2014 Draft Discussion

Discussion about the June amateur draft, college baseball, high school baseball, etc.
User avatar
Tangled Up in Plaid
Dripping with analytics
Posts: 5900
Joined: Sun Mar 31, 2013 9:30 pm
Location: Sacramento, CA
Contact:

Re: 2014 Draft Discussion

Postby Tangled Up in Plaid » Thu Jul 24, 2014 9:48 am

a "short" ucl? what the hell does that even mean?

User avatar
Vinestal
All-Star
Posts: 4863
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2003 12:06 pm
Contact:

Re: 2014 Draft Discussion

Postby Vinestal » Thu Jul 24, 2014 10:01 am

Tangled Up in Plaid wrote:a "short" ucl? what the hell does that even mean?

Hey, it's not how much UCL you have, it's what you do with it.... Or something like that. Lol

User avatar
Tangled Up in Plaid
Dripping with analytics
Posts: 5900
Joined: Sun Mar 31, 2013 9:30 pm
Location: Sacramento, CA
Contact:

Re: 2014 Draft Discussion

Postby Tangled Up in Plaid » Thu Jul 24, 2014 10:06 am

This whole thing seems so stupid to me. If everyone's doctor and all their mothers say his ligament is structurally sound, maybe your team should get a new doctor. As far as inherent risk goes, HE'S A [expletive] PITCHER, DUH. The UCL hasn't evolved to take the stress of thousands of violent arm actions per year.

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

Re: 2014 Draft Discussion

Postby CubinNY » Thu Jul 24, 2014 10:54 am

SouthSideRyan wrote:
CubinNY wrote:IMO, if they disliked Akein's MRI to the extent that they think he's a greater risk for arm problems you don't offer him a contract. If they only offered him a contract because of the CBA, that kind of sucks for the Astros. But if they used the results as a pretext to parley the other players, that's dirty pool.

If I was the Astros FO and I truly believed he was damaged goods, I would have petitioned MLB for some relief and not sign him. I think they were gambling their shady practice would pay off.

If the Docs think it's not a big deal, it's not a big deal.


But their doctor does think it's a big deal. The general public is going to take Andrews's word 100 times out of 100, but a team should trust its own doctors. If he says there's an issue, there's an issue.

The MLB was absolutely not going to give "relief" to the Astros so they could overslot lower round talents. I'd say MLB was quite happy with how this entire ordeal played out.

Why is it dirtier to use an injury concern discovered post-draft to offer a lower contract than to do it with a preexisting injury?

Their doctor is not an unbiased source. You know why a pre-existing injury is not the same as a concern about an injury, especially with pitchers. If the concern is big enough to lower my offer significantly, I think I claim damaged goods and seek help. It's what is fair.

User avatar
seanimal
stats enthousiast
Posts: 8749
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2006 6:56 pm
Location: the final frontier

Re: 2014 Draft Discussion

Postby seanimal » Thu Jul 24, 2014 1:26 pm

SouthSideRyan wrote:Why is it dirtier to use an injury concern discovered post-draft to offer a lower contract than to do it with a preexisting injury?


because one is a thing and the other is not

edit: i don't necessarily think of it as "dirty", so much as i think it's a flimsy pretext. draft a daywalker and lowball him based on the deleterious effects of the sun for all i care, but let's not pretend that's 1:1 with "had to reattach arm 24 months ago"
:stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman:

User avatar
SouthSideRyan
is ELL
Posts: 47568
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2003 12:08 am
Location: Chicago Loop

Re: 2014 Draft Discussion

Postby SouthSideRyan » Thu Jul 24, 2014 1:38 pm

seanimal wrote:
SouthSideRyan wrote:Why is it dirtier to use an injury concern discovered post-draft to offer a lower contract than to do it with a preexisting injury?


because one is a thing and the other is not

edit: i don't necessarily think of it as "dirty", so much as i think it's a flimsy pretext. draft a daywalker and lowball him based on the deleterious effects of the sun for all i care, but let's not pretend that's 1:1 with "had to reattach arm 24 months ago"


But the Astros didn't change course until after the MRI. I mean, it's not like they planned from the beginning let's offer him this and then smudge the MRI with our fingerprints and call it trauma.
Exile on Waveland wrote: IU smells like poop.

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

Re: 2014 Draft Discussion

Postby CubColtPacer » Thu Jul 24, 2014 3:22 pm

I was initially fully on Aiken's side, but the more I read suggests that the Astros weren't at fault here.

Let's review the timeline. As the BP article suggests, the Astros select Aiken and Nix, and do so in a way that suggests that 1) they are very confident in signing them and 2) Marshall isn't given a high importance. They then announce verbal agreements with both that match up very well with that strategy.

When Aiken goes into that MRI, in order for the Astros to be in the wrong they either had to be a) looking for something to use against him (which doesn't make sense with the clear strategy they were using and the relative unimportance they had shown Marshall), or 2) the doctor had to show this abnormality, declare it not a concern, and the team than hastily came up with this plan to play it up to try to gain leverage on talks that had already been completed rather amicably.

It seems much more likely that the doctor brought it up because he thought it was a concern. I do think the Astros made a mistake here. The doctor should have known he was not with most of the medical community on this issue, and the Astros should have known that Aiken would not be happy once he confirmed this with other doctors. As the BP article demonstrates, they did underestimate Aiken's ability to bet on himself knowing that other teams would not be scared off by this issue and the PR problems they would get.

If anybody's at fault, it's the MLB rules here. Not being able to get medical information beforehand combined with no ability to trade the selection gives teams very few options. The team is boxed into a corner and you then give them compensation, and it starts to seem to them like a way out of the situation which leads to things like this.

I believe the doctor did have what he thinks is a legitimate concern here. Comparing this to the other similar case recently (the Saffold contract with the Oakland Raiders) it seems far more likely in that case that things were dirty than it does in this one.

User avatar
Transmogrified Tiger
Hall of Fame
Posts: 49202
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2003 10:23 am
Location: Puget Sound

Re: 2014 Draft Discussion

Postby Transmogrified Tiger » Thu Jul 24, 2014 3:32 pm

I don't think MLB rules prohibit getting medical information pre-draft. If Callis is correct on Twitter, it's mostly a logistical problem. Ultimately I think very few people are of the mind that the Astros maliciously tried to drive Aiken's price down, it's the insensitivity to the process that makes them absolutely in the wrong. Dropping your valuation for medical reasons that only you think are a problem is at best ignoring the dynamics of the situation, at worst not negotiating in good faith. By drafting a player you carry some responsibility, lest you not only lose that player but the faith of the larger community. The Astros ignored that responsibility, and worst of all did so for very little benefit and even more loss than just Aiken.

User avatar
jersey cubs fan
Hall of Fame
Posts: 49519
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 12:38 pm

Re: 2014 Draft Discussion

Postby jersey cubs fan » Thu Jul 24, 2014 3:33 pm

Transmogrified Tiger wrote:Dropping your valuation for medical reasons that only you think are a problem is at best ignoring the dynamics of the situation, at worst not negotiating in good faith.


This makes absolutely no sense.
Tim wrote:"Hawthorne Effect". Basically, people improve their behavior if they know they're being watched. I'm a competitive cur, so having friends that are also doing it drives me to want to "win" daily/weekly challenges and such.

User avatar
SouthSideRyan
is ELL
Posts: 47568
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2003 12:08 am
Location: Chicago Loop

Re: 2014 Draft Discussion

Postby SouthSideRyan » Thu Jul 24, 2014 4:34 pm

Right what the Astros think is a medical problem is the only thing that matters.
Exile on Waveland wrote: IU smells like poop.

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

Re: 2014 Draft Discussion

Postby CubinNY » Thu Jul 24, 2014 5:53 pm

SouthSideRyan wrote:Right what the Astros think is a medical problem is the only thing that matters.

Why offer him a contract?

They saw a way to use information obtained to try to get the best possible draft results. They did knowing they had a handshake agreement with Aiken.

davell
Superstar
Posts: 15883
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 5:55 pm

Re: 2014 Draft Discussion

Postby davell » Thu Jul 24, 2014 6:09 pm

CubinNY wrote:
SouthSideRyan wrote:Right what the Astros think is a medical problem is the only thing that matters.

Why offer him a contract?

They saw a way to use information obtained to try to get the best possible draft results. They did knowing they had a handshake agreement with Aiken.


Agreed.
Additional rule: you have to have one or the other.The only exception is you have an amazing board name. davell, I'm looking at you; put up a [expletive] avatar or something if your name only sounds like somebody tried say Dave as they lapsed into a coma.

User avatar
seanimal
stats enthousiast
Posts: 8749
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2006 6:56 pm
Location: the final frontier

Re: 2014 Draft Discussion

Postby seanimal » Thu Jul 24, 2014 6:46 pm

did the astros seek a second opinion prior to acting?

if not, then this talk of being legitimately concerned that their pick was damaged goods is nonsense. and even if they had legitimate concerns regarding his ucl to the point of it being a deal breaker, none of that excuses them salting the earth for this kid. their actions following the disclosure of the adjusted offer, raising the bonus in the final hour, saying they reached out to his "representative", are pieces that are hard to reconcile in the "did what they were supposed to do" narrative
:stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman:

User avatar
Tangled Up in Plaid
Dripping with analytics
Posts: 5900
Joined: Sun Mar 31, 2013 9:30 pm
Location: Sacramento, CA
Contact:

Re: 2014 Draft Discussion

Postby Tangled Up in Plaid » Thu Jul 24, 2014 7:01 pm

This should be Aiken's reaction to the Astros:

Spoiler: show
Image

davell
Superstar
Posts: 15883
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 5:55 pm

Re: 2014 Draft Discussion

Postby davell » Thu Jul 24, 2014 7:06 pm

At any rate, a grievance was filed today by the MLBPA on Aiken and Nix's situation.
Additional rule: you have to have one or the other.The only exception is you have an amazing board name. davell, I'm looking at you; put up a [expletive] avatar or something if your name only sounds like somebody tried say Dave as they lapsed into a coma.

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

Re: 2014 Draft Discussion

Postby CaliforniaRaisin » Thu Jul 24, 2014 7:13 pm

Nice of the MLBPA to care now, as oppose to when it mattered during the CBA negotiations.

davell
Superstar
Posts: 15883
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 5:55 pm

Re: 2014 Draft Discussion

Postby davell » Thu Jul 24, 2014 7:17 pm

CaliforniaRaisin wrote:Nice of the MLBPA to care now, as oppose to when it mattered during the CBA negotiations.


Seriously. It's such a slippery slope with this. Boras, Close, Tellem-all the too agents are licking their chops.

Personally, I'd just like the old system back.
Additional rule: you have to have one or the other.The only exception is you have an amazing board name. davell, I'm looking at you; put up a [expletive] avatar or something if your name only sounds like somebody tried say Dave as they lapsed into a coma.

User avatar
SouthSideRyan
is ELL
Posts: 47568
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2003 12:08 am
Location: Chicago Loop

Re: 2014 Draft Discussion

Postby SouthSideRyan » Thu Jul 24, 2014 7:22 pm

CubinNY wrote:
SouthSideRyan wrote:Right what the Astros think is a medical problem is the only thing that matters.

Why offer him a contract?


Because they had to in order to sign any of the 3? It's clear you don't know the mechanisms of the draft.
Exile on Waveland wrote: IU smells like poop.

User avatar
SouthSideRyan
is ELL
Posts: 47568
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2003 12:08 am
Location: Chicago Loop

Re: 2014 Draft Discussion

Postby SouthSideRyan » Thu Jul 24, 2014 7:25 pm

seanimal wrote:did the astros seek a second opinion prior to acting?

if not, then this talk of being legitimately concerned that their pick was damaged goods is nonsense. and even if they had legitimate concerns regarding his ucl to the point of it being a deal breaker, none of that excuses them salting the earth for this kid. their actions following the disclosure of the adjusted offer, raising the bonus in the final hour, saying they reached out to his "representative", are pieces that are hard to reconcile in the "did what they were supposed to do" narrative


Does the 2nd opinion automatically invalidate their own doctor's opinion? They said they reached out to him and he wouldn't return their calls. That doesn't jeopardize his amateur status.
Exile on Waveland wrote: IU smells like poop.

User avatar
mul21
5-Time All-Star
Posts: 7135
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2005 11:53 am
Location: Hell (a.k.a. St. Louis)
Contact:

Re: 2014 Draft Discussion

Postby mul21 » Thu Jul 24, 2014 7:44 pm

CubinNY wrote:
SouthSideRyan wrote:Right what the Astros think is a medical problem is the only thing that matters.

Why offer him a contract?

They saw a way to use information obtained to try to get the best possible draft results. They did knowing they had a handshake agreement with Aiken.


I'm somewhere in the middle here. I kind of understand the Astros point of view in trying to minimize their risk after the abnormality was discovered. You planned on getting 2 pitchers for $8MM, but now you have doubts about the durability of one of them, so rather than just take a blind chance, you try to hedge your bets by getting him to sign for less and pick up an additional high upside arm as insurance in Marshall.

On the other hand, what's the point of making the "official" offer at 40% of the max when you're making an unofficial offer of $5MM at the same time? That's the part I don't really understand. I also think it would be a great idea to allow the teams to pull in maybe a half dozen to ten guys for medical evals pre-draft like they allow a certain number in the NFL draft.
I like beer.

User avatar
Tangled Up in Plaid
Dripping with analytics
Posts: 5900
Joined: Sun Mar 31, 2013 9:30 pm
Location: Sacramento, CA
Contact:

Re: 2014 Draft Discussion

Postby Tangled Up in Plaid » Thu Jul 24, 2014 7:56 pm

let's get rid of the draft and just make guys free agents when they graduate high school. it'll be like college football recruiting except all the bribes are legal

davell
Superstar
Posts: 15883
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 5:55 pm

Re: 2014 Draft Discussion

Postby davell » Thu Jul 24, 2014 8:10 pm

SouthSideRyan wrote:
CubinNY wrote:
SouthSideRyan wrote:Right what the Astros think is a medical problem is the only thing that matters.

Why offer him a contract?


Because they had to in order to sign any of the 3? It's clear you don't know the mechanisms of the draft.


That's fine. But they only needed to offer 40% of slot for that. They upped their offer to 5 mill from their initial offer. They let 1.5 mill keep them from signing him.

It's pretty easy to see they looked at the MRI as a situation to take advantage of. By getting a 3rd guy signed as well. Who knows if 5 mill was even their final offer? They pissed off Aiken and Close enough that they didn't even bother re-engaging in talks at the end.

If they were so worried, I find it very hard to believe they'd keep upping their offer.

They lost their footing in this over getting greedy and trying to add a Carson Sands type prospect to standing pat with Aiken, Nix, and no future backlash.
Additional rule: you have to have one or the other.The only exception is you have an amazing board name. davell, I'm looking at you; put up a [expletive] avatar or something if your name only sounds like somebody tried say Dave as they lapsed into a coma.

User avatar
seanimal
stats enthousiast
Posts: 8749
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2006 6:56 pm
Location: the final frontier

Re: 2014 Draft Discussion

Postby seanimal » Thu Jul 24, 2014 8:29 pm

SouthSideRyan wrote:Does the 2nd opinion automatically invalidate their own doctor's opinion?


no, and that's not what i'm suggesting. what i'm suggesting is that any reasonable attempt to validate a serious, impactful medical finding would involve seeking a second opinion. seek a second opinion, and at least there is plausible deniability. a third and it's clear the intent was on getting it right. one team physician making a risk diagnosis that just happens to be awfully convenient towards the immediate goals of the franchise? how is this not suspect behavior?

SouthSideRyan wrote:They said they reached out to him and he wouldn't return their calls. That doesn't jeopardize his amateur status.


we don't know that yet as the ncaa hasn't ruled on his eligibility, afaik. that being said, that's just pure devil's advocate to refuse to acknowledge that the specific mention of calls to his "advisor" (as opposed to his family) were anything other than a smear

which is only a reminder that of all the exploitation that exists among the professional sports, no one, and i mean NO ONE, exploits harder than the ncaa. there may be nothing in all of sports that needs more comeuppance than the ncaa. [expletive] them hard
Last edited by seanimal on Thu Jul 24, 2014 8:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
:stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman:

User avatar
seanimal
stats enthousiast
Posts: 8749
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2006 6:56 pm
Location: the final frontier

Re: 2014 Draft Discussion

Postby seanimal » Thu Jul 24, 2014 8:33 pm

also, let's not forget that the astros have every right to change their mind. that's totally legit. it's the disingenuity and unprofessionalism that i take issue with
:stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman: :stickman:

User avatar
SouthSideRyan
is ELL
Posts: 47568
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2003 12:08 am
Location: Chicago Loop

Re: 2014 Draft Discussion

Postby SouthSideRyan » Thu Jul 24, 2014 8:34 pm

davell wrote:
SouthSideRyan wrote:
CubinNY wrote:
SouthSideRyan wrote:Right what the Astros think is a medical problem is the only thing that matters.

Why offer him a contract?


Because they had to in order to sign any of the 3? It's clear you don't know the mechanisms of the draft.


That's fine. But they only needed to offer 40% of slot for that. They upped their offer to 5 mill from their initial offer. They let 1.5 mill keep them from signing him.

It's pretty easy to see they looked at the MRI as a situation to take advantage of. By getting a 3rd guy signed as well. Who knows if 5 mill was even their final offer? They pissed off Aiken and Close enough that they didn't even bother re-engaging in talks at the end.

If they were so worried, I find it very hard to believe they'd keep upping their offer.

They lost their footing in this over getting greedy and trying to add a Carson Sands type prospect to standing pat with Aiken, Nix, and no future backlash.


They upped their offer because they needed Aiken signed to get the other 2. I don't think they'd kick him out of bed for eating crackers but they certainly soured on him from the MRI. And if Close wouldn't even bother reengaging the Astros in talks at the end then he did more wrong by his client than the Astros ever could.
Exile on Waveland wrote: IU smells like poop.


Return to “Amateur Baseball”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest