on De Leon, Encarnacion, Garcia, Santana, and Yuten. Another team may have spent that $4.15M on one guy. Is it better to have the one guy or the five? I think the answer is almost certainly "it depends what you think of the six players," and I'm sure that's the answer the Red Sox would give you. And I think your point would be more persuasive if the Red Sox weren't spending up to their cap limit every year - the question is how to spread the bonus money around. Yeah you can sign a guy for $4.5M and a guy for $600k under the cap, but you can't sign 6 guys for $600k and the $4.5M guy. Maybe it's unstated but I figured we all were aware there is a hard cap on resources that can be used, so the question is how to distribute it to acquire the most talent. I don't think the Red Sox are purposefully avoiding high bonuses as a rule - they're almost certainly thinking of it more pragmatically. For example, they gave Daniel Flores $3.1M in July 2017 when they could trade for more cap space (they essentially traded Nick Longhi, at the time a top 20 prospect in the system on our list, straight up for the space to sign him). I think it's a combination of (1) the player has to agree to sign with you as well, and the top guys are obviously courted by many teams, (2) there may be a question of whether putting that much of a percentage of your pool, and (3) there is a negotiation that's part of this, so using bonus as the ONLY means of determining the player's pre-signing value is a bit flawed. If the Red Sox are better at getting more talent for cheaper for whatever reason, it'd look like they weren't signing big money guys when in fact they were signing them for less. See the Devers example above for example - he signed for $1.5M but was offered more elsewhere. If they reach a deal with a guy before other teams see him, he may look like a low-bonus signing but he might've commanded more in a market with complete information for all players - again, listen to our interview with Eddie Romero to hear stories about that sort of thing, where they get a guy at the complex and basically don't let him leave without getting him under contract so other teams don't see him (not in the sense of literal kidnapping obviously). I mean, the real answer here is I need to ask Eddie when he's on the podcast next. Hoping that'll be soon.
|
|
|
Post by pedroelgrande on Jan 19, 2022 16:01:47 GMT -5
I think we also have take into account other teams have great connections in the Dominican and Venezuelan market. They too if they get a guy early would just lock him up and other teams won’t see him again in live games. Buscones and agents know which teams are more aggressive money wise so they probably get preferences to showcase the player.
As a fan I would obviously be thrilled if the Red Sox signed the “top players” in the market but at the end of the day it comes down to scouting and player development and the Red Sox are up there with the best in the league based on results.
Anyways I think the draft is coming in the next CBA so we’ll see how that is gonna affect strategies and how Latin baseball will adapt.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Jan 19, 2022 21:34:37 GMT -5
Sevarino is a major question. He had the talent for sure but if I remember correctly, the velocity hasn't returned yet. That's not a great sign. Sorry but I just don't see German as anything but a bottom of the rotation guy. When was the last time the Red Sox drafted or signed and developed a reliable #5 A more relevant question is how many World Championships do the Yankees have this millennium ? Debating the pros and cons of targeting a major piece or spreading the wealth is a valid debate. There have been successful franchises using both approaches. Using a team who is not a top 10 franchise this millennium and has a poor history of bringing top talent to market is just Yankee ball washing and pretty much makes the case for those who prefer the spreading approach.
|
|
|
Post by azblue on Jan 19, 2022 22:28:24 GMT -5
Full list as of 10:28 EST January19
Boston Red Sox ($5,179,700)
Fraymi de Leon, SS, Dominican Republic Freili Encarnacion, SS, Dominican Republic Jancel Santana, SS, Dominican Republic Nathanael Yuten, OF, Dominican Republic Willian Colmenares, RHP, Venezuela Johanfran Garcia, C, Venezuela Denison Sanchez, RHP, Venezuela Marvin Alcantara, SS, Venezuela Inmer Lobo, LHP, Venezuela Yosander Asencio, SS, Dominican Republic Franyer Noria, SS, Venezuela Denis Reguillo, RHP, Dominican Republic Luis Cohen, RHP, Venezuela Natanael Eusebio, OF, Dominican Republic Yohander Linares, SS, Venezuela Darlin de la Cruz, RHP, Dominican Republic
|
|
|
Post by stunzisox on Jan 20, 2022 1:01:57 GMT -5
The publications always gas up the MFY’s talent . It’s just noise to me now. They been wrong so many times on there talent. These international lists come out before the teams sign them, no? Yes, but only technically speaking. All of the negotiation is done in advance of the formal signing period. Often times many years (2+) in advance so it’s predetermined where they are going with great certainty.
|
|
|
Post by prospectlove on Jan 20, 2022 16:13:09 GMT -5
I mean, sure. Every organization would spend on one of those guys if they knew what they're getting. But international scouting is often a crapshoot (or at least highly unpredictable) and for every Soto, Wander, or Vlads there are hundreds of busts. By the way, Soto got $1.5m (same bonus as Bleis last year) and wasn't seen as one of the top few players in his class. Same note on your Devers comment - obviously the team would take 5 Devers-type players if they could guarantee that. I mean, Devers only got $1.5. And he agreed to sign with the Red Sox for less than he was being offered by other teams. I didn't know he agreed with red sox for less. And that's EXACTLY my point. We should be able to spend with any team for a player we identify as an impact talent. Yet for whatever reason we aren't willing to. I realize Devers got $1.5 million and the top prospect "Eloy Jimenez" got $2.8 million. So you can't just compare amounts of signing bonuses because it's clear they have increased (70% at the top in 9 years). At $1.5 million MOST players below top 10 were in play. For Devers year MOST EVERY SINGLE PLAYER accept Eloy was in play for $1.5 million. We talk about risk. International is risk, but it's the nature of the beast. I'ld rather they play that risk on higher players such as Devers. If we play in the market of being able to sign every single player but one with our bonus amount, then I'm more than fine with the attention they are playing in this market. Or even most players accept the top 10, then I'm ok. But we aren't even playing in the top 20 right now. The biggest point is this. Since we have changed that signing philosophy (Devers was a highly rated prospect) we haven't been producing ANY impact players. Sorry I don't see a reliever as an impact player (which is why I would like and several others would like Eloy, Soto, Vlad, Wander, Arias etc type signings). We have the following in our top 15 prospects: Byran Bello (seen as possible reliever), Gilberto Jimenez (wasn't even protected on 40 man this year), Bryan Mata (maybe starter or reliever), Wilkerman Gonzalez (breakout year last year could be impact starter), and Miguel Bleis (way to far away and could null and void this entire discussion). And of these players the ONLY player we wouldn't have been able to sign is Miguel Bleis given what they signed for. So we aren't having impact yet. And those that are close we could have signed every single one accept Bleis.
|
|
|
Post by prospectlove on Jan 20, 2022 16:20:19 GMT -5
One thing we are forgetting is this: If we hand out a super high bonus to say a top 1-5 talent (one we identify as worth it after scouting). We still could afford the Brujans, Sanchez, Moreno, Perdoma, Cabrera, Rocchio etc. Almost up to the $250-$300k range. So we aren't taking them out of the equation UNLESS we spend all our money on one player. Yankess I believe signed the top prospect for $4 million leaving them another $1.2 plus to sign others. So we aren't talking about not signing just one player (even at the very top). Even Dominguez allows us to sign others where scouting matters a lot. I just feel we aren't targeting those players and willing to spend that money, and I hope the results pay out a LOT better than currently have (again Devers can't be counted as he's exactly the player I want to target). I don't think anyone is forgetting that. The thing is you cannot sign as many of them. This year, the Red Sox have spent $4.15M on De Leon, Encarnacion, Garcia, Santana, and Yuten. Another team may have spent that $4.15M on one guy. Is it better to have the one guy or the five? I think the answer is almost certainly "it depends what you think of the six players," and I'm sure that's the answer the Red Sox would give you. And I think your point would be more persuasive if the Red Sox weren't spending up to their cap limit every year - the question is how to spread the bonus money around. Yeah you can sign a guy for $4.5M and a guy for $600k under the cap, but you can't sign 6 guys for $600k and the $4.5M guy. Maybe it's unstated but I figured we all were aware there is a hard cap on resources that can be used, so the question is how to distribute it to acquire the most talent.I don't think the Red Sox are purposefully avoiding high bonuses as a rule - they're almost certainly thinking of it more pragmatically. For example, they gave Daniel Flores $3.1M in July 2017 when they could trade for more cap space (they essentially traded Nick Longhi, at the time a top 20 prospect in the system on our list, straight up for the space to sign him). I think it's a combination of (1) the player has to agree to sign with you as well, and the top guys are obviously courted by many teams, (2) there may be a question of whether putting that much of a percentage of your pool, and (3) there is a negotiation that's part of this, so using bonus as the ONLY means of determining the player's pre-signing value is a bit flawed. If the Red Sox are better at getting more talent for cheaper for whatever reason, it'd look like they weren't signing big money guys when in fact they were signing them for less. See the Devers example above for example - he signed for $1.5M but was offered more elsewhere. If they reach a deal with a guy before other teams see him, he may look like a low-bonus signing but he might've commanded more in a market with complete information for all players - again, listen to our interview with Eddie Romero to hear stories about that sort of thing, where they get a guy at the complex and basically don't let him leave without getting him under contract so other teams don't see him (not in the sense of literal kidnapping obviously). I mean, the real answer here is I need to ask Eddie when he's on the podcast next. Hoping that'll be soon. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- To the point, that's the question. I don't think the way they are distributing it (or I'm concerned) that it's not producing talent that makes a difference at the major league level RIGHT NOW. I'm anxious to see how Bleis turns out this year. I also think they drastically changed their philosophy after Daniel Flores tragedy (and the other 2 higher signings they had that flamed out). I also don't think we will ever know, because soon their will be a draft. So long as the Red Sox don't draft for signing bonus I believe they will be fine. But I sure haven't been happy with what they have turned out lately from international realm.
|
|
|
Post by prospectlove on Jan 20, 2022 16:24:43 GMT -5
When was the last time the Red Sox drafted or signed and developed a reliable #5 A more relevant question is how many World Championships do the Yankees have this millennium ? Debating the pros and cons of targeting a major piece or spreading the wealth is a valid debate. There have been successful franchises using both approaches. Using a team who is not a top 10 franchise this millennium and has a poor history of bringing top talent to market is just Yankee ball washing and pretty much makes the case for those who prefer the spreading approach. I'ld argue Yankess have more potential and have gotten more from their international signings than Red Sox have. World Championships PROBABLY have more to do with I don't know David Ortiz, Bill Muehler, Manny, Pedro, high payroll under Dombrowski, John Lester, etc. A strong international department just allows them to spend more money elsewhere or retain a certain player or sign an extra free agent or make a trade for a power player midseason they might like.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jan 20, 2022 16:50:42 GMT -5
I mean, Devers only got $1.5. And he agreed to sign with the Red Sox for less than he was being offered by other teams. I didn't know he agreed with red sox for less. And that's EXACTLY my point. We should be able to spend with any team for a player we identify as an impact talent. Yet for whatever reason we aren't willing to. I realize Devers got $1.5 million and the top prospect "Eloy Jimenez" got $2.8 million. So you can't just compare amounts of signing bonuses because it's clear they have increased (70% at the top in 9 years). At $1.5 million MOST players below top 10 were in play. For Devers year MOST EVERY SINGLE PLAYER accept Eloy was in play for $1.5 million. We talk about risk. International is risk, but it's the nature of the beast. I'ld rather they play that risk on higher players such as Devers. If we play in the market of being able to sign every single player but one with our bonus amount, then I'm more than fine with the attention they are playing in this market. Or even most players accept the top 10, then I'm ok. But we aren't even playing in the top 20 right now. The biggest point is this. Since we have changed that signing philosophy (Devers was a highly rated prospect) we haven't been producing ANY impact players. Sorry I don't see a reliever as an impact player (which is why I would like and several others would like Eloy, Soto, Vlad, Wander, Arias etc type signings). We have the following in our top 15 prospects: Byran Bello (seen as possible reliever), Gilberto Jimenez (wasn't even protected on 40 man this year), Bryan Mata (maybe starter or reliever), Wilkerman Gonzalez (breakout year last year could be impact starter), and Miguel Bleis (way to far away and could null and void this entire discussion). And of these players the ONLY player we wouldn't have been able to sign is Miguel Bleis given what they signed for. So we aren't having impact yet. And those that are close we could have signed every single one accept Bleis. Ah, time to remind everyone of this again. Devers signed in 2013. Moncada signed in 2014. Fair to say he's the best, most recent "impact" international signing, which I'll loosely define as an everyday regular or true SP. In 2015, the club was limited to no bonuses over $300k. Then MLB made 5 of the 7 $300k signings they even made free agents as punishment for "package deals." To the extent they didn't sign any "impact talent" during that period, it's because they literally couldn't. In 2016, they were barred from literally signing any IFAs. Again, they were literally prevented from signing any "impact talent." In 2017, they spent money like you want them to. The poor kid unfortunately passed away. Not sure you can hold that against them. Then the two other 7-figure guys just didn't pan out, which happens and proves it's not just about spending money. And I'd hope we can agree that it's far too early to draw conclusions about classes more recent than that, given that those players are only just starting to even come stateside due in part to COVID. So the lack of high-end IFA talent since Devers and Moncada isn't due to a change in philosophy. It's due to the limitations in 2015 and 16 and the fact that Daniel Flores died and Diaz and Antoni Flores didn't pan out (this despite both looking pretty damn good at first).
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Jan 21, 2022 5:52:56 GMT -5
Dominguez has pretty much been this year's poster boy for why I prefer spreading things around several baskets. This time last year, he was the next Acuna. Late in the season, his struggles with basic skills suggested a much longer timetable than previously thought. Post season, reports of his thickening up (read chubby) downgraded his speed from plus to average and projected position from CF to corner outfield. Additionally, for whatever reason. his plus arm suddenly became average. Now, he's in nobody's top 100 and his absolute ceiling is now everyday regular.
Well put (above) Chris
|
|
|
Post by vermontsox1 on Jan 21, 2022 10:12:19 GMT -5
Jesse Sanchez has the bonuses for the 16 known signings: Fraymi De Leon, SS, Dominican Republic -- $1,200,000 Freili Encarnacion, SS, Dominican Republic -- $1,100,000 Johanfran Garcia, C, Venezuela -- $850,000 Jancel Santana, SS, Dominican Republic -- $600,000 Natanael Yuten, CF, Dominican Republic -- $400,000 Franyer Noria, SS, Venezuela -- $265,000 Willian Colmenares, RHS, Venezuela -- $125,000 Yosander Asencio, SS, Dominican Republic -- $85,000 Marvin Alcantara, SS, Venezuela -- $30,000 Natanael Eusebio, CF, Dominican Republic -- $10,000 Dennis Reguillo, RHS, Dominican Republic -- $10,000 Yohander Linarez, SS, Venezuela -- $10,000 Denison Sanchez, RHS, Venezuela -- $10,000 Inmer Lobo, LHS, Venezuela -- $10,000 Luis Cohen, RHS, Venezuela -- $10,000 Darlyn De La Cruz, RHS, Dominican Republic -- $8,000 www.mlb.com/news/red-sox-2022-international-prospectsThat leaves $524,700 in pool money for the rest of the signing period.
|
|
|
Post by vermontsox1 on Jan 21, 2022 10:16:38 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jan 21, 2022 13:24:23 GMT -5
I feel like a decent chunk of the $524,700 remaining might go to pitching. I'm not sure there are 10 guys who I'd project for the DRCL rotation at this time.
|
|
|
Post by prospectlove on Jan 21, 2022 14:17:51 GMT -5
I didn't know he agreed with red sox for less. And that's EXACTLY my point. We should be able to spend with any team for a player we identify as an impact talent. Yet for whatever reason we aren't willing to. I realize Devers got $1.5 million and the top prospect "Eloy Jimenez" got $2.8 million. So you can't just compare amounts of signing bonuses because it's clear they have increased (70% at the top in 9 years). At $1.5 million MOST players below top 10 were in play. For Devers year MOST EVERY SINGLE PLAYER accept Eloy was in play for $1.5 million. We talk about risk. International is risk, but it's the nature of the beast. I'ld rather they play that risk on higher players such as Devers. If we play in the market of being able to sign every single player but one with our bonus amount, then I'm more than fine with the attention they are playing in this market. Or even most players accept the top 10, then I'm ok. But we aren't even playing in the top 20 right now. The biggest point is this. Since we have changed that signing philosophy (Devers was a highly rated prospect) we haven't been producing ANY impact players. Sorry I don't see a reliever as an impact player (which is why I would like and several others would like Eloy, Soto, Vlad, Wander, Arias etc type signings). We have the following in our top 15 prospects: Byran Bello (seen as possible reliever), Gilberto Jimenez (wasn't even protected on 40 man this year), Bryan Mata (maybe starter or reliever), Wilkerman Gonzalez (breakout year last year could be impact starter), and Miguel Bleis (way to far away and could null and void this entire discussion). And of these players the ONLY player we wouldn't have been able to sign is Miguel Bleis given what they signed for. So we aren't having impact yet. And those that are close we could have signed every single one accept Bleis. Ah, time to remind everyone of this again. Devers signed in 2013. Moncada signed in 2014. Fair to say he's the best, most recent "impact" international signing, which I'll loosely define as an everyday regular or true SP. In 2015, the club was limited to no bonuses over $300k. Then MLB made 5 of the 7 $300k signings they even made free agents as punishment for "package deals." To the extent they didn't sign any "impact talent" during that period, it's because they literally couldn't. In 2016, they were barred from literally signing any IFAs. Again, they were literally prevented from signing any "impact talent." In 2017, they spent money like you want them to. The poor kid unfortunately passed away. Not sure you can hold that against them. Then the two other 7-figure guys just didn't pan out, which happens and proves it's not just about spending money. And I'd hope we can agree that it's far too early to draw conclusions about classes more recent than that, given that those players are only just starting to even come stateside due in part to COVID. So the lack of high-end IFA talent since Devers and Moncada isn't due to a change in philosophy. It's due to the limitations in 2015 and 16 and the fact that Daniel Flores died and Diaz and Antoni Flores didn't pan out (this despite both looking pretty damn good at first). -------------------------- I agree and value your insight, contacts, and knowledge. I agree with all of that. However, there is this small note to argue that you can infact establish value now. 2018- Marco Luciano, Ornelvis Martinez, Noelvi Marte, Francisco Alveraz, Antonio Gomez, Luis Matoa 2019-Jason Dominguez, Erik Pena, Bayron Lora, Robert Puason 2020- Carlos Colmeranz, Christian Hernandez, Wilman Diaz I realize some of those players we just don't know yet. But I also believe every single one of them could be a headliner (accept maybe Gomez) to a trade for a player that makes an impact on the team now. To me, it sure seems like something changed after they lost the catcher. Something happened between the years of penalties and the catcher passing on (with the two other high round busts) that changed how they went after or acquired international talent. Given that teams DO sign talent years in advance, it could be a simple explanation as the red sox lost scouts on the ground and therefor lost who to sign. Or it could be that John Henry decided he doesn't want to spend money on high end talent and have them flame out (like happened in 2017). I don't know that we will ever truly be told what happened and I respect what people are saying. Hopefully it's ok to say that as a red sox fan that wants our team to competitive on the field and bringing in exciting new prospects; I'm very concerned something happened that made us go away from the Devers/Moncada types and instead aim to a lower field of players. I would like to study the Braves system as they also were on penalties. It would be interesting to compare the two. Because they just went out and paid for one of the top players this year, their first off penalties. Hoping I'm not knowledgable and all wrong about this.
|
|
|
Post by soxfanatic on Jan 21, 2022 14:58:27 GMT -5
Jesse Sanchez has the bonuses for the 16 known signings: Fraymi De Leon, SS, Dominican Republic -- $1,200,000 Freili Encarnacion, SS, Dominican Republic -- $1,100,000 Johanfran Garcia, C, Venezuela -- $850,000 Jancel Santana, SS, Dominican Republic -- $600,000 Natanael Yuten, CF, Dominican Republic -- $400,000 Franyer Noria, SS, Venezuela -- $265,000 Willian Colmenares, RHS, Venezuela -- $125,000 Yosander Asencio, SS, Dominican Republic -- $85,000 Marvin Alcantara, SS, Venezuela -- $30,000 Natanael Eusebio, CF, Dominican Republic -- $10,000 Dennis Reguillo, RHS, Dominican Republic -- $10,000 Yohander Linarez, SS, Venezuela -- $10,000 Denison Sanchez, RHS, Venezuela -- $10,000 Inmer Lobo, LHS, Venezuela -- $10,000 Luis Cohen, RHS, Venezuela -- $10,000 Darlyn De La Cruz, RHS, Dominican Republic -- $8,000 www.mlb.com/news/red-sox-2022-international-prospectsThat leaves $524,700 in pool money for the rest of the signing period. Hmm interesting. In other years most January/July signings were 50K+, with lower figure bonuses being handed out towards the end of the signing period.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jan 21, 2022 15:42:15 GMT -5
Ah, time to remind everyone of this again. Devers signed in 2013. Moncada signed in 2014. Fair to say he's the best, most recent "impact" international signing, which I'll loosely define as an everyday regular or true SP. In 2015, the club was limited to no bonuses over $300k. Then MLB made 5 of the 7 $300k signings they even made free agents as punishment for "package deals." To the extent they didn't sign any "impact talent" during that period, it's because they literally couldn't. In 2016, they were barred from literally signing any IFAs. Again, they were literally prevented from signing any "impact talent." In 2017, they spent money like you want them to. The poor kid unfortunately passed away. Not sure you can hold that against them. Then the two other 7-figure guys just didn't pan out, which happens and proves it's not just about spending money. And I'd hope we can agree that it's far too early to draw conclusions about classes more recent than that, given that those players are only just starting to even come stateside due in part to COVID. So the lack of high-end IFA talent since Devers and Moncada isn't due to a change in philosophy. It's due to the limitations in 2015 and 16 and the fact that Daniel Flores died and Diaz and Antoni Flores didn't pan out (this despite both looking pretty damn good at first). -------------------------- I agree and value your insight, contacts, and knowledge. I agree with all of that. However, there is this small note to argue that you can infact establish value now. 2018- Marco Luciano, Ornelvis Martinez, Noelvi Marte, Francisco Alveraz, Antonio Gomez, Luis Matoa 2019-Jason Dominguez, Erik Pena, Bayron Lora, Robert Puason 2020- Carlos Colmeranz, Christian Hernandez, Wilman Diaz I realize some of those players we just don't know yet. But I also believe every single one of them could be a headliner (accept maybe Gomez) to a trade for a player that makes an impact on the team now. To me, it sure seems like something changed after they lost the catcher. Something happened between the years of penalties and the catcher passing on (with the two other high round busts) that changed how they went after or acquired international talent. Given that teams DO sign talent years in advance, it could be a simple explanation as the red sox lost scouts on the ground and therefor lost who to sign. Or it could be that John Henry decided he doesn't want to spend money on high end talent and have them flame out (like happened in 2017). I don't know that we will ever truly be told what happened and I respect what people are saying. Hopefully it's ok to say that as a red sox fan that wants our team to competitive on the field and bringing in exciting new prospects; I'm very concerned something happened that made us go away from the Devers/Moncada types and instead aim to a lower field of players. I would like to study the Braves system as they also were on penalties. It would be interesting to compare the two. Because they just went out and paid for one of the top players this year, their first off penalties. Hoping I'm not knowledgable and all wrong about this. Again, they spend up to the cap and have traded for more money every year that they could, so it doesn't make sense to put Henry's name into the conversation. They're spending the money. Also, your list doesn't really make sense. Some of those guys didn't even get 1M. Some (Puason) are good arguments AGAINST the big bonus strategy because they don't look like they're going to pan out: Puason was awful last year. Erick Peña and Wilman Diaz had bad debuts too. I'm not sure anymore what your point is. You want them to be right more? They're guessing on 15-year-olds. It's a crap shoot. By the way, you're gonna want to type your post after the word "/quote" that's in brackets - it's very hard to read your posts that quote other posts.
|
|
|