2016 Prospects Thread

[a700hitter]

Perhaps the Sox were more open and deliberate about it and they thought they had to put their foot down as slasher said. The thing that doesn't sit right with me is that these guys were signed over a YEAR ago, and it wasn't that secretive. You would think that the league would have been clearer and warned teams or clarified the rules prior.

 

Do I think the Sox probably did it more than any other team and thats' why they are being punished? Yes, but I'm skeptical that if they were a smaller market team that they'd be coming down on them like this. All these spending rules, and bonus penalties are derived from the fact that baseball is trying to pump up small markets and create more parity in baseball.

If this is a selective enforcement of the rule, the Red Sox would have a great shot at getting the penalty and 1 year ban over-turned by an arbitrator. Until I see some evidence that other organizations exceeded the limits in this way, I have to think the Sox were the only team that exceeded the prescribed limits. Other organizations may have bundled the prospects, but still not have exceeded the limits even if they were unbundled.

[a700hitter]

He's hitting .298/.353/.423 in AAA with 22 SB's and excellent defense in CF.

 

Sure could of used us some Margot right about now.

The Padres have the 3rd lowest OBP in the league. I guess they can use him too.

[Hugh2]

If this is a selective enforcement of the rule, the Red Sox would have a great shot at getting the penalty and 1 year ban over-turned by an arbitrator. Until I see some evidence that other organizations exceeded the limits in this way, I have to think the Sox were the only team that exceeded the prescribed limits. Other organizations may have bundled the prospects, but still not have exceeded the limits even if they were unbundled.

 

Well technically the Sox didn't go over their bonus pool. They weren't allowed to sign a guy to more than 300K so if there was a guy who was worth more than 300K they'd give him 300K and another guy or two from their camp who were highly regarded prospects money as well.

 

http://news.soxprospects.com/2016/05/report-mlb-investigating-red-sox-for.html

[a700hitter]

Well technically the Sox didn't go over their bonus pool. They weren't allowed to sign a guy to more than 300K so if there was a guy who was worth more than 300K they'd give him 300K and another guy or two from their camp who were highly regarded prospects money as well.

 

http://news.soxprospects.com/2016/05/report-mlb-investigating-red-sox-for.html

I think MLB just ruled that said technique was not a technical loophole and that it was a violation. They took a chance and blew it.

[Hugh2]

I think MLB just ruled that said technique was not a technical loophole and that it was a violation. They took a chance and blew it.

 

What is your take on Baseball Americas Ben Badler and ESPN's Keith Law saying that packaged deals are not uncommon among MLB teams?

[Hugh2]

Also worth pointing out is that every contract that MLB voided today, they APPROVED last year.

[Hugh2]

http://www.baseballamerica.com/international/mlb-takes-away-prospects-red-sox-hammers-boston-international-penalties/#SBWxUtOaH8s8Thy2.97

 

"Package deals are not uncommon among Latin American signings"

 

"All of these five players (and the players who signed with the Red Sox from the same trainers’ programs) signed last year and had their contracts approved by MLB, with the knowledge that they were all coming from the same program."

 

Not to mention that article does make it sound to me that some bullying may have been going on by MLB investigators who effectively threatened the sox signees careers to get them to negotiate.

 

In the end, we lost players who never would of had if we didn't circumnavigate the rules. And 16 year old international free agents are more lottery picks than high school draftees (although the Sox have done VERY well here in recent years) But I'm not 100% convinced the Red Sox aren't being singled out here.

 

They just got Rodger Goodelled.

[a700hitter]

What is your take on Baseball Americas Ben Badler and ESPN's Keith Law saying that packaged deals are not uncommon among MLB teams?

As I said in my earlier post, if other teams package or bundle the deals, the Red Sox must be the only team that avoided the limits by doing so. In other words, if you unbundled the deals by other teams they still would have been within the limits. If other teams did the same thing and circumvented the limits, the Red Sox should challenge the ruling.

[a700hitter]

In the end, we lost players who never would of had if we didn't circumnavigate the rules. And 16 year old international free agents are more lottery picks than high school draftees (although the Sox have done VERY well here in recent years) But I'm not 100% convinced the Red Sox aren't being singled out here.

 

.

And we have been banned from international signings for a year.

[Hugh2]

As I said in my earlier post, if other teams package or bundle the deals, the Red Sox must be the only team that avoided the limits by doing so. In other words, if you unbundled the deals by other teams they still would have been within the limits. If other teams did the same thing and circumvented the limits, the Red Sox should challenge the ruling.

 

Yes except all 33 of the Sox international signees in the 2015 signing period did not exceed their $3,681,000 million dollar bonus pool.

[a700hitter]

Yes except all 33 of the Sox international signees in the 2015 signing period did not exceed their $3,681,000 million dollar bonus pool.

The penalty for circumventing the rule is meant to be punitive with a deterrent effect.

[Hugh2]

The penalty for circumventing the rule is meant to be punitive with a deterrent effect.

 

yes I read that, I've also read that what the Sox did was common practice. It looks like they were made an example of, which I say is unfair. Also not too mention that every kid who had a deal lined up with the Sox has now been rung up to dry for tomorrow. That's not fair to the kids either.

[a700hitter]

yes I read that, I've also read that what the Sox did was common practice. It looks like they were made an example of, which I say is unfair. Also not too mention that every kid who had a deal lined up with the Sox has now been rung up to dry for tomorrow. That's not fair to the kids either.

If the rule was applied selectively, they should challenge the ruling in arbitration. If they don't, I have to assume that they were the only team that actually exceeded the limits using this technique.

[Hugh2]

The Sox did not exceed their total bonus pool, nor did they sign one player to more than 300K.

 

They packaged players from the same camps in multiple 300K deals. Which as you said MLB is now saying against the rules, but it's been widely reproted that this is not uncommon so that is why I say it seems not fair to the Sox.

[Hugh2]

If the rule was applied selectively, they should challenge the ruling in arbitration. If they don't, I have to assume that they were the only team that actually exceeded the limits using this technique.

 

So you ignore the industry insiders saying that this is common practice???

[a700hitter]

It might have been prudent to get agreement from MLB on this technique in advance. They played cute with the rule and they got burned. IMO, it was avoidable and stupid.

 

As a tax attorney, before I would apply a new interpretation of a rule for a client, I would get an advance ruling. They got cute and got burned. The culprit has already been fired. End of story. At least they didn't fine Tom Brady.

[a700hitter]

So you ignore the industry insiders saying that this is common practice???

If it was and teams avoided the limits in that way, the Red Sox should challenge the selective application of the rule. I said that already, didn't I? LOL!!

[moonslav59]

Supposedly, we were the only team that did a common practice to avoid paying a penalty.

 

I'm thinking we have a case with an arbiter.

[a700hitter]

Have the red Sox given any public reaction to the ruling?

[Hugh2]

If it was and teams avoided the limits in that way, the Red Sox should challenge the selective application of the rule. I said that already, didn't I? LOL!!

 

I don't buy that bs. I'll trust the experts in the industry over a clever poster (I mean that as a compliment) who wants to win an argument. And here is my problem with your argument. If the Sox challenge the rule then they are throwing all the other teams under the bus too.

 

If me you and 3 other guys went out to the tittie bar and left our wives at home, and then get into a fight and only I got arrested and end up in the newspaper, I'm not going to run and tell the world that everyone else was there too just because I got in trouble.

 

That is exactly how you make enemies, I seriously doubt that John Henry wants to make an enemy of 1/2 the other teams in the league.

 

Again, the Sox didn't exceed their bonus pool, they didn't exceed 300K on any one player they DID try to circumnavigate that rule by bundling contracts. However they are the only team that is getting in trouble for the latter of those even though it's been widely reported that bundled contracts is common. Reported by respected industry insiders. Reported not just today buy a year ago when teams were entering the second signing period of having to work around such restrictions.

 

Again I'll take the word of respected industry insiders over choosing not to believe what they reported just because the Sox havent' pushed back against it. And for all we know they may, this is day ONE.

Edited July 1, 2016 by A Red Sox fan named Hugh

[Hugh2]

It might have been prudent to get agreement from MLB on this technique in advance. They played cute with the rule and they got burned. IMO, it was avoidable and stupid.

 

As a tax attorney, before I would apply a new interpretation of a rule for a client, I would get an advance ruling. They got cute and got burned. The culprit has already been fired. End of story. At least they didn't fine Tom Brady.

 

All international contracts are not effective until cleared by MLB, as they were almost a year ago.

[a700hitter]

The Sox did not exceed their total bonus pool, nor did they sign one player to more than 300K.

 

They packaged players from the same camps in multiple 300K deals.

Read what you have posted above. Does it really seem kosher to you? To me, it seemed like they were playing fast and loose with the rule and that they were not operating within the spirit of the rule.

[a700hitter]

All international contracts are not effective until cleared by MLB, as they were almost a year ago.

The contracts were approved, but they were deceptive (basically they were lies), and the technique was not approved.

[Hugh2]

Read what you have posted above. Does it really seem kosher to you? To me, it seemed like they were playing fast and loose with the rule and that they were not operating within the spirit of the rule.

 

Nothing I said was inaccurate. The packaged deals circumnavigate the rule that they can't sign a guy over 300K who is likely worth over 300K, and as is widely recognized....has been common practice. The fact that the Red Sox haven't filed a grievance yet isn't evidence of the contrary.

[Hugh2]

The contracts were approved, but they were deceptive (basically they were lies), and the technique was not approved.

 

I never said they were, only that it was common practice. And why would MLB clear them in the first place if they knew they all came from the same camp? Why not just tell them they can't do that then and there and end it.

[a700hitter]

I don't buy that bs. I'll trust the experts in the industry over a clever poster (I mean that as a compliment) who wants to win an argument. And here is my problem with your argument. If the Sox challenge the rule then they are throwing all the other teams under the bus too.

The issue isn't whether I am more credible than "industry experts". The issue is whether MLB is right about this. "Industry experts" is just another set of opinions.

[Hugh2]

The issue isn't whether I am more credible than "industry experts". The issue is whether MLB is right about this. "Industry experts" is just another set of opinions.

 

No that's not the issue, even if MLB is right all evidence suggests they singled out the Red Sox. That's what I take issue over.

[a700hitter]

Nothing I said was inaccurate. The packaged deals circumnavigate the rule that they can't sign a guy over 300K who is likely worth over 300K, and as is widely recognized....has been common practice. The fact that the Red Sox haven't filed a grievance yet isn't evidence of the contrary.

I did not say that what you posted was inaccurate. I am accepting that you are accurate. I am just asking you if the technique seems right to you. To me it looks like the contracts are out and out lies.

[a700hitter]

No that's not the issue, even if MLB is right all evidence suggests they singled out the Red Sox. That's what I take issue over.

Then the Red Sox should challenge the ruling. If what you say is a fact, and arbitrator would reverse the finding. This is business. They are not in this business to make friends.

[a700hitter]

We are going in circles now.