International signings 2014

[maxisagod]

I'm sure Doogie Wolfson will keep digging up the Twins' Interest in Cuban players like he did today. And Jeremy will write up a primer in April or May again, but Kiley McDaniel has been reporting that the International trading rules are about to be taken advantage of again, this time on a whole new spending level. For a few months now he has been writing about how the Yankees plan to blow by their international "cap" limits this year. Just like the Cubs and Rangers did last year, and the Rays the year before that. He also goes into the Game Theory: The Tragedy of the Commons to explain why this is happening now.

 

This coupled with the rumors the Brewers have an agreement with Twins target Gilbert Lara,

might make this a horrible season to have the 5th biggest spending pool.

I get the Twins 'could' do this if they wanted too as well, and they may still have money to spend from the 2013 period, but I don't see that happening. They have a price in their head about what a player's value is actually worth and don't make an offer over that, The Cuban Free agent market over the past three years is proof that they'll get out bid on most of these players.

 

The bottom line is the Twins will keep playing within the rules, they will not be able to sign any high end 16 year old free agent stars for the next couple years, which will weaken the system down the road. For the first time, I'm firmly in the camp of a International draft.

[johnnydakota]

2 (15 )year olds already have a handshake deal in place worth ove 3 million each.

The Yankees are reportedly going to spend 12-18 million (not counting penalty money)

To me it is time for a hard cap on every thing on all drafts and payroll caps 189 million

I would prefer there was a national and an International draft that included all players including 23 year olds and no posting fee to Japan ...if you want to play in the MLB , then sign up for the draft and get treated like the rest of America

[maxisagod]

2 (15 )year olds already have a handshake deal in place worth ove 3 million each.

The Yankees are reportedly going to spend 12-18 million (not counting penalty money)

To me it is time for a hard cap on every thing on all drafts and payroll caps 189 million

I would prefer there was a national and an International draft that included all players including 23 year olds and no posting fee to Japan ...if you want to play in the MLB , then sign up for the draft and get treated like the rest of America

 

I try to stay positive, and it's hard to fault the Twins for doing what 25 other teams are doing by not turning this into a higher and earlier bidding war; But when would it stop on its own? Are teams going to begin coming to agreements with children out of the Little League World series? This is unsustainable. Could you imagine if the Yankees and the Red Sox came to agreements with 8 of the top 15 prospects 6 months before the Rule 4 draft? I look forward to amateur signings, but I suspect the Twins won't be signing any big names out of the Dominican Republic or Venezuela this year.

[Mike Sixel]

Some teams do everything they can to add premium talent. Within the rules. I wish the twins would even spend the amount allowed, let alone do this.

[Jim H]

Some teams do everything they can to add premium talent. Within the rules. I wish the twins would even spend the amount allowed, let alone do this.

 

Are you the Twins won't spend the amount allowed? I don't believe the signing period is over yet. More importantly, I think the talent pool in the Dominican Republic gets over estimated, quite a bit. There has been some incredible talent from DR, but it doesn't appear every year. For every Cabrera there are a lot of guys who get very good money but never amount to much. Remember that one of the best pitchers for DR last year in the International Series was Sam Deduno, can you a imagine how far down on the list he would of been if he were an American citizen?

 

The kids from the Domincan are so young when they are signed, that it mostly a guess which will develop into something and which won't. There are obvious exceptions such as Sano, but spending a lot less money might get you a Polanco, if you guess right. Largely, I have no problem with the Twins playing by the rules. You have to be pretty sure the 16 year old kid you are investing big bucks in, has a darn good chance to be extra special to justify going way over the cap.

[bird]

Some teams do everything they can to add premium talent. Within the rules. I wish the twins would even spend the amount allowed, let alone do this.

 

First, you're wrongfully insinuating that the Twins aren't spending to their cap. Check your facts, mike. They're almost at the cap and there's time left. It's unfair on your part to make this claim.

 

Secondly, mike, it's a question of ethics. It is not alright to behave contrary to the very obvious spirit of the rules, even if the rules aren't technically broken. We should be happy when organizations play by the rules and honor the spirit upon which they were established.

[CwK]

Damn Yankees. I am a big fan of the international free agent pool and believe that it's the best way to add talent. It's a shame that these teams "beat the system." Though I'm sure it will be considered innovative. Was the idea of a draft tabled? Or is it still in talks?

[jokin]

First, you're wrongfully insinuating that the Twins aren't spending to their cap. Check your facts, mike. They're almost at the cap and there's time left. It's unfair on your part to make this claim.

 

Secondly, mike, it's a question of ethics. It is not alright to behave contrary to the very obvious spirit of the rules, even if the rules aren't technically broken. We should be happy when organizations play by the rules and honor the spirit upon which they were established.

 

What? If the "spirit of the rules' were truly being violated, don't you think the other members of the club would scream bloody murder? There are sanctions in place for teams that choose to go over their spending limits, dollar for dollar taxes, plus the sanction of an extreme limit of $250,000/max per signee in the year following the overage. The Twins haven't chosen some sort of "ethical high road", they simply have chosen not to pay a tax in a system they had a hand in establshing in the first place.

[johnnydakota]

Damn Yankees. I am a big fan of the international free agent pool and believe that it's the best way to add talent. It's a shame that these teams "beat the system." Though I'm sure it will be considered innovative. Was the idea of a draft tabled? Or is it still in talks?

There is talk that will come into effect in 2016 at the earliest

[johnnydakota]

First, you're wrongfully insinuating that the Twins aren't spending to their cap. Check your facts, mike. They're almost at the cap and there's time left. It's unfair on your part to make this claim.

 

Secondly, mike, it's a question of ethics. It is not alright to behave contrary to the very obvious spirit of the rules, even if the rules aren't technically broken. We should be happy when organizations play by the rules and honor the spirit upon which they were established.

 

3,908,600, is what the Twins were allowed, what have they spent?really if you or any one knows I would like to be educated, as I have only heard of 3 guys signing and that puts them some where around 2,250,000-2,500,000

[maxisagod]

3,908,600, is what the Twins were allowed, what have they spent?really if you or any one knows I would like to be educated, as I have only heard of 3 guys signing and that puts them some where around 2,250,000-2,500,000

 

Ben Badler has it at 3,490,000

http://www.baseballamerica.com/international/2013-international-spending-by-team/

So about 400,000 still in the coffers. The Blue Jays and the Orioles have both spend that much on Dominican pitchers in the last 10 days, so the window isn't completely closed, nor is the well dry.

[Thrylos]

Secondly, mike, it's a question of ethics. It is not alright to behave contrary to the very obvious spirit of the rules, even if the rules aren't technically broken. We should be happy when organizations play by the rules and honor the spirit upon which they were established.

 

"Ethics" and "spirit" of rules are open for interpretation. And speaking about "ethics" (i.e. what is "good" or "bad") in baseball is somewhat naive (Philosophically/Theologically/Whatever: Baseball is a game. Ethos is morality-centered; by definition a game is a non-moral situation.)

 

As far as rules (in opposition to laws) go, the only way to interpret them is to push them and see what happens. And last time I checked, rules, as abstract contraptions occasionally written down, have no spirit (whatever that might be - and I don't mean Vodka.)

[maxisagod]

"Ethics" and "spirit" of rules are open for interpretation. And speaking about "ethics" (i.e. what is "good" or "bad") in baseball is somewhat naive (Philosophically/Theologically/Whatever: Baseball is a game. Ethos is morality-centered; by definition a game is a non-moral situation.)

 

As far as rules (in opposition to laws) go, the only way to interpret them is to push them and see what happens. And last time I checked, rules, as abstract contraptions occasionally written down, have no spirit (whatever that might be - and I don't mean Vodka.)

 

It's a pendulum swing. Spending on international amateurs started to increase higher than many owners wanted, so they tried (and failed) to get a draft put in place, but the soft cap they did get had disincentives that were weak, so spending starts swinging harder the other way, so then stricter rules or a draft will be demanded, and a system that really wasn't broken, suddenly needs to get fixed. I can understand why some teams would want to take advantage of that and why others wouldn't want to be complaisant in dissolving status quo.

[bird]

What? If the "spirit of the rules' were truly being violated, don't you think the other members of the club would scream bloody murder? There are sanctions in place for teams that choose to go over their spending limits, dollar for dollar taxes, plus the sanction of an extreme limit of $250,000/max per signee in the year following the overage. The Twins haven't chosen some sort of "ethical high road", they simply have chosen not to pay a tax in a system they had a hand in establshing in the first place.

 

Choosing the ethical high ground is EXACTLY what teams like the Twins are doing.

 

They use words like "sanction" for a reason. While open to interpretation, I'm betting that almost every professor that teaches ethics would consider what the Cubs did as unethical. They knew what they agreed to, the behavior that the rules intended to incent. In the ethical worls, the Cubs cheated the system, period.

[bird]

3,908,600, is what the Twins were allowed, what have they spent?really if you or any one knows I would like to be educated, as I have only heard of 3 guys signing and that puts them some where around 2,250,000-2,500,000

 

They have roughly $300,000 unspent. Consider yourself educated, johnny.

[bird]

"Ethics" and "spirit" of rules are open for interpretation. And speaking about "ethics" (i.e. what is "good" or "bad") in baseball is somewhat naive (Philosophically/Theologically/Whatever: Baseball is a game. Ethos is morality-centered; by definition a game is a non-moral situation

 

As far as rules (in opposition to laws) go, the only way to interpret them is to push them and see what happens. And last time I checked, rules, as abstract contraptions occasionally written down, have no spirit (whatever that might be - and I don't mean Vodka.)

 

With all due respect, this is nonsensical to the core. First of all, MLB is a business. A very big business. Secondly, I'd be a millionaire if I had ten bucks for every time you and others have called out the Twins management on questions of ethos. So, if it is a game, you'll have to explain this to me. Thirdly, rules and law go hand in hand. Google the Rules of Civil Procedure and then get back to me, because the last time I checked, there isn't a trial lawyer in existence that would chuckle at the thought of rules as some sort of contraption.

 

Let's be real about the topic. Everyone knew what was expected of them. A handful of organizations are cheating the rest. Period.

[jokin]

"Ethics" and "spirit" of rules are open for interpretation. And speaking about "ethics" (i.e. what is "good" or "bad") in baseball is somewhat naive (Philosophically/Theologically/Whatever: Baseball is a game. Ethos is morality-centered; by definition a game is a non-moral situation.)

 

As far as rules (in opposition to laws) go, the only way to interpret them is to push them and see what happens. And last time I checked, rules, as abstract contraptions occasionally written down, have no spirit (whatever that might be - and I don't mean Vodka.)

 

 

Better run that by Dave for further verification.

[jokin]

With all due respect, this is nonsensical to the core. First of all, MLB is a business. A very big business. Secondly, I'd be a millionaire if I had ten bucks for every time you and others have called out the Twins management on questions of ethos. So, if it is a game, you'll have to explain this to me. Thirdly, rules and law go hand in hand. Google the Rules of Civil Procedure and then get back to me, because the last time I checked, there isn't a trial lawyer in existence that would chuckle at the thought of rules as some sort of contraption.

 

Let's be real about the topic. Everyone knew what was expected of them. A handful of organizations are cheating the rest. Period.

 

If this were true, there would be a slew of lawsuits. With respect to these "agreements" between the clubs, I have yet to see one civil or crimnal lawsuit on a docket anywhere.

[jokin]

Choosing the ethical high ground is EXACTLY what teams like the Twins are doing.

 

They use words like "sanction" for a reason. While open to interpretation, I'm betting that almost every professor that teaches ethics would consider what the Cubs did as unethical. They knew what they agreed to, the behavior that the rules intended to incent. In the ethical worls, the Cubs cheated the system, period.

 

When the clubs came to the original agreement on this matter, the so-called sanctions you mention certainy would have had more teeth and consequences attached to them than simply a mere "matching tax," if this was really put in place with more serious intent. In that respect, you're right, the clubs knew what they agreed to....or should have known!

 

Words like......."You shall not exceed your spending limit....PERIOD".... carry significantly more weight, both in an Business Ethics 101 course, as well as in the Real World.

[Jeremy Nygaard]

Just a note, the Twins had an agreement with Lewin Diaz well in advance of last July 2. Obviously not this early, but the Twins, like all other teams bend the rules. Teams, and players, also have been known to break verbal agreements. And teams have also made much earlier - and sometimes shadier - deals with trainers in the past. The issue isn't the Yankees, but the system. And I think we'll see a change coming in the future.

 

One other thing to consider: the Yankees are significantly overpaying for guys this year. I *speculate* that in return for that, the trainers that benefited this year will scratch the Yankees back in the future, whether that means bargain deals or hiding prospects remains to be seen.

[nicksaviking]

Secondly, mike, it's a question of ethics. It is not alright to behave contrary to the very obvious spirit of the rules, even if the rules aren't technically broken. We should be happy when organizations play by the rules and honor the spirit upon which they were established.

 

Kind of like the obivous spirit of the rule that says when the taxpayers build you a new stadium which you claim you need to become an equal to your peers, you open up the wallet to compete with said peers to put the best possible team on the field.

[Dman]

With the playing field leveling in baseball I think the Yankee's plan of just buying the cream of the crop players isn't working as well as it used to. In regards to the draft they can't just sign a talent who slipped to round 20 and give him a multi-million dollar deal to get him to sign as there is a cap in place now. With teams controlling their players for 6 years you can't buy young talent from other teams via free agency as they are usually 30 years old before they hit now. With the new cap on payroll you can't just buy your team and not pay for it once you are over the cap.

 

So what is a team that can usually take advantage of other teams supposed to do. Well I guess you go and spend places where the rules are more bendable. With a farm club that is not that great and an aging team and the international market structured the way it is you hit it hard for this year and hope you can infuse some talent until they take that away as well. Playing by the spirit of the rules is for suckers or losers, right?

[Mike Sixel]

I was under the impression they were more than 500K under, so thanks for the update on that. I continue to hope they spend the full amount. As for "they aren't worth it"......we are talking about less money than almost any other way they can spend money. It is a dice roll. Spending this money doe not stop them from spending it otherwise. There is no reason not to spend the money, from a baseball perspective at all. The worst thing that happens is that they get nothing for their relatively small investment.

 

The rules are: if you spend over the amount in one year, you get less the next year. Those are the rules. Teams doing that ARE following the rules. They are choosing a different strategy than teams that want more money every year. Neither has the "ethical highground".

[bird]

If this were true, there would be a slew of lawsuits. With respect to these "agreements" between the clubs, I have yet to see one civil or crimnal lawsuit on a docket anywhere.

Not all problems are resolved through lawsuits, jokin. The league will certainly address the problem.

[bird]

This is a completely bogus analogy, nick. And if you didn't intend for it to be analogous, perhaps we could start a new thread on that topic, seeing as how it's such a fresh one. Geez.

[chaderic20]

The rules are: if you spend over the amount in one year, you get less the next year. Those are the rules. Teams doing that ARE following the rules. They are choosing a different strategy than teams that want more money every year. Neither has the "ethical highground".

 

As much as we may not like it, and as much as it may not be in the spirit of the rules, it is perfectly allowable as long as they take the sanctions as mandated. I would say it's akin to intentionally taking a penalty in football in certain situations (e.g. committing pass interference to prevent a TD, or taking a delay of game to burn clock or give a punter a few extra yards to pin the ball), or fouling at the end of a basketball game. They're intentionally breaking the rules, knowing and accepting the consequences, because in their opinion what they gain from breaking the rules is greater than the consequences suffered.

[diehardtwinsfan]

Just a moderator note, let's try to keep the tone civil. This is an interesting thread, let's keep it that way.

 

Thanks.

[nicksaviking]

This is a completely bogus analogy, nick. And if you didn't intend for it to be analogous, perhaps we could start a new thread on that topic, seeing as how it's such a fresh one. Geez.

 

How is it bogus? The team should act ethically in terms of unwritten roster manuevers but not in terms of unwritten rules involving new stadiums and commitments to fans?

 

Do we need to live in a world are shenanigans against other billionaire owners is more of an injustice than shenanigans agaist the taxpaying peons?

 

If it's bogus, you should probably clarify why instead of just throwing that word out there, otherwise it seems like it just doesn't fit your narrative.

[diehardtwinsfan]

I honestly think that most teams want an international draft. The easiest way for that to happen is for these rules to get broken enough that the sytem fails. They tweak the rules to fix a broken system and then at the next CBA, they will be rightfully upset when teams like the Cubs, Yankees, and RedSox do what they did last year and will do this year.

 

Oh, and we'll see Cubans, Japanese, and Koreans subject to it too.

 

I don't like it for the players, but I do think that long term it's best for baseball.

[nicksaviking]

I honestly think that most teams want an international draft. The easiest way for that to happen is for these rules to get broken enough that the sytem fails. They tweak the rules to fix a broken system and then at the next CBA, they will be rightfully upset when teams like the Cubs, Yankees, and RedSox do what they did last year and will do this year.

 

Oh, and we'll see Cubans, Japanese, and Koreans subject to it too.

 

I don't like it for the players, but I do think that long term it's best for baseball.

 

Yes, and for middle of America teams that are not as natural of a draw for foriegn players.