Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

1969 Rookie Draft

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • mac195
    replied
    My estimate of Blue's career salary prospects without the FP designation:

    69-1m
    70-1m
    71-1.25m
    72-2.5m
    73-2.75m
    74-3m
    75-24m
    76-24m
    77-24m
    78-24m
    79-8m
    80-8m
    81-8m
    82-8m
    83----
    85----
    86- 1M

    Total - $142.5M
    Last edited by mac195; 05-26-2008, 11:17 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • The Dude
    replied
    Originally posted by BlueBlood View Post
    I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that the winner of the free agent auction has the player for 3, 4 or 5 years depending on what they choose.
    Very true sir, I had forgotten. However, I did fail to mention something I think about a lot now with my pick coming up soon in the draft ... the idea of forcing prices up higher. Example with Vida Blue again. Say you FP him, that takes one high quality pitcher off the free agent market 6 years from now, thus driving up the prices of other quality pitchers in Free Agent market in said year. You can thus possibley cripple one team fiscally for at least 3 seasons. Granted ... some might consider this dirty ball, but if it's logically in the best interest of your team ...

    Leave a comment:


  • BlueBlood
    replied
    Originally posted by The Dude View Post
    However, you're still gonna be paying him say, 22 million for these 5 years, whoever gets him. 1980 is good enough that you're gonna be stuck paying for him for 5 years at around 14m.
    I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that the winner of the free agent auction has the player for 3, 4 or 5 years depending on what they choose. Theoretically, you could avoid some of the inferior years on the back end of a 5-year contract by only paying for the first three. This means Vida could be much cheaper than your estimates if people are doing a three year, followed by a relatively cheap contract that includes some mediocre years, etc.

    I don't think any of us have written about trade bait. You could always de-franchise one of these players at the right moment and make an absolute killing. Who wouldn't give up an arm and a leg for a pitcher having a career year for only $12 million?

    Leave a comment:


  • The Dude
    replied
    From my perspective, I think there's 6-8 franchise players worthy. I don't go as in depth on the fiscal end. To me, it's relatively simple. Take Vida Blue. Sure, you franchise him for 12m a year, and you get 2 useless seasons in 69-70, a medicore 72, an all-time season in 71, and two quality seasons in 73-74.

    Lets say that if you FP Blue, you let him go after 1982. I would ... You've paid him 168 million.

    Now let's look at Vida if we don't franchise him out (thinking he was your first overall pick this draft).
    69-1m
    70-1m
    71-1m
    72-2m
    73-2.25m
    74-2.5m
    75-22m
    76-22m
    77-22m
    78-22m
    79-22m
    80-14m
    81-14m
    82-14m
    83-14m
    84-14m

    Now, his 76 and 78 campaigns are likely league leading campaigns, followed by a good 75, an alright 77, and a horrid 79. However, you're still gonna be paying him say, 22 million for these 5 years, whoever gets him. 1980 is good enough that you're gonna be stuck paying for him for 5 years at around 14m.

    That brings you to 180m total that you've spent on Blue's career, and granted, I think my numbers were conservative...

    Leave a comment:


  • BlueBlood
    replied
    Oh, there's definitely big money to be had out of some of these, but I just don't think there's any players that can really be worth the $12 million each season. There's no telling what team will need who and when, obviously. That's the fun of this game.

    But certainly, there are some monster seasons out of this lot. If Vida's 71 were his seventh season and he was on the free agent market, I think he'd top $30 million. And that's a pitcher. Biggest question for everyone is whether you go for the guy that gives you six great, dirt-cheap seasons or someone that has a few for the ages and doesn't play in half of the six.

    Leave a comment:


  • leecemark
    replied
    --If you think none of the 69 rookies will get that kind of money I suggest you review some of the past free agent auctions. If Dave McNally can get 20M+ I think at least one pitcher in this draft will. We haven't had an elite catcher up for auction before, but I'd venture to say that such a creature exists in this draft (perhaps thrice). There is one other player who I would not be surprised to see get such a contract based on a scarcity of talent at his position over the next decade.
    --I think the franchise options are at least as good in 69 as they were for the 64 expansion teams. I can see the case for not exercising that option though. The other thing you have going for you is you may be able to tie up your second franchise player next year (though you wouldn't have to pay the 12M until his 4th season) and have a pair of guys to build around together for a long time.

    Leave a comment:


  • BlueBlood
    replied
    The problem is that expansion owners only had '69's draft to apply the FP tag, need to apply it right away, and the field includes very few, if any, that could potentially be worth the money. I do see the point being raised about how overpaying now for a player that would easily pull $20M later makes financial sense but this draft just doesn't have those sort of players.

    Leave a comment:


  • catcher24
    replied
    Originally posted by Sockeye View Post
    Mark makes a good point. IMO it's better to invest and overpay for a player in non-contending years only to have a bargain in the contending years when it could make a difference in a championship team. There are still at least 3 - 4 players who I could see bringing in 20-25 mill per season on the free agent market over the course of the next two free agent cycles. That is seasons 7-11 and 12-16. Thus making them worth the franchise player tag. The secret for the expansion teams is finding those 3 or 4 players who are still producing 15 seasons from now.
    I touched on this in my reply as well. I think to make the FP worthwhile, it has to be a player who is still putting up very decent numbers in their first FA cycle (years 7-11) so the owner will want to keep them. Someone putting up very good numbers in the second cycle (years 12-16) is even more valuable, because if they would bring even 16M on the free agent market, they continue to save you cap space. Of course, the higher the contract they might bring, the more cap space they save you in later years. So the ideal FP is one who puts up very good to excellent numbers for at least a dozen years. Someone who does it from a tough to fill spot offensively (catcher, SS and 2B come to mind) is even more valuable. I expect Joe Morgan to bring 22M+ when he hits free agency in four years, so if he were a FP (which he can't be) that would be a savings of 10M per year for five years on cap space. A player in that mold would be an excellent FP.

    Leave a comment:


  • Windy City Fan
    replied
    Munson gives me a solid and consistent bat from a nortoriously hard spot to get any offense and he doesn't compromise me on defense. I seriously considered Fisk, but he has too many seasons where he missed time to injury or just flat out didn't produce at the level of a franchise player.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sockeye
    replied
    Mark makes a good point. IMO it's better to invest and overpay for a player in non-contending years only to have a bargain in the contending years when it could make a difference in a championship team. There are still at least 3 - 4 players who I could see bringing in 20-25 mill per season on the free agent market over the course of the next two free agent cycles. That is seasons 7-11 and 12-16. Thus making them worth the franchise player tag. The secret for the expansion teams is finding those 3 or 4 players who are still producing 15 seasons from now.

    Leave a comment:


  • leecemark
    replied
    --The difference is you are overpaying the player in the years when you don't expect to compete (or the first couple of them anyway) and saving significant cap space later - when you can use it to pick up whatever pieces you need to complete your contendng teams. I'd say overpaying for years 1-2/3 are worth it for the savings in years 7-?. The years when you might regret it are 3/4-6 when having a cheap star could allow you to sign somebody else. It all depends on the player and how long you want to make sure you can keep him. Several guys from this draft are likely to fetch 20M deals when/if they hit the market in 6 years.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hack_Miller
    replied
    Originally posted by leecemark View Post
    --Honestly I'm not sure that the franchise tag is a great deal for anybody in this draft. There are several people who its reasonable for, but the have to be good for a really long time to pay you back for the overpay up front. If you keep the guy for the 6 cheap years until free agency you get a 20% advantage on resigning him as a free agent anyway. Unless the guy is going to be worth alot more than 12M (and if you look at the FA auctions you'll see the biggest stars getting 20 or more) then its tough to make your money back. OTOH you all have a huge amount of cap space and you can only sign so many free agents..... KW must be weighing these issues now
    I'm so weighing those issues....


    Here's my analysis of the econmics of the Munson pick. You guys please double check my math and make sure I'm getting this right.
    Basically to tag a guy you will overpay him to the tune of 64.5 M during his first six years under team control. Munson plays exactly five seasons after this 6th year before his tragic death. Even if he would have fetched 22-24 M on the free agent market, you still only get back 50-60 M of that original 64.5 M.

    Never mind Lew answered the question in the previous post much clearer than my rambling....didn't see it until after I submitted my post....
    Last edited by Hack_Miller; 05-26-2008, 06:26 AM. Reason: Redundant post...

    Leave a comment:


  • catcher24
    replied
    Originally posted by leecemark View Post
    --Honestly I'm not sure that the franchise tag is a great deal for anybody in this draft. There are several people who its reasonable for, but the have to be good for a really long time to pay you back for the overpay up front. If you keep the guy for the 6 cheap years until free agency you get a 20% advantage on resigning him as a free agent anyway. Unless the guy is going to be worth alot more than 12M (and if you look at the FA auctions you'll see the biggest stars getting 20 or more) then its tough to make your money back. OTOH you all have a huge amount of cap space and you can only sign so many free agents..... KW must be weighing these issues now
    Mark makes a very valid point here. If the player has a huge upside and a 15 to 20 year career, it would most certainly be worth applying the franchise tag. In the first six years, if the franchise tag is not used, you'd be paying the player only 13.5M for the entire six years. If the franchise tag is used, you're paying the same guy 72M over the six years, or 58.5M extra $$$. If you don't apply the tag, the player becomes a free agent, but you do get a 20% advantage to resign. You bid 20M for his next five years, meaning anyone else has to bid 24M at least (unlikely, but not unheard of). Using the dollars you've saved, the extra 8M per season that this player will cost you now ABOVE what he would've cost as a FP, times the five seasons you resign him for, is only 40M, meaning you're still 18.5M ahead after 11 seasons, and at this point most players will start to decline (although not so much now as back in the 70s).

    If this were real life applying the FP tag would almost certainly be a mistake, because you could use those extra $$$ over the eleven years to invest in various ways. However, the long term picture is sort of ignored in the CKL, as you have to worry only about your cap from year to year. Applying the FP tag will hit your cap more the first six years, but save you cap space thereafter for likely as long as you keep the FP. And as expansion teams, you guys have the extra cap space up front, so were I in your shoes I would probably use it. But that's a determination each will have to make for themselves.

    Leave a comment:


  • leecemark
    replied
    --Honestly I'm not sure that the franchise tag is a great deal for anybody in this draft. There are several people who its reasonable for, but the have to be good for a really long time to pay you back for the overpay up front. If you keep the guy for the 6 cheap years until free agency you get a 20% advantage on resigning him as a free agent anyway. Unless the guy is going to be worth alot more than 12M (and if you look at the FA auctions you'll see the biggest stars getting 20 or more) then its tough to make your money back. OTOH you all have a huge amount of cap space and you can only sign so many free agents..... KW must be weighing these issues now

    Leave a comment:


  • BlueBlood
    replied
    Munson was a great pick if you're an expansion team and applying the franchise player. Meaty bat in an offensively weak position. Only other options here were to pay 12 million for pitching right off the bat which is absolutely crazy. If they play '69-75 you could get them for virtually nothing, six great seasons. You could then probably grab the same pitcher later for a little more but it would still be less than 12 million a year on average for a guy that works 1 out of 4 days, if that.

    I think I know what the next two picks are going to be. One has a monster year but doesn't really play for the upcoming two, so they'd be absolutely worthless to apply a franchise tag towards but could really amp up any team in that season and pull off big playoff wins. The other is a consistently great pitcher for the next six years at least. I really doubt I'll be using my franchise tag, to be honest. It's a lot to pay for pitching. After six years, I could run out and buy someone else with a bigger year for a little more money, if not the same in some cases. Munson was the pick I was really worried about. If he were still around when my turn came, I'd have honestly spent at least a week sitting here trying to figure out what to do.

    Leave a comment:

Ad Widget

Collapse
Working...
X