PDA

View Full Version : Marlins Offer Contract to Chapman


Jpgr91
12-20-2009, 11:06 PM
http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20091220&content_id=7834588&vkey=news_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb

Marlins and Chapman would be a good fit. If his per year value ends up less than the Viciedo, KW deserves to catch a little bit of flack.

michned
12-21-2009, 12:41 AM
I don't know. It's tough to compare because the signings are a year apart. The guy still may be a major league first basemen or DH.

oeo
12-21-2009, 04:57 AM
I don't know. It's tough to compare because the signings are a year apart. The guy still may be a major league first basemen or DH.

He's 20 years old. You act like he's a failed prospect, but he's still very young.

cws05champ
12-21-2009, 08:42 AM
What ever happened to Yadel Marti and Yasser Gomez? Gomez was supposed to be a fringe ML CF with tons of speed and Marti was supposed to be ML ready, maybe out of the BP.

They don't seem to fit the Sox now, but just wondering. I googled it but just found old stories from August.

jabrch
12-21-2009, 09:24 AM
http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20091220&content_id=7834588&vkey=news_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb

Marlins and Chapman would be a good fit. If his per year value ends up less than the Viciedo, KW deserves to catch a little bit of flack.


Trends in current signings need to be considered...

Jpgr91
12-21-2009, 11:44 AM
I am not saying Viciedo is a failed prospect, but I think that a LHP that can throw over 100 MPH has more value than a power hitting corner infield / DH prospect. Viciedo signed his contract a year ago, the market this year is pretty much the same as last year so it is fair to compare the contract values. All things consiered, can anyone honestly say they would rather have Viciedo over Chapman?

voodoochile
12-21-2009, 11:58 AM
I am not saying Viciedo is a failed prospect, but I think that a LHP that can throw over 100 MPH has more value than a power hitting corner infield / DH prospect. Viciedo signed his contract a year ago, the market this year is pretty much the same as last year so it is fair to compare the contract values. All things consiered, can anyone honestly say they would rather have Viciedo over Chapman?

Chapman wasn't available last year.

Jpgr91
12-21-2009, 12:10 PM
Chapman wasn't available last year.

I realize that. Chapman and Viciedo are in very similar situations both bieng unproven Cuban free agents that are signing contracts under the same market conditions. It is fair to compare the two players when considering if KW overpaid for Viciedo. That is why I asked the question about which player would you rather have.

pythons007
12-21-2009, 01:46 PM
I realize that. Chapman and Viciedo are in very similar situations both bieng unproven Cuban free agents that are signing contracts under the same market conditions. It is fair to compare the two players when considering if KW overpaid for Viciedo. That is why I asked the question about which player would you rather have.

But you're trying to compare apples to oranges. If both players were available at the same time, your argument would be different. Thats like comparing a number one draft pick from one year to the next. Who would you rather have? You don't have that option, just like Kenny didn't have this option.

Besides his 100mph, that everyone is peeing their pants about what else does he have? His control is suspect and he doesn't have plus offspeed pitches.

Chapman is going to get paid. I guarentee he is going to get a lot more than what the Marlins offered. How many years was Boston offering with the 15 mil? He'll get offered a lot more than Viciedo did.

Jpgr91
12-21-2009, 03:56 PM
But you're trying to compare apples to oranges. If both players were available at the same time, your argument would be different. Thats like comparing a number one draft pick from one year to the next. Who would you rather have? You don't have that option, just like Kenny didn't have this option.

Besides his 100mph, that everyone is peeing their pants about what else does he have? His control is suspect and he doesn't have plus offspeed pitches.

Chapman is going to get paid. I guarentee he is going to get a lot more than what the Marlins offered. How many years was Boston offering with the 15 mil? He'll get offered a lot more than Viciedo did.

The market is pretty much the same as it was last year. The two biggest free agents this year (Lackey and Holliday) were using the contracts that Burnett and Teixeria signed last year to establish their value. It is fair to compare market value of two similar players, in this case Viciedo and Chapman. My concern is not which player the Sox have, but rather the behavior that is inconsistent with the "you cant spend .50 if you only have 1 Dollar" mentality of the Sox. I love KW, but I do not think he should get a free pass if it is found that he paid over market for Viciedo as he continues to preach about how the Sox have no money to sign players.

All prospects have rough spots in their game, that is why they are prospects. Lets not forget that Viciedo is also very rough. Once Chapman's contract gets finalized I am sure we will have a complete picture of his value, but I really hope that he lands in Florida and not Boston.

jabrch
12-21-2009, 04:06 PM
The market is pretty much the same as it was last year.

That's just untrue. Look at the players being released because teams don't want to go to arbitration with them. The fact that the top of the market is similar doesn't mean the middle and bottom is.

nug0hs
12-21-2009, 04:21 PM
As a side note, the Marlins signed Danny Richar today :D:

Jpgr91
12-21-2009, 04:25 PM
That's just untrue. Look at the players being released because teams don't want to go to arbitration with them. The fact that the top of the market is similar doesn't mean the middle and bottom is.

The number of players that were non tendered seem pretty similar to me:
http://mlbrumorblog.com/archives/2009-non-tender-free-agents.php
http://www.sportingnews.com/mlb/article/2009-12-13/non-tender-free-agents

As far as "middle of the road" free agents last year, look at the deals that Hudson and Abreu signed compared to the contract that Matsui signed this year. Again, pretty much identical.

jabrch
12-21-2009, 06:13 PM
The number of players that were non tendered seem pretty similar to me:
http://mlbrumorblog.com/archives/2009-non-tender-free-agents.php
http://www.sportingnews.com/mlb/article/2009-12-13/non-tender-free-agents

As far as "middle of the road" free agents last year, look at the deals that Hudson and Abreu signed compared to the contract that Matsui signed this year. Again, pretty much identical.


There are many more players this year being non-tendered over a few bucks. The total # of nontenders isn't as relevant as who/why. Players are getting less money this year than last year.

NardiWasHere
12-21-2009, 08:16 PM
What does our signing of Viciedo a year ago have to do with Chapman?

Jpgr91
12-21-2009, 08:33 PM
There are many more players this year being non-tendered over a few bucks. The total # of nontenders isn't as relevant as who/why. Players are getting less money this year than last year.

Many more players? Such as?

DumpJerry
12-21-2009, 08:56 PM
What does our signing of Viciedo a year ago have to do with Chapman?
I've been trying to figure out the connection, too. Maybe there is a limit to the number of Cuban defectors a team can have and we're at it?

Jpgr91
12-21-2009, 10:19 PM
I've been trying to figure out the connection, too. Maybe there is a limit to the number of Cuban defectors a team can have and we're at it?

What does our signing of Viciedo a year ago have to do with Chapman?

Maybe reading the entire thread would have helped, but if you need a summary here it is... If the contract that Chapman signs has the same or less value than the contract Viciedo signed it means KW paid over market for Viciedo. Paying over market for a player lessens the money available to spend on in other areas.

voodoochile
12-21-2009, 10:22 PM
Maybe reading the entire thread would have helped, but if you need a summary here it is... If the contract that Chapman signs has the same or less value than the contract Viciedo signed it means KW paid over market for Viciedo. Paying over market for a player lessens the money available to spend on in other areas.

So it's not really about Chapman, it's about slamming KW... I thought so...:rolleyes:

Just curious, has Chapman actually signed for less money than Viciedo or is this just a preemptive slam on KW in case that happens? :dunno:

Jpgr91
12-21-2009, 10:31 PM
So it's not really about Chapman, it's about slamming KW... I thought so...:rolleyes:

Just curious, has Chapman actually signed for less money than Viciedo or is this just a preemptive slam on KW in case that happens? :dunno:

It's not a slam on KW at all. All I said is that KW should catch a little bit of flack IF he overpaid for Viciedo. Given that the Sox are prevented on making moves because of how tight the payroll is I think it is fair to examine any situation in which KW has overpaid for a player.

voodoochile
12-21-2009, 10:32 PM
It's not a slam on KW at all. All I said is that KW should catch a little bit of flack IF he overpaid for Viciedo. Given that the Sox are prevented on making moves because of how tight the payroll is I think it is fair to examine any situation in which KW has overpaid for a player.

And IF it turns out he didn't what will you say then?

Jpgr91
12-21-2009, 10:37 PM
And IF it turns out he didn't what will you say then?

I won't cancel my season tickets? Or maybe good job?

voodoochile
12-21-2009, 10:41 PM
I won't cancel my season tickets? Or maybe good job?

Were you contemplating canceling your season tickets if Chapman signed for less than Viciedo? That seems like an awfully fine line to be drawing.

Oh and just for the record, Viciedo's "cap" hit is 1.25M in 2010. Who do you think they could sign for that much money who would change your mind about canceling your season tickets?

DumpJerry
12-21-2009, 10:42 PM
Maybe reading the entire thread would have helped, but if you need a summary here it is... If the contract that Chapman signs has the same or less value than the contract Viciedo signed it means KW paid over market for Viciedo. Paying over market for a player lessens the money available to spend on in other areas.
Before I made my post, I read this thread several times. Could not figure out what your beef is with Kenny. One player (Viciedo) is a position player. Another player (Chapman) is a pitcher. Somehow the size of Chapman's contract is an indication of Viciedo's "true" value. Of course, a little known fact about Viciedo is that he has come out of the Bullpen in his career in Cuba, so maybe they are comparable players.

What's not to say that the team that lands Chapman is not overpaying for him? It is one thing to have a 102 MPH fastball, it is another to be a Pitcher. Give me the Pitcher. A MLB batter gets a hold of that 102 MPH baby, it goes 450 feet before returning to Planet Earth.

DumpJerry
12-21-2009, 10:52 PM
Other than both being from Cuba, is there any logical reason to compare the contracts of Viciedo and Chapman?

Jpgr91
12-21-2009, 11:00 PM
Were you contemplating canceling your season tickets if Chapman signed for less than Viciedo? That seems like an awfully fine line to be drawing.

Oh and just for the record, Viciedo's "cap" hit is 1.25M in 2010. Who do you think they could sign for that much money who would change your mind about canceling your season tickets?

Of course I would not cancel, I was being sarcastic. And the "cap" hit would be less than 1.25, it would be the market value difference between the Viciedo contract and the Champman contract. Such a small amount probably would not make a difference, but it does hurt the overall flexability of the payroll. However it is important to consider that paying over market for players can saddle a franchise for years. You have to look no further than across town to see what happens when a GM gets into the business of overpaying for players.

Before I made my post, I read this thread several times. Could not figure out what your beef is with Kenny. One player (Viciedo) is a position player. Another player (Chapman) is a pitcher. Somehow the size of Chapman's contract is an indication of Viciedo's "true" value. Of course, a little known fact about Viciedo is that he has come out of the Bullpen in his career in Cuba, so maybe they are comparable players.

What's not to say that the team that lands Chapman is not overpaying for him? It is one thing to have a 102 MPH fastball, it is another to be a Pitcher. Give me the Pitcher. A MLB batter gets a hold of that 102 MPH baby, it goes 450 feet before returning to Planet Earth.

I just think that the general belief is top tier pitching prospects have more value than top tier position prospects. It would stand to reason that Chapman would sign for more than Viciedo because he is a pitcher. It is more about the market and less about the player. If KW is paying over market for a player, it could prevent him from making other moves. Also overpaying for players is a dangerous business to get into.

Only time will tell which player will be a better value, for all we know Viciedo is the next Miguel Cabrera and Chapman will be Kris Honel.

Jpgr91
12-21-2009, 11:03 PM
Other than both being from Cuba, is there any logical reason to compare the contracts of Viciedo and Chapman?

Viciedo was the top international free agent signing last year and Chapman is the top international free agent signing this year. Not to mention they are pretty close in age and both competed at very high levels prior to their signing.

DumpJerry
12-21-2009, 11:03 PM
I just think that the general belief is top tier pitching prospects have more value than top tier position prospects. It would stand to reason that Chapman would sign for more than Viciedo because he is a pitcher. It is more about the market and less about the player. If KW is paying over market for a player, it could prevent him from making other moves. Also overpaying for players is a dangerous business to get into.

Only time will tell which player will be a better value, for all we know Viciedo is the next Miguel Cabrera and Chapman will be Kris Honel.
The vast change in the economic conditions in the country between the signing of Viciedo and Chapman's arrival would have nothing to do with Chapman possibly getting a smaller deal.......

Jpgr91
12-21-2009, 11:09 PM
The vast change in the economic conditions in the country between the signing of Viciedo and Chapman's arrival would have nothing to do with Chapman possibly getting a smaller deal.......

Viciedo signed in November/December of 2008. We were already in this mess when Viciedo signed. As early as October of 2008 Bud Selig was cautioning teams about the economy and ticket prices, so it is fair to say that MLB was already well aware of the big economic mess baseball was facing.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/05/sports/baseball/05selig.html

voodoochile
12-21-2009, 11:12 PM
Of course I would not cancel, I was being sarcastic. And the "cap" hit would be less than 1.25, it would be the market value difference between the Viciedo contract and the Champman contract. Such a small amount probably would not make a difference, but it does hurt the overall flexability of the payroll. However it is important to consider that paying over market for players can saddle a franchise for years. You have to look no further than across town to see what happens when a GM gets into the business of overpaying for players.

Yes and when the contracts are Milton Bradleyesque or Sorianoesque it's a valid point, but to start this thread over this little money is simply silly, IMO. In short I simply don't get the point you are trying to make here.

If you are making a point on principle, then fine, but in the real world this analogy doesn't hold water. Viciedo's contract simply isn't big enough to be worrying about and if the $4M (or whatever) the Sox owe him before his contract expires handcuffs their ability to sign quality players than there are bigger issues at work than that money alone can solve.

I wish you had simply started a thread on Chapman, that would have been more interesting, IMO. One more shot at KW thread and this for such a minor amount of money (in a professional baseball sense) simply makes no sense.

Whatever, carry on...

Jpgr91
12-21-2009, 11:19 PM
Yes and when the contracts are Milton Bradleyesque or Sorianoesque it's a valid point, but to start this thread over this little money is simply silly, IMO. In short I simply don't get the point you are trying to make here.

If you are making a point on principle, then fine, but in the real world this analogy doesn't hold water. Viciedo's contract simply isn't big enough to be worrying about and if the $4M (or whatever) the Sox owe him before his contract expires handcuffs their ability to sign quality players than there are bigger issues at work than that money alone can solve.

I wish you had simply started a thread on Chapman, that would have been more interesting, IMO. One more shot at KW thread and this for such a minor amount of money (in a professional baseball sense) simply makes no sense.

Whatever, carry on...

I do not think I started it as a shot at KW. Not like it matters but I really like KW. I think he is a great GM that does not get enough credit.

voodoochile
12-21-2009, 11:22 PM
I do not think I started it as a shot at KW. Not like it matters but I really like KW. I think he is a great GM that does not get enough credit.

Okay, but like it or not, you posed the question/statement in your opening post. You effectively turned this from a thread on Chapman to a thread on KW right then and there.

jabrch
12-21-2009, 11:40 PM
This is completely silly. I'm not sure what this is code for - but it can't be a serious thread comparing the contract signed by a Corner IF/OF last year to the contract not yet signed by a pitcher this year...there's no way that anyone would use this to blame KW...

CWSpalehoseCWS
12-22-2009, 12:25 AM
I am not saying Viciedo is a failed prospect, but I think that a LHP that can throw over 100 MPH has more value than a power hitting corner infield / DH prospect. Viciedo signed his contract a year ago, the market this year is pretty much the same as last year so it is fair to compare the contract values. All things consiered, can anyone honestly say they would rather have Viciedo over Chapman?

With hindsight, no, especially because we got Morel who seems to have passed Viciedo on the prospect list. But you really can't say that signing Viciedo was a bad idea because Chapman is now available a year later. If they were at the same time, then yes, I think we all would rather have Chapman, but nothing is proven yet on who is the better player.

pythons007
12-22-2009, 08:18 AM
I still don't understand the argument here. So we paid for Viciedo, just like we would pay for a first round draft pick. I considered last year Viciedo to be just that, a draft pick. The higher the draft pick the more guarenteed money he gets. So are you then going to question every draft pick we draft and pay and then compare that to the upcoming draft!?!? I'm really confused as to what the point of this thread really is.:scratch:

soxfanreggie
12-22-2009, 06:33 PM
$13 million for 5 years could end up being a huge steal for the Marlins. Heck, at one point that would have been well over 10% of their payroll. If he pans out, they have him locked up for a while, at which point they could see if he's worth paying a lot more money to. If not, it's not like they had to put a $50 million signing fee out there.

I'm still willing to give Viciedo some time to develop. He has a tremendous amount of talent, and I'm not willing to write him off right now. Even if he doesn't see a Major League field next season, I just want to see some good progress.