I read some information about this, would like to know what all of you guys think.
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
Im guessing BA has a slight sprain/tear that he's rehabbed to the point of being little to no issue and the Astros seen it as a chance to drop th Tommy John label on him and save some money. Thats my guess.
Jacob Nix and Mac Marshall were also affected by this.
Can someone who knows the terms of the CBA or other relevant rules explain why a 1-1 pick would negotiate the contract before undergoing the team's physical when there is zero possibility of finding anything in the physical that could raise his value and a fair chance the physical could uncover something (legit or not) that lowers his value? It almost invites this sort of "gotcha" after you have established a number you would sign for.
If you know you have to take the physical before you sign, and the physical might produce info that lowers your value, why would you negotiate at all before you take the physical? Is there a rule against it or is there some other reason?
Good summary here:
Regardless of what the "top doctors in the country" have to say about his arm, if the Astros medical staff is not comfortable with it, then that's it. The Astros team physicians make all final decisions regarding medical decisions for their players. Not outside doctors.
What people fail to realize is that Dr. Andrews is only a team physician for one team. And that's the Tampa Bay Rays. That's not to say that Dr. Andrews does not have significant "power" in baseball when it comes to sports medicine. We all know that he is considered the top surgeon in the world in this area. But the team physicians for the individual teams have to make those final decisions. Not the "top docs."
What I don't understand is why should the Astro's get the second pick in the draft next year because they failed to sign their pick this year? Seems like the deck is stacked against the player. IMO they should have done their home work BEFORE the draft and be forced to come to an agreement and if not too bad.
Something is wrong with the process IMO.
Originally Posted by Bulldog 19:
Regardless of what the "top doctors in the country" have to say about his arm, if the Astros medical staff is not comfortable with it, then that's it. The Astros team physicians make all final decisions regarding medical decisions for their players. Not outside doctors.
What people fail to realize is that Dr. Andrews is only a team physician for one team. And that's the Tampa Bay Rays. That's not to say that Dr. Andrews does not have significant "power" in baseball when it comes to sports medicine. We all know that he is considered the top surgeon in the world in this area. But the team physicians for the individual teams have to make those final decisions. Not the "top docs."
Doctors can be bought just like politicians. Sign a kid, make up some humpty dumpty ligament. Drop the kids bonus and now the kid is stuck.
Originally Posted by BOF:
What I don't understand is why should the Astro's get the second pick in the draft next year because they failed to sign their pick this year? Seems like the deck is stacked against the player. IMO they should have done their home work BEFORE the draft and be forced to come to an agreement and if not too bad.
Something is wrong with the process IMO.
The MLBPA agreed to the process.
I would think that the Astros wished that there was a healthy Aiken in camp. Top draft picks are not just about money, it is a chance for a franchise to get a front line player that could possibly help anchor an organization for the next 8-10 years. If a 1st rounder signs for $5 million and pans out, that's actually a bargain. The excitement of having a Strasburg or a Posey in your system is something that everyone wants this time of year.
The Astros could have used the excitement of signing Aiken to distract from what Appeal is doing in the minors and the bad press he's getting. His ERA is 10+. Class A hitters are hitting almost .400 off him. He's given up enough homers to pitch HRD BP. It's been a rough start for such a heralded player.
http://www.baseballamerica.com...art-cant-be-ignored/
RJM, the MLBPA did sign the agreement but they have been discussions that they would like to change it during the next contract. Obviously any team wants to sign their first round picks, but the system is flawed if they have the leverage since they still get a second round pick next year, plus this "slotting" system is just a fancy name for price fixing IMO. Baseball has anti-trust protection that is a bit flawed given the nature of the game today. This one smells to me.
The process is very flawed. Unless a kid is 100% sure of signing he's negotiating without an agent in the room against professional negotiators. It's ridiculous teams get compensated for whiffing in the draft. They have all the leverage. How is the kid compensated for not signing?
$2 million is a small price to pay to not look like a laughingstock.
What kid wants to be the Astros first pick next year?
There are certainly flaws on both sides of the agreement between MLBPA and MLB. To not be able to examine a players health until after he is drafted is one of them. If anyone has read the details of what is public, Aiken has a significantly smaller UCL (genetically) than a "normal" person would have. This is a risk the Astros decided risking three players was worth. Look back at RA Dickey's draft story and how his bonus was reduced after it was found out he had no UCL.
Personally, I wish they would have signed Aiken to the original offer, and gotten Jacob Nix for his agreed price in the fifth round. They lost them both plus MacDonald. All three were on USA Baseball's 18U national team.
I'm an Astros fan and we just missed out on three really good players.
Originally Posted by SultanofSwat:
$2 million is a small price to pay to not look like a laughingstock.
What kid wants to be the Astros first pick next year?
Next year when the Astros call on draft day prospective picks are going to ask that they not draft them. The Astros asked Aiken to take less then slot money (although awful lot). Then they tried to parley 1 pick into 3. Their penalty is next years #2 overall. Doesn't seem like much of a penalty.
Originally Posted by SultanofSwat:
$2 million is a small price to pay to not look like a laughingstock.
What kid wants to be the Astros first pick next year?
All of them.
Sultan- a kid who can pass their physical. Baltimore also has played the physical card in recent history with free agents and trades. Lets hope the kid doesn't have 2 or 3 mediocre years like a pitcher recently did who was a first round selection and he didn't sign. That kid signed I think for 100,000 this year versus what he could have had a few years ago. Crapshoot as pitchers are susceptible to arm problems. His bonus would still have been life changing money.
It is a crap shoot for most. That is why these players when they reach free agency want BIG money, I say get it, cause you never know. People rant about selfish players and agents, I say go for it.
This is a business, it is all about money. The teams should do their due diligence before they give a player millions of dollars, otherwise it is not good business.
And for the players get as much money as you can now, later or whenever because many are one injury away, or just don't make it.
Just the way it is.
Bottom line, Aiken turned down $5m. There is a significantly higher probability his next offer will be less than $5m.
IMHO, classic example of emotions getting in the way of logic in a negotiation. Is it fair what the Astro's are doing? Probably not, but how many picks on the board next year will be worth more than $5m (if he goes CC)? What is his risk of not being one of those top few picks? Probably significant as now teams will see another year and if the plot on the graph showing that expected performance increase isn't there, he'll fall. How many teams will use the elbow in negotiations? How many teams will think they are dealing with a moron for turning down $5m and stay away?
If he goes to college what are his chances of still being a top 5 guy in three years? How many guys turn down top 3 round money out of HS and sign in the 10-20 round as juniors? I can think of at least one from the Phoenix area this year.
Risk versus reward. There is a very high risk for him and very little upside reward.
Originally Posted by JMoff:
Bottom line, Aiken turned down $5m.
Did he? That number was rumored, but I haven't seen anything confirming more than $3.1M.
The other thing I forgot to mention; when these negotiations became overtly public, there were statements from the Astro's trying to reach Aiken's advisor to 'negotiate'.
I realize the NCAA is pretty backward, but if anyone there has internet access, they will be asking questions about direct negotiations between a team and advisor violating their rules of amaturism.
Typically the MLB teams don't return phone calls from the NCAA (unless they are a pissed off Phillies GM) but if they do in this case, what do you think will happen? I'm hoping nothing that hurts the kid any more.
Originally Posted by Matt13:
Originally Posted by JMoff:
Bottom line, Aiken turned down $5m.
Did he? That number was rumored, but I haven't seen anything confirming more than $3.1M.
I had seen $4.5m in multiple reports and supposedly raised to $5m at the deadline. http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/ had most of the trail I was watching.
I hope the player stays healthy and does well. It is a big risk turning down that kind of money.I read the initially it was 6.5 then went to 5. 5 is still a lot of money.
Doesn't this nugget imply that Luhnow was calling the agent/adviser at the deadline to negotiate? Isn't that pretty clear cut?
Astros GM Jeff Luhnow addressed the issues surrounding top draft pick Brady Aiken and the team’s failed effort to sign him before today’s deadline:
“Basically, we tried to engage the other side, Casey Close three times today. Made three increasing offers and never received a counter, really they just never engaged, for whatever reason there was no interest."
Originally Posted by fanofgame:
I hope the player stays healthy and does well. It is a big risk turning down that kind of money.I read the initially it was 6.5 then went to 5. 5 is still a lot of money.
I'd seen that, then I also saw reports that the Astros were simply leaking rumors and that the only firm offer was 3.1.
I think the Astros poisoned the whole thing when they dropped to 3.1 and by the time they went back up to 5mil it was too late as far as Aiken and advisors were concerned. I am very curious to hear what Aiken's next move will be.
Originally Posted by therookie:
I think the Astros poisoned the whole thing when they dropped to 3.1 and by the time they went back up to 5mil it was too late as far as Aiken and advisors were concerned. I am very curious to hear what Aiken's next move will be.
John Lester has the right approach about negotiations. "It's a business. You can't take it personally. The owners of the Red Sox didn't get where they are by being stupid."
There's no such thing as too late if the money is put back on the table. I'm guessing Aiken and his team let it become personal. I doubt he will be offered 5M again in three years. Even if he is he lost three years of minor league ball and the interest from investing his signing bonus. I don't understand how anyone can risk "set for life" money. He must be too stupid to go to college.
Every time I hear how brilliant some of these guys in the baseball front offices are, something like this happens that shows that a person can have the best college degrees and still be incompetent in the real world. For 1.5 million dollars--chump change to a team that has been spending less than 25 million on payroll the last few years, the Astros let a player they considered the best in the draft get away. This player is uninjured and according to Keith Law threw 97 in his last start of the spring.
They were worried what MIGHT happen because he has a smaller ligament than usual. They could have gotten what the Giants got out of Lincecum and if he's used up at 28 or 29 so what else is new in the world of pitchers. So many drafted pitchers have already had TJ surgery before they are drafted, what is the big deal of drafting one who might someday need it.
Any young pitcher in the minors or majors might eventually need it the way things are going. So what's the difference except that the Astros considered this guy a franchise pitcher. Then to top it off because of their poor job of negotiating, the Astros lost their fifth rounder also because he was promised the overslot money that would be taken from Aiken's original 6.5 million offer. How the Astros could let this even get to the last day makes it look like they were twiddling their thumbs until the eleventh hour and by then they had teed off the two players and their families so much, they wouldn't even consider the final offers.
This is a public relations disaster for the Astros and will certainly cost them more than 1.5 million in good will. Their first pick SS of two years ago broke his leg this summer, their first round pick of last year can't get anyone out in A ball and has one of the worst minor league records of an number one overall pick since the draft was instituted and now this.
I was starting to think the Astros were on the right track and while Correa's injury can't be helped, I 'm not too high on their decision making lately.
At the same time the Aikens turned down $5 Million dollars at the last minute. You could hurt my feelings a lot for that kind of money! The kid and his advisor are not likely to see that kind of money in the draft again. Too much can happen and everybody will be looking even more closely at him and his arm. I know hurt feelings and anger over the initial lowball offer and then the last minute raise in the offer. The kid should of took the 5 million and then done a job and walked away as a free agent the first chance he got or at least stuck it to the Astros in arbitration in a few years.
Instead everyone including the adviser, Casey Close came out with mud on their faces and he may have cost the young man his eligibility for a four year college on top of that, although a Juco is probably the sounder option so that Aikens can get back in the draft as soon as possible.
...and in the process they lost the other two early round picks.
What upcoming draft pick next year would want to play for these guys?
My son was required to have an MRI on his shoulder and on his elbow after he came to terms with the team. Even though many teams request medical records before the draft, nothing is set in stone until they do medicals. BTW I do know of players that did get lower $$ after their physicals, it happens all of the time.
And it was very minimal in comparison to what was being offered to the player, but they have the right to reduce the offer if they found something of significance. Recently my son was turned down by the Reds, they just didnt like his medical reports, but another team, the Red Sox had no issue with it, neither did the Tigers. Everything is relevant in the chance you want to take of signing any player. If you take a look at the #1 pick for the Astros from last year, maybe you can understand why the they felt they didnt want to offer him that money as as stated, the final decision goes on the doctors findings and his (the doc) recommendation as well. It doesnt matter what the players doctor thinks, or anyone else, it has to come from teh team doctor that they pay (so yes its biased).
BTW, in case anyone feels that the GM can't pick em, many of those young stud MLB cardinals were drafted under Jeff Luhnow.
My opinion, thinking if it were my son and what I know I would have said sign for what you feel is a fair amount and begin your career, because it should be about wanting to play, not about how much money you feel you are worth, especially if there are questions surrounding your physical anatomy.
JMO
I just saw an article on the subject with Scott Boras' "proposal".
Decent idea.
SI is trying to smear the kid with this rumor. Shame on them.
I thought that there might be some concern about the bony anatomy where the ligament attaches, perhaps the medial epicondyle. If that is damaged or abnormal, you’re left with less bone there to reconstruct the ligament, and that can mean that a reconstruction won’t always work. They must have thought, for some reason, that a future reconstruction would not take.”
Originally Posted by SultanofSwat:
SI is trying to smear the kid with this rumor. Shame on them.
I thought that there might be some concern about the bony anatomy where the ligament attaches, perhaps the medial epicondyle. If that is damaged or abnormal, you’re left with less bone there to reconstruct the ligament, and that can mean that a reconstruction won’t always work. They must have thought, for some reason, that a future reconstruction would not take.”
Pretty reckless speculation by Dr. Dines, as well.
The end of this story is not yet written.
If I was the Astros, I'd worry about how this teenagers medical issue managed to get leaked. If the leakage is tied to the Astros, under HIPA, the monetary consequences would dwarf the potential bonus.
Interesting that the article admits that a person outside the organization (and perhaps outside the scope of any medical records release) was allowed to be present while players were discussed - again, the Astros had better hope that no players medical histories were discussed.
Here is the best article I have seen on the subject, this is a total cluster for the Astro's and it goes into the cause and effect that rippled through their whole draft board:
The anatomy of an Astro's break down.
The story may not be finished, but I am reminded of Padres 2010 1st rounder Karsten Whitson, who turned down $2 million out of high school. He went to Florida, had shoulder surgery missing junior year. Washington drafted him 37th round in 2013. He signed for $100,000 in 2014 with Boston.
Originally Posted by BOF:
Here is the best article I have seen on the subject, this is a total cluster for the Astro's and it goes into the cause and effect that rippled through their whole draft board:
The anatomy of an Astro's break down.
"You would be hard pressed to script a believable failure larger in scope, and more sweeping in potential fallout, than what we’ve seen with the 2014 draft efforts of the Houston Astros."
"Seems like the deck is stacked against the player."
The rules of the draft are part of the collective bargaining agreement between the MLBPA and the MLB owners.
In other words, you have one group interested in holding all the cards in negotiations with draftees, and one group with no dog in that fight. The draftees therefore are subjected to rules that they had no say in developing.
The entire point of the draft is not to allocate talent, but rather, to eliminate bidding among the teams for the top talent and thereby to depress the amounts paid out. Slotting by rule is now in effect on top of that.
At the top of the draft, the money is still spectacular. But when you have teams shelling out like they did for foreign players like Tanaka, Matsusaka or Chapman, you can see that the American-born players are getting shafted here. No drafted player can command what the foreign guys can, for the simple reason that they can't play one team off against another to drive up the number.
In short, the draft is a cartel, legalized by union laws and the CBA.