Oct
01

Arangure: Yanks were interested in Sano

By

As you may already know, the top prospect on this year’s international market – shortstop Miguel Sano – finally signed earlier this week after MLB investigated his age (actually, the investigation is still ongoing). Several teams, including the Pirates and Orioles, were hard after Sano, but the Twins landed him because they were willing to meet his asking price. According to Jorge Aragure Jr. at ESPN, the Yankees expressed some interest in signing Sano after his agent turned down Pittsburgh’s $2.6M offer, and says that “at one point it appeared the Yankees would swoop in and sign Sano.” The Yanks have an extra $850,000 in their pocket after their deal with Dominican shortstop formerly known as Damian Arredondo was voided, so it looks like the team was actively looking to redistribute those funds, and then some.

Categories : Asides, Minors

63 Comments»

  1. Free Mike Vick says:

    $850,000?

    i can has Chapman?

    i can has CUBAN RULES?

  2. King says:

    Scouts have said his power was better than Montero’s at the same age, that is if he really is 16.

  3. King says:

    Yanks should have met Sano’s demands because Chapman is going to get stupid money and for someone who’s not a finished product and far from a sure thing who I doubt will be a starter in the majors in 2010.

    • JobaWockeeZ says:

      Yeah…
      You develop him. That’s the point. You don’t rush him in the majors when he isn’t ready.
      By the way Sano is 16 and he’s nowhere near playing a MLB game yet. So your point is moot.
      Don’t get so accustomed to instant gratification on young players.

    • Unrelated. Sano is a 16 (presumably) year old IFA being signed on spec and potential. Chapman is a 21 year old free agent not subject to the restrictions of the IFA signing period. He’s able to market himself to clubs in a wholly different fashion than a bunch of kids not yet out of high school, and he’s much closer to reaching his potential since he’s 5 full years older and has a track record against top-level, non-juniors national and international competition.

      Chapman and Sano have virtually nothing at all to do with each other.

      Oh, and: “Chapman is… far from a sure thing who I doubt will be a starter in the majors in 2010.”

      Do yourself a favor: Lower your expectations. Chapman is going to get stupid money AND he won’t be ready by 2010. Those two concepts are not incongruous. He’s not getting stupid money because he’s ready instantly, he’s getting stupid money because of his upside and potential, and because every other prospect that has his combination of upside, projectability, youth, stuff, and track record has his earning power artificially depressed by the constrictions of several different mechanisms of organized baseball (i.e., the Rule V Entry Draft, the IFA period, the NPB posting system and gentlemans agreement, etc.).

      Chapman is an anomaly. Can’t compare his situation to anyone else’s.

      • JMK aka The Overshare says:

        Different era, _____________ (fill in the bank).

      • Ed says:

        every other prospect that has his combination of upside, projectability, youth, stuff, and track record has his earning power artificially depressed by the constrictions of several different mechanisms of organized baseball (i.e., the Rule V Entry Draft, the IFA period, the NPB posting system and gentlemans agreement, etc.).

        Question for you… how does international free agency restrict earning power? The others are pretty obvious, but I wasn’t aware of anything that would hold back IFA earnings.

        Most of those guys are signing when they’re 16 and have played against very weak competition, so I always thought their bonuses were just limited by how far away from the majors they are, which would make their potential to bust very high. I wouldn’t call that artificially depressed.

        Is there something else at play?

        • Well, the IFA market restricts earning power simply because these kids are being signed at 16 rather than 21. If the rules were that you couldn’t sign any of these kids until they were Chapman’s age, and you had 5 more years to separate the wheat from the chaff, there would likely be fewer people getting deals, but those who did get deals would get larger ones.

          Take Miguel Angel Sano and hit the fastforward button on him for 5 years. Say he pans out and shows all the upside he shows now, but has demonstrated it not just against other Dominican juniors in semi-organized leagues, but against grown men on international stages. He’d be getting a 5yr/40M deal, not a 3.1M signing bonus.

          By forcing teams to buy youngsters far before physical maturity on spec, you widen the bust potential and lower the potential investment teams are willing to make.

          • But yeah, maybe “artificially depressed” isn’t the best nomenclature for the IFA market. Maybe “naturally depressed”? Is that more apropos?

            Their earning power isn’t artificially depressed, just naturally depressed based on the high levels of risk in signing 16 year old kids who are maybe 10 years away from their athletic prime.

          • Ed says:

            Ah ok, we’re looking at the same issue differently.

            I’m under the impression that in most countries where the IFA rules come into play, they don’t have leagues that compare in difficulty to our high school and college levels. The result of that is teams can either sign guys when they’re younger and take a risk then, or let them physically mature while playing weak competition, and deal risk them not being able to keep up with the higher levels of play.

            Based on my understanding of it, I’d think most players would prefer the lower reward at an earlier age, as probably more players would get signed that way. US dollars go a lot further in Latin America than they do here, so even a relatively small signing bonus is a big deal to them.

            • Absolutely.

              I wasn’t speaking in terms of whether or not Latin American amateurs like the current IFA system (I’m sure they do, since 16 year olds earning good signing bonuses can set their families up nicely).

              Just saying, the money they get will, on average, be lower than what a similar IFA system would net them if the kids in question were 18 or 21 instead of 16. The 16 age bar lets more kids get deals, since there are more kids who haven’t been appropriately exposed as non prospects, but the kids who ARE still prospects at 18 or 21 would get larger deals, because they’re more proven, less raw, and more projectable.

              That’s all I’m saying.

          • Mike bk says:

            yes, but look at him getting 3.1 mil today compared to a kid who goes to college and gets it at 21 after his junior year. if anything sano and the 16 yr olds if they are legit and pan out make more money quicker.

            cubans cant be compared because they arent in the market.

      • Free Mike Vick says:

        We don’t have to give another club a bunch of money to talk to Chapman…

        we don’t have to have a horrid team so that we can draft chapman…

        we don’t have to sign chapman before a certain date…

        We just have to give him loads of money…and a little time to develop.

        • Mike bk says:

          when u read reports that vary from 90 to 100 mph on a fastball it is going to take a lot more than a little time. for the same 50 million you could sign proven ml fa’s or sign every hyped prospect in the IFA market for the next 3-4 years and if any of them pan out you are in an even better position then tossing it all in on an unproven 21 year old.

          • for the same 50 million you could sign proven ml fa’s or sign every hyped prospect in the IFA market for the next 3-4 years and if any of them pan out you are in an even better position then tossing it all in on an unproven 21 year old.

            That’s not necessarily true. I’ll actually disagree with that. I bet if you took 50M and signed proven ML free agents AND signed every hyped prospect in the IFA market for the next 3-4 years, you won’t find someone as good and as young as Chapman.

          • Free Mike Vick says:

            what proven FA are you talking about?

            You want give chapman money to Doug Davis? Lay the money down again for Pavano? Roll the dice and hope it comes up 7 with Ben Sheets? i heard Randy Wolf is a FA….Josh Fogg doesn’t have a home for next year yet…think Randy Johnson wants to come back for 1 more tour of duty?

            • Mike bk says:

              well u could probably get 4 years of john lackey for maybe 55-60 since he has backed off his demands of cc money and went more to like lowe money.

              but sure, go ahead pick the worst out there and compare it to the figment you think chapman will be.

  4. JackISBACK says:

    FIRE CASHMAN!!!!!!!!!!!!

    If some of you thought about the team more, and bought those tickets behind home plate, we would’ve had the money to get him. BLAME YOURSELVES!!

    Ok, really, yeah lets spend it on Chapman. While its a risk, that type of arms don’t come around that often at that young of an age.

  5. JMK aka The Overshare says:

    I’ll be really bummed if Sano becomes an excellent player because the Yanks decided not to toss in an extra million. Then again, they’ve never been cheap with players (especially in IFA), so they must have had legitimate concerns. Meh. If we get Chapman, I’ll still be happy.

    • Tom Zig says:

      I’m sure there will be a 16 year SS next year.

      • JMK aka The Overshare says:

        There will always be another Sano-type player, but next year? I’m not sure of that. His talent level (from what I’ve heard) is not something you see every year. Maybe every five, ten? I really don’t know. I think teams went ga-ga over him because that type of talent doesn’t come around that often (of course, much of it depends on age).

        Is there a good website out there that covers international free agency prospects anyone could recommend?

        • Tom Zig says:

          Wasn’t Ynoa(sp?) hyped the same way?

          • JMK aka The Overshare says:

            He was hyped, no doubt. I’m not sure that it was Sano-level hyped. Besides, the Yanks only stopped pursuing him because of principle, not because they were skeptical of his talent (although he hasn’t wowed people yet).

            I’ll admit that Sano’s more likely to bust than be a great player; what I’m saying is I would think that his talent would justify the risk. There will always be hot-shot prospects every year and most will disappoint, but the Yankees’ greatest asset is that they can spend the money on talent other teams can’t afford. Most won’t pan out but the ones that do are cost-controlled. I’d rather sign six top-notch IFAs to a total of $12 million and have two or three pan out than sign an average to reliever for 2 years at $12 million. Still, as I mentioned below, the Yanks must have had good reason to let him go. I’ll trust their judgment in this situation.

            I’m rambling now, aren’t I?

            • There will always be hot-shot prospects every year and most will disappoint, but the Yankees’ greatest asset is that they can spend the money on talent other teams can’t afford.

              I don’t think that really holds true on the IFA market.

              The kids are too unpredictable for us to just financially outmuscle EVERYONE for every prospect. And, other teams have built up their international scouting teams and academies, and are just as willing as the Yankees to put out 7 figure bonuses.

              The IFA market is leveled. We’ll get some of them, but getting all of them isn’t possible.

              • JMK aka The Overshare says:

                What I mean to say is the Yankees budget now is what, $7 million? Something around there. Whatever, pick a number. Say you increase that budget to $10 million. You don’t go after every guy, but the top few you’ve isolated. Maybe they already do. If they felt that strongly about Sano, they probably would have doled out the extra million. But if that million was the tipping point it seems short-sighted.

                I don’t see other teams upping their IFA budget that to around $10 million, but for the Yankees, with their financial advantage, it seems a small price to pay for guys that could be cost-controlled stars.

        • leokitty says:

          Follow Jorge Arangure on twitter (you’ll need ESPN Insider to read his blog) and Melissa Segura from SI also covers IFA stuff.

          If you’re in a spending mood, get a Baseball America subscription.

          • JMK aka The Overshare says:

            Yeah, I try to avoid ESPN. How would you rank the three? Also, thanks a lot.

            • leokitty says:

              JMK, hope you see this several hours later. :)

              Jorge Arangure always has the inside bead on IFA stuff, very good information and sources. His twitter is @jorgearangure

              Segura is similar but doesn’t create as much content as Arangure.

              BA’s coverage doesn’t really hit until the players are state side, so they’re a distant third. A lot of their lists about hot players are free (http://www.baseballamerica.com.....l-affairs/) but scouting reports are usually paid content. You can also follow @BenBadler on twitter, he updates frequently on all matters prospect.

              They do keep the blog fairly updated, and that’s free content: http://www.baseballamerica.com.....ts/?cat=21

      • leokitty says:

        The speculation that he won’t stick as a SS has already begun anyway!

        A huge amount of these kids are “shortstops” because they’re so athletic and just like HS draftees few of them actually stick there very long.

    • Then again, they’ve never been cheap with players (especially in IFA), so they must have had legitimate concerns.

      +1.

      Cano, Wang, Soriano, Montero, etc.

      Yeah, I’ll trust the Yankees judgment on this one. You can’t sign everyone, and there are concerns about Sano’s age serious enough that numerous teams backed off and the MLB continues its investigation.

      I’m not sad. We’ll sign some other studs next year. And, Gary Sanchez is no slouch.

      • JMK aka The Overshare says:

        Totally. As usual, you’re right on point. I just feel a bit divided on it. Sure, there are budgets and you can’t sign everyone. But say he’s 17, as Montero was, not 16, and does develop well. Isn’t that worth the $3 million? I suppose the crux of what I’m saying is if he’s young and that talented isn’t the money worth the risk? They must have really believed that he wasn’t the greatest thing since sliced bacon. Frankly, I’ll trust the Yankees’ judgment on this; they have a good track record and are privy to a lot more information and insight than I am.

  6. Mike bk says:

    if we were intrigued at all on Sano does that mean we are possibly looking at Mateo who the cards killed their deal with who was considered the 2nd best hitter out there this year. for the record the reason the cards are now giving for killing that smells like they are trying to save money to spend on keeping their free agents.

  7. Bob Stone says:

    I understand there is controvery over Sano being 16 years old. Do people think he is older or younger?

  8. Aj says:

    i cant believe the yanks didnt get this guy, especially because ynoa was grabbed right from under us we had him gone now sano gone.

  9. J3 says:

    I get impression that the yanks rated Gary Sanchez the top player and were not going to give Sano more than what they Sanchez.

Leave a Reply

You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> in your comment.

If this is your first time commenting on River Ave. Blues, please review the RAB Commenter Guidelines. Login for commenting features. Register for RAB.