2014 Draft Discussion

[Guest]

Even if Aiken goes JUCO and declares next year..and even if he's healthy..i expect the issue with his elbow to keep him from ever seeing a 5M signing bonus again.

If he goes the JUCO route and dominates/stays healthy I could easily see him getting $5 million+, plus i'd imagine there are other team's doctors that are of the same mindset of the ones Aiken/Close got to review his MRI and said it shouldn't be an issue.

 

Agreed. Stay healthy and he should be in the top 5 mix and get a $5 million bonus. He has quite a bit of room for negotiation since he'd only be a college freshman.

[wekim81]

Even if Aiken goes JUCO and declares next year..and even if he's healthy..i expect the issue with his elbow to keep him from ever seeing a 5M signing bonus again.

If he goes the JUCO route and dominates/stays healthy I could easily see him getting $5 million+, plus i'd imagine there are other team's doctors that are of the same mindset of the ones Aiken/Close got to review his MRI and said it shouldn't be an issue.

 

Agreed. Stay healthy and he should be in the top 5 mix and get a $5 million bonus. He has quite a bit of room for negotiation since he'd only be a college freshman.

I don't see it at all. I guess we'll see what happens. To me, he's damaged goods.

[mul21]

He's not hurt and doctors who know what they're talking about have said as much. He's not at any higher risk of blowing out his elbow than any other 18 year old flame thrower. He'll get his money, and a lot of it.

[Guest]

Even if Aiken goes JUCO and declares next year..and even if he's healthy..i expect the issue with his elbow to keep him from ever seeing a 5M signing bonus again.

If he goes the JUCO route and dominates/stays healthy I could easily see him getting $5 million+, plus i'd imagine there are other team's doctors that are of the same mindset of the ones Aiken/Close got to review his MRI and said it shouldn't be an issue.

 

Agreed. Stay healthy and he should be in the top 5 mix and get a $5 million bonus. He has quite a bit of room for negotiation since he'd only be a college freshman.

I don't see it at all. I guess we'll see what happens. To me, he's damaged goods.

 

I don't know how you can actually say he is damaged goods. There's a lot of misinformation out there but it does sound like some really well thought of doctors/surgeons think he's healthy.

[davell]

Seriously, [expletive] Andrews said he's fine.

[Guest]

He was just joking.

[Guest]

Seriously, [expletive] Andrews said he's fine.

 

And I don't think Dr. Andrews cares about an agent-team spat.

[wekim81]

Seriously, [expletive] Andrews said he's fine.

 

And I don't think Dr. Andrews cares about an agent-team spat.

So you don't think there's a chance that with all this "mis-information" that's out there - there's not a nonzero chance he's got a shaky UCL that's gonna go eventually? I do.

 

I can understand him not wanting to sign with Houston due to bad blood. That makes sense. I'm just not sure he's ever gonna get that kind of money in the form of a signing bonus down the road. That's all, nothing more. :)

[Tangled Up in Plaid]

are there actually people saying now that the astros totally fabricated this UCL thing to get a discount?

[Cubswin11]

are there actually people saying now that the astros totally fabricated this UCL thing to get a discount?

I don't think so, I think that their doctor(s) felt there was something wrong/abnormal then Aiken/Close got multiple other doctors (including Andrews) to review the same info and their conclusions were all the same that nothing was wrong/nor a concern.

 

So they didn't fabricate it, just their conclusion(s) didn't matchup with a handful of other guys.

Edited July 23, 2014 by Cubswin11

[mul21]

are there actually people saying now that the astros totally fabricated this UCL thing to get a discount?

 

No, there are people saying that while he does have a smaller than normal UCL, according to people who are experts (Dr. James Andrews specifically), there's nothing indicating that it makes him a higher risk for blowing out his elbow and he'll still get a very large signing bonus.

[XZero771679666304]

are there actually people saying now that the astros totally fabricated this UCL thing to get a discount?

 

No, there are people saying that while he does have a smaller than normal UCL, according to people who are experts (Dr. James Andrews specifically), there's nothing indicating that it makes him a higher risk for blowing out his elbow and he'll still get a very large signing bonus.

 

Maybe I'm being presumptuous, but while I don't think the Astros fabricated anything, I think they tried to overplay the abnormality as leverage to get more savings to use on overslot guys. Obviously they didn't think it was dire, or they wouldn't have offered him the reduced amount, either. If you believe enough in the guy to give him 5MM, giving him 6.5MM should not have been a dealbreaker. They got greedy, and it blew up spectacularly in their faces.

[davell]

You damn near HAVE to offer the minimum. It's only 40% of slot and if you don't, you don't get the pick next year. Not to mention, they obviously knew Aiken wasn't about to accept at that figure.

 

I have no doubt that the MRI shows stuff that is less than ideal. But they changed course here. You don't lose Aiken just because you can't get Marshall.Nor do you lose him over 1.5 mill. If you're willing to pay him 5, you should be willing to pay the 6.5. The fact they would have paid 5 shows they didn't care THAT much about the results.

 

I honestly think they got spooked by Appel, seeing all these pitching injuries, and came to terms that pitching needs to be acquired in ways other than at the top of the draft. Hedged their bets with Marshall, but are likely extremely happy they'll have the 2nd pick next year instead. And I'll be beyond shocked if they take pitching high again.

 

There only real flaw here is its going to hurt them moving forward negotiating with agents. And I honestly think they're underestimating how much.

[SouthSideRyan]

If you're willing to pay him 5, you should be willing to pay the 6.5. The fact they would have paid 5 shows they didn't care THAT much about the results.

 

I don't understand this logic at all.

[Guest]

If they're truly willing to offer 5 million to sign Aiken, it means some combination of 1)they think Aiken's elbow is not a complete non-starter and 2) Nix is worth throwing away money on Aiken to get in the fold. The odds that this logic holds at 5 million but not at 6.5 million seems incredibly unlikely given the circumstances of the situation(they are already getting well below market value prices due to it being the draft, not signing Aiken when he/his reps/other docs think he is healthy has negative external effects, etc).

[SouthSideRyan]

But they already came up to 5. The Astros don't have to think his arm is worthless just because they saw something amiss in his physical. If they're willing to spend 5, then surely they can go to 6.5...well surely if they'll go up to 6.5, they can pay slot.

[Guest]

But they already came up to 5. The Astros don't have to think his arm is worthless just because they saw something amiss in his physical. If they're willing to spend 5, then surely they can go to 6.5...well surely if they'll go up to 6.5, they can pay slot.

 

If you offer slot you lose Nix and then you're putting nearly 8 million on Aiken alone. If you're willing to go to 5 that says you're willing to put ~6.5 on Aiken+Nix. If you're willing to do that then my guess is you're willing to put 8 million on Aiken+Nix too, but not necessarily 8 million on only Aiken.

[SouthSideRyan]

But why does being willing to put 8m on Aiken+Nix+Marshall mean you're willing to out 8m on Aiken+nix?

[Guest]

Nick Faleris at BP with a great analysis of what happened with Aiken, Nix, Marshall and the Astros: http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=24223

[Guest]

But why does being willing to put 8m on Aiken+Nix+Marshall mean you're willing to out 8m on Aiken+nix?

 

I didn't say anything about Marshall. All I'm saying is that the odds of the Astros rationally valuing Aiken+Nix at 6.5 million but not willing to go to 8 million for them(losing both and inviting a lot of backlash that will likely have future repercussions) is very unlikely.

[davell]

But why does being willing to put 8m on Aiken+Nix+Marshall mean you're willing to out 8m on Aiken+nix?

 

I don't think losing Marshall, when you didn't originally think you were signing him anyway, equals the headache attached to re-building trust from agents and potential draft picks.

[Guest]

@NickJFaleris: As general note, Astros had pick of any player in class and wanted Aiken. Next yr comp pick is complete unknown...(cont.)

 

@NickJFaleris: Aiken would have to be very broken (w/high risk re: return) for unknown comp pick to make up for Aiken and loss of Nix (5th Rdr)...(cont.)

 

@NickJFaleris: Evidence we have is he's fully functional/healthy, w/relatively short UCL....(cont.)

 

@NickJFaleris: No evidence structural integrity of ligament is compromised, but disagreement as to inherent risk moving forward.

[Guest]

IMO, if they disliked Akein's MRI to the extent that they think he's a greater risk for arm problems you don't offer him a contract. If they only offered him a contract because of the CBA, that kind of sucks for the Astros. But if they used the results as a pretext to parley the other players, that's dirty pool.

 

If I was the Astros FO and I truly believed he was damaged goods, I would have petitioned MLB for some relief and not sign him. I think they were gambling their shady practice would pay off.

 

If the Docs think it's not a big deal, it's not a big deal.

[SouthSideRyan]

IMO, if they disliked Akein's MRI to the extent that they think he's a greater risk for arm problems you don't offer him a contract. If they only offered him a contract because of the CBA, that kind of sucks for the Astros. But if they used the results as a pretext to parley the other players, that's dirty pool.

 

If I was the Astros FO and I truly believed he was damaged goods, I would have petitioned MLB for some relief and not sign him. I think they were gambling their shady practice would pay off.

 

If the Docs think it's not a big deal, it's not a big deal.

 

But their doctor does think it's a big deal. The general public is going to take Andrews's word 100 times out of 100, but a team should trust its own doctors. If he says there's an issue, there's an issue.

 

The MLB was absolutely not going to give "relief" to the Astros so they could overslot lower round talents. I'd say MLB was quite happy with how this entire ordeal played out.

 

Why is it dirtier to use an injury concern discovered post-draft to offer a lower contract than to do it with a preexisting injury?

[Tangled Up in Plaid]

a "short" ucl? what the hell does that even mean?