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 Draft Signing Period
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Jul 27, 2021 13:26:33 GMT -5
I do think it's crazy how so many people in here were excited about Fabian when we drafted him and called it great value and now those same people are bringing up the k-rate and waxing poetic about a future unmade pick. Kind of funny - this isn't wrong. Perfectly human behavior to be sure though. Although i guess it could just be the faceless masses and the actual speakers aren't the same. Just a few other thoughts that have popped into my head over the course of this conversation: 1) We don't know what the Red Sox have offered. We just know that Gammons has said he had 2 teams that were ready to give him $3M (which I heard at least one team was ready to do, and I think some of you are on the right path...), and the Red Sox literally can't give him $3M. 2) Even if they're only offering him, say, $2M, it's bold for him to turn that down. Maybe it's a principle thing, but he's going to have to be like a top 20 pick next year to justify this gamble unless the Red Sox are really lowballing him. I figure they at least should be offering like $2.3 or $2.4, which was roughly picks 29-31-level money in this year's draft. If you go back for a year, you'd hope to bump that way up, not go back to get $100k more, as many have noted. 3) Thinking it through, this seems pretty agent-driven, as it'd be more useful to the agency to make clear teams shouldn't pop their guys when they have deals with other teams who are picking later. But that said... 4) If any college junior could pull this off, it might be Fabian this year. He's super young and still has his COVID year of eligibility to use as leverage next year. He's essentially a draft-eligible sophomore but even younger. For those saying he doesn't really have leverage, I'd disagree - he definitely does. Even a typical DE soph, who is 21, has the knock against them that they'd be an old junior the following year. Fabian is in the opposite position. 5) I don't think I'm rationalizing here, but while it'd be disappointing not to add Fabian to the system, I don't think this is a disaster. Frankly, it might be a real boon to have pick 41 next year, when they're picking near the back of the round and can use that extra pool money to throw around in a draft where they're not going to add a blue-chip talent on Mayer's level. Maybe that's the idea behind swinging for the fences at 40 - they were playing with house money to some degree at that point, so why not? 6) To be clear, they definitely talked with Fabian's camp. He was at a workout at Fenway with House and I think either Davis or Watson? Longenhagen mentioned it on Goldstein's podcast. Was thinking the same thing about your point #5. If they're picking at #30 as WS champs, and then not until around #65 after all the sandwich picks, it would be nice to also have #41 as a consolation prize for swinging for the fences on Fabian and missing. Plus, they may have a chance to sign one or two of the "difficult to sign" guys they picked on Day 3 this year.
|
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Jul 27, 2021 13:32:12 GMT -5
5) I don't think I'm rationalizing here, but while it'd be disappointing not to add Fabian to the system, I don't think this is a disaster. Frankly, it might be a real boon to have pick 41 next year, when they're picking near the back of the round and can use that extra pool money to throw around in a draft where they're not going to add a blue-chip talent on Mayer's level. Maybe that's the idea behind swinging for the fences at 40 - they were playing with house money to some degree at that point, so why not? So, the only way it seems to me like this might have been a mis-play on the Sox' part is if they held back in rounds 3-10 because they wanted to conserve resources to sign Fabian; if they don't sign him then that would just have been a squander. But is there any indication they did this? |
|
|
|
Post by julyanmorley on Jul 27, 2021 13:44:52 GMT -5
3) Thinking it through, this seems pretty agent-driven, as it'd be more useful to the agency to make clear teams shouldn't pop their guys when they have deals with other teams who are picking later. But that said.. This is a great point. This is all easy-to-explain rational behavior from the agent's perspective, who has countless future negotiations to worry about. |
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jul 27, 2021 13:47:19 GMT -5
5) I don't think I'm rationalizing here, but while it'd be disappointing not to add Fabian to the system, I don't think this is a disaster. Frankly, it might be a real boon to have pick 41 next year, when they're picking near the back of the round and can use that extra pool money to throw around in a draft where they're not going to add a blue-chip talent on Mayer's level. Maybe that's the idea behind swinging for the fences at 40 - they were playing with house money to some degree at that point, so why not? So, the only way it seems to me like this might have been a mis-play on the Sox' part is if they held back in rounds 3-10 because they wanted to conserve resources to sign Fabian; if they don't sign him then that would just have been a squander. But is there any indication they did this? Not that I see. 1) slot 2) (overslot not signed yet) 3) basically slot 4) underslot by $57K 5) (overslot not signed yet) 6) underslot by $109k 7) basically slot 8) overslot by $11k 9) basically slot 10) underslot by $100k I don't see the pick they punted on to sign Fabian. Add that they popped Kavadas and Green on day 3 and they certainly weren't being conservative. |
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Jul 27, 2021 13:52:17 GMT -5
So, the only way it seems to me like this might have been a mis-play on the Sox' part is if they held back in rounds 3-10 because they wanted to conserve resources to sign Fabian; if they don't sign him then that would just have been a squander. But is there any indication they did this? Not that I see. 1) slot 2) (overslot not signed yet) 3) basically slot 4) underslot by $57K 5) (overslot not signed yet) 6) underslot by $109k 7) basically slot 8) overslot by $11k 9) basically slot 10) underslot by $100k I don't see the pick they punted on to sign Fabian. Add that they popped Kavadas and Green on day 3 and they certainly weren't being conservative. Right, though we wouldn't necessarily "see" the picks they held back on; maybe they would've gone overslot with someone in the 3rd or 4th round if not for the Fabian pick, for instance. But I suppose we'll never know. |
|
|
|
Post by julyanmorley on Jul 27, 2021 13:58:35 GMT -5
So they're 277k underslot with the guys they've signed, plus they get another 550k over slot because of the 5% rule. Some of that might go to Guerrero, and some is money that Hickey would have gotten in normal circumstances (he might get it all as it stands since he seems to be doing a good job negotiating for himself)
I think it's fair to assume that they were planning to get Fabian some decent money over slot, and him not signing means they lose something like 3% of one draft cap in value.
|
|
|
|
Post by jaffinator on Jul 27, 2021 14:00:03 GMT -5
This is somewhat dated but it's a list of players that didn't sign and what they got afterwards. Most interesting one was Brady Aiken who turned down 40% of his slot (medical issues) then got much less later from the Indians (for those of you who are too young to remember, that's the old name for the Guardians). Astros picked Bregman the next year for that slot. www.baseballamerica.com/stories/what-has-happened-to-top-picks-who-failed-to-sign/The kicker:
What I want to do is grab Fabian (or any of these other guys) by the collar and say: "You are incredibly lucky! I know you think your success is due to your own hard work, because you wouldn't have gotten where you are without it, and that if you just keep working hard you will surely improve your position next time around. But life is not required to conform itself to your own sense of what you deserve; your hand-eye coordination could deteriorate some tiny amount; you could get injured; you might just not be as good as you think you are. And yet someone is offering you $2.5 million because they think there is maybe a 15% chance you will succeed as one of the top 0.01% of performers in this line of work. If a year from now you are merely in the top 0.02% you get nothing."
I don't agree with the sort of "you're lucky" rhetoric which is uncomfortably close to the sort of "be thankful you're getting paid for playing a game" arguments which have been used to keep salaries low and money in owners' pockets. No matter what circumstances, luck or otherwise, brought him to this point, he owes it to himself to negotiate for everything he can. Every player should negotiate for every penny they can and no one else (except for those they directly employ) is going to do that for them. Taking slot or below is not a virtue and the team organization is not your friend, especially not when you're negotiating a signing bonus. Just as we don't know the Red Sox strategy or thought process, we equally don't know Fabian's. While it may be his representation doing something that's better for them than it is for him (sending the message not to pick their guy if they have a better deal lined up later), it's a bit disrespectful to just assume that's the case as well. I've made a number of comments here stating that I'm not high on him, but I'm rooting for him to be successful and to get his money (as I am for pretty much all players) either with the Sox this year or with another team next year. All that being said, yeah strategy-wise, I would take the money is I was in his shoes, but it is very much not my place to tell him to sign whatever deal the Sox are offering (which we don't actually know the terms of). When I was 17 and still playing competitive sports, I got very sick and it cost me the vision in one of my eyes. I already knew professional sports wasn't in my future and I was applying to college normally at the time, but I can't imagine what that would do to someone like Jud Fabian. That's not even getting into the realm of true tragedy, like what happened to Terrence Clarke preparing for the NBA draft this year. Or Daniel Flores in 2017. At least Flores had already signed before he passed. |
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Jul 27, 2021 14:00:59 GMT -5
So, the only way it seems to me like this might have been a mis-play on the Sox' part is if they held back in rounds 3-10 because they wanted to conserve resources to sign Fabian; if they don't sign him then that would just have been a squander. But is there any indication they did this? Not that I see. 1) slot 2) (overslot not signed yet) 3) basically slot 4) underslot by $57K 5) (overslot not signed yet) 6) underslot by $109k 7) basically slot 8) overslot by $11k 9) basically slot 10) underslot by $100k I don't see the pick they punted on to sign Fabian. Add that they popped Kavadas and Green on day 3 and they certainly weren't being conservative. Based on what I've read about Green, he might be the guy they tabbed as the fallback option if Fabian doesn't sign. [EDIT: Didn't know that you can't apply leftover slot money from the top 10 picks to the Day 3 picks (h/t Jim Callis on the latest podcast)... how far over $125k can a Day 3 pick get?]
The MLB draft is so much more interesting than any of the other drafts (the NBA's is also interesting but way more confusing with all the "trade exception" stuff). It's a shame they can't figure out how to promote it better, besides just copying the NFL (hell, they even copied the word "combine" for the pre-draft workout camp -- nobody in the NFL even knows where that word came from).
|
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Jul 27, 2021 14:13:51 GMT -5
The kicker:
What I want to do is grab Fabian (or any of these other guys) by the collar and say: "You are incredibly lucky! I know you think your success is due to your own hard work, because you wouldn't have gotten where you are without it, and that if you just keep working hard you will surely improve your position next time around. But life is not required to conform itself to your own sense of what you deserve; your hand-eye coordination could deteriorate some tiny amount; you could get injured; you might just not be as good as you think you are. And yet someone is offering you $2.5 million because they think there is maybe a 15% chance you will succeed as one of the top 0.01% of performers in this line of work. If a year from now you are merely in the top 0.02% you get nothing."
I don't agree with the sort of "you're lucky" rhetoric which is uncomfortably close to the sort of "be thankful you're getting paid for playing a game" arguments which have been used to keep salaries low and money in owners' pockets. No matter what circumstances, luck or otherwise, brought him to this point, he owes it to himself to negotiate for everything he can. Every player should negotiate for every penny they can and no one else (except for those they directly employ) is going to do that for them. Taking slot or below is not a virtue and the team organization is not your friend, especially not when you're negotiating a signing bonus. Just as we don't know the Red Sox strategy or thought process, we equally don't know Fabian's. While it may be his representation doing something that's better for them than it is for him (sending the message not to pick their guy if they have a better deal lined up later), it's a bit disrespectful to just assume that's the case as well. I've made a number of comments here stating that I'm not high on him, but I'm rooting for him to be successful and to get his money (as I am for pretty much all players) either with the Sox this year or with another team next year. I hear you on all these points, and mostly share your perspective. But when I say "you're lucky," I don't mean "you should be thankful John Henry is deigning to give you his money"; I just mean "it is very rare for any human being to be in the position you are in and you are in danger of blowing it by making a bad strategic choice." And driving a hard bargain - which may well be all this is! - is one thing. But turning down the deal entirely is not striking a blow for the working man. Framing it that way is a bit reminiscent of those who wanted to frame that whole Gamestop thing as a strike against financial capitalism: no it wasn't, guys, you were just making a different set of Wall Street vultures rich. |
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 15,867 
|
Post by cdj on Jul 27, 2021 14:18:48 GMT -5
If they sign a qualified free agent like Carlos Correa next year would they lose pick 41?
|
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 27, 2021 14:41:03 GMT -5
The kicker:
What I want to do is grab Fabian (or any of these other guys) by the collar and say: "You are incredibly lucky! I know you think your success is due to your own hard work, because you wouldn't have gotten where you are without it, and that if you just keep working hard you will surely improve your position next time around. But life is not required to conform itself to your own sense of what you deserve; your hand-eye coordination could deteriorate some tiny amount; you could get injured; you might just not be as good as you think you are. And yet someone is offering you $2.5 million because they think there is maybe a 15% chance you will succeed as one of the top 0.01% of performers in this line of work. If a year from now you are merely in the top 0.02% you get nothing."
No matter what circumstances, luck or otherwise, brought him to this point, he owes it to himself to negotiate for everything he can. Every player should negotiate for every penny they can and no one else (except for those they directly employ) is going to do that for them. Taking slot or below is not a virtue and the team organization is not your friend, especially not when you're negotiating a signing bonus. Just as we don't know the Red Sox strategy or thought process, we equally don't know Fabian's. While it may be his representation doing something that's better for them than it is for him (sending the message not to pick their guy if they have a better deal lined up later), it's a bit disrespectful to just assume that's the case as well. I've made a number of comments here stating that I'm not high on him, but I'm rooting for him to be successful and to get his money (as I am for pretty much all players) either with the Sox this year or with another team next year. All that being said, yeah strategy-wise, I would take the money is I was in his shoes, but it is very much not my place to tell him to sign whatever deal the Sox are offering (which we don't actually know the terms of). When I was 17 and still playing competitive sports, I got very sick and it cost me the vision in one of my eyes. I already knew professional sports wasn't in my future and I was applying to college normally at the time, but I can't imagine what that would do to someone like Jud Fabian. That's not even getting into the realm of true tragedy, like what happened to Terrence Clarke preparing for the NBA draft this year. Or Daniel Flores in 2017. At least Flores had already signed before he passed. This is not the case for the draft. There is a cap and the owner is willing to spend all of it plus 5% every single year. This isn't John Henry being cheap or trying to keep money in his pocket in this case.
This is more of a "there is a spending cap for the draft every year and you are more than likely never going to get what you want, even if you're a 22 year old Babe Ruth."
By all means, negotiate like you're JD Drew if there is no cap, but at this point you're just yelling at the clouds trying to get money that does not exist.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jul 27, 2021 15:30:41 GMT -5
I mean, the point of a draft is very, very much to artificially lower signing bonuses. That's not a debatable point. Maybe there's a secondary "distribution of talent" reason but the primary reason is always money.
I otherwise don't think he's disagreeing with you.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 27, 2021 15:37:24 GMT -5
I mean, the point of a draft is very, very much to artificially lower signing bonuses. That's not a debatable point. Maybe there's a secondary "distribution of talent" reason but the primary reason is always money. I otherwise don't think he's disagreeing with you. The point of this negotiation is not to have John Henry pocket more money. That was done when the CBA was signed, but not during these negotiations.
It is a minor distinction.
|
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Jul 27, 2021 15:49:23 GMT -5
The money doesn't exist unless the drafting team squeezes other draftees for it. That sends its own uncomfortable message about the process. It may also result in players pitted against one another in the draft, working together afterwards. Bad optics. That said, I doubt if it ever enters into agent calculations.
|
|
|
|
Post by greatscottcooper on Jul 27, 2021 15:58:04 GMT -5
So, I know this is close to impossible unlikely but if the Sox did go over for Fabian. Would it the make since to just say “eff it” and sign everyone else including Green?
|
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 27, 2021 15:59:28 GMT -5
So, I know this is close to impossible unlikely but if the Sox did go over for Fabian. Would it the make since to just say “eff it” and sign everyone else including Green? There's no way they'd do that without knowing that was going to be their strategy prior to the draft. They would have drafted much differently. |
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Jul 27, 2021 15:59:41 GMT -5
So, I know this is close to impossible unlikely but if the Sox did go over for Fabian. Would it the make since to just say “eff it” and sign everyone else including Green? If they were going to do that, they needed to have that plan from the start and draft a bunch of signability guys in the later rounds. I certainly wouldn't do it for Fabian and Green. |
|
|
|
Post by greatscottcooper on Jul 27, 2021 16:02:36 GMT -5
Yeah, that’s pretty much what I thought. Would of had to make it worth it.
|
|
|
|
Post by jchang on Jul 27, 2021 16:10:22 GMT -5
So, I know this is close to impossible unlikely but if the Sox did go over for Fabian. Would it the make since to just say “eff it” and sign everyone else including Green? If they were going to do that, they needed to have that plan from the start and draft a bunch of signability guys in the later rounds. I certainly wouldn't do it for Fabian and Green. if we went over for Fabian, we lose a first or second? So which is worth more: 1) Fabian or 2) the pick lost + next years #41. I am inclined to guess 2 is worth more. Good luck Jud (no sarc, I appreciate a river boat gambler even if I don't like the risk vs. upside) |
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 27, 2021 16:13:27 GMT -5
If they were going to do that, they needed to have that plan from the start and draft a bunch of signability guys in the later rounds. I certainly wouldn't do it for Fabian and Green. if we went over for Fabian, we lose a first or second? So which is worth more: 1) Fabian or 2) the pick lost + next years #41. I am inclined to guess 2 is worth more. Good luck Jud (no sarc, I appreciate a river boat gambler even if I don't like the risk vs. upside) If they exceed the cap by more than 5 and less than 10%, they lose a 1st round pick. A first and a second if it's between 10-15% and two firsts if it's more than 15%. |
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on Jul 27, 2021 16:14:46 GMT -5
Question about the signing deadline - how does it apply to UDFA's? If they don't sign by August 1st, can they just not sign until the next calendar year? Are they still hit by the same restrictions? I doubt any UDFA is intentionally not signing just to sign a 500k deal in January, but just wondering if it's even possible, or if guys who don't sign by the deadline just can't sign.
|
|
|
|
Post by jaffinator on Jul 27, 2021 16:24:32 GMT -5
I don't agree with the sort of "you're lucky" rhetoric which is uncomfortably close to the sort of "be thankful you're getting paid for playing a game" arguments which have been used to keep salaries low and money in owners' pockets. No matter what circumstances, luck or otherwise, brought him to this point, he owes it to himself to negotiate for everything he can. Every player should negotiate for every penny they can and no one else (except for those they directly employ) is going to do that for them. Taking slot or below is not a virtue and the team organization is not your friend, especially not when you're negotiating a signing bonus. Just as we don't know the Red Sox strategy or thought process, we equally don't know Fabian's. While it may be his representation doing something that's better for them than it is for him (sending the message not to pick their guy if they have a better deal lined up later), it's a bit disrespectful to just assume that's the case as well. I've made a number of comments here stating that I'm not high on him, but I'm rooting for him to be successful and to get his money (as I am for pretty much all players) either with the Sox this year or with another team next year. I hear you on all these points, and mostly share your perspective. But when I say "you're lucky," I don't mean "you should be thankful John Henry is deigning to give you his money"; I just mean "it is very rare for any human being to be in the position you are in and you are in danger of blowing it by making a bad strategic choice." And driving a hard bargain - which may well be all this is! - is one thing. But turning down the deal entirely is not striking a blow for the working man. Framing it that way is a bit reminiscent of those who wanted to frame that whole Gamestop thing as a strike against financial capitalism: no it wasn't, guys, you were just making a different set of Wall Street vultures rich. I'm not framing this as some "worker's revolution" thing. Just that when it comes to a drafted player negotiating a signing bonus a lot of people talk like there are a lot of concerns other than strictly the money at play - how lucky they are to be playing a sport for a living, whether it's somehow unseemly to be negotiating aggressively, or whether they're hurting the team by negotiating for what they're worth. But those are mostly distractions from the only thing a player ought to be doing - negotiating the largest possible bonus they can. Nothing else is their responsibility and given their minor league pay for the next 3-6 years, every dollar can make a difference. I totally agree with you that anything other than taking the money is likely a mistake, especially given the recent history of guys turning down their signing bonus, Fabian's status as a particularly risky prospect (in my opinion), and the possibility of a random health issue as I mentioned before. I suppose I've been bothered by the tone of some comments on this board besides your own. |
|
|
|
Post by jaffinator on Jul 27, 2021 16:34:28 GMT -5
I don't agree with the sort of "you're lucky" rhetoric which is uncomfortably close to the sort of "be thankful you're getting paid for playing a game" arguments which have been used to keep salaries low and money in owners' pockets. No matter what circumstances, luck or otherwise, brought him to this point, he owes it to himself to negotiate for everything he can. Every player should negotiate for every penny they can and no one else (except for those they directly employ) is going to do that for them. Taking slot or below is not a virtue and the team organization is not your friend, especially not when you're negotiating a signing bonus. Just as we don't know the Red Sox strategy or thought process, we equally don't know Fabian's. While it may be his representation doing something that's better for them than it is for him (sending the message not to pick their guy if they have a better deal lined up later), it's a bit disrespectful to just assume that's the case as well. I've made a number of comments here stating that I'm not high on him, but I'm rooting for him to be successful and to get his money (as I am for pretty much all players) either with the Sox this year or with another team next year. All that being said, yeah strategy-wise, I would take the money is I was in his shoes, but it is very much not my place to tell him to sign whatever deal the Sox are offering (which we don't actually know the terms of). When I was 17 and still playing competitive sports, I got very sick and it cost me the vision in one of my eyes. I already knew professional sports wasn't in my future and I was applying to college normally at the time, but I can't imagine what that would do to someone like Jud Fabian. That's not even getting into the realm of true tragedy, like what happened to Terrence Clarke preparing for the NBA draft this year. Or Daniel Flores in 2017. At least Flores had already signed before he passed. This is not the case for the draft. There is a cap and the owner is willing to spend all of it plus 5% every single year. This isn't John Henry being cheap or trying to keep money in his pocket in this case.
This is more of a "there is a spending cap for the draft every year and you are more than likely never going to get what you want, even if you're a 22 year old Babe Ruth."
By all means, negotiate like you're JD Drew if there is no cap, but at this point you're just yelling at the clouds trying to get money that does not exist.
I fully understand the way the MLB draft is formatted. The fact that essentially every team spends to their draft cap in no way makes me less likely to have a problem with the idea that draft prospects should consider themselves lucky to be there. The attitudes around drafted players don't just disappear and reset once they become major leaguers. As others have pointed out as well, the draft does very much exist to limit spending. None of this detracts from my overall point which is that each player should negotiate for every dollar they're worth. Obviously, there is a maximum that can be in the context of the draft, but that's not inconsistent with anything I've said. The point has been made again and again, when it comes to the draft the only thing that matters is your bargaining position, don't give that up or voluntarily weaken it. |
|
|
|
Post by evanstonredsox on Jul 27, 2021 16:59:10 GMT -5
Pirates 14th rounder HS OF Braylon Bishop (87 BA / 94 MLB) signed for $260K today. Pretty crazy considering his price rumors and consensus talent rankings.
|
|
|
|
Post by ematz1423 on Jul 27, 2021 17:03:14 GMT -5
Pirates 14th rounder HS OF Braylon Bishop (87 BA / 94 MLB) signed for $260K today. Pretty crazy considering his price rumors and consensus talent rankings. Pirates had themselves a great draft. Where did their GM learn how to maneuver like this!! |
|
|
