Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 63
  1. #31
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Up along first, behind the bag.
    Posts
    1,166
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by VRP723 View Post
    Agree with the majority here, it should be protected. If for nothing else than the Mets signing an aging player who's best asset is speed in the middle of a rebuild.
    Oh, I doubt the Mets intend to sign Bourne anyway. The problem is they're getting a lot of heat from fans for not signing any outfielders and losing their best one from last year (Hairston). They have nobody of Major League caliber. By making the draft pick an issue, now they'll have an excuse for signing nobody good. "We wanted to sign Bourne, but we couldn't because we would have had to give up our draft pick".

    Some fans will buy it. That's how this team is run; team strategy has nothing to do with winning - it's a series of rationales for spending the least while charging the most. It all comes down to having the worst ownership in professional sports.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,950
    vCash
    1500
    The Mets had nothing to do with the Pirates not signing Appel. Why should their pick be unprotected now? This is a no brainer. Exceptions HAVE to be made in situations like this. This year, the top 11 picks should be protected. Or even consider this to be picks, 10A and 10B. Allowing this exception will also set a precedent to things like this if it happens again. And having case law in place already, is usually in the best interest of all involved.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    22,235
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by MG3 View Post
    Wow everyone blame the Pirates. Blame MLB and Mr Selig for putting a cap on the draft. Don't blame a team who took the best player available, went well above "slot" and went up to the point of losing their first round pick the next year. You really believe that the compensation pick isn't fair because its happening to the Mets?

    It's happened for years. Deal with it
    It's not fair because its not the in the spirit of the rule..

    That shouldn't be held against the Mets that the Pirates couldn't sign a guy that wanted #1 overall pick money. That's all of Scott Bora's clients that unfortunately turn teams off from drafting them especially with these new slot rules.

    The idea is to protect the pick for the 10 worst teams in regards to on the field performance and the Pirates did finish 5 games better than the Mets last year.

    The least the league should do is make an exception but it's more likely they won't change the rule until after the fact.
    Last edited by metswon69; 01-25-2013 at 03:22 PM.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Wethersfield/Storrs, CT
    Posts
    8,841
    vCash
    1500
    I could be wrong and I don't feel like looking it up, but didn't Appel at least give off the impression that he wasn't going to sign with the Pirates before they even drafted him? I heard something like that. Or it may have been that the Pirates didn't even talk to him before drafting him. There's plenty of error the Pirates' way. I would say it was kind of douchey by Appel, but frankly I wouldn't want to do the things the Pirates prospects are put through (Army training).

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,950
    vCash
    1500
    I have an issue with this whole situation. The Pirates picked 8th last year. Appel was there because it was a well known fact that he may not even sign. Hell....I even knew that!! I think if a player is selected in the top 10, and the team can't, or won't sign him. Tuff s***t! That team should not be allowed to get another first round pick one spot behind the previous year. That's just insane!

    If you're ignorant enough to do that, then that team needs to just lose that pick, or get another pick the following year, but much lower. The way it's set up now, teams can manipulate the draft by just picking a guy that they know may not be able to sign, or a player that they just don't want to sign in order to get an extra first round pick the following year!

    Some draft years are much stronger than others. If you don't like somebody at your selection in one year, you can just not sign him and move on to the next year..... with essentially the same selection spot??? Now they have an extra top pick, in possibly deeper draft! Absolutely asinine!! And in this case, it could affect another team!

    So at the end of the day, if a team doesn't do their due diligence, and are unable to sign their pick, they get rewarded with an extra top selection. This.......instead of being penalized for not doing their homework. Nice way to operate!
    Last edited by thawv; 01-25-2013 at 03:41 PM.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    22,235
    vCash
    1500
    And I wouldn't be surprised if Appel does it again this year considering his demands.

    He could turn into this generation's Matt Harrington.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,950
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by metswon69 View Post
    And I wouldn't be surprised if Appel does it again this year considering his demands.

    He could turn into this generation's Matt Harrington.
    He has no leverage this year. And he will be one or two. He either signs, or plays somewhere else. Just not in the MLB.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    22,235
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by thawv View Post
    He has no leverage this year. And he will be one or two. He either signs, or plays somewhere else. Just not in the MLB.
    Depends...

    Some mock drafts i've saw have him going as low as 13 to the Padres.

    I think what happened last year will hurt him this year.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    778
    vCash
    1500
    most definitely it should be protected. its not the Mets fault that the Pirates didn't sign their pick. Comp picks like that should fall after the protected picks.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,950
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by metswon69 View Post
    Depends...

    Some mock drafts i've saw have him going as low as 13 to the Padres.

    I think what happened last year will hurt him this year.
    You are correct. I didn't even look at mock drafts until now. I just assumed that he would be taken in the top 3. Appel, Stanek, Manaea, Meadows, and Frazier are what I had rounding out the top 5. In no particular order.

    I believe all five are "can't miss" guys. This is a pretty good year if your picking early!

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    22,235
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by thawv View Post
    You are correct. I didn't even look at mock drafts until now. I just assumed that he would be taken in the top 3. Appel, Stanek, Manaea, Meadows, and Frazier are what I had rounding out the top 5. In no particular order.

    I believe all five are "can't miss" guys. This is a pretty good year if your picking early!
    Good for the Cubs you mean?

    Yeah Manaea seems like the best arm and he dominated the Cape Cod with 85 k's in 51 innings. He's got 2 plus pitches with his fastball and slider.

    Kris Bryant is a beast with the bat too..

    I like Meadows and Frazier quite a bit as well.

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,950
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by metswon69 View Post
    Good for the Cubs you mean?

    Yeah Manaea seems like the best arm and he dominated the Cape Cod with 85 k's in 51 innings. He's got 2 plus pitches with his fastball and slider.

    Kris Bryant is a beast with the bat too..

    I like Meadows and Frazier quite a bit as well.
    It IS good for the Cubs!!! I see another top 10 pick coming next year too. All our top prospects are in the lower levels, so we're looking at 2015 before we can make some serious noise. But the sticks down there are the real deal.

    I think we need to cut ties with a couple young guys that we've been waiting for, for some time now. J. Vitters for sure, and maybe even B. Jackson. Jackson can be an all star type player if he can cut down his swings and misses is a big way!! If he can't get his K rate below 30%, he'll be a failure. Last year he was over 49% K's!!! Unless he hits 50 homers, that's not gonna work.

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    3,941
    vCash
    1500
    Sounds like terrible looking over of wording, good for the MLB - causes controversy.
    There are no men like me, only me.


  14. #44
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    6,903
    vCash
    1500
    i think it should be protected

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    19,809
    vCash
    1500
    I don't think it should be protected.

    The old CBA specifically protected against these type of situations. It's pretty clear that in the new CBA that this wasn't an oversight, and if such a situation like this was to occur that the team that would have otherwise been 10th (Mets) would not receive a protected pick.

    I understand the arguments in favour of it, but I think the new CBA made it pretty clear that MLB doesn't want to protect picks in situations like what we're seeing with the Mets.


    Vic Mackey: You better figure out how much you hate me. And how you're going to deal with that. 'Cause I'm not going anywhere.

    This sums up every sports interview, ever.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 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
  •