|
Post by brianstark on Jul 28, 2021 21:07:06 GMT
|
|
|
Post by CMF on Aug 2, 2021 13:06:13 GMT
So the Mets didn't sign Rocker by the deadline, he goes back into the draft. The result is we didn't get a first rounder this year and next year we pick at 11. How bad must Rocker's elbow look in the MRI? Seems like a big fail here by the organization.
|
|
|
Post by saxon on Aug 2, 2021 15:29:50 GMT
meanwhile Donald Boras claims his client's injury is fake news...his "independent" mri's says he's strong as a horse...however, he also had his client skip the pre-draft mlb authorized mri that is customary..
the following excerpt is from a 2016 article talking about the league's voluntary mri program for the top 50 ranked potential draft picks, so the player that they talk about was likely the 2014 draft class:
Two years ago the Astros selected left-hander Brady Aiken with the first overall pick and agreed to sign him for more than $6 million. Then, during his pre-signing MRI, the team found something they didn't like in his elbow and reduced their offer substantially. Aiken declined and did not sign. He had Tommy John surgery the following spring and was selected 17th overall by the Indians. His $2.5 million was less than Houston offered after the MRI.
Aiken's bad MRI and decision not to sign did not only affect him, however. He agreed to a below-slot deal, and the Astros planned to use the savings on fifth-rounder Jacob Nix. Houston lost the pool money associated with the No. 1 pick when Aiken didn't sign, which means the money they agreed to give Nix disappeared. The Astros reneged on their deal with Nix, because if they'd have stuck to the agreement, they would have gone over their bonus pool and forfeited their 2015 first-round pick.
(Nix filed a grievance against the Astros because they went back on their handshake agreement, and the two sides settled before a hearing. They reportedly paid him $1.5 million, the amount of their original agreement.)
The new MRI rules mean situations like Aiken's (and Nix's) won't happen. Teams won't have to risk draft pool space on potentially injured players and lost bonus money when the physical shows something unexpected. In the grand scheme of things, the money is still going to the players, and that's good. Teams won't walk away and forfeit pool money rather than sign an injured player.
So the overall good news is the pre-draft MRIs will help keep pool money with the players. Teams won't forfeit it and walk away from an injured player. The bad news is an individual player could potentially lose a lot of negotiating leverage if the MRI shows something out of the ordinary. Stick any pitcher in an MRI tube and it'll show something unusual. Even high school and college kids. Pitching is not natural.
If were a parent of a top-50 draft pitching prospect, would I let him undergo the MRI? Gosh, that's tough. You have to trust the kid is telling you the truth about his health and how he feels, and trust his representative can still cut a good deal if the MRI shows something unexpected. It's a risk, no doubt about it.
|
|
|
Post by saxon on Aug 2, 2021 21:41:43 GMT
www.audacy.com/wfan/sports/mets/boras-rips-unjust-mlb-draft-after-mets-whiff-on-rockerScott Boras rips 'unjust' draft system after Mets fail to sign Kumar Rocker MLB super agent Scott Boras has sounded off after the Mets declined to sign one of his clients, first-round draft pick Kumar Rocker. Boras, who has negotiated some of the biggest contracts in league history, went on the offensive over the weekend, when he forcefully claimed that Rocker's pitching arm was was fully healthy. His comments came after the Aug. 1 deadline to sign draftees passed without a deal materializing between the Mets and Rocker, and amid reports suggesting the Mets had been scared off by Rocker's medical records. On Monday, Boras continued to rail against the MLB draft system, which he characterized as "unjust" while pointing out that teams who do not sign draftees are awarded compensatory draft picks, while the draftees are left high and dry. "MLB missed the opportunity to have this player in their system because of the club's decision to pursue draft dollars in next year's draft," Boras said in a text published by Audacy insider Jon Heyman. "The player should have the opportunity to pursue other MLB teams to sign with," Boras continued. "The rule is unjust. Carter Stewart (who the Braves didn't sign after he was drafted 8th overall but signed in Japan for $6M and is now in the majors at 21 over there) is an example of the injustice of the draft system and an example of the competency of our medical experts who gave the correct prognosis ..." Monday's remarks came after Boras declared on Sunday that Rocker is "healthy according to an independent medical review by multiple prominent baseball orthopedic surgeons." The Mets did not officially address why Kumar went unsigned. GM Zack Scott released an anodyne statement, saying "This is clearly not the outcome we had hoped for and wish Kumar nothing but success moving forward." The team was apparently scared off by what they found during medical exams, and seemed to want Rocker to accept a discounted signing bonus for their concerns, reports said. The right-hander was projected by most to be off the board before the Mets pick at No. 10, but he seemed to see a draft-day slide after his velocity dipped this season. The "value pick" was widely lauded by Mets fans and media -- only to backfire when a deal couldn't be reached. The Mets receive the 11th overall pick in 2022 for whiffing on Rocker, while the Vanderbilt star is left in something of a lurch -- much to Boras' chagrin. Rocker can return to college, where he has two years of eligibility remaining -- plus the potential to earn some cash under the NCAA's new NIL rules -- or potentially play overseas, a la Stewart.
|
|
|
Post by abat on Aug 4, 2021 19:24:20 GMT
Buster Olney has been having a really big go at the Mets for this on his podcast over the last couple of days.
|
|
|
Post by nyf on Aug 4, 2021 21:58:39 GMT
|
|
|
Post by abat on Aug 5, 2021 15:36:00 GMT
The issue seems to be the system basically says if the Mets don't want him no-one else can sign him either so the kid is stuck.
|
|
|
Post by nyf on Aug 6, 2021 15:51:16 GMT
I mean what is the fix if that is the issue? What is to stop a player from saying "I don't like who drafted me" and then refusing to sign to then become a FA eligible to sign with whomever they like? Where does slot money come into play for teams that don't sign? For instance, should Rocker be allowed to get as big a bonus as he wants? Or is he still tied to his slot value? And if still tied to slot, aren't all teams that DID manage to sign their draft theoretically spend all their slot?
Do you make it where if the team declines to pay slot, only then is he allowed to sign with whomever he likes? But if they team offers slot, he has to sit out? What does this do for the teams that specifically draft a player valued lower than slot in a higher draft round to give more draft flexibility later? If they fail to sign them, they lose that slot money.
I'm asking the questions because I don't think it's as easy as saying "Mets said no thanks, now the kid is screwed". Let's not forget, the kid (and his agent) made the choice not to provide medicals before the draft. Maybe if he had, he would have fallen a few picks lower, but would be signed to a multi-million dollar contract right now.
|
|
|
Post by saxon on Aug 6, 2021 16:51:42 GMT
I was reading an article at work the other day, don't remember what the source was...however, it had the Miami Marlins for President (I believe his last name is Sampson)...Sampson said that the Mets did the right move, that Boras manipulated the situation, hiding the kids injuries thru use of his own "doctors"...it was a little more insightful than what I said, if I find the article again, I will share it
|
|
|
Post by saxon on Aug 6, 2021 16:52:53 GMT
I mean what is the fix if that is the issue? What is to stop a player from saying "I don't like who drafted me" and then refusing to sign to then become a FA eligible to sign with whomever they like? Where does slot money come into play for teams that don't sign? For instance, should Rocker be allowed to get as big a bonus as he wants? Or is he still tied to his slot value? And if still tied to slot, aren't all teams that DID manage to sign their draft theoretically spend all their slot? Do you make it where if the team declines to pay slot, only then is he allowed to sign with whomever he likes? But if they team offers slot, he has to sit out? What does this do for the teams that specifically draft a player valued lower than slot in a higher draft round to give more draft flexibility later? If they fail to sign them, they lose that slot money. I'm asking the questions because I don't think it's as easy as saying "Mets said no thanks, now the kid is screwed". Let's not forget, the kid (and his agent) made the choice not to provide medicals before the draft. Maybe if he had, he would have fallen a few picks lower, but would be signed to a multi-million dollar contract right now. Kind of like how John Elway manipulated his way into a Denver Bronco uniform? www.nytimes.com/1983/04/27/sports/colts-pick-elway-but-the-quarterback-refuses-to-go.html
|
|
|
Post by CMF on Aug 6, 2021 17:55:57 GMT
|
|
|
Post by nyf on Aug 6, 2021 18:40:23 GMT
I mean those type of leverage moves are going to happen here or there. In that case, Elway had the leverage of an unrelated sport to turn to where the penalties facing an NFL only guy wouldn't apply. But yes, essentially, that is what every player could do if all it took was not signing on the dotted line to gain ones own freedom to sign wherever following the deadline... Not arguing the current system is great, but there are problems no matter how you slice it. In this case, Rocker got f'ed, but the Mets also lost a year of development on the 10th overall pick and the sacrificed better picks later in the draft to afford Rocker's over slot value, so this can't have been their ideal situation either. Something HAD to have happened that scared them enough to completely walk away.
|
|
|
Post by saxon on Aug 6, 2021 21:05:10 GMT
|
|
|
Post by nyf on May 17, 2023 20:17:11 GMT
Looks like the Mets got this one right...
|
|
|
Post by Admin on May 17, 2023 20:56:59 GMT
I was thinking the same thing...except I think that the elbow wasn't the Mets big yank, it was his shoulder...
|
|