Page 1 of 7
Bickford doesn't sign, Brentz($700k) and Tellez($850k) do
Posted: Thu Jul 11, 2013 3:37 pm
by dagger
Gregor Chisholm @gregorMLB 3m
Anthopoulos does not expect to sign first rounder Phil Bickford prior to tomorrow's deadline. #BlueJays
Gregor Chisholm @gregorMLB 34s
In the first three rounds, clubs must offer at least 40% of slot value in order to receive compensation.Anthopoulos expects a pick next year
With the comp pick it's not a disaster, but to have this happen twice in three years suggests someone isn't doing proper due digilence. It's not like the slot money can be used elsewhere in this case, and the Jays lose a year in development of a potential top prospect.
So far, all but two first rounders in the past draft have signed.
Re: AA: Bickford isn't going to sign
Posted: Thu Jul 11, 2013 3:39 pm
by galacticos2
Do GM's speak to the prospects before hand when they scout them, do they not give an indication if they would sign with them or no. Or is this a money issue?
Re: AA: Bickford isn't going to sign
Posted: Thu Jul 11, 2013 3:42 pm
by Fairview4Life
His agent knows how much the Jays have to spend and wants his client to get it instead of Tellez and...other guy or whoever the late round signings we've been saving money for are.
Re: AA: Bickford isn't going to sign
Posted: Thu Jul 11, 2013 3:49 pm
by dagger
im Callis @jimcallisBA 10s
Still not convinced #BlueJays definitely won't sign Bickford. We'll see. #mlbdraft
Gregor Chisholm @gregorMLB 1m
AA: "It looks as though we won't be signing him. Anything can change but ... right now we probably won't have a deal in place."
Re: AA: Bickford isn't going to sign
Posted: Thu Jul 11, 2013 3:51 pm
by BigLeagueChew
I hate the MLB draft compared to other sports.
Re: AA: Bickford isn't going to sign
Posted: Thu Jul 11, 2013 3:59 pm
by SharoneWright
It's the right play by AA. Get it out in public you don't expect to sign him and are prepared to accept that reality. It might make Bickford's people second guess a little and come back to AA with a lower number.
Re: AA: Bickford isn't going to sign
Posted: Thu Jul 11, 2013 4:09 pm
by dagger
John Lott @LottOnBaseball 6m
Anthopoulos says #BlueJays unlikely to sign top draft pick Bickford. Says don't jump to conclusions about reasons, but won't give reasons.
Re: AA: Bickford isn't going to sign
Posted: Thu Jul 11, 2013 4:10 pm
by dagger
SharoneWright wrote:It's the right play by AA. Get it out in public you don't expect to sign him and are prepared to accept that reality. It might make Bickford's people second guess a little and come back to AA with a lower number.
Even better, signed one or both of the other two we're after and tell Bickford it's impossible to get more.
Re: AA: Bickford isn't going to sign
Posted: Thu Jul 11, 2013 4:13 pm
by Graham's Cracker
Well, that's dissapointing. I wonder if Bickford's demands changed once he saw how much money the Jays had saved?
Re: AA: Bickford isn't going to sign
Posted: Thu Jul 11, 2013 4:15 pm
by -MetA4-
Graham's Cracker wrote:Well, that's dissapointing. I wonder if Bickford's demands changed once he saw how much money the Jays had saved?
No, man. No team is going to "fall" for this.
Re: AA: Bickford isn't going to sign
Posted: Thu Jul 11, 2013 4:24 pm
by Garmfay
Good. We get the 10th pick in next years stacked class
Re: AA: Bickford isn't going to sign
Posted: Thu Jul 11, 2013 4:27 pm
by dagger
Graham's Cracker wrote:Well, that's dissapointing. I wonder if Bickford's demands changed once he saw how much money the Jays had saved?
AA said not to speculate on the reasons Bickford won't sign, but then didn't elaborate on his reasons. I can't think of a reason other than Benjamins... It's not like he's a Rhodes scholar.
Re: AA: Bickford isn't going to sign
Posted: Thu Jul 11, 2013 5:04 pm
by distracted
dagger wrote:Even better, signed one or both of the other two we're after and tell Bickford it's impossible to get more.
I thought the point was we need to sign Bickford for a lower amount to be able to sign the other two?
Re: AA: Bickford isn't going to sign
Posted: Thu Jul 11, 2013 5:07 pm
by distracted
Also, MLB should just scrap the draft and do one huge amateur free agency where you have a defined amount of pool money each year. Hard capped based on your standings the prior year, though you can trade the pool money you have once the season is over and the pools are set (prior to season end you can trade any amount up to first place pool money).
Any bonus < 100K doesn't count towards your pool, for filling out rosters.
Re: AA: Bickford isn't going to sign
Posted: Thu Jul 11, 2013 5:16 pm
by -MetA4-
distracted wrote:I thought the point was we need to sign Bickford for a lower amount to be able to sign the other two?
No. Even with Bickford at slot we could offer a little over a million each for both Brentz and Tellez.
Re: AA: Bickford isn't going to sign
Posted: Thu Jul 11, 2013 6:14 pm
by vaff87
Given the mixed reviews on this guy, I certainly don't see it as the end of the world.
Re: AA: Bickford isn't going to sign
Posted: Thu Jul 11, 2013 6:38 pm
by Schad
Somewhat odd.
Re: AA: Bickford isn't going to sign
Posted: Thu Jul 11, 2013 7:41 pm
by dagger
Jim Callis @jimcallisBA 13m
That would be $3,516,500 @jcrmarlinsbeat: Source: #Marlins and sixth overall pick Colin Moran have agreed to terms for slot bonus.
Jays are the only team with an unsigned first.
By the way, how good is the 2014 draft? If it looks really good, I'm Machievallian enough to be persuaded AA might be happy with two firsts in that draft. If I'm too cynical, what other explanation for missing out on our first two years out of the last three?
Re: AA: Bickford isn't going to sign
Posted: Thu Jul 11, 2013 7:50 pm
by tecumseh18
dagger wrote:Jim Callis @jimcallisBA 13m
That would be $3,516,500 @jcrmarlinsbeat: Source: #Marlins and sixth overall pick Colin Moran have agreed to terms for slot bonus.
Jays are the only team with an unsigned first.
By the way, how good is the 2014 draft? If it looks really good, I'm Machievallian enough to be persuaded AA might be happy with two firsts in that draft. If I'm too cynical, what other explanation for missing out on our first two years out of the last three?
Yeah, it's not a disaster. Except that this whole year has been a disaster with our starting pitching, and [edit: many of the highly-touted] SP prospects in the minors have been struggling. For a Toronto sports fan, it's hard to not use this as yet another opportunity to act out our unique brand of hang-dog defeatism.
Re: AA: Bickford isn't going to sign
Posted: Thu Jul 11, 2013 7:56 pm
by -MetA4-
dagger wrote:By the way, how good is the 2014 draft? If it looks really good, I'm Machievallian enough to be persuaded AA might be happy with two firsts in that draft. If I'm too cynical, what other explanation for missing out on our first two years out of the last three?
The 2014 draft is looking stronger than this year's draft.
I dont think this was some super-secret ploy to defer this pick to next year's stronger draft class. I believe this ultimately falls on the Jays' now clear-cut hardass "negotiation" process in which they hope a kid will come to his senses and take the money. I think they wanted to sign Bickford and were banking on him realizing that the Jays' offer was wise to take. At the same time; it appears clear that the Jays dont seem to care about not getting a deal done - they wont budge.