Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Tottenham's Plans for Northumberland Stadium Approved

What the Indians didn't do

With the 2007 draft season concluded as of last night's signing deadline, here are two scenarios the Indians didn't put themselves into:

  1. Give up first-round pick to sign Carlos Lee for $100 million.
  2. Give up second-round pick to sign Woody Williams for $12.5 million.
  3. Use third-round pick, now the team's top pick, on a guy they weren't sure they could sign.
  4. Fail to sign him.
  5. While you're at it, don't sign your fourth-round pick either.
The Astros, already with a thin system and thin major league team, continue to dig their hole deeper and deeper still.  What was that Carlos Lee signing for, exactly?  To play-act at contending while giving Biggio his send-off?
  1. Give an 18-year-old a major league contract.
  2. Or anyone else for that matter.
Coverage of draft signings tends to focus on the dollars -- it's easy to write headlines that way -- but giving a drafted player a major league contract, rather than the standard minor league deal, is a gigantic concession for a team and often a very foolish one.  Three players got such a contract this week, among them David Price, the number-one overall pick in the draft.  Price will turn 22 next week.  Another is Andrew Brackman, a 21-year-old pitcher who got silly Yankee money.

The other one, however, is just 18 years old:  Rick Porcello, now a RHP for the Detroit Tigers.  Yes, yes, he'll make millions.  Here's what else will happen, however, because he already has a major league contract.

  • They're required to be added to the 40-man roster immediately, rather than at the end of 2011.  This will prevent the Tigers from using that spot on a player to help them for the stretch run, or, on another emerging prospect in the upcoming offseason.  They likely will lose a prospect in the Rule 5 draft as a direct result.
  • Porcello will be out of options before he turns 22.  Since he's added to the 40-man immediately, he then must be sent down to the minors immediately, which burns an option.  Players in this situation do get four option years rather than three, but if he doesn't adapt quickly to very advanced competition, that fourth option will be used in 2010.
  • If he does make it as a major leaguer, the Tigers will then take a bath in arbitration.  Several of these contracts, incredibly, allow the players to opt out of the stipulated salaries in later years and go to arbitration instead -- and that is, of course, exactly what they'll do.  Arbitrated salaries are based not just on the salaries of comparable players, but also on what each particular player has been paid in the past.  So instead of a track record of $400,000 salaries, each of these players will enter arbitration with average annual salaries of up to $2 million.
The Indians ran out of time with Jeremy Guthrie at age 28.  If Porcello has to be put on waivers as Guthrie was, it will be at age 22.  A player who hasn't made it by age 28 is probably not going to get very far at any point.  But a top high school draft pick may well struggle for a few years and develop late.  The stupidity of the Porcello deal is just unfathomable.  The Tigers may have lots of money to throw around, but they don't have roster spots to spare.

One could argue that it was, ultimately, a good day for Indians fans.  The Indians drafted Beau Mills, arguably the best college hitter in the draft, and signed him to a minor league deal for $1.6 million.  He's been playing for almost two months now, as have several other top picks.  The only late-ish signing was fourth-rounder T.J. McFarland, who got third-round money a few days ago.

The Indians seem to have adapted to the new signing deadline by adopting a two-month draft-and-follow approach.  They devoted several picks in medium-high rounds to players avoided by other teams for signability reasons, then watched those players in summer leagues for two months.  At that point, the Indians decided either to go over-slot to sign the player, or to let him go.  It's a shrewd strategy that one could see being emulated by other teams in the future.  In any event, McFarland made the cut, while 7th rounder Cole St. Clair and 11th rounder Matt Hague did not.  The Indians signed all four of their picks from the first six rounds, and 11 of 13 from the first 15 rounds.

Mills turned 21 just last week, an age that combines with an already-advanced bat to make a delightful combination of projectability and maturity.  The Indians had already scouted him heavily playing with wood bats a year ago, in the Alaska League.  Mills doesn't have to be added to the 40-man roster until the end of 2010.  In the event he doesn't develop quickly, he should not face an option crunch until Spring 2014, at age 27.

McFarland, several months younger than the trio discussed above, is on a roster track on year behind Mills.  He won't have to be added to the 40-man roster until the end of 2011, which pushes any potential roster crunch for him until Spring 2015, at age 25.  Of course he doesn't have the same kind of upside as the first-rounders above.  But whatever potential he does have, the Indians should have plenty of time to realize it.

Comment 71 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Re: What the Indians didn't do
Hire Shapiro!
Nice post, Jay. Thanks for putting that in a nice perspective.

I can never get psyched up for the MLB draft for some reason... I don't know if it's the immense amount of rounds, or the fact that these guys won't crack the majors for some time, or anything else. It might be because I love the NHL draft too much... 7 rounds, might see those guys in the NHL (or AHL... like in Cleveland perhaps) sooner rather than later. But now, I'm just rambling.

"We've talked about it so many times," Wedge said, "but this is a special group."

by CarnegieAndOntario on Aug 16, 2007 1:46 PM EDT reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
LOVE the NHL Draft?!?! Alright Chester you've officially become too Canadian for your own good. Granted I was pretty damn excited this year when Cherepanov dropped all the way down to the Leafs' former spot, swearing under my breath at JFJ the whole time. But too many of those late rounders have become busts for my team for me to even feign interest in the late rounds.

by supermarioelia on Aug 16, 2007 2:21 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
"Alright Chester you've officially become too Canadian for your own good."

...sigh, if only.
I haven't really scouted the past two drafts so well, maybe it was the lockout that really got me down for awhile. But I'm getting back into fantasy hockey a lot, and I have renewed my love for the NHL lately.

"We've talked about it so many times," Wedge said, "but this is a special group."

by CarnegieAndOntario on Aug 16, 2007 2:23 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
It sounds like you guys are a lot more knowledgeable than I am on the players, but it's always nice to hear other people get excited about the NHL.  

by Pronk33 on Aug 16, 2007 2:29 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
I thought the NHL was still going through a lock-out

by Roger Dorn on Aug 16, 2007 2:37 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
Nope... they've got uniforms and sticks and toothless guys from Alberta going again now.
"We've talked about it so many times," Wedge said, "but this is a special group."

by CarnegieAndOntario on Aug 16, 2007 2:39 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
Cleveland even has an AHL (AAA equivalent) hockey team now.

by Pronk33 on Aug 16, 2007 2:45 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
Lake Erie Monsters for those who haven't heard. (If you can't tell... I'm pretty excited hockey is back in C-Town)
"We've talked about it so many times," Wedge said, "but this is a special group."

by CarnegieAndOntario on Aug 16, 2007 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
I started following the Avs since Cleveland never had an NHL team in my lifetime, so it's kinda funny that the current team is a Colorado affiliate.

by Pronk33 on Aug 16, 2007 3:56 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
I've been sort of hating on the Avs for the past few years (I miss the Nordiques and hate the DET-COL rivalry, mainly because it was all ABC ever showed). But now, I must accept them as our new overlords. At least we aren't teamed up with the Flyers. :P
"We've talked about it so many times," Wedge said, "but this is a special group."

by CarnegieAndOntario on Aug 16, 2007 4:00 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
Yeah, they did get a lot of coverage back in the day, can't argue with that.  That partly contributed to my choice of team when I was younger though, they were one of the more accessible teams at the time.  That and I'm a big Roy fan (hence the 33).  So I guess I'm not quite a convert/bandwagoner, since I never had a home team to root for, haha.

by Pronk33 on Aug 16, 2007 4:13 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
Cleveland also added a USL Div 2 (AA, basically) soccer team this year as well.
I spoke the words but never gave a thought to what they all could mean.

by Brad D on Aug 16, 2007 6:46 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
DO you have any details? I'd love to catch some soccer in Cleveland next time I'm on that side of the world

by Luis (Tribe Fan in London) on Aug 17, 2007 3:39 AM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
I always laugh when I hear non-Canadians describe how their interest in hockey goes through peaks and valleys. We simply don't have a choice in the matter. Even when I pretend that I don't "care" about hockey for a few weeks, my friends call bullshit on me pretty quickly. They know it's impossible not to be completely immersed in the game up here if you consider yourself a true sports fan.

And regarding fantasy hockey, if any of you are interested in joining a free Yahoo league with some sharks from north of the border, let me know. I'll warn you ahead of time, it's usually pretty competitive. I used to be a writer for fantasyhockey.com, and yet somehow I still missed the playoffs last year. So enter at your own peril I guess.

by supermarioelia on Aug 16, 2007 4:30 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
I wish I could be not go through peaks and valleys... but hockey coverage 'round these parts is usually next to none. I was a pretty prominent commissioner of a fantasy hockey league for awhile, but the lockout and transitioning into college life put the kabosh on that one. I'm trying to start up an old 1980s retro league, and that's piqued my interest lately.

I'll take you up on the Yahoo league. The past two seasons (again, more part of the problem of disinterest) have been very non-competitive for me. I'd be pretty intrigued with some higher-class play.

"We've talked about it so many times," Wedge said, "but this is a special group."

by CarnegieAndOntario on Aug 16, 2007 4:36 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
Oooh, fantasy hockey against real competition... where do I sign up??  Seriously, if you're taking applications that's something I'd like to get in on.  I don't mind getting my butt kicked by pros. ;)

by Corsairs on Aug 16, 2007 10:14 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
Sounds like we got another victim here, Mario. :p
"We've talked about it so many times," Wedge said, "but this is a special group."

by CarnegieAndOntario on Aug 16, 2007 10:59 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
I completely disagree. Porcello was a brilliant signing by the Tigers. I see the downsides of the deal but they still got an unbelivably talent player at such a late pick. It's like Verlander, Maybin, and Miller all over again. The Indians take no risks in the first-round of the draft anymore and I think that may eventually hurt them.
The poster formerly known as JRam.

by Joe on Aug 16, 2007 1:47 PM EDT reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
I'm not sure if I agree with Jay but there's no reason to call the signing "brilliant" that I can see. It's using resources that other teams don't have-it's not innovative or ingenious. They get some credit for exploiting the system, the same way the Yankees do. But what's "brilliant" about it?

It's like winning a knife fight with a handgun.

by afh4 on Aug 16, 2007 1:56 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
It'll be brilliant if he pans out to be a frontline starter. Right now its a gamble, one that all the teams ahead of them were unwilling to make. You have to give them credit for their aggressive pursuit of the highest projected talent available to them, despite not having an unlimited payroll. The strategy has landed them the highest level of talent in the last four drafts, I believe all of whom landed in their lap, after other teams passed.

You could acually say that strategy is kind of brilliant, in the strict moneyball sense of taking advantage of a gap in the market. Other teams got scared off, and Detroit got to pull the trigger on elite prospects they arguably weren't in a position to even aim at.

by mcrose on Aug 16, 2007 2:24 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
Agreed. It is a gamble, but so is a free agent signing. 7 mil is really nothing. As Jay points out the major league contract is the biggest part of the gamble, but to get a top talent late in the draft, the tigers did well. Count me as jealous.

by oxforddave on Aug 16, 2007 3:19 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
I'm probably being nitpicky about the word "brilliant." But, similar to a free agent signing, I don't like to give teams a lot of credit for overspending and making poor roster decisions even if they work out. It's bad for the sport and, as I stated, it's not like they innovated this approach. It's obvious to everyone.  

by afh4 on Aug 16, 2007 3:56 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
It's not a poor roster decision and if it is bad for the sport, it's not their fault. We can blame the Tigers, Yankees, and Red Sox all we want but the real culprit here is Bud Selig. This drafting format needed to be changed years ago and it's now getting to the point where it's more like free agency than a draft.
The poster formerly known as JRam.

by Joe on Aug 16, 2007 7:29 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
wouldn't be more than just Selig,....like the don fehr as well. Selig ain't know Mussolini.

by hans on Aug 16, 2007 8:51 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
I don't see how anyone who understands the process can blame Selig.  In order to make changes, Selig has to build consensus among the teams (that is, the owners as advised by their respective GM's) and then negotiate with the players' union.  If he only had to do one or the other, it would be a lot simpler to fix the system.  The last two agreements each made improvements in drafting and development, and I'm sure the next two will as well.

How can it be a good roster decision to have a high school kid on the 40-man when you're struggling to win a player spot?  Obviously it isn't.

Know how many games this season have featured a pitcher under 21?  Three.  That's right, three games in all of baseball.  One was started by Felix Hernandez, who turned 21 four days later.  The other two were started by Phillip Hughes -- right before he went on the DL, where he later turned 21.

We'll see this kid in two years, if the Tigers are lucky.  And there's a reasonably good chance that we'll never see him.

by Jay on Aug 16, 2007 8:55 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
From what I surmise, Porcello is immediately the Tigers 2nd best prospect. Surely they can burn a roster spot for their 2nd best prospect. Its not like the chaff at the bottom of the tribe's 40-man is worth much (Rouse, Luna, Aubrey).

Yeah he has to stick when he is 22, but that is not unheard of. It is not a ridiculous time schedule, it is a reasonable schedule. If he is later than that, he is either not progressing, or, more likely, hurt. Miller likely have been on the tribe's 25-man this year if he did not get hurt.    

Sure, by doing this the tigers have lost some injury insurance, roster flexibility, and a modest amount of cash. But that was the price of doing business, and I'd put it on the cheap rather than expensive side.

Oh yeah, they have to be berated by the commissioner also. Big whoop.

by oxforddave on Aug 16, 2007 10:29 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
Regarding the commissioners office, am I the only one that thinks that this whole "Selig is pissed off about what the Tigers did" story smacks of collusion?  The whole slotting of draft pick money really feels like meddling on the part of the MLB to me.
-Erik

by drerikbrady on Aug 17, 2007 8:18 AM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
I think you can make an argument that there's room on the 40-man, but it does hurt their ability to stockpile depth.  Had we been one roster spot short in the offseason, we might have lost Francisco or Rouse.  And whatever you think of Rouse, we were better off having him than not as of April.

It's easy to say now, looking back at who did well, "Rouse, Luna, Aubrey."  But you don't get to pick after the fact.  You couldn't have told me those were the three guys last November.

Yeah he has to stick when he is 22, but that is not unheard of. It is not a ridiculous time schedule, it is a reasonable schedule.

Easy to say, but is there any reason to believe it?

The normal time frame even for a top high school pitcher is 5-6 years, and the "deadline" generally is 7-8 years.  There is nothing reasonable about three years.  Andrew Miller was not ready to stick at 21 ...

If he is later than that, he is either not progressing, or, more likely, hurt. Miller likely have been on the tribe's 25-man this year if he did not get hurt.

... and Adam Miller is still not on the 40-man.

You're basically saying of Porcello, "If he can't stick by 21, then who needs him anyway?"  That's crazy talk.  Carmona at 23 is one of the best pitchers in the majors -- he wasn't ready to stick at 21, but he's incredibly valuable.  How about Sabathia?  Had he struggled in 2001, would that have made him more or less worthless?  Of course not.

The normal draft signing -- 99% of them -- gives the team 7-8 years to develop the player into a major leaguer.  To cut it down to three years is always questionable, but to do so for an 18-year-old pitcher is just insanity.  Even among elite draft picks, very few pitchers can perform in the majors by age 21.

by Jay on Aug 17, 2007 10:33 AM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
Why not create a slotting system like in the NBA draft? A player picked in a certain spot gets a set contract. If that had been put into place, the draft would have never devolved into this.

by Joe. on Aug 17, 2007 11:40 AM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
That would solve the competitive balance issue, but a true slotting system would have to be collectively bargained for. I'm sure this was brought up in the last CBA, but instead we got the signing deadline and the end of draft-and-follows, which are designed to increase the teams' leverage without imposing a strict slotting system.

by Ryan on Aug 17, 2007 12:43 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
We also got equivalent compensation picks for unsigned first-rounders (none used this year) and an extra year of Rule 5 exemption for all minor league contracts.  Those were both significant gains for teams that rely on homegrown players.

by Jay on Aug 17, 2007 7:59 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
All of which is great for allowing teams to keep their players already in the organization, but which does little to allow teams with bad records and relatively few resources to pick the best player available in the first round.

by Ryan on Aug 18, 2007 2:49 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
That's true, but (a) it's all part of the big picture of developing talent internally, and (b) major league rosters are not filled with top-half-of-first-round picks.

This problem realistically affects only the first five or ten picks in the draft.  So while it would be nice for it to get fixed, the problems that were addressed last year affect every pick in every round of the draft, as well as all international signings.

Consider the high school draftees, almost all of whom are 18, and the international signees, most of whom are 16.  Getting an extra year to develop all those players is a much more significant win for a team like the Indians than whatever change would allow them to draft Jeff Porcello for the same money as Beau Mills.

And by the way, the minute that change gets made, a guy like Jeff Porcello never makes it out of the Top Five anyway.

by Jay on Aug 18, 2007 3:48 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
Only five picks got more than $2 million this year.  Three of them went within the first few picks.  The Indians passed on Brackman and Porcello, but so did 20 other teams.  So the idea that they're not worth the money, or the contract demands, obviously was pretty widely held.

Keep in mind, too, that the Indians with the 13th pick faced a different choice than the Tigers.  The Indians had Beau Mills available, for much more favorable terms.  The Tigers could choose Porcello or Brackman, and put up with the ridiculous terms, or they could choose the 29th best player in the draft.  And that 29th best player was no Beau Mills.

We can't be certain that the Indians and Tigers, in reverse positions, wouldn't have made reversed choices.  I am pretty certain, however, that the Indians would never have agreed to a major league deal.

by Jay on Aug 16, 2007 2:11 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
The only way it makes sense is if these 18-year olds are sure-fire guaranteed top shelf major leaguers.  

But can you guarantee that about any 18-year-old?

by Jackdaw on Aug 16, 2007 1:47 PM EDT reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
Brackman will be 22 in December.

Birthdate near bottom.

by afh4 on Aug 16, 2007 1:53 PM EDT reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
Thanks -- somewhere I read his DOB as being in 1989.

by Jay on Aug 16, 2007 2:01 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
Yeah I was at Duke when he was playing basketball at NCSU, so I knew that couldn't be right.

by afh4 on Aug 16, 2007 2:04 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
This is why our farm system is one of the best in baseball. I don't think that throwing silly money at prospects is very smart. They are prospects after all and there is no sure thing with them. If that was the case, Jaret Wright would be our ace right now.
I heard that L.Carr is only going to dress 25 players this Sat........the rest can dress themselves!

by gahnki on Aug 16, 2007 3:45 PM EDT reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
Well Wright wasn't as much of a case of a prospect not panning out as he was just overused in 1997.

by Roger Dorn on Aug 16, 2007 4:05 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
Not only that, but we'd probably have lost him to free agency by now anyway.

by Jay on Aug 16, 2007 4:18 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
That's my point, though, To sink money and roster spots into unproven prospects seems a bit ridiculous. However, if we would have won the WS in '97 I'm sure his value would seem reasonable. Even if he was a bust after that.
I heard that L.Carr is only going to dress 25 players this Sat........the rest can dress themselves!

by gahnki on Aug 16, 2007 4:25 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
I disagree that our farm system is one of the best in baseball and the indians unwillingness to shell out for premium prospects is one of the reasons why:
  The biggest weakness of the system, is lack of impact players- Beyond Adam Miller and Fausto Carmona(who was a surprise) the indians lack any players who have a legitamate shot at being an all-star. Even if you look at the major league roster, half of the impact players(sizemore, hafner, westbrook) were acquired by trade. I'd argue the best way to win is to develop a smaller number of impact players you can control cheaply, vs the indians method of developing solid, but often times redundant parts
     Look at the indians history of 1st, sandwich, and 2nd rounders- find impact players. The history is littered with players who either didn't pan out or who have become average big league players. Looking back, the only 2 drafted players who have really panned out are sabathia and miller.
   Jim Callis(BA) did a study in which he demonstrated that paying a premium for players early in the draft is more effective than picking safely.
   It's much more cost effective to spend and extra 2-3 mil in the draft each year and build a dynamic system like the red sox or the yankees, or one could even argue the tigers- than it is to spend it on trot nixon, j-mich etc.
  To me, shapiro's draft strategy is the most frustrating part of his reign

by prudential18 on Aug 16, 2007 8:24 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
Its not really Shapiro's right? Someone help me out here...Isn't Maribelli the one involved in the drafting of players more-so than Shapiro?

Also I do agree that we haven't really drafted that well, no better than most teams anyways.

by hans on Aug 16, 2007 8:55 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
Mirabelli works for Shapiro.

There's no doubt we've done better the last few years in acquiring prospects through trades and international signings than through the draft.  But I think there's been more focus on those areas, and that part of Shapiro's strategy undoubtedly has been dead-on.

I think the post prior suffers from a lot of unrealistic expectations, but I don't have time to get into it in detail at the moment ... maybe later.

by Jay on Aug 16, 2007 9:02 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
I am way out of my element here, but isn't there a strong argument that you can do a better job identifying arbitrage situations and solid potential prospects in the low- to mid-minors than in the draft?

Teams always have spare parts to move or system strengths (like the Indians OF prospects) that they might be able to move for lower-level high-ceiling prospects.

Also, it's important to note that the draft is only a portion of prospect acquisition - efforts in Latin America are also important, although I don't have the knowledge to speak as to the Indians' relative success there as compared to other teams.

by dave @ Let's Go Tribe! on Aug 16, 2007 9:49 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
Well, if you wanna know how their Latin American scouting system is doing, why not look at the roster.  Let's see, Victor, Fausto, Perez, and Jhonny - not sure about Mujica.  So that's one potential MVP a Cy Young candidate, a solid shortstop/soon to be third baseman and arguably the most effective (yeah, I know that other Latino, Betancourt) set-up guy on the team.

Not too bad, huh?

LeBron must GO!

by mauichuck on Aug 17, 2007 7:02 AM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
I agree.

The 2000 - 2001 - 2002 drafts were pretty disastrous.  

I'm willing to give the subsequent picks some time to develop, but it's hard to project many of these guys as future all-stars.  And I certainly don't see any Manny Ramirez / Jim Thome types in the bunch.

Time will tell, I suppose.  

by CaptainEasy on Aug 16, 2007 9:18 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
I think that all you have to do is look at our Farm teams records to show that we have good players.
I heard that L.Carr is only going to dress 25 players this Sat........the rest can dress themselves!

by gahnki on Aug 16, 2007 11:07 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
I think that all you have to do is look at our Farm teams records to show that we have good players.

Well, that's certainly one metric, and it has simplicity going for it.

I think there are two problems with that approach:

  1. It doesn't take into account the age/experience of each team, compared to its opponents.*

  2. Good minor leaguers don't necessarily make good major leaguers.

The purpose of the minor league system is to produce major leaguers you can win with (or trade for other players you can win with).

Consider two minor league teams:

  • Team A: 3 "studs" who are young for their level, but excelling; and 22 guys who are struggling.

  • Team B: 25 guys, all average or above average age for their league, all solid contributors, but not dominating.

Team B is likely to have a better record, but Team A is more likely to produce good major league players.

* I'm not asserting that the Indians' teams are older than their opponents (it would be easy enough to research that, but I'm not going to).

by CaptainEasy on Aug 16, 2007 11:38 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
It also fails to take into account the depth of the ML team. The Indians will have some better players in the minors (Sowers, Laffey, Lee, Stanford, Francisco) that would be playing for the Pirates. That is not a reflection of the actual minor league so much as it is a reflection of the major league talent.
I spoke the words but never gave a thought to what they all could mean.

by Brad D on Aug 17, 2007 12:44 AM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
That is very true.
I heard that L.Carr is only going to dress 25 players this Sat........the rest can dress themselves!

by gahnki on Aug 17, 2007 10:07 AM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
In the grand scheme of things, $7 million isn't really that absurd, but the roster spaces for a COMPLETELY unproven guy, as well as the entire options fiasco really makes this a bone head deal, IMO.

Either these guys turn out to be Felix Hernandez, or they'll have success with their second team.

by gte619n on Aug 16, 2007 4:17 PM EDT reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
This is where the long-term projection coverage, most everywhere but particularly from BA, really is lacking.  People do all kinds of studies on how different types of players turned out -- high school pitchers, college shortstops, etc. -- but they always focus on total career stats.  Win shares, games played, RBI's, whatever.

Using total career stats is a foolish move in evaluating the value of draft picks -- and that is always what these studies purport to do.  The only meaningful question is, how much major league value (go ahead and VORP it) does the drafted player provide within the context of his first contract?

Jamie Moyer, for example, was drafted by the Cubs in 1984, progressed rapidly in their system, played for the Cubs for a couple of years, got traded to Texas for value but eventually was released in 1990.

As a draft pick, that's where his ledger ends.  104 starts, 27 relief appearances, some 650 or so IP with just under a 5.00 ERA.  Anything he achieved after 1990 has nothing to do with how good of a draft pick he was.

by Jay on Aug 16, 2007 9:49 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
I was mildly upset that the Indians didn't pick Porcello, until I read about the Major League contract.  (Hm, maybe Shapiro et al. knew something I didn't know!)  Jay's argument here is exactly why.  

Even if he does turn into a great pitcher, the Tigers' rights to Porcello will be gone by the time he's in his mid-20s or so.  If I understand the system correctly, they're sacrificing a few years of controlling his contract when he'd likely give them the most value for drafting him.

We should learn from Guthrie and Wily Mo that the original contract will probably expire before they player provides much/any value.

by jds16 on Aug 17, 2007 3:09 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
The obvious solution is to give these kids 10 year deals (with all kinds of out clauses, of course)

by homelytourist on Aug 17, 2007 4:35 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
Rick DiPietro?
"On September 12, 2006, DiPietro signed a 15-year, $67.5 million contract with the Islanders. It is the longest official NHL contract ever to be signed, topping teammate Alexei Yashin's contract of 10 years. Newsday reported that the team offered him a 15-year contract in September 2005, but the league discouraged this, instead he signed a one-year offer."
"We've talked about it so many times," Wedge said, "but this is a special group."

by CarnegieAndOntario on Aug 17, 2007 4:51 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
Wow.  I guess that the disruption in revenue caused by the events of lockout and the decline of the league instigated this insanity*

*I know little to nothing about the NHL, so I'm going on instincts alone here

by homelytourist on Aug 17, 2007 4:59 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
Good ol' Charlie Wang instigated this insanity. Had nothing to do with a league-wide anything, that was completely out of left field and no pundit could justify it. In the next few years you might see enormously long contracts being thrown around, but this comes as GMs try to be the first to master the new CBA, hoping the market continues to take a spike upwards, signing players to deals that will look like steals in 8 years. Contrary to all the doom and gloom ESPN throws around, the NHL is actually making more money now than pre-lockout.

by supermarioelia on Aug 17, 2007 6:23 PM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
I stopped subscribing to BA a few years ago. Thanks to LGT, I'm regaining my knowledge about the Indians farm system. Thanks guys.

by Gradyforpresident on Aug 16, 2007 5:59 PM EDT reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
I wonder if there were actually more over-slot signings this year as the bargaining period was shorter and tightly huddled around the last day. The normal market bracketing as picks are signed over the course of a year was pretty much trashed.

by mcrose on Aug 16, 2007 8:27 PM EDT reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
I really enjoyed reading this, and it makes me (and I'm sure everyone else) really glad that our GM is who he is.

That said, what do you suggest the tigers, or anyone else, could have done differently?  Meaning, the assumption here is that Porcello would not have signed with anyone for anything less than a major league deal, correct?  I'm just trying to figure out if your argument is that he should have been signed for a minor league deal or, if his demands were so high, that maybe he should not have been drafted, period?

I think we have to assume that if he could have been signed for a minor league deal by Detroit, that he would have been.  Or maybe I'm crazy?  
This kid was coming out of HS, so he did have the leverage to say "I'm not going to sign if I don't get an MLB deal".  

- Jake

by jakesinger777 on Aug 17, 2007 5:06 AM EDT reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
In some ways, the Tigers had less leverage because they were picking so low. If they didn't sign him, they get the same pick in next year's draft, but there's a very good chance they don't have a chance to pick anyone near as good in that spot. Of course, Porcello would have to spend three years at college, which would decrease his future earning potential (not to mention the risk of injury and bad performance).

While the earlier signing deadline and the compensatory picks have given the clubs more leverage, the good agents will still get their clients these kinds of deals.  

by Ryan on Aug 17, 2007 10:08 AM EDT up reply actions  

Re: What the Indians didn't do
I don't have any problem with the money, I have a problem with the roster spot.

by gte619n on Aug 17, 2007 12:18 PM EDT up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Constantly updated Indians news, lots of in-depth analysis, live in-game discussions — and more fanatical and thoughtful Indians fans than every other web site combined.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Dsc01731_small
Some quick questions for the locals
Etat_small
Eric's 2012 Cleveland Indians Projections...
Its_alive-fstn_small
Oswalt > Carmona/Heredia
Topps1978-332f_small
Indians by the Numbers — #24
Avatard_small
Nickname Seeks Indian — "Country Peach Passion"
Avatard_small
Nickname seeks Indian vote — "Fridge Magnet"
Topps1978-332f_small
Indians by the Numbers — #23
Small
Seriously Go Get Carlos Peña Now
Avatard_small
Indians by the Numbers — #22
Avatard_small
Nickname Seeks Indian: "Fridge Magnet"

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Featured Poll

Poll
Will Matt LaPorta be on the opening day roster?
Yes
59 votes
No
140 votes

199 votes | Poll has closed

FanShots

Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.

Recent FanShots

Indians depth chart heading into spring training (from Acta's twitter account)
Cleveland reliever Vinnie Pestano had the highest fastball swinging-strike...
Oakland Out-Winnercurses MLB for Cespedes
Indians Sign Jon Garland
A look back at the last Tribe arbitration hearing
MLB.COM Tribe Top 20
Jared Goedert is Puddin Head Jones
Chisenhall v.  Hannahan
After watching Lindor in the Fall Instructional League, I have very little...
Coming off of an optimistic 80-82 season, is this the Indians window to win?  

See full post on Beyond the Box Score

+ New FanShot All FanShots >


Managers

427px-nap_lajoie_1913_small Ryan

Dosequisman_small Jay

Editors

3444ant_black_small APV

47b8dd28b3127cceb64839d9746800000026102bauwjrq3za_small afh4