LaRoche / Napoli

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    LaRoche / Napoli

    The Sox should absolutely not sign Adam LaRoche.

     

    Nothing wrong with LaRoche. He is a good player, but with the new compensation, the cost is just too high.

     

    And really, it is not even about the draft pick. The real issue is the slot money associated with the pick. The way I understand it, and I might be wrong, the Sox lose any slot money with their associated pick, and therefore this handicaps their ability to pay overslot on their first round pick.

     

    This is a realistic concern because the sox pick seventh overall this upcoming draft, and that is high enough that truly elite talents can fall that far. For example, say Mark Appel was available, which could happen as he fell to number 8 last year. The Sox might need a significant portion of both their first round money and second round money to sign him. I have no idea what the actual associated values are, but let us say the 7 pick carries a $5mil slot and the sox second round pick (around 44) carries a $1.5mill slot. The Sox would have potentially $6.5mill to spend on the first rounder. Without the second pick, their $5mill might not be enough to retain a player like Appel. They could potentially enhance the number a little higher with third round money, etc, but the values probably get incrementally smaller, so it is doubtful it gets that much better. The Sox are slightly further handicapped in this regard because they have no sandwich picks with corresponding slot money. And giving a qualifying offer to Cody Ross would not have changed this, as he would definitely have accepted it. If Ross and his agent valued him at about $25mill over 3 years, no way they turn down half that money over one third of that time. He could easily get a 2 year $12mill offer after 2013 and break even. That is Jonny Gomes money.

     

    The sox are also slightly helped with their draft position because the Cleveland drafts in front of them, and signed Nick Swisher, meaning Cleveland has no second round pick and slot money. Cleveland also did not gain a sandwich pick and any additional slot money to compensate. Had I understood how this worked better, I would not have suggested Swisher as a solid outfield signing. I see why the Sox passed on him. I also see why they opted for Dempster as a smarter option than Lohse.

     

    And they should do the same with LaRoche. Even taking the third year of Napoli at full price would be preferable, especially since the DH position will be available in 2015 anyway…

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from EnchiladaT. Show EnchiladaT's posts

    Re: LaRoche / Napoli

    In response to pinstripezac's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    it will be interesting 2C how this plays out

    I'm not sure losing the slot money

    is as big of a deal as some have suggested

    in it's simplest look U lose the money that you don't need

    because you already lost that draft choice

    as far as stealing from one slot to grease another slot

    this could be a problem, question is how big of a problem

    I think there is a big difference in telling a draft choice

    this is out best offer and this is all I'm allowed to offer

    while the cash might not be what the player wants the '' respect '' is

    it's not like a FA being able to go elsewhere to get a better deal at the time

    that said odds favor I don't really understand / know what I'm talking about

    with this new CBA yet

    [/QUOTE]

    English please?

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Beantowne. Show Beantowne's posts

    Re: LaRoche / Napoli

    In response to pinstripezac's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    it will be interesting 2C how this plays out

    I'm not sure losing the slot money

    is as big of a deal as some have suggested

    in it's simplest look U lose the money that you don't need

    because you already lost that draft choice

    as far as stealing from one slot to grease another slot

    this could be a problem, question is how big of a problem

    I think there is a big difference in telling a draft choice

    this is out best offer and this is all I'm allowed to offer

    while the cash might not be what the player wants the '' respect '' is

    it's not like a FA being able to go elsewhere to get a better deal at the time

    that said odds favor I don't really understand / know what I'm talking about

    with this new CBA yet

    [/QUOTE]

    The big deal in the end isn't so much signing the #1 picks or for that matter the #2 guy if the players a college seniors they don't have much leverage if they want to play pro ball.

    It's the college draft eligable juniors who have the leverage in negiotions ones that still have the option of returning to college and/or signing HS players. In both cases team might need to use funds earmarked for lower slots to make offers compelling enough. So that the player and his family would forgo accepting a scholarship to play college ball. That's how the Sox landed Swiihart. Especially if you pick a player represented by the devil himself Scott Boras....

     

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from pelosireturns. Show pelosireturns's posts

    Re: LaRoche / Napoli

    In response to EnchiladaT's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to pinstripezac's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    it will be interesting 2C how this plays out

    I'm not sure losing the slot money

    is as big of a deal as some have suggested

    in it's simplest look U lose the money that you don't need

    because you already lost that draft choice

    as far as stealing from one slot to grease another slot

    this could be a problem, question is how big of a problem

    I think there is a big difference in telling a draft choice

    this is out best offer and this is all I'm allowed to offer

    while the cash might not be what the player wants the '' respect '' is

    it's not like a FA being able to go elsewhere to get a better deal at the time

    that said odds favor I don't really understand / know what I'm talking about

    with this new CBA yet

    [/QUOTE]

    English please?

    [/QUOTE]

    I think he's saying the pick has to take it or leave it?

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from SonicsMonksLyresVicars. Show SonicsMonksLyresVicars's posts

    Re: LaRoche / Napoli

    I don't follow you, Notin.   In your example, if we give the 1st round pick the combined 1st/2nd round money, we then have no 2nd round money for the 2nd round pick we refused to give as compensation....so we don't sign him.

    Even taking some 3rd round money wouldn't work because it likely wouldn't be enough for a 2nd round pick.

    It would, however, possibly enable us to pay overslot for a stud, however.

    I realise the situation wouldn't be so exact in real life, but it seems to me to be not much of an issue....unless I'm missing something.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from EnchiladaT. Show EnchiladaT's posts

    Re: LaRoche / Napoli

    all of a sudden notin and some act like draft picks are the most important part... is this the NFL?

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Beantowne. Show Beantowne's posts

    Re: LaRoche / Napoli

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I don't follow you, Notin.   In your example, if we give the 1st round pick the combined 1st/2nd round money, we then have no 2nd round money for the 2nd round pick we refused to give as compensation....so we don't sign him.

    Even taking some 3rd round money wouldn't work because it likely wouldn't be enough for a 2nd round pick.

    It would, however, possibly enable us to pay overslot for a stud, however.

    I realise the situation wouldn't be so exact in real life, but it seems to me to be not much of an issue....unless I'm missing something.

    [/QUOTE]


    As I posted above...only issue is with players that still have college eligabiltiy and or Top HS players with scholarships in hand...both have the option and the leverage to decline and then re-enter the draft the following year. A gamble on the part of the College Junior, not so much for the HS player who would benefit from attending and attaining a degree while living the life of a college kid...

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: LaRoche / Napoli

    In response to EnchiladaT's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    all of a sudden notin and some act like draft picks are the most important part... is this the NFL?

    [/QUOTE]

    I would assume it has a similar importance.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: LaRoche / Napoli

    In response to EnchiladaT's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    all of a sudden notin and some act like draft picks are the most important part... is this the NFL?

    [/QUOTE]


    Thats the way the team has to rebuild, at least primarily-identifying, obtaining, and retaining good young talent, especially pitching talent. These younger players should be mixed in with an occasional proven ML player who brings not only his baseball prowess but a good attitude as well. Its not going to happen this year..maybe not next year either. So as long as things are going in the right direction it will be hard to blame Cherington for not making the playoffs in 2013. So far I do not see much improvement in this area however....besides Webster and Delarosa who have the Sox obtained to bolster the SP staff in future years? I agree about Laroche.....do not sign him. If Napoli does not sign its not a big deal either since the team is likely going nowhere this year anyway. This is a rebuilding year and I for one would like to see more rebuilding than has been done so far. Guys like Victorino simply are not going to help the team become a contender in 2014 and beyond.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    Re: LaRoche / Napoli

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I don't follow you, Notin.   In your example, if we give the 1st round pick the combined 1st/2nd round money, we then have no 2nd round money for the 2nd round pick we refused to give as compensation....so we don't sign him.

    Even taking some 3rd round money wouldn't work because it likely wouldn't be enough for a 2nd round pick.

    It would, however, possibly enable us to pay overslot for a stud, however.

    I realise the situation wouldn't be so exact in real life, but it seems to me to be not much of an issue....unless I'm missing something.

    [/QUOTE]

    That is a legitimate concerm but usually the first round pick is the guy you want more and has greater potential to build around.   For some picks like Appel it might be worthwhile to either forego signing thr second round pick or overdrafting a more signable player.  Either way more slot money equals more flexibility and some free agents are not worth giving that up over. Josh Hamilton? Yes. Adam LaRoche or Nick Swisher? No way

     

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from SonicsMonksLyresVicars. Show SonicsMonksLyresVicars's posts

    Re: LaRoche / Napoli

    I don't follow you, Notin.   In your example, if we give the 1st round pick the combined 1st/2nd round money, we then have no 2nd round money for the 2nd round pick we refused to give as compensation....so we don't sign him.

    Even taking some 3rd round money wouldn't work because it likely wouldn't be enough for a 2nd round pick.

    It would, however, possibly enable us to pay overslot for a stud, however.

    I realise the situation wouldn't be so exact in real life, but it seems to me to be not much of an issue....unless I'm missing something.

    [/QUOTE]

    That is a legitimate concerm but usually the first round pick is the guy you want more and has greater potential to build around.   For some picks like Appel it might be worthwhile to either forego signing thr second round pick or overdrafting a more signable player.  Either way more slot money equals more flexibility and some fre

    [/QUOTE]

    That's true.  I suppose a big part of the equation is what you are giving up the pick and money for....and LaRoche isn't worth it to me.  This would have been the year for us to splurge on a big-time FA i.e. given our protected 1st rounder but, alas, there were no good big FA bets to make.

    From another perspective, the slot money has to go with the pick or the team getting the pick has no money with which to sign the pick.  The league could give the team getting the pick the monetary equivalent of the sandwich round pick to sign the pick, leaving the original money with the team signing the FA/losing the pick....but that would screw the (generally) smaller teams losing FAs to the (generally) larger teams. 

    As a Sox fan, wahoo, let's do that! 

     

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from parhunter55. Show parhunter55's posts

    Re: LaRoche / Napoli

    This new compensation deal has really hurt LaRoche (and others).  If it was something the players union insisted on, then the players ought to oust their union negotiators.  It does result in a situation much more like the NFL than in the past.  It is acting a bit like the franchise tag.

    LaRoche has very limited choice when it comes to who to sign with, for how much and for how many years.  He may have to take a two-year deal from the Nationals if he wants to play in the majors next season.  He probably should have taken the $13.3 qualifying offer and hoped not to get one next season, but at his age he was looking for security.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from SonicsMonksLyresVicars. Show SonicsMonksLyresVicars's posts

    Re: LaRoche / Napoli

    In response to parhunter55's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    This new compensation deal has really hurt LaRoche (and others).  If it was something the players union insisted on, then the players ought to oust their union negotiators.  It does result in a situation much more like the NFL than in the past.  It is acting a bit like the franchise tag.

    LaRoche has very limited choice when it comes to who to sign with, for how much and for how many years.  He may have to take a two-year deal from the Nationals if he wants to play in the majors next season.  He probably should have taken the $13.3 qualifying offer and hoped not to get one next season, but at his age he was looking for security.

    [/QUOTE]

    I agree, but it's also helped many others e.g. Cody Ross, Victorino, Napoli, etc. as they did not cost a compensatory draft pick so probably got extra money/years because of that.

    That does not invalidate your comment about the union negotiators failing their clients (overall)....they should not have created such a disparity between the winners and losers.

     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from EnchiladaT. Show EnchiladaT's posts

    Re: LaRoche / Napoli

    lol..... maybe

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from parhunter55. Show parhunter55's posts

    Re: LaRoche / Napoli

    While I certainly agree that this new system seems to help others, just below the level of what might once have made them type A free agents, I do not remember any type A free agents being as limited in their options, and accepting deals that they just could not live with as has happened to LaRoche, Lohse and possibly Bourn.  Agree with you that Varitek and some relievers may have been hindered by being type Bs at one time, the LaRoche situation seems unprecedented to me.  Here is a guy who had a very productive season in his walk year (unlike Varitek) and seems completely unable to cash that in in any way.

     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from SinceYaz. Show SinceYaz's posts

    Re: LaRoche / Napoli

    In response to parhunter55's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    While I certainly agree that this new system seems to help others, just below the level of what might once have made them type A free agents, I do not remember any type A free agents being as limited in their options, and accepting deals that they just could not live with as has happened to LaRoche, Lohse and possibly Bourn.  Agree with you that Varitek and some relievers may have been hindered by being type Bs at one time, the LaRoche situation seems unprecedented to me.  Here is a guy who had a very productive season in his walk year (unlike Varitek) and seems completely unable to cash that in in any way.

    [/QUOTE]


    I agree ... thanks to Notin and his insight, I have learned it may not have been LaRoche who was unwilling to sign on for two years plus the money, but there are clubs who have just said the cost - for the future - might be too high.

    Interesting.  I agree with the post that suggests that the players union should have checked into this more fully, if it was the union's selling point.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from georom4. Show georom4's posts

    Re: LaRoche / Napoli

    we need a first baseman in 2013, not a draft pick....there are like 50 rounds of draft in mlb...none are sure fire stars - even first rounders..i checked out the list from the last 20 years and some of those #1's are excellent players, some were total busts....

     

    the only way you would not want AL to play 1B is either you agree with Softy that his a 5mil a yr hack at best or you still think a crippled napoli is a better solution (apparently Ben does)

    meanwhile I remember that short stint when AL played for the sox and still curse the Kotchman trade to this day....

     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from georom4. Show georom4's posts

    Re: LaRoche / Napoli

    In response to Ben Cheringtom's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to georom4's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    we need a first baseman in 2013, not a draft pick....there are like 50 rounds of draft in mlb...none are sure fire stars - even first rounders..i checked out the list from the last 20 years and some of those #1's are excellent players, some were total busts....

     

    the only way you would not want AL to play 1B is either you agree with Softy that his a 5mil a yr hack at best or you still think a crippled napoli is a better solution (apparently Ben does)

    meanwhile I remember that short stint when AL played for the sox and still curse the Kotchman trade to this day....

    [/QUOTE]


     

     

    morning whine

    [/QUOTE]


    thanks ben  gm to you too

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: LaRoche / Napoli

    In response to georom4's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    the only way you would not want AL to play 1B is either you agree with Softy that his a 5mil a yr hack at best or you still think a crippled napoli is a better solution (apparently Ben does)

    [/QUOTE]

    Napoli is definitely not crippled.  He was on the DL last year from mid-August to mid-September but when he came back, in 16 games he had a 1.051 OPS and 7 homers.

    Pretty hard to hit 7 homers in 16 games if you're crippled.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: LaRoche / Napoli

    ....besides Webster and Delarosa who have the Sox obtained to bolster the SP staff in future years?

    • Barnes
    • Owens
    • Johnson
    • Light
     

Share