Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 80
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    The Boogie Down
    Posts
    79,156
    vCash
    1500

    Mets argue draft-pick issue

    http://espn.go.com/blog/new-york/met...aft-pick-issue
    How could the Mets pursue Michael Bourn after openly suggesting they are unwilling to forfeit their first-round draft pick?

    Apparently by arguing they should not have to forfeit the pick.

    The Mets are due to pick 11th in the draft. The top 10 picks are protected and are not forfeited if a team signs a free agent such as Bourn.

    The thrust of the Mets' argument, first reported by John Harper, is that the Mets' pick at No. 11 ought to be protected because it would have been the 10th pick had the Pirates not been awarded an extra pick in the top 10 for failing to sign their top pick last year.

    A source familiar with the topic said "as of now" the Mets' pick at No. 11 remains unprotected.
    I am really glad they kept Hairston around because he did help the Mets win an extra game or two and that allowed them to slide out of the top 10 picks.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Queens, NY
    Posts
    53,759
    vCash
    1500
    Hairston won us a game or two?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    14,521
    vCash
    1500
    I think it's a legitimate argument but if I had to guess, the pick doesn't get protected


    2014-2015 New York Knicks

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    301
    vCash
    1500
    Imagine if a team just decided to suck for a decade, low-ball the drafted players and stock-pile top 10 picks until a super deep class came along. They'd have all that accumulated pool money built up.

    Wow. The rules need re-written already. The Pirates pick shouldn't be protected.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    27,613
    vCash
    1500
    Conspiracy theory alert!

    Selig will never protect the 11th pick for the Mets because if he does the Wilpons have no legitimate excuse left to not sign a real major league free agent.
    Go Grab My Belt

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Asheville, NC
    Posts
    29,164
    vCash
    1500
    They must really want Bourne.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    2
    vCash
    1500

    So True

    Quote Originally Posted by GottaBelieve View Post
    Conspiracy theory alert!

    Selig will never protect the 11th pick for the Mets because if he does the Wilpons have no legitimate excuse left to not sign a real major league free agent.
    going off your cartoon the definition of insanity doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results, that sums up us Met fans for sure thinking they are going do do something for the fans instead of saving money

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Asheville, NC
    Posts
    29,164
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by PC View Post
    I think it's a legitimate argument but if I had to guess, the pick doesn't get protected
    It definitely is a legitimate argument. Why should the 10 worst team get punished because someone decided not to sign their pick. Apparently the Mets think they have a shot to get it protected because they told some reporter on twitter that it was "protected as of now".

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    27,613
    vCash
    1500
    It actually is a very valid argument, and flies in the face of the entire purpose of protecting picks - to allow the lower end teams a chance to improve via FA and the draft without compromising one for the other.

    The 2012 Mets were awful enough to need the help of a draft pick and a Type A free agent. They've earned that distinction, and it should not be forfeited simply because the Pirates couldn't sign their own draft pick a year ago.
    Go Grab My Belt

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    3,120
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by numbers-king View Post
    Imagine if a team just decided to suck for a decade, low-ball the drafted players and stock-pile top 10 picks until a super deep class came along. They'd have all that accumulated pool money built up.

    Wow. The rules need re-written already. The Pirates pick shouldn't be protected.
    One thing is that you only get the compensation pick the year following failure to sign the draftee. You can't amass those picks yearly. That said, if a team did stink for a while, their pick for that year could carry over to the next if they fail to sign a player. So I see where you're going. The thing is, it would not be beneficial for a team to do what you mentioned. Say for instance 5 teams in the top 10 picks fail to sign the player they drafted--in this scenario 5 teams the following year would get the shaft that the Mets got. Again teams could do what you said, but there's a far more liklihood that players will sign to slot money. There will only be a few exceptions in a competitive system. Teams will not pass on talent they can develop immediately than wait 4 years to get a really good pick. I could understand holding out for 1 draft class, but not consistently from year to year.

    Again I see what you're saying. But I don't really know how to fix it.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    3,120
    vCash
    1500
    But now this got me thinking....anyone want to take a stab at this. I'm going to push this situation to the max:

    Basically my question is, say last year in a hypothetical situation, (1) the worst 5 teams (the Astros, Twins, Mariners, Orioles and Royals) all didn't sign their draft picks AND (2) these teams again all finished in the bottom 5 the next year, would they collectively own the top 10 picks in the next draft? Basically teams that finished 5-10 would not have a protected draft pick right? Is my logic right? I just wanted to know if any of you knew the rules behind that because that's crazy. It would never really happen because teams are competitive and would have to respect their slot. But this could happen and it would screw bad teams so hard. It's not really a loophole, but it's a bit weird.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    28,902
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by GottaBelieve View Post
    It actually is a very valid argument, and flies in the face of the entire purpose of protecting picks - to allow the lower end teams a chance to improve via FA and the draft without compromising one for the other.

    The 2012 Mets were awful enough to need the help of a draft pick and a Type A free agent. They've earned that distinction, and it should not be forfeited simply because the Pirates couldn't sign their own draft pick a year ago.
    This is actually how I feel.
    Last edited by Claymation; 01-24-2013 at 08:11 AM. Reason: added a verb


    "You don't know how to drink. Your whole generation, you drink for the wrong reasons. My generation, we drink because it's good, because it feels better than unbuttoning your collar, because we deserve it. We drink because it's what men do."

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    East of the Sun, West of the Moon
    Posts
    16,347
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by ikemauiman View Post
    going off your cartoon the definition of insanity doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results, that sums up us Met fans for sure thinking they are going do do something for the fans instead of saving money
    Alderson does not need to do something for the fans other than to build a winner. Alderson clearly has a plan in mind, and based on history it is fundamentally sound.

    Quote Originally Posted by GottaBelieve View Post
    Conspiracy theory alert!

    Selig will never protect the 11th pick for the Mets because if he does the Wilpons have no legitimate excuse left to not sign a real major league free agent.
    Cynicism to a bizarre degree.
    John Maeda@johnmaeda

    Knowing the overall *shape* of an idea, argument, situation requires as many facts, models, opinions as you can take/make to see a whole.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Hill Valley, 1985.
    Posts
    7,792
    vCash
    1500
    Maybe this idea of tanking every season isn't that beneficial after all.....

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Hill Valley, 1985.
    Posts
    7,792
    vCash
    1500
    This smells like another Mets wild-goose chase. I wonder how long they will drag this out before not signing him?

Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •