Page 22 of 58 FirstFirst ... 12202122232432 ... LastLast
Results 421 to 440 of 1145

Thread: Discussion of Braves 2018 Offseason plans

  1. #421
    Mr. Free Trade
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    3,139
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    470
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    834
    Thanked in
    514 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by clvclv View Post
    Have to disagree.

    If you pay your representation to scratch and claw for every last dime like Folty did, you better make *amn sure your agent is smarter than the team's front office guys - especially when it's over something as miniscule (relatively speaking as it is in his case) when you're gambling that you might bite the hand that feeds you.

    It's absolutely the players' right to present their case, but they better be sure they're going to win if it goes to a hearing because the team remembers that when opportunities for extensions come up. If you couldn't get them to budge a little (even less than the halfway point between the sides) and you blow out your elbow this season, you're *ucked. About the only team we heard that was going to negotiate after today was the Orioles (and that was because they were already close to hammering things out - and actually did before the deadline).

    File-or-trial is likely to become the norm for everyone - especially as the franchises get smarter. Borass clients like Martinez threatening to hold out into camp (or longer) are playing with fire - if the Red Sox call his bluff and go to Plan B because they KNOW their offer is the best out there, they've screwed themselves by not taking it. Folty's in an even tougher situation because he can't jump ship even if someone else would pony up that extra $100K.
    I can't agree with your thinking. If a player forces arbitration and the club doesn't like it then they may well trade the player. But it's got nothing to do with extensions. A team offers extensions because of perceived economic advantage not out of any sense of loyalty to the player (the only exception might be a end of life type contract for a long time team icon, which is economic in its own way).

    If anything this tells me that the Braves have no interest right now in extending Folty. If they did, they would pay the extra $100K as an inducement to try to keep him at the extension negotiation table. Instead the Braves are taking a hard line which tells me that they really don't care what Folty thinks or wants.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Horsehide Harry For This Useful Post:

    clvclv (01-13-2018)

  3. #422
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    26,261
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    34
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    10,000
    Thanked in
    6,108 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by clvclv View Post
    Have to disagree.

    If you pay your representation to scratch and claw for every last dime like Folty did, you better make *amn sure your agent is smarter than the team's front office guys - especially when it's over something as miniscule (relatively speaking as it is in his case) when you're gambling that you might bite the hand that feeds you.

    It's absolutely the players' right to present their case, but they better be sure they're going to win if it goes to a hearing because the team remembers that when opportunities for extensions come up. If you couldn't get them to budge a little (even less than the halfway point between the sides) and you blow out your elbow this season, you're *ucked. About the only team we heard that was going to negotiate after today was the Orioles (and that was because they were already close to hammering things out - and actually did before the deadline).

    File-or-trial is likely to become the norm for everyone - especially as the franchises get smarter. Borass clients like Martinez threatening to hold out into camp (or longer) are playing with fire - if the Red Sox call his bluff and go to Plan B because they KNOW their offer is the best out there, they've screwed themselves by not taking it. Folty's in an even tougher situation because he can't jump ship even if someone else would pony up that extra $100K.
    What.

    The.

    ****?

  4. #423
    Arbitration Eligible
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    2,811
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    29
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    887
    Thanked in
    589 Posts
    Taking cases to arbitration means the team has to argue that the player doesn’t deserve to be paid. Regardless of the outcome it strains the relationship with the player.

  5. #424
    It's OVER 5,000! Hudson2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    8,679
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    956
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,455
    Thanked in
    1,123 Posts
    Over a $100k?? Either split the difference or just pay it. Not only does it look bad to Folty but to the other players also.

  6. #425
    Playing the Waiting Game blueagleace1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    884
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    78
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    277
    Thanked in
    155 Posts
    I could be wrong about this but, I believe the $ amount which is referred to as "filed" is a number the said party ended on, and not necessarily what was being discussed and countered. To help clear my statement up i'll create a fictitious dialog between team and player/agent...

    Numbers first released:

    Team: "Our numbers show Enscheff is deserving of a contract of $4 million

    Player/agent: "We believe Enscheff is worth $6.5 million


    Round 2 of discussions:

    Team: We've determined a number of $4.25 million to be sufficient

    Player/agent: $6.25 million is what we're looking for


    Deadline passes and numbers are filed without another interaction between team/player/agent

    Team files at: $4.9 milion

    Player/agent files at: $5.2 million



    So while that $300k may seems like nothing in relative terms, the two salaries that were "filed" are numbers each believe they "can win" or are worth and doesn't necessarily dictate the large gap each had at their last meeting. Does that make sense or did I just confuse even more people?? Haha
    "Don't tell me the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon"

  7. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to blueagleace1 For This Useful Post:

    dak (01-13-2018), Gary82 (01-13-2018), jpx7 (01-13-2018)

  8. #426
    NL Rookie of the Year dak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    2,604
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    204
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,252
    Thanked in
    696 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by blueagleace1 View Post
    I could be wrong about this but, I believe the $ amount which is referred to as "filed" is a number the said party ended on, and not necessarily what was being discussed and countered. To help clear my statement up i'll create a fictitious dialog between team and player/agent...

    Numbers first released:

    Team: "Our numbers show Enscheff is deserving of a contract of $4 million

    Player/agent: "We believe Enscheff is worth $6.5 million


    Round 2 of discussions:

    Team: We've determined a number of $4.25 million to be sufficient

    Player/agent: $6.25 million is what we're looking for


    Deadline passes and numbers are filed without another interaction between team/player/agent

    Team files at: $4.9 milion

    Player/agent files at: $5.2 million



    So while that $300k may seems like nothing in relative terms, the two salaries that were "filed" are numbers each believe they "can win" or are worth and doesn't necessarily dictate the large gap each had at their last meeting. Does that make sense or did I just confuse even more people?? Haha
    Came in here to post this.

  9. #427
    It's OVER 5,000! Tapate50's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    24,255
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    9,057
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5,693
    Thanked in
    3,881 Posts
    Should have traded him at the deadline
    Ivermectin Man

  10. #428
    Sabermetric Slut
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Your Mom's Basement
    Posts
    29,668
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,721
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    8,744
    Thanked in
    5,837 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Tapate50 View Post
    Should have traded him at the deadline
    While you hope for more of Folty we still have league average production on the cheap at the worst.

  11. #429
    NL Rookie of the Year
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    2,469
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    431
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    577
    Thanked in
    376 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Tapate50 View Post
    Should have traded him at the deadline
    Should have traded him last offseason

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to Chico For This Useful Post:

    Braves1976 (01-13-2018)

  13. #430
    "What is a clvclv"
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Nebo, NC
    Posts
    9,634
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    5,354
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2,340
    Thanked in
    1,628 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Horsehide Harry View Post
    I can't agree with your thinking. If a player forces arbitration and the club doesn't like it then they may well trade the player. But it's got nothing to do with extensions. A team offers extensions because of perceived economic advantage not out of any sense of loyalty to the player (the only exception might be a end of life type contract for a long time team icon, which is economic in its own way).

    If anything this tells me that the Braves have no interest right now in extending Folty. If they did, they would pay the extra $100K as an inducement to try to keep him at the extension negotiation table. Instead the Braves are taking a hard line which tells me that they really don't care what Folty thinks or wants.
    That's just it for me - the player has to realize it works both ways. As Slippy points out, any time you wind up having to go before the panel it strains the relationship between the parties on both sides. I'm sure the Braves would prefer not to argue with Folty's reps over such a small amount - he's already a head case WITHOUT them putting the thought in the back of his mind that they don't think he's as good as he thinks he is. Complete speculation of course, but you have to think that if his reps showed the least sign of being willing to budge in the least that the team would have as well since they were so close to begin with.

    Think about it - in the hearing, his reps will be arguing that he's worth $50,000.01 more than the team's figure and the team will be arguing that he's worth 50,000.01 less than his figure. If his reps showed any sign that the Braves agreeing to meet them at the midpoint would avoid the whole mess, he'd be signed - and more importantly wouldn't have to deal with the baggage that comes with having his team tell him they don't think he's that good.

    Everybody screams bloody murder when these teams won't go that "little bit further" to sign a player about how "cheap" the team is being. These situations keep them from having that extra flexibility lots of times - if they HAVE to pay every arb-eligible player more than they think they're worth, that quickly makes that extra million or so that they need to come up with to add a free-agent disappear quickly.

    The only reason I think it has anything to do with a potential extension in this case is that he's made it more than obvious he's not willing to give up anything in return for the stability that one would provide - as well as the fact that he wouldn't have to go through this again. That's absolutely his right, but it also shows everyone he's out for himself before the team. As of today, he's done little to prove that the Braves simply HAVE to keep him when he starts to get expensive - he's betting on himself and the fact that he's going to prove that he's going to improve enough that they can't do without him, and that's great. I just think that's going to be that much harder in his case after he's had them tell him all the things they don't like about him.
    Last edited by clvclv; 01-13-2018 at 10:26 AM.
    Has there EVER been a statement and question a certain someone should absolutely never have made and asked publicly more than...

    Kinda pathetic to see yourself as a message board knight in shining armor. How impotent does someone have to be in real life to resort to playing hero on a message board?

  14. #431
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    26,261
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    34
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    10,000
    Thanked in
    6,108 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by blueagleace1 View Post
    I could be wrong about this but, I believe the $ amount which is referred to as "filed" is a number the said party ended on, and not necessarily what was being discussed and countered. To help clear my statement up i'll create a fictitious dialog between team and player/agent...

    Numbers first released:

    Team: "Our numbers show Enscheff is deserving of a contract of $4 million

    Player/agent: "We believe Enscheff is worth $6.5 million


    Round 2 of discussions:

    Team: We've determined a number of $4.25 million to be sufficient

    Player/agent: $6.25 million is what we're looking for


    Deadline passes and numbers are filed without another interaction between team/player/agent

    Team files at: $4.9 milion

    Player/agent files at: $5.2 million



    So while that $300k may seems like nothing in relative terms, the two salaries that were "filed" are numbers each believe they "can win" or are worth and doesn't necessarily dictate the large gap each had at their last meeting. Does that make sense or did I just confuse even more people?? Haha
    Then in that case they should still be able to come to terms on a deal to bridge the $100k gap.

    Going to a hearing against a player over such a trivial amount of cash for an MLB franchise is beyond stupid.

    I just hope it doesn’t mean we are about to see a Folty extension.

  15. #432
    Playing the Waiting Game blueagleace1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    884
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    78
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    277
    Thanked in
    155 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Enscheff View Post
    Then in that case they should still be able to come to terms on a deal to bridge the $100k gap.

    Going to a hearing against a player over such a trivial amount of cash for an MLB franchise is beyond stupid.

    I just hope it doesn’t mean we are about to see a Folty extension.
    That gap may not have been 100k before they submitted. Could have been 800k and then the submitted figures were at that 100k number.
    "Don't tell me the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon"

  16. #433
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    26,261
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    34
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    10,000
    Thanked in
    6,108 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by blueagleace1 View Post
    That gap may not have been 100k before they submitted. Could have been 800k and then the submitted figures were at that 100k number.
    So again, they should be able to bridge that gap now. There’s no reason to take a member of your organization to an arbitration hearing over the spare change rattling around in some executives glove box.

  17. #434
    Playing the Waiting Game blueagleace1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    884
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    78
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    277
    Thanked in
    155 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Enscheff View Post
    So again, they should be able to bridge that gap now. There’s no reason to take a member of your organization to an arbitration hearing over the spare change rattling around in some executives glove box.
    Gotcha, so you have a problem with the whole "file and trial" exercise.
    "Don't tell me the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon"

  18. #435
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    26,261
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    34
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    10,000
    Thanked in
    6,108 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by blueagleace1 View Post
    Gotcha, so you have a problem with the whole "file and trial" exercise.
    It’s a silly policy, especially if both sides don’t know the real numbers until figures are exchanged as you suggest.

    What possible logic could justify taking a member of the organization to arbitration over an amount of money that is about 0.05% of the total player payroll? It is insanely stupid.

  19. #436
    Playing the Waiting Game blueagleace1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    884
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    78
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    277
    Thanked in
    155 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Enscheff View Post
    It’s a silly policy, especially if both sides don’t know the real numbers until figures are exchanged as you suggest.

    What possible logic could justify taking a member of the organization to arbitration over an amount of money that is about 0.05% of the total player payroll? It is insanely stupid.
    I agree, it's a small price to pay that could have large implications in the future
    "Don't tell me the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon"

  20. #437
    I <3 Ron Paul + gilesfan sturg33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    52,573
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,018
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    8,093
    Thanked in
    5,756 Posts
    Would Sean Newcomb have more value this off-season than Giolito did last off-season?

  21. #438
    Shift Leader thethe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    69,567
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    5,507
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5,179
    Thanked in
    3,898 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by sturg33 View Post
    Would Sean Newcomb have more value this off-season than Giolito did last off-season?
    Good question. I think Giolito had more buzz about his repertoire and was younger. But Newk never had a surgery so it could balance that out.
    Natural Immunity Croc

  22. #439
    I <3 Ron Paul + gilesfan sturg33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    52,573
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,018
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    8,093
    Thanked in
    5,756 Posts
    I thought MLB tr article about comparing Yelich to Eaton was interesting.

    Giolito was the highlight... But if I recall correctly his shine had worn off substantially by the time of that deal

  23. #440
    Mr. Free Trade
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    3,139
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    470
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    834
    Thanked in
    514 Posts
    What does everyone think about Greg Holland?

    Sure he comes with the loss of a pick (in the Braves case a 3rd rounder) but his market hasn't really developed.

    MLBTR has him projected for a 4 year $50M payday (AAV $12.5M). My thinking is to sign him and then move him at the deadline to teams needing a closer. Maybe backload the contract a bit ( $5M bonus, $5M salary, then $13.33M years 2-4). If he doesn't get hurt or completely fall apart (a risk with any player) then he is probably one of the premier closers that might be available at the deadline. When you look at what the Yankees got for Andrew Miller ( Frazier, Sheffield - #4 prospect, Heller #21 prospect and closer candidate, and Feyeriesen - middle relief candidate) and Chapman (Torres - #1 prospect/#2 in baseball, Billy McKinney - #22 prospect, Adam Warren - MLB swingman, and Rashad Crawford).

    You could argue that Holland wouldn't have the value of either and most likely be right. However, even taking that as a given would a Holland for a Frazier type prospect (or Sheffield) straight up be likely better than a 3rd round pick? Would Holland for a Torres straight up?

    You could argue economics in that the 3rd round pick would cost you about $1M while Holland (under the scenario outlined above would cost about $7.5M (5M bonus, 2.5M salary for 1/2 season). You could also argue that the third round pick might ultimately be a better player than anything you could get in trade. I find that unlikely since not many 3rd rounders ever make an impact (it does happen).

    If the Braves were to take this approach they would need to be disciplined enough under the scenario where Holland has 25 saves and a 1.5 era at the break that they still make him available to trade. Otherwise they open themselves to longevity risk that you were writing off when you originally made the decision.

Similar Threads

  1. MLB plans to change IL rule
    By bravesfanforlife88 in forum 2023: Celebrating Our 10th Year Here
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 11-19-2019, 07:52 AM
  2. 2018 Offseason And Targets
    By clvclv in forum 2023: Celebrating Our 10th Year Here
    Replies: 11578
    Last Post: 03-26-2019, 07:29 PM
  3. Around the League: 2017 offseason edition / 2018 Season
    By bravesfanforlife88 in forum 2023: Celebrating Our 10th Year Here
    Replies: 2322
    Last Post: 10-31-2018, 12:15 PM
  4. Around the League: 2018/2019 Offseason
    By bravesfanforlife88 in forum 2023: Celebrating Our 10th Year Here
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-21-2018, 05:44 PM
  5. 2018 Offseason
    By thewupk in forum 2023: Celebrating Our 10th Year Here
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 09-28-2016, 07:38 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •