Please Come to Minnesota, Roki Sasaki

2 hours ago, bean5302 said:

I think your position is a bit naive. It just means teams will be more careful about how they word it or they'll be more judicious when they choose to tamper.

"We really value our players and young core of our team, and we want to keep those players together. We were just thinking about making an offer to a pitcher for 6yrs and $80MM for example."

The Braves were breaking all kinds of rules including illegally tampering with players on other teams, and visiting international prospects too early. Stuff which was not only widespread, but far more visible and easier to prove.

Saying the words you're suggesting right there would end up with the same penalties the Braves suffered. They closed those holes in the new CBA. The wording is very broad and doesn't take much to prove. "Whether implied or explicit" is how they worded it exactly for this reason. That's what happens after teams get caught, like I said, especially with a target this big. It takes 1 former employee with knowledge of the strategy to get interviewed to end careers.

Teams are always pushing the boundaries and the safe bet is to always assume somebody is breaking a rule somewhere, but coming out with an extension like that quickly for somebody like Roki would have every other team in the league pissed and have an investigation into your entire international operation opened immediately. 

John Coppolella can never work in baseball again. You think guys are risking their careers for Roki Sasaki or any other individual international signing? I don't. Once somebody gets caught and the hammer is dropped and the holes closed things tend to go away substantially. You said you were waiting for the first bait-n-switch. It already happened. It was happening a decade ago and 7 years ago MLB brought the hammer down. Then they closed the holes 2 years ago. You couldn't put a 6/80 deal in place during his first year without having MLB investigate you aggressively. Nobody is risking that.

1 hour ago, sweetmusicviola16 said:

So what are the terms you see being agreed upon by Sasaki. Not asking which team but the terms. Amount I can presume is all of the teams pool money. How many years is typical for the top IFA?

All he can sign is a minor league deal. Meaning he'll get whatever pool money he agrees to as a signing bonus and then he'll be subject to the same pre-arb and arbitration rules as the rest of the minor league players. He can sign an extension after agreeing to his original deal, but coming out with an extension like the 6/80 deal suggested in the first year would lead to an investigation because the team has no motivation to do that deal. They already have him under team control for 6 years. 

For example, Shohei Ohtani signed his original deal with the Angels for a $2.3 million signing bonus. He then made 545k, 650k, 260k (2020), 3 mil, 5.5 mil, and 30 mil through his pre-arb and arb years before hitting free agency. Roki Sasaki will follow the same kind of route with higher numbers as league minimums have gone up.

1 minute ago, bean5302 said:

The only offer an MLB team can make to Sasaki under the rules is a one year, Minor League Baseball contract. Period. They can add up to their full available International Signing Bonus Pool. After signing, Sasaki can be added to the team's 40 man and active 26 man roster. Discussing extensions or any MLB contracts is not allowed under league rules.

I don't think any team would dare extend Sasaki before the end of the current year, but if Sasaki plays well in year 1, an extension to buy out arbitration years and maybe 1-2yrs of free agency at a huge value would be accepted.

While @chpettit19 believes teams will adhere strictly to not only the black and white rules, but the spirit of the rules, I believe teams will push any gray area they see when you're talking about $100s of millions of dollars based on my own personal experience dealing with potential contracts in the hundreds of millions or billions.

Don't put words in my mouth. I never said that. In fact, I said the safe bet is to always assume somebody somewhere is breaking a rule.

What I did was point out that your questioning of the first "bait-n-switch" is a decade behind. I pointed out the things you guaranteed are happening would lead to GMs/POBOs being permanently banned from Major League Baseball, which is a fear they didn't have a decade ago when this actually was happening frequently. You haven't suggested subtle ways, you've suggested blatant ways that would lead to people losing their careers the second somebody got fired who knew about it or Roki said something random he didn't know was going to get somebody in trouble (like Kirk Cousins randomly mentioning he talked to the Falcon's trainer before signing).

"Hypothetically... hahhaha, believe me, this is a "hypothetical" what.. if you, say, make the team out of of Spring Training might you be amicable to an extension to x years and y dollars?" isn't some sneaky subtle way of getting around rules. Throwing out 6/80 terms isn't some subtle way of getting around rules. They're blatant rule violations. Your suggestions wouldn't happen because they'd get people banned from the league. That's what I've said. These aren't gray areas anymore. They aren't the spirit of the rules. They are the rules. With severe consequences. Does that mean everyone is playing fair? Of course not. But they aren't sitting in pitches dropping blatant rule violations that will get them banned, either.

45 minutes ago, Jocko87 said:

Agreed completely no one is going to mess with this one.  Relatively no one had heard of Yunior at that time.  Death sentence is possible.

What the Twins could have, that is perfectly legal, is a potential new owner that could hypothetically layout his general thoughts about signing talent in the media as part of introducing himself to the locals.  Something about we love our homegrown stars and when Derek develops the next Joe Mauer we will have money to sign them and make them Twins for life.  An existing owner couldn’t do that without attracting attention.  We can dream I guess.

I do wonder what they can talk about in the meetings as far as the sale.  I assume there is some sort of agreement to keep all things private but if I’m Sasaki and considering the Twins I’d want to know some details on the sale situation.  The Twins might have some details they would want to share as well.  Could they bring him into an NDA to give him the most current information?  Reputation of the organization and owners is what fills in the gaps of not being able to talk long term plans. 

I’d hate to be Falvey in that meeting knowing I can’t say anything about nothing.  He’s quite good at it but it’s a worthless skill in recruiting. 

Yeah, it'd be interesting to know what they can, and would, say about where they're at in the process. We know about 1 possible interested party publicly, but don't know anything about any conversations or due diligence that have actually taken place. 

If I'm Roki, a team in the Twins position only wins the bidding for my services if they're head and shoulders ahead of the competition. If it's close, I'm just not taking the risk on the sale and the unknown. Because even if Falvey can say stuff, he can't say "the new owner isn't going to like me or Rocco or X and thats going to change on day 1."  

I hope the Twins put together an A+ presentation and give themselves a chance. But they're in a tough spot that has nothing to do with Falvey or any of the employees. The Pohlads continue to strike.

1 hour ago, TopGunn#22 said:

I've made my feelings clear on Roki Sasaki.  A situation like this rarely, if ever, comes around where the smaller-mid market teams have a reasonable chance to add a 23 year old player like Sasaki without the $50 million dollar posting fee and a $300 million dollar contract.  The Twins should be willing to commit every penny of their $7.55 million dollar International Pool signing money to Sasaki.

That by itself won't get the deal done.  But it at least puts the Twins on equal footing with the other teams that also have $7.55 million (Tigers, Reds, Mariners etc...) and it sends the message to Sasaki that the Twins value him above any other candidate for that money.  The Twins cannot let the Tigers get this guy.  

I'm not sure what else would be permitted by MLB.  I've suggested furnishing him with an awesome fishing boat and a rotating group of local guides to show him all the hot spots for whatever it is he would like to catch.  I'm not sure what MLB would think of that.

Our current ownership problem is a hurdle to clear.  But I'd try to turn it into a positive.  I'd point out the Ishbia brothers willingness to invest in the team and the community and the likelihood of an extension to stay with the Twins long term for Sasaki with the Ishbia brothers ownership.  

But a sale would have to be announced quickly to leverage that.  I for one wonder what the Pohlad family thinks they're going to get out of this season.  The quicker they sell, the quicker they can start counting their money and go away.  A Pohlad ownership probably means a LOT of empty seats.

Whether any trades have been made to pair down salary...Vasquez, Paddack, Castro...(Correa???)  The Twins need to be on Sasaki with a vengeance and quickly.  The Pohlad's need to be consulting the Ishbia brothers as to what kind of team they are interested in buying.  One whose payroll is "right-sized" but a roster gutted??  Or something else.  There is no future for the Pohlad's in baseball.  The quicker they sell the team, the better.  For all parties concerned.  

FYI, can't offer the player a boat. Can offer them your bonus pool money. Can acquire up to 50% more and offer them that as well. Can offer nothing else. Can't even imply you're offering more than that.

And definitely can't talk about an extension. That would lead to Derek Falvey being banned from Major League Baseball. The likelihood of a sale being finalized in less than a month is essentially 0. All they've done is said they're interested in the Twins. Roki has to be signed by the end of January. There's no chance the Ishbia brothers own the Twins by then. So, mentioning them is a no go as well, I'd think.