Author Topic: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread  (Read 170820 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline lastobjective

  • Posts: 4751
  • Natitude

Offline blue911

  • Posts: 18487
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #1076: November 02, 2012, 09:51:41 AM »
You can't blame it on the Astros.  They guys they drafted refused to sign for slot, what you gonna do?    :shrug:

They signed their guys. They simply choose players that would sign for slot. Judging teams on their first round talent doesn't tell you much about the development side. The Nationals had 4 players on their roster that were drafted after the 10th round. None were starters but contributed something to the team, with the least helpful being John Lannan. In the early days, this was one item that was missing from the team, no talent arriving from the minors. The Detwilers of the world are expected to contribute but the Lombardozzis are what drafting and development are all about.

Offline Boss Dealwiler

  • Posts: 144
  • Hit the lights.
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #1077: November 02, 2012, 10:04:27 AM »
with the least helpful being John Lannan.


Offline cmdterps44

  • Posts: 15551
  • Future
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #1078: November 02, 2012, 10:45:05 AM »
Ray Knight needs to be a Manager or something once Davey leaves. At least keep him around forever. He's passionate about this team.

Offline HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 21641
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #1079: November 02, 2012, 10:47:43 AM »
Ray Knight needs to be a Manager or something once Davey leaves. At least keep him around forever. He's passionate about this team.

make him and Phill Woods 'of counsel'

Offline subnuclear

  • Posts: 15
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #1080: November 02, 2012, 11:31:43 AM »
They signed their guys. They simply choose players that would sign for slot. Judging teams on their first round talent doesn't tell you much about the development side. The Nationals had 4 players on their roster that were drafted after the 10th round. None were starters but contributed something to the team, with the least helpful being John Lannan. In the early days, this was one item that was missing from the team, no talent arriving from the minors. The Detwilers of the world are expected to contribute but the Lombardozzis are what drafting and development are all about.

I believe in 2007 the Astros had problem signing players because McLane decided to listen to Selig and only offer slot. Wade/Heck were ok in the draft, maybe not geniuses, but not terrible and they didn't get top 10 draft picks until 2010. The real problem is that after they made the World Series in 2005, McLane lost interest in winning and kept pushing the salaries down every year until in 2010 they started trading all their veterans for whoever. McLane was a good owner until 2005 or so, but then he let the team rot.

Offline PC

  • Posts: 47236
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #1081: November 02, 2012, 12:55:40 PM »
For the love of God, DON'T SIGN MICHAEL BOURNE.  He wants too much money and too many years (for his age).   He strikes out too much and doesn't hit for nearly enough power.  This team already has enough strikeout artists.

There's no place for Bourn in this lineup.

Offline chemist

  • Posts: 1099
  • Cheering All Zimmermen

Offline WhiteWhale

  • Posts: 1168
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #1083: November 02, 2012, 01:14:03 PM »
Hey man, I put a request out there, she obliged.  :D

This exact quote got me punched in the face once

Offline cmdterps44

  • Posts: 15551
  • Future

Offline BigMeech

  • Posts: 3739
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #1085: November 02, 2012, 01:25:22 PM »

Offline spidernat

  • Posts: 76956
  • The Lerners are Cheap AND Crooked
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #1086: November 02, 2012, 01:30:16 PM »
Anyone that looked at Martis's numbers knew the wins wouldn't keep coming.

Level 3 - Berkman swung

Paging PC, paging PC....


Offline PC

  • Posts: 47236
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #1088: November 02, 2012, 01:39:41 PM »
Paging PC, paging PC....



I've seen shorter homerun swings.

Offline chemist

  • Posts: 1099
  • Cheering All Zimmermen
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #1089: November 02, 2012, 01:53:51 PM »
(Image removed from quote.)

I've seen shorter homerun swings.

Stop it. We've had enough pain at the hands of the Cardinals lately.

Offline spidernat

  • Posts: 76956
  • The Lerners are Cheap AND Crooked
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #1090: November 02, 2012, 02:35:23 PM »
(Image removed from quote.)

I've seen shorter homerun swings.

:lmao:  But you're right.

Offline Mattionals

  • Posts: 5749
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #1091: November 02, 2012, 06:10:48 PM »
Anybody read Kilgore's article on what to do this Hot Stove™ season?  Suggests that they tried to trade for Ellsbury this year, TWICE.  Not surprised if they give it another go and if LaRoche is signed, they might leverage Morse.  They want Duke over Gorzo and will try to leverage Gorzo out in a deal somewhere.

Ellsbury makes most sense as you can have him for one year and determine by then if Goodwin is ready by 2014.  Then let Ells walk next year.

Offline comish4lif

  • Posts: 2934
  • Too Stressed to care.
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #1092: November 02, 2012, 07:01:14 PM »
maybe angels?  Dodgers?  Boston?

Not the Dodgers, they just gave $22M to Brandon League.

Offline zimm_da_kid

  • Posts: 7942
  • The one true ace
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #1093: November 02, 2012, 07:02:18 PM »
Anybody read Kilgore's article on what to do this Hot Stove™ season?  Suggests that they tried to trade for Ellsbury this year, TWICE.  Not surprised if they give it another go and if LaRoche is signed, they might leverage Morse.  They want Duke over Gorzo and will try to leverage Gorzo out in a deal somewhere.

Ellsbury makes most sense as you can have him for one year and determine by then if Goodwin is ready by 2014.  Then let Ells walk next year.

That's the juiciest piece of info that I've heard so far this offseason

Offline UMDNats

  • Posts: 18063
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #1094: November 02, 2012, 07:05:17 PM »
Anybody read Kilgore's article on what to do this Hot Stove™ season?  Suggests that they tried to trade for Ellsbury this year, TWICE.  Not surprised if they give it another go and if LaRoche is signed, they might leverage Morse.  They want Duke over Gorzo and will try to leverage Gorzo out in a deal somewhere.

Ellsbury makes most sense as you can have him for one year and determine by then if Goodwin is ready by 2014.  Then let Ells walk next year.

Ellsbury would be interesting. Wonder what it would take. Morse obviously involved, but what else?

Offline TylerDC

  • Posts: 5962
  • The Future.
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #1095: November 02, 2012, 07:28:00 PM »
So as I understand, this new system basically says if YOU think a player is worth the 13.3M offer, you'll get the compensation pick if they sign elsewhere? Seems flawed. What keeps a rich team from offering a bunch of players these deals in hopes of the compensation picks? Don't know if this is realistic.. but yeah. Or what if a team treats a player poorly in September in hopes of them turning down the 13.3M offer?

Two other things. Say LaRoche signs in Houston.. they wouldn't lose their number one overall pick, correct? Confusing.

Lastly, let's say a player who's market value is under 13.3M/year is offered the extension but decides to test the market. Teams aren't going to want to give up a 1st rounder for a 1.5 WAR player. Could this result in an overload of average players in the market with teams unwilling to sign?

Thanks to anyone who sorts this out.

Offline houston-nat

  • Posts: 19050
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #1096: November 02, 2012, 07:29:37 PM »
Two other things. Say LaRoche signs in Houston.. they wouldn't lose their number one overall pick, correct? Confusing.

This year the top 9 picks are protected. Usually it would be the top 10, but last year somebody (Pirates I think) failed to sign their top-ten draft pick so they got compensation for that.

Lastly, let's say a player who's market value is under 13.3M/year is offered the extension but decides to test the market. Teams aren't going to want to give up a 1st rounder for a 1.5 WAR player. Could this result in an overload of average players in the market with teams unwilling to sign?

Well, that's why basically if you're a bad player you have incentive to accept. Like, say, if Nyjer Morgan had been offered $13.3M, nobody would have signed him in free agency because he's not worth a draft pick, and nobody would have EVER signed him for $13.3M. Basically that's where your agent says, "hey, you may be a fruitcake, but you're not getting a bigger offer than that." My only thought is, maybe somebody hates the city/team so much they would give up anything and everything to get out of there.

Offline zimm_da_kid

  • Posts: 7942
  • The one true ace
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #1097: November 02, 2012, 07:47:03 PM »
Quote
Agent Scott Boras said there’s no chance of Rick Ankiel returning to the mound, Yahoo’s Tim Brown reports (on Twitter). “He's not pitching," Boras said. It was reported yesterday that Ankiel might be open to pitching again.

Offline Mattionals

  • Posts: 5749
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #1098: November 02, 2012, 07:52:35 PM »
Lastly, let's say a player who's market value is under 13.3M/year is offered the extension but decides to test the market. Teams aren't going to want to give up a 1st rounder for a 1.5 WAR player. Could this result in an overload of average players in the market with teams unwilling to sign?

Thanks to anyone who sorts this out.

This is two fold.  Now-a-days players are signing longer term extensions when they are younger.  Very rarely do you get very good talent that hits FA at an age under 30.  What you are left with are guys who are past their primes and as you say a bunch of average guys in the market.  Sure it would be weird if some team extends a huge offer to a nobody who is average and doesn't accept it.  Chances are that guy plays in Japan, or Mexico.



Or Cuba.




Or soccer.

Offline Mattionals

  • Posts: 5749
Re: 2012/13 Offseason Discussion Thread
« Reply #1099: November 02, 2012, 07:53:49 PM »
Quote
Mike DiGiovanna ‏@MikeDiGiovanna

#Angels are on the verge of trading RHP Dan Haren to the #Cubs for RH reliever Carlos Marmol.

Wow, that's a crap trade.  Rizzo must hate Haren if that is what he is going for.