Aledmys Diaz

[Mike Sixel]

Abreu, the reviews so far indicate he will hit in the majors. I would have signed him.

Cespedes, I'd say he has paid dividends for Oakland.

Soler- no idea why anyone would go nuts for using money to sign players.

 

that's three in the last 3 years that I would have signed.

[Mike Sixel]

Also, since they are sitting on piles of money, who cares if it is of "value"? If the money can be spent, or pocketed, why not spend it? What good is that money doing the Twins on the field right now, that wasn't spend on Soler, Cespedes, or Abreu? What is the "value" of that money to the onfield product?

[ashbury]

Your complaint is exactly what I said it was. You don't care about the player as long as the Twins spend silly money to satisfy you.

 

Moderator's note: This kind of personal bickering has reached a level where it needs to stop.

[howieramone1406390264]

Abreu, the reviews so far indicate he will hit in the majors. I would have signed him.

Cespedes, I'd say he has paid dividends for Oakland.

Soler- no idea why anyone would go nuts for using money to sign players.

 

that's three in the last 3 years that I would have signed.

 

Mike, correct me if I'm wrong, but you also wanted us to sign Alex Guerrero and Miguel Gonzalez. With Diaz, that makes 4 in one year.

[Mike Sixel]

I don't think they need to sign 4 in one year. I think it would be nice if they signed one, that would be a nice start. What I think I've consistently said is that I don't know if these guys are good or not. But, not signing Cubans seems like a bad strategy to follow if your team is bad, and you appear to have plenty of money, and plenty of roster space. When arguing to sign any of those players, the argument was never meant to imply they had to sign all of them. But maybe 1 a year, or every other year, or every three years. Not one every 40 years.

[bird]

Fair point. Although we don't know what the Twins scouts thought of these guys, so it may be as much about value, which, your protests notwithstanding, they have a right to embrace, as it does thrift. I used to complain about them being out of touch with the Japanese market, and still think they might be. It could be that they simply choose to focus resources on, say, Europe and Australia. But my guess, and it's just conjecture, is that because the Cuban market tends to get over-hyped and the bids get very aggressive, the Twins will lose these bidding contests. It's just not their MO to get in the mix. Maybe they'd rather devote scouting resources elsewhere (my guess here) and more quietly go after Thorpe and Barrie in Australia or Kepler and Verkerk in Europe.

[The Wise One]

It's a setback but it clearly didn't deter them or the Rangers. The Yankees are publicly saying 4 months before signing even begins that they will spend 10-14M which if they actually spend should net them 6-10 of the top prospects.

 

As it is the Cubs signed 4 of the top 30 prospects while forfeiting the next signing period when they probably would have only signed 1-2 if they played by the rules. Additionally the Cubs can still trade most of their signing allowance this year netting them even more prospects.

 

compare this to the MLB draft where the penalties quickly escalate to losing multiple 1st rd draft picks for a similar action.

 

A list of the international signings http://www.mlbprospectguide.com/p/international-signings.html It is a pretty long list. Tell me how many of them as a percent do you recognize as good players. Yes they signed 6 of the top 30. There is a chance one will be a serviceable major league player.

 

What the Cubs have to trade is 6 slots of $250k and no leverage to trade from.

[The Wise One]

I don't think they need to sign 4 in one year. I think it would be nice if they signed one, that would be a nice start. What I think I've consistently said is that I don't know if these guys are good or not. But, not signing Cubans seems like a bad strategy to follow if your team is bad, and you appear to have plenty of money, and plenty of roster space. When arguing to sign any of those players, the argument was never meant to imply they had to sign all of them. But maybe 1 a year, or every other year, or every three years. Not one every 40 years.

 

 

All of these players have been seen a little bit in international tournaments and in the workouts. There is a base idea from limited data. It might be as many views in person by a scout as a high school player gets. The Cubans do play in the world tournaments that are held. Their players are not a complete secret. Nationality does not make you worth the money offered. The current Twins scouts would appear to be doing a decent job of evaluating talent. I don't know if there was a recommendation to sign any of these guys, but I would bet they all had a file on what skills they possess and what comparable level they would be at.

[kab21]

A list of the international signings http://www.mlbprospectguide.com/p/international-signings.html It is a pretty long list. Tell me how many of them as a percent do you recognize as good players. Yes they signed 6 of the top 30. There is a chance one will be a serviceable major league player.

 

What the Cubs have to trade is 6 slots of $250k and no leverage to trade from.

 

Let's consider it ironic that you show how much of a longshot the players that the Cubs won't be able to sign next offseason are.

 

The fact is the Cubs felt they could sign more talent in one season by abusing the rules rather than in 2 seasons following the rules.

[kab21]

Abreu, the reviews so far indicate he will hit in the majors. I would have signed him.

Cespedes, I'd say he has paid dividends for Oakland.

Soler- no idea why anyone would go nuts for using money to sign players.

 

that's three in the last 3 years that I would have signed.

 

60+M for an unproven player with very mixed scouting reports. They only say that he will hit for power. He carries no other value and could easily be a .220/.300/.450 hitter. I would rather focus on proven MLB players at that point.

 

Cespedes has done very well but he carried huge risk when signed. In addition many on here or at BYTO were against this only because the Twins were deep in the OF. IIRC I neither liked nor disliked the idea of signing him. He carried upside and was younger. This was the same offseason that the Twins signed Willingham (ironically an Oakland FA).

 

Soler. I absolutely agreed with going after him but again the overwhelming argument against was that the Twins didn't NEED OF'ers.

 

I also like Diaz and Guerrero for the price of their current deals despite that the Twins don't need a 2Bman. The scouting reports also said that Alexei Ramirez might not stick at SS (CF) when he came to the US.

 

What the recurring theme here? Most of the arguments against individual players has little do with value but rather that the Twins NEED. The problem is that this list is a grand total of 3-4 players and 2 of those were signed by teams that have silly money to spend and have spent on int'l players. I'm not going to complain endlessly about a sample size this small when the Twins have a lot more scouting information on these players.

[The Wise One]

Let's consider it ironic that you show how much of a longshot the players that the Cubs won't be able to sign next offseason are.

 

The fact is the Cubs felt they could sign more talent in one season by abusing the rules rather than in 2 seasons following the rules.

The fact is they signed 6 players with what sort of clue would be available? Those players cost them any reasonable shot at signnig a player this year. And cost them twice for each player.

Ironic that you can't see the players they signed last year are a long shot to make it to the big leauges

[kab21]

The fact is they signed 6 players with what sort of clue would be available? Those players cost them any reasonable shot at signnig a player this year. And cost them twice for each player.

Ironic that you can't see the players they signed last year are a long shot to make it to the big leauges

 

The irony is that their penalty doesn't allow them to sign those long shot players next year. So you're basically saying that they didn't lose much since the players that they can't sign are longshots.