Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.
The same great Twins Daily coverage, now for the Vikings.

The Store


Photo

International Watch: Huascar Ynoa

  • Please log in to reply
33 replies to this topic

#1 Jeremy Nygaard

Jeremy Nygaard

    Twins Database Manager

  • Twins Database Managers
  • 2,129 posts

Posted 20 June 2014 - 10:46 AM

[SIZE=3][FONT=arial]I wouldn't get my hopes up too much because it doesn't jive with what Doogie reported earlier (that the team wouldn't sign anyone for more than $1 million):

[COLOR=#000000]The Twins are the favorite to sign the young pitcher.[/COLOR]

[COLOR=#000000]
Ynoa currently ranks as the #17 IFA prospect according to MLB.com[/COLOR][/FONT][/SIZE]

#2 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,693 posts

Posted 20 June 2014 - 11:14 AM

[SIZE=3][FONT=arial]I wouldn't get my hopes up too much because it doesn't jive with what Doogie reported earlier (that the team wouldn't sign anyone for more than $1 million):

[COLOR=#000000]Ynoa currently ranks as the #17 IFA prospect according to MLB.com[/COLOR][/FONT][/SIZE]


Which would be frustrating considering plenty of teams will likely be going over budget. I hope the Twins surprise us and game the system also. It's likely this sytem is going to have to be remodled after the Cubs and Rangers exposed this loophole, I hope the Twins are smart enough and liberal enough to take advantage while they can.

#3 Jeremy Nygaard

Jeremy Nygaard

    Twins Database Manager

  • Twins Database Managers
  • 2,129 posts

Posted 20 June 2014 - 12:19 PM

Badler connected Ynoa to the Twins over a month ago.

#4 birdwatcher

birdwatcher

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 913 posts

Posted 20 June 2014 - 12:20 PM

Which would be frustrating considering plenty of teams will likely be going over budget. I hope the Twins surprise us and game the system also. It's likely this sytem is going to have to be remodled after the Cubs and Rangers exposed this loophole, I hope the Twins are smart enough and liberal enough to take advantage while they can.


And I hope the Twins sign Ynoa too, but more importantly, I hope they're ethical enough to be one of the teams that's courageous enough to get screwed by the cheaters. We should all be outraged b the cheaters instead of encouraging more dishonesty in our own community.

#5 mike wants wins

mike wants wins

    Would Like to be More Positive

  • Members
  • 6,030 posts

Posted 20 June 2014 - 12:22 PM

IMO, it isn't cheating. The rules have consequences, if you are willing to pay those, you are playing by the rules (feel better now that we are disagreeing again?).
Lighten up Francis....

#6 Jeremy Nygaard

Jeremy Nygaard

    Twins Database Manager

  • Twins Database Managers
  • 2,129 posts

Posted 20 June 2014 - 12:24 PM

The Twins have a total of $3,686,600 to spend this year. That's a $700k base pool plus four other slots ($2,025,800, $452,100, $305,200, $203,500) that can be traded.

I don't think there's anything wrong with the Twins not spending big money on any one player. My only issue would be if they didn't use these assets that are available to them.

#7 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,693 posts

Posted 20 June 2014 - 12:27 PM

And I hope the Twins sign Ynoa too, but more importantly, I hope they're ethical enough to be one of the teams that's courageous enough to get screwed by the cheaters. We should all be outraged b the cheaters instead of encouraging more dishonesty in our own community.


Why is it cheating? There's no rule against it, and there are consequences for doing it. If all teams are able to do this it's a level playing field.

Is it cheating for a middle infielder to drop a boarderline pop up that wasn't called the infield fly rule by umps and then turn a double play? Is it cheating to steal signs? Is it cheating to sign Jason Kubel to a minor league contract so you don't yet have to cut an extra player all while promising him he'll get a 25 man spot regardless of what happens in the spring training?

#8 Jeremy Nygaard

Jeremy Nygaard

    Twins Database Manager

  • Twins Database Managers
  • 2,129 posts

Posted 20 June 2014 - 12:36 PM

IMO, it isn't cheating. The rules have consequences, if you are willing to pay those, you are playing by the rules (feel better now that we are disagreeing again?).


Teams are realizing that the consequences aren't that severe.

#9 mike wants wins

mike wants wins

    Would Like to be More Positive

  • Members
  • 6,030 posts

Posted 20 June 2014 - 12:38 PM

Teams are realizing that the consequences aren't that severe.


that is a problem with the rules, not the teams following the as written rules.
Lighten up Francis....

#10 Jeremy Nygaard

Jeremy Nygaard

    Twins Database Manager

  • Twins Database Managers
  • 2,129 posts

Posted 20 June 2014 - 12:55 PM

that is a problem with the rules, not the teams following the as written rules.


Yep. And the teams that want to follow the "rules" will provide the push to get the International draft, which is probably what MLB is hoping.

#11 mike wants wins

mike wants wins

    Would Like to be More Positive

  • Members
  • 6,030 posts

Posted 20 June 2014 - 12:57 PM

The draft is an awful thing......there should, imo, be some hybrid draft/FA thing, imo. All the draft does is lower the income of these players (from the player side).
Lighten up Francis....

#12 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,693 posts

Posted 20 June 2014 - 01:12 PM

Teams are realizing that the consequences aren't that severe.


Just like a free throw in basketball. You're not supposed to foul another player but the penalty isn't severe enough to stop teams from doing it both unintentionally and intentionally.

#13 Dman

Dman

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 466 posts

Posted 20 June 2014 - 01:45 PM

Why is it cheating? There's no rule against it, and there are consequences for doing it. If all teams are able to do this it's a level playing field.

Is it cheating for a middle infielder to drop a boarderline pop up that wasn't called the infield fly rule by umps and then turn a double play? Is it cheating to steal signs? Is it cheating to sign Jason Kubel to a minor league contract so you don't yet have to cut an extra player all while promising him he'll get a 25 man spot regardless of what happens in the spring training?


It is cheating because the reason they put that rule out there was to give the teams that needed players the most (i.e the worst teams) a chance to get better. Thus they created a structure to do that which is now being circumvented.

To say that there is level playing field is disingenuous as that is the exact reason the rule was created. Big money teams could role over teams with less revenue. So essentially as it stands now nothing has changed. The rule is so terribly flawed that it can't even enforce its intended purpose.

I agree that a draft stinks for the players but when teams ignore the rules or at the very least the spirit of the rules, what else can you do but a draft?

#14 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,693 posts

Posted 20 June 2014 - 02:19 PM

The rule is so terribly flawed that it can't even enforce its intended purpose.


I'm not arguing that it's not flawed, but it's still not breaking the rule. It's simply a bad rule. Until it's changed, the team's that aren't using the flaw to better their team is doing a disservice to their fans and the whole organization. Well except the bean counters.

I am for a draft, and I hoe the rule is changed. It should be more fair for the have-nots. These guys will still be making more money then they will playing ball on the Latin American ball fields. If they're good, they'll make a lot more. But until there is a draft, or until the rule is changed, I don't want to hear the Twins or any other team who has a vote in this process complain about it. Mock indignation sounds pretty hollow when the only thing harmed is the profit margins.

And to be clear, I've never heard the Twins complain about this, nor have I heard them say they are against this rule and would not use it to their advantage.

#15 mike wants wins

mike wants wins

    Would Like to be More Positive

  • Members
  • 6,030 posts

Posted 20 June 2014 - 02:20 PM

Here is one idea:

Step 1, first 2 weeks of Int'l FA:
FA for the 10 worst teams. They can spend any amount they want, up to 3 players.

Step 2, next 2 weeks:
FA for the next 10 worst teams. They can spend up to $500K per player, but only 1 player.

Step 3, next week:
Draft, 1 round, $250K per player max

Step 4, next 10 months:
FA, any team can sign any player up to $250K.

No team can be in step one 2 years in a row......

The specifics can vary, but there are ways to help the bad teams, and to free up the players to go where they want, for the money they want, if they want.
Lighten up Francis....

#16 James

James

    Sideburns Specialist

  • Members
  • 1,422 posts
  • LocationThe dive bars of NE Minneapolis

Posted 20 June 2014 - 02:40 PM

It is cheating because the reason they put that rule out there was to give the teams that needed players the most (i.e the worst teams) a chance to get better. Thus they created a structure to do that which is now being circumvented.

To say that there is level playing field is disingenuous as that is the exact reason the rule was created. Big money teams could role over teams with less revenue. So essentially as it stands now nothing has changed. The rule is so terribly flawed that it can't even enforce its intended purpose.

I agree that a draft stinks for the players but when teams ignore the rules or at the very least the spirit of the rules, what else can you do but a draft?

To be fair, can't the big money teams only roll over the lower money team every other year? By going a certain percentage over their signing allotment means that those "cheating" team can't spend over a certain amount the next year. So, the Cubs cant give a signing bonus of over $250k this year because they went so far above their allotment last year. Any team could outbid $250k signing bonus if they wanted to, even the teams with lower revenues.

You can come up with statistics to prove anything. Forty percent of all people know that.


#17 Dman

Dman

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 466 posts

Posted 20 June 2014 - 02:47 PM

To be fair, can't the big money teams only roll over the lower money team every other year? By going a certain percentage over their signing allotment means that those "cheating" team can't spend over a certain amount the next year. So, the Cubs cant give a signing bonus of over $250k this year because they went so far above their allotment last year. Any team could outbid $250k signing bonus if they wanted to, even the teams with lower revenues.


Sure but the top 5 or 6 revenue teams can switch years and essentially accomplish the same thing. Three of the top revenue teams each year could outbid most of the other teams if they so desired. So the penalty is really no penalty at all. The Yankee's will not be able to bid next year but if they do get a third of the best available talent this year that seems like a pretty large advantage to me.

#18 James

James

    Sideburns Specialist

  • Members
  • 1,422 posts
  • LocationThe dive bars of NE Minneapolis

Posted 20 June 2014 - 03:04 PM

Sure but the top 5 or 6 revenue teams can switch years and essentially accomplish the same thing. Three of the top revenue teams each year could outbid most of the other teams if they so desired. So the penalty is really no penalty at all. The Yankee's will not be able to bid next year but if they do get a third of the best available talent this year that seems like a pretty large advantage to me.

That's a fair assessment, but there's not a guarantee that they will get 1/3 of the talent. Also, higher revenue teams could trade off years, but it's not like they are scheming with each other to keep the lower revenue teams down. The truth is every team in baseball probably has enough money to do the same thing if they wanted to. I'm not saying it's a great system, or that I even like it, but I don't think it is cheating. The teams are following the rules as written, it's just there were some unintended consequences associated with that rule.

You can come up with statistics to prove anything. Forty percent of all people know that.


#19 twinsfan34

twinsfan34

    Paul DeVos

  • Members
  • 676 posts

Posted 20 June 2014 - 03:06 PM

So there's a pool of money...but you can exceed it...and the penalties are what?

Because...of the top 7 prospects listed there, 4 of them, the Yankees are listed as the favorite to sign. They also are favorites for 9 of the top 25. Again...no way they could stay under their pool allotment.

The Yankees are listed at #17 overall for pool money at $2,193,100.

It's highly unlikedly they could even sign the top 2 prospects for that individually.

That said, a lot of prospects have comfort with teams due to the relationships of scouts make (or agreements) with managers of these young kids (these managers get paid off handsomely).

But I would think MLB could still put a kabosh on that. Be nice if the Twins could snipe in on a few of those Yankee favorites...

Slot Values:
http://www.baseballa...nd-slot-values/

Top IFA prospects:
http://mlb.mlb.com/m...layers#list=int

Edited by twinsfan34, 20 June 2014 - 03:08 PM.


#20 Dman

Dman

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 466 posts

Posted 20 June 2014 - 03:10 PM

I'm not arguing that it's not flawed, but it's still not breaking the rule. It's simply a bad rule. Until it's changed, the team's that aren't using the flaw to better their team is doing a disservice to their fans and the whole organization. Well except the bean counters.

I am for a draft, and I hoe the rule is changed. It should be more fair for the have-nots. These guys will still be making more money then they will playing ball on the Latin American ball fields. If they're good, they'll make a lot more. But until there is a draft, or until the rule is changed, I don't want to hear the Twins or any other team who has a vote in this process complain about it. Mock indignation sounds pretty hollow when the only thing harmed is the profit margins.

And to be clear, I've never heard the Twins complain about this, nor have I heard them say they are against this rule and would not use it to their advantage.


It is not breaking the rule as written but there is a thing humans are supposed to have or at least try and develop and those things are called morals. How do we know the Cubs\Yankees are cheating? Well the intention of the rule was to help teams with low revenues who typically aren't that good get better by having a shot to sign some of the top talent to get better. Baseball agrees that this is good for the game so that it is easier for teams that have been bad for a long time to get better quickly and keep their fans interested etc.

So along comes a team that in the past typically wins their division every year and they are willing to spend whatever it takes to add more talent to their system effectively negating the advantage that lower revenue ,poor performing teams were supposed to get. Is being last in line and then budding to the front of the line something you want to encourage? I don't think so as then why have a line at all. Is it something every team can do? If it were then there would be no need for the rule in the first place.

Here's a none baseball example. There is no law that punishes you if you sleep with another woman and yet I bet your wife would consider that cheating. Cheating is as much about intention as it is about the written rule. The Cubs cheated and the Yankee's will be cheaters this year. They are what they are there is no way to sugar coat it. They know they are cheating and the world knows they are cheating and they don't really care, but they are cheaters.

#21 Monkeypaws

Monkeypaws

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 661 posts

Posted 20 June 2014 - 03:48 PM

International signings are a chance to go balls out and spend some money - I don't have any complaints with the Twins' results lately, but if a prize offers itself, spend spend spend.

#22 Dman

Dman

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 466 posts

Posted 20 June 2014 - 03:57 PM

That's a fair assessment, but there's not a guarantee that they will get 1/3 of the talent. Also, higher revenue teams could trade off years, but it's not like they are scheming with each other to keep the lower revenue teams down. The truth is every team in baseball probably has enough money to do the same thing if they wanted to. I'm not saying it's a great system, or that I even like it, but I don't think it is cheating. The teams are following the rules as written, it's just there were some unintended consequences associated with that rule.


I agree they aren't scheming to keep the other teams down but in the end that is the likely consequence. We know for a fact that many lower revenue clubs do not have the financial resources that that the top clubs enjoy. The Royals, Rays, Marlins etc will have to turn over there talent after 6 years if not before because they cannot afford star players. If you want to keep the fans of low revenue teams interested then you have to create a way to give them an advantage otherwise the team would likely get contracted. Baseball seems to agree with trying to give the worst teams the greatest advantage to grab the highest talent to get back on track. When teams circumvent that with money then it doesn't work.

Look at it like this. How would you like it if the Yankee's got to pick first in the draft every year? When they have more cash to spend than every other team that is effectively what happens. Revenue can be an unfair advantage.

Cheating to me equals creating an unfair advantage (i.e. Money\revenue) or not following the rules.

#23 ScottyB

ScottyB

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 592 posts

Posted 20 June 2014 - 04:01 PM

Here's MLB.Com's list of teams leading for the top 30 prospects by team and ranking:

Yankees: 1,2,5,7,9,13,14,16,18,25,29
Rays: 3
Brewers: 4
Red Sox: 6,10
Mariners, 8
Blue Jays: 11
Rockies: 12,22
Phillies: 15
Twins: 17
Tigers: 19
Astros: 20,21,23
Royals: 24
White Sox: 26,28
Mets: 27
Padres: 30

Just a bit uneven. If Yankees sign 1/2 of those guys, they should be banned from signing any more for 10 years. I don't know what the penalty is for going over allotment, but it's not enough.

#24 HansGruber

HansGruber

    Member

  • Members
  • 33 posts

Posted 20 June 2014 - 05:07 PM

I am a bit skeptical about the report of the Twins not signing anyone over a million. They have a rather large bonus pool so it would be difficult to spread that over many smaller signings, though not a bad strategy, unless they plan to trade some it. I imagine if there is a player they like, they would spend what is necessary, within reason as they have always been somewhat risk averse. Also, Doogie has whiffed on the Twins in the past when he reported they weren't likely to make any major moves the day before the biggest free agent signing in team history. I am hoping this is a long the same lines as Ynoa sounds intriguing even if 16 yo pitchers are tough to project.

As for the Yankees and other big market teams spending on IFA, I don't like it but it's within the rules and guessing the other owners are just fine collecting the checks on the tax overages. Not that the fans should care. Guessing it won't change until there is a draft.

#25 Thrylos

Thrylos

    Yes

  • Members
  • 4,286 posts

Posted 20 June 2014 - 06:36 PM

The draft is an awful thing......there should, imo, be some hybrid draft/FA thing, imo. All the draft does is lower the income of these players (from the player side).


Well... I think doing some research in the ages before the draft, will convince you that the draft is likely the best thing to happen to equalize competition. Seriously.
-----
Blogging Twins since 2007 at The Tenth Inning Stretch
http://tenthinningst...h.blogspot.com/
twitter: @thrylos98

#26 Jim H

Jim H

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 439 posts

Posted 20 June 2014 - 06:51 PM

I expect that the Yankees will end up throwing most of their money away if they out bid everybody for a bunch of the so called top thirty. We are talking about largely 16 year old kids. With rare exceptions, most of these top thirty won't amount to much. The odds are about as good to just sign a number of the next 50 for more reasonable money. That is largely what the Twins do every year, which is has yielded the Twins prospects like Arcia and Pinto.

There are a few guys who really stand out at a young age, like Sano did. But most of the time there is a lot of projecting on these young guys. Which is a polite way of saying guessing. The Twins have a number of interesting international pitchers in their farm system right now. Very few of them received even modestly large bonuses. I expect that one or more of them (Thorpe, Romero and others) has about as good chance of becoming an ace as any of the guys in that year's "class" that received much larger bonuses.

#27 benji21

benji21

    Member

  • Members
  • 38 posts

Posted 20 June 2014 - 07:37 PM

[SIZE=3][FONT=arial]I wouldn't get my hopes up too much because it doesn't jive with what Doogie reported earlier (that the team wouldn't sign anyone for more than $1 million):
[/FONT][/SIZE]


That approach and mindset is sooooooo flawed and makes me so angry I can't even believe I'm a fan of this organization sometimes. Do the Twins realize that when they make a splash with one player he turned out to be one of the best minor league prospects they have ever had??? Seriously, they paid 3.15 million (way more than the measly 1 they won't go over) and have a previously ranked #2 in minor league baseball. Everyone is not Sano, but obviously the approach works when the player deserves it. Sure, spread the money around and buy more lottery tickets, but when the odds go up, go all in. Please...

#28 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,693 posts

Posted 20 June 2014 - 08:40 PM

It is not breaking the rule as written but there is a thing humans are supposed to have or at least try and develop and those things are called morals. How do we know the Cubs\Yankees are cheating? Well the intention of the rule was to help teams with low revenues who typically aren't that good get better by having a shot to sign some of the top talent to get better.


Well let me bring back the basketball analogy. James Naismith created a non-contact game. The players were not supposed to foul each other. Yet they still do, and often intentionally. Is that cheating?

#29 Dman

Dman

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 466 posts

Posted 20 June 2014 - 09:01 PM

Well let me bring back the basketball analogy. James Naismith created a non-contact game. The players were not supposed to foul each other. Yet they still do, and often intentionally. Is that cheating?


If it is deemed an intentional foul it is. I believe you can be kicked off the court after two technical fouls. Also FYI Basketball has a cap.

#30 70charger

70charger

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,145 posts

Posted 20 June 2014 - 10:40 PM

I hate to derail this thread by... talking about the subject, but I would love to see Bert attempt to pronounce Huascar Ynoa.