Exactly a month until the draft. Who are we gonna take???

Discussion about the June amateur draft, college baseball, high school baseball, etc.
User avatar
UK
Superstar
Posts: 19469
Joined: Thu May 15, 2003 8:38 am

Postby UK » Tue Jun 05, 2007 1:55 pm

It doesn't work like that though, there's a reason why the slots are so important to the draft and signs. What happens if they don't? I have no idea, but I assume MLB is under bend but don't break type of ploicy.

davearm
Starter
Posts: 673
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2006 12:46 pm

Postby davearm » Tue Jun 05, 2007 2:39 pm

PingHitter wrote:
TruffleShuffle wrote:
CaliforniaRaisin wrote:
TruffleShuffle wrote:
RichHillIsABeast wrote:Good, so the bitching about not getting Wieters can stop before it starts.


yeah, i won't bitch about the cubs wasting millions on samardzija and other assorted major league players, but then all of a sudden having to obey slot money the year that a big piece to the puzzle is available in the draft.


So who are you bitching at?


I have no idea. Just bitching in general. It still seems ridiculous to me that the Cubs have to be handcuffed by money during this draft, when the actual budget for a draft is such a small part of the overall spending on the team. It seems to me that as long as the Trib owns the Cubs, they should operate like a large market team, and the next person coming in knows that they're buying a large market team.


Every team is handcuffed by slotted amounts and each team goes beyond it at various times, MLB does frown upon it. I'm sure the Cubs heard about it from Selig.

MLB may frown upon it, but those slot figures are purely recommendations and completely unenforceable.

If MLB tried to hold teams to the slot figures without it being collectively bargained through MLBPA, they'd be in court on collusion charges (again) in no time.

User avatar
NCCubFan
Hall of Fame
Posts: 22170
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2003 9:42 pm
Location: near Raleigh, NC

Postby NCCubFan » Tue Jun 05, 2007 2:41 pm

davearm wrote:
PingHitter wrote:
TruffleShuffle wrote:
CaliforniaRaisin wrote:
TruffleShuffle wrote:
RichHillIsABeast wrote:Good, so the bitching about not getting Wieters can stop before it starts.


yeah, i won't bitch about the cubs wasting millions on samardzija and other assorted major league players, but then all of a sudden having to obey slot money the year that a big piece to the puzzle is available in the draft.


So who are you bitching at?


I have no idea. Just bitching in general. It still seems ridiculous to me that the Cubs have to be handcuffed by money during this draft, when the actual budget for a draft is such a small part of the overall spending on the team. It seems to me that as long as the Trib owns the Cubs, they should operate like a large market team, and the next person coming in knows that they're buying a large market team.


Every team is handcuffed by slotted amounts and each team goes beyond it at various times, MLB does frown upon it. I'm sure the Cubs heard about it from Selig.

MLB may frown upon it, but those slot figures are purely recommendations and completely unenforceable.

If MLB tried to hold teams to the slot figures without it being collectively bargained through MLBPA, they'd be in court on collusion charges (again) in no time.
And not just in court, but almost guaranteed to lose.
Beautiful words: Former GM Jim Hendry

User avatar
UK
Superstar
Posts: 19469
Joined: Thu May 15, 2003 8:38 am

Postby UK » Tue Jun 05, 2007 3:17 pm

davearm wrote:
PingHitter wrote:
TruffleShuffle wrote:
CaliforniaRaisin wrote:
TruffleShuffle wrote:
RichHillIsABeast wrote:Good, so the bitching about not getting Wieters can stop before it starts.


yeah, i won't bitch about the cubs wasting millions on samardzija and other assorted major league players, but then all of a sudden having to obey slot money the year that a big piece to the puzzle is available in the draft.


So who are you bitching at?


I have no idea. Just bitching in general. It still seems ridiculous to me that the Cubs have to be handcuffed by money during this draft, when the actual budget for a draft is such a small part of the overall spending on the team. It seems to me that as long as the Trib owns the Cubs, they should operate like a large market team, and the next person coming in knows that they're buying a large market team.


Every team is handcuffed by slotted amounts and each team goes beyond it at various times, MLB does frown upon it. I'm sure the Cubs heard about it from Selig.

MLB may frown upon it, but those slot figures are purely recommendations and completely unenforceable.

If MLB tried to hold teams to the slot figures without it being collectively bargained through MLBPA, they'd be in court on collusion charges (again) in no time.


They're not enforceable but slotted amounts set the standard as far for signing bonuses.

User avatar
RichHillIsABeast
5-Time All-Star
Posts: 5033
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2006 11:13 am

Postby RichHillIsABeast » Tue Jun 05, 2007 3:26 pm

TruffleShuffle wrote:
CaliforniaRaisin wrote:
TruffleShuffle wrote:
RichHillIsABeast wrote:Good, so the bitching about not getting Wieters can stop before it starts.


yeah, i won't bitch about the cubs wasting millions on samardzija and other assorted major league players, but then all of a sudden having to obey slot money the year that a big piece to the puzzle is available in the draft.


So who are you bitching at?


I have no idea. Just bitching in general. It still seems ridiculous to me that the Cubs have to be handcuffed by money during this draft, when the actual budget for a draft is such a small part of the overall spending on the team. It seems to me that as long as the Trib owns the Cubs, they should operate like a large market team, and the next person coming in knows that they're buying a large market team.


It's the uncertainty of future ownership that's causing this. It's nothing to blame the Cubs about at all - for once. This truly is a Trib decision.
Founding member of the Josh Vitters BandWGN

Image

User avatar
TruffleShuffle
Inner-Circle HOF
Posts: 50813
Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2004 8:47 am
Location: Perth, W.A.
Contact:

Postby TruffleShuffle » Tue Jun 05, 2007 3:28 pm

RichHillIsABeast wrote:
TruffleShuffle wrote:
CaliforniaRaisin wrote:
TruffleShuffle wrote:
RichHillIsABeast wrote:Good, so the bitching about not getting Wieters can stop before it starts.


yeah, i won't bitch about the cubs wasting millions on samardzija and other assorted major league players, but then all of a sudden having to obey slot money the year that a big piece to the puzzle is available in the draft.


So who are you bitching at?


I have no idea. Just bitching in general. It still seems ridiculous to me that the Cubs have to be handcuffed by money during this draft, when the actual budget for a draft is such a small part of the overall spending on the team. It seems to me that as long as the Trib owns the Cubs, they should operate like a large market team, and the next person coming in knows that they're buying a large market team.


It's the uncertainty of future ownership that's causing this. It's nothing to blame the Cubs about at all - for once. This truly is a Trib decision.


fine, then the trib is wrong

CubinNY
Superstar
Posts: 19411
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2004 11:52 am
Location: Pike Road, Al

Postby CubinNY » Tue Jun 05, 2007 10:22 pm

TruffleShuffle wrote:
RichHillIsABeast wrote:
TruffleShuffle wrote:
CaliforniaRaisin wrote:
TruffleShuffle wrote:
RichHillIsABeast wrote:Good, so the bitching about not getting Wieters can stop before it starts.


yeah, i won't bitch about the cubs wasting millions on samardzija and other assorted major league players, but then all of a sudden having to obey slot money the year that a big piece to the puzzle is available in the draft.


So who are you bitching at?


I have no idea. Just bitching in general. It still seems ridiculous to me that the Cubs have to be handcuffed by money during this draft, when the actual budget for a draft is such a small part of the overall spending on the team. It seems to me that as long as the Trib owns the Cubs, they should operate like a large market team, and the next person coming in knows that they're buying a large market team.


It's the uncertainty of future ownership that's causing this. It's nothing to blame the Cubs about at all - for once. This truly is a Trib decision.


fine, then the trib is wrong
It's BS too. They let hendry spend money like a druken sailor in Amsterdam and knew the Cubs were to be sold. It makes no sense at all and would seem to me to actually be a detraction to a potential buyer. It would be like cutting on plant maintenance and setting up the machines to fail after the sale.

User avatar
Rob
Superstar
Posts: 12817
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 8:33 am

Postby Rob » Wed Jun 06, 2007 5:17 pm

It looks more and more in these later hours like we're going to end up with Parker... a decision I am very upset about.

User avatar
CaliforniaRaisin
Inner-Circle HOF
Posts: 84788
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2003 8:20 am
Location: Pasadena, CA

Postby CaliforniaRaisin » Wed Jun 06, 2007 5:19 pm

Rob wrote:It looks more and more in these later hours like we're going to end up with Parker... a decision I am very upset about.


I'd LOVE Parker.

User avatar
Rob
Superstar
Posts: 12817
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 8:33 am

Postby Rob » Wed Jun 06, 2007 5:27 pm

CaliforniaRaisin wrote:
Rob wrote:It looks more and more in these later hours like we're going to end up with Parker... a decision I am very upset about.


I'd LOVE Parker.


It's not like he's a bad choice, but right now I'd much rather look for an impact bat. We have almost nothing in the system as far as position players are concerned now that Pie is up and EPatt isn't looking like he can stick at 2nd. And considering all the potential impact bats available (Wieters, Vitters, Heyward, Moustakas) it just doesn't seem to fit. Besides, I'm just not too keen on a small fireballing high school pitcher... I like draft picks with arms likely to stay connected.

User avatar
cuubs4life
Role Player
Posts: 241
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 9:44 am

Postby cuubs4life » Wed Jun 06, 2007 6:05 pm

Parker would not be a bad choice here. Vitters would not be a bad choice. Wieters would be the best choice but thats not gonna happen. If Vitters goes #2 the the cubs will almost certainly draft Parker or Dolittle (which would suck)

CubColtPacer
Superstar
Posts: 13461
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2006 1:08 pm

Postby CubColtPacer » Wed Jun 06, 2007 6:11 pm

cuubs4life wrote:Parker would not be a bad choice here. Vitters would not be a bad choice. Wieters would be the best choice but thats not gonna happen. If Vitters goes #2 the the cubs will almost certainly draft Parker or Dolittle (which would suck)


That's about how I feel. I don't really care who the Cubs choose between Wieters or Vitters or Parker (although I would prefer one of the hitters) but drafting Doolittle there would be something I would not like at all.

User avatar
Mephistopheles
5-Time All-Star
Posts: 8726
Joined: Sun May 14, 2006 11:29 pm
Contact:

Postby Mephistopheles » Wed Jun 06, 2007 6:18 pm

I do not think anyone thinks that Doolittle is the best choice for the team, but from the Tribs POV its a great move. All the cash they invest in the draft is going to get ZERO return when the team is sold, unless there's a Prior (Price).

User avatar
cuubs4life
Role Player
Posts: 241
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 9:44 am

Postby cuubs4life » Wed Jun 06, 2007 7:17 pm

Mephistopheles wrote:I do not think anyone thinks that Doolittle is the best choice for the team, but from the Tribs POV its a great move. All the cash they invest in the draft is going to get ZERO return when the team is sold, unless there's a Prior (Price).


If Price does not go #1 to tampa (for signing resons), And your the Royals who have been said not being able to aford Porcello, and the Cubs are on the clock what do you do??? They have already said they do not want to exceed slot money, and with the Whold Trib. situation I think their hands are tied.

D-Rays pick Vitters first

Royals pick Parker

Cubs pick well......... Not vitters, Parker, Wieters (cant "afford" him), Not Price (if not wieters),......... hummm..............

CubColtPacer
Superstar
Posts: 13461
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2006 1:08 pm

Postby CubColtPacer » Wed Jun 06, 2007 7:20 pm

cuubs4life wrote:
Mephistopheles wrote:I do not think anyone thinks that Doolittle is the best choice for the team, but from the Tribs POV its a great move. All the cash they invest in the draft is going to get ZERO return when the team is sold, unless there's a Prior (Price).


If Price does not go #1 to tampa (for signing resons), And your the Royals who have been said not being able to aford Porcello, and the Cubs are on the clock what do you do??? They have already said they do not want to exceed slot money, and with the Whold Trib. situation I think their hands are tied.

D-Rays pick Vitters first

Royals pick Parker

Cubs pick well......... Not vitters, Parker, Wieters (cant "afford" him), Not Price (if not wieters),......... hummm..............


If that was the case (which I see is extremely unlikely) my guess is that the Cubs would try to strike a deal with the Tribune in order to make an exception, possibly in return a promise to cut salary elsewhere.

User avatar
cuubs4life
Role Player
Posts: 241
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 9:44 am

Postby cuubs4life » Wed Jun 06, 2007 7:21 pm

CubColtPacer wrote:
cuubs4life wrote:
Mephistopheles wrote:I do not think anyone thinks that Doolittle is the best choice for the team, but from the Tribs POV its a great move. All the cash they invest in the draft is going to get ZERO return when the team is sold, unless there's a Prior (Price).


If Price does not go #1 to tampa (for signing resons), And your the Royals who have been said not being able to aford Porcello, and the Cubs are on the clock what do you do??? They have already said they do not want to exceed slot money, and with the Whold Trib. situation I think their hands are tied.

D-Rays pick Vitters first

Royals pick Parker

Cubs pick well......... Not vitters, Parker, Wieters (cant "afford" him), Not Price (if not wieters),......... hummm..............


If that was the case (which I see is extremely unlikely) my guess is that the Cubs would try to strike a deal with the Tribune in order to make an exception, possibly in return a promise to cut salary elsewhere.


It is very unlikely, but wow if they had the chance to draft price and pass on him that would just blow my mind.

User avatar
TruffleShuffle
Inner-Circle HOF
Posts: 50813
Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2004 8:47 am
Location: Perth, W.A.
Contact:

Postby TruffleShuffle » Wed Jun 06, 2007 7:23 pm

price's bonus demands are not that high... if tampa doesn't pick him i'll be shocked.

User avatar
cuubs4life
Role Player
Posts: 241
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 9:44 am

Postby cuubs4life » Wed Jun 06, 2007 7:30 pm

The Cubs select Beau Mills!!!!! I can just picture this happening......

User avatar
TruffleShuffle
Inner-Circle HOF
Posts: 50813
Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2004 8:47 am
Location: Perth, W.A.
Contact:

Postby TruffleShuffle » Wed Jun 06, 2007 7:34 pm

cuubs4life wrote:The Cubs select Beau Mills!!!!! I can just picture this happening......


I'd prefer him over Vitters

User avatar
cuubs4life
Role Player
Posts: 241
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 9:44 am

Postby cuubs4life » Wed Jun 06, 2007 7:39 pm

TruffleShuffle wrote:
cuubs4life wrote:The Cubs select Beau Mills!!!!! I can just picture this happening......


I'd prefer him over Vitters


I like him a lot as well. If he played division 1 baseball he would almost certainly be in consideration for the top 3 teams. But do to the lack of competition at the NAIA level compared to Div. 1, he would be a good mid first round pick for someone.

User avatar
CaliforniaRaisin
Inner-Circle HOF
Posts: 84788
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2003 8:20 am
Location: Pasadena, CA

Postby CaliforniaRaisin » Wed Jun 06, 2007 7:49 pm

Cubs can do much better than Beau Mills at 3.

User avatar
TruffleShuffle
Inner-Circle HOF
Posts: 50813
Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2004 8:47 am
Location: Perth, W.A.
Contact:

Postby TruffleShuffle » Wed Jun 06, 2007 7:52 pm

CaliforniaRaisin wrote:Cubs can do much better than Beau Mills at 3.


Cubs can do much better than Beau Mills, Josh Vitters, Jarrod Parker or Dudley Doolittle at 3, but unfortunately they won't. :x

User avatar
Mephistopheles
5-Time All-Star
Posts: 8726
Joined: Sun May 14, 2006 11:29 pm
Contact:

Postby Mephistopheles » Wed Jun 06, 2007 7:54 pm

TruffleShuffle wrote:
CaliforniaRaisin wrote:Cubs can do much better than Beau Mills at 3.


Cubs can do much better than Beau Mills, Josh Vitters, Jarrod Parker or Dudley Doolittle at 3, but unfortunately they won't. :x



they really cant do much better than parker or vitt at 3

User avatar
cuubs4life
Role Player
Posts: 241
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 9:44 am

Postby cuubs4life » Wed Jun 06, 2007 7:55 pm

Mephistopheles wrote:
TruffleShuffle wrote:
CaliforniaRaisin wrote:Cubs can do much better than Beau Mills at 3.


Cubs can do much better than Beau Mills, Josh Vitters, Jarrod Parker or Dudley Doolittle at 3, but unfortunately they won't. :x



they really cant do much better than parker or vitt at 3


Wieters..............

JeffH
All-Star
Posts: 3622
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 9:40 am
Location: Sugar Land, TX

Postby JeffH » Wed Jun 06, 2007 8:32 pm

We are going to have a dominant, middle-of-the-order college hitter who plays a premium defensive position fall into our lap and we are going to blow it.

Only the Cubs.


Return to “Amateur Baseball”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest