From watching him several times in college, I can tell you he's one cocky mofo. I never liked him. If and when he becomes a Red and produces I'm sure I can jump on board.Originally Posted by redsfan30
From watching him several times in college, I can tell you he's one cocky mofo. I never liked him. If and when he becomes a Red and produces I'm sure I can jump on board.
“The crows seem to be calling my name,” thought Caw.
How is ARod's comments to Alonso not tampering? While Arod isn't Yankee management, he does have a long term contract with them and is clearly trying to influence Alonso's decision.
That's not exactly true. Teams do focus on their organizational make-up on draft day. They don't necessarily sit there and say "we're going to have X position open in Y amount of years, so our first-round pick should be at position X." But if you have no pitching, you're looking for pitching. If you need middle-infielders, you're looking for middle-infielders.
Even in our recent history, Stubbs and Mesoraco were not BPA. So yeah, teams do look at need to a degree.
The successful teams don't care if someone wants to leave for huge money eventually. CC Sabathia left for huge money. And the Indians cashed him in for a boatload of talent. Texiera was traded twice for good value for the same reason.
This is not about loyalty and it's not about making a lifetime commitment. It is about value. Plain and simple.
Alonso is reputedly a terrific hitter -- for average, power and high OBP. If that is true, he will have enormous value and when his free agency time comes up the Reds can swap him for a significant return.
Of course there are limits on how much to spend. But the question is not whether Alonso will someday leave for a bigger market.
Last edited by Kc61; 08-15-2008 at 03:03 PM.
And many (most?) thought they were reaches at best.
I had already edited my prior post to elaborate.
BPA is a little subjective, of course, but I disagree; both players were selected around the spot where they were forecast to go. Mesoraco was a fast riser, just like Jay Bruce.
I agree and it scares me. Early on, I would expect kids to be happy with the bonus and a chance to become a major leaguer within a few years. That should be their focus. Perhaps it is only posturing, but Alonzo's tone suggests he has assumed his success and is viewing the Reds as a stepping stone.
I expect that the deal will be done at 3 Mil and minor league contract or not at all. I also think he would be foolish not to take that. After walking away this year, he would have to put up fantastic numbers next year to move higher in the draft. His down side risk is far greater than his up side potential.
Because he's a Yankee. And the Yankees can do no wrong.
Alonso is not property of the Reds yet. A-Rod isn't saying he should play for the Yankees. All he's saying is that Alonso can crash on his couch and play for an indy league team if he doesn't get his money and doesn't want to go back to school. Personally, if I weren't going to sign with the Reds, I wouldn't want to leech off A-Rod for a year playing for an indy league team. I'd much rather go back to Coral Gables and rake with an aluminum bat for another year and possibly improve my draft status which means more money.
Exactly. From the Reds perspective -- the value standpoint, it makes little difference whether or not he gets $7M or $3.5M. If he becomes anything more than a fringe major leaguer, he's worth it. If he doesn't, he's not. That calculus doesn't really change.
It's more of an issue of how much it's worth to Alonso to slipping in the draft next year and of potentially costing himself a year of MLB salary. Turning down the contract is a bit risk for him. Unless he improves a minor league year's worth while in college, he's setting his career back and limiting his long term earning potential. To say nothing of the risk of getting injured or simply losing shine as a prospect and slipping in the draft.
Games are won on run differential -- scoring more than your opponent. Runs are runs, scored or prevented they all count the same. Worry about scoring more and allowing fewer, not which positions contribute to which side of the equation or how "consistent" you are at your current level of performance.
In a sense, he is property of the Reds, for at least a few more hours, and a person with another MLB organization is offering him an inducement to not sign with the Reds. Hypothetically, what if Leatherpants was his pal, and he said, you can come crash with me and play a semipro team near my groovy leatherpants pad? Is the difference, one is management and one just a player?
I think the owners should accept WIC vouchers for treats at the ballpark. Then pay back season ticket holders if their team sucks.
See how that works? Why is it greed when it comes to the ballplayers, but not greed when it comes to the owners? Don't understand that.
“And when finally they sense that some position cannot be sustained, they do not re-examine their ideas. Instead, they simply change the subject.” Jamie Galbraith
There was some dispute over the type of contract, but the Reds have already conceded on giving him a major league contract. It is now about the size of the bonus.
The thing is the "ifs" are already factored into the slotting. The $3.5 million difference between $7M and $3.5M isn't significant to the big league club, but it means the difference between getting a Yorman Rodgriguez or a Juan Duran and not, which hedges your bets against the busts.
Every time you overpay one guy you suffer elsewhere, and as an organization. One Freel or one Gonzalez or one Alonso doesn't matter much, but when added up, it means the difference between winners and losers.
You can't escape the importance of getting good value on the dollar, because all-in-all, payroll limits are the one thing a GM has no control over.
Last edited by kpresidente; 08-15-2008 at 03:41 PM.
I agree with your confusion on that one.
That said, I don't think Alonso's worth more than $3M. Now, I'd be willing to pay a bit more than I think he's worth to get the deal done. For instance, if he came down to $4M and I was at $3M, I'd give him a $3.5 final offer.
But I've yet to see any indication that there's a reasonable bone in the body of his negotiation team. It sounds like the Reds are the only party that's shown any movement and the final outcome probably needs to be closer to the team's starting number than Alonso's because his starting number was ludicrous.
So, yeah, teams are every bit as greedy (and often far more greedy) than players, but I think the Reds in this case have every right to decide this kid isn't worth anything close to the amount it's going to take to sign him.
And if they make that decision, then I'm referring to him as Milo Alonso in perpetuity.
I'm not a system player. I am a system.
Posting Permissions
|
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please. |
Reply With Quote