i believe there may be a subtle reason why a pick as high as #11 may be even more valuable to us and offer more of a reason to hang onto it and not sign Bourn (at least under the current CBA rule)
my reasoning may be off base here but i'd think with what happened with the Pirates/Mets and with a very good possibility the rules of the current CBA will be changed moving forward is it possible that a better prospect could fall to the Mets if a couple of teams drafting in front of us feel their first choice would be unsignable? Not necessarily on a financial basis but on the personal preference of the prospect?
If Team A approaches Prospect X and says we'd like to draft you at #5 for example and the kid turns around and says "no thanks,i'm not signing with you,i have no desire to play in OshKosh,etc."..Team A may pass on the prospect and move onto Plan B?
if the kid's a college senior that might make this situation moot but if he's a top ranked high schooler maybe he drops down?
not sure how this would work but generally speaking is it possible a better prospect becomes available at #11 then would otherwise be the case?...Has this year's "controversy" and potential for a change in the CBA (ie a lower compensatory pick if you don't sign your first rounder) made something like this possible? Will teams take as big a chance on an upper level pick if they think they won't be able to sign him?
I think you have a valid point. The reason the Pirates drafted Appel at eight last year was because he fell to them, he was the consensus number one pick, but the teams at the top of the draft knew he was demanding big money.
The draft bonus cap is the biggest issue. Appel had a year of eligibility left and could play hard ball and any underclassmen/high school players can do the same. What will be interesting is to see where guys like Appel go this year and what they sign for. He turned down $3.8 million last year which was $1 million over slot and half of the Pirates entire bonus pool.
If one of the players ranked well above #11 falls to us, we will pass rather than pay over-slot.
I'd be scanning the rankings 15-20 for the name of the player we'll be taking.
i'm guessing the potential uncertainty in regards to any changes in the CBA regarding this particular issue may play a role this year in how teams approach potential selections
if a team wants to sign player A but believes that he may be tough to sign AND believe there's a possibility the compensation next year may be lowered for not signing him will they pass?
and the flip side is are the Mets in a position to sign a better prospect or will they fall victim to this "uncertainty" just like anyone else?
let me ask this of those who would lose a first round draft pick for a 30 year old CFer whose best years are probably behind him: would you trade Matt Harvey for Bourn?....there are a few people on this board who are misguided enough to do so but most fans who actually know a thing or two about baseball probably wouldn't...
you're so angry and so sad, i agree with the poster who feels you should find another team to "root for" because you very plainly hate the Mets and everything they do,and now it's spreading to the regard you have for posters on the board....
it's either anger management or the Colorado Rockies for you
I will have to agree with you. Not because of his age mind you but his track record. He’s not worth 75 mil over 5 years and a draft pick. I would rather take a chance with Den Dekker than give up that money and a pick.
Now if it was a outfielder that was asking 5 years 150 mil but was putting up numbers like Albert Pujols at the age of 30 and a CF then of coarse I’ll say (HECK YEA). But until that day comes, ...... ( NEVER WILL WITH THE WILPONS) I have to say (HECK NO)