Discussion of Braves 2018 Offseason plans

clvclv said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
clvclv said:
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.
Click to expand...

What.

The.

****?
 
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.
 
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.
 
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
 
blueagleace1 said:
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
Click to expand...

Came in here to post this.
 
Horsehide Harry said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
blueagleace1 said:
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
Click to expand...

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.
 
Enscheff said:
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.
Click to expand...

That gap may not have been 100k before they submitted. Could have been 800k and then the submitted figures were at that 100k number.
 
blueagleace1 said:
That gap may not have been 100k before they submitted. Could have been 800k and then the submitted figures were at that 100k number.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Enscheff said:
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.
Click to expand...

Gotcha, so you have a problem with the whole "file and trial" exercise.
 
blueagleace1 said:
Gotcha, so you have a problem with the whole "file and trial" exercise.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Enscheff said:
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.
Click to expand...

I agree, it's a small price to pay that could have large implications in the future
 
sturg33 said:
Would Sean Newcomb have more value this off-season than Giolito did last off-season?
Click to expand...

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.
 
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
 
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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top