Ben Goessling of the Washington Times had the following notes today regarding the Nationals and the process of signing their draft picks …
Draft pick at standoff
Negotiations between the Nationals and fifth-round draft pick Adrian Nieto have stalled, and according to a source familiar with the negotiations, the two sides haven’t spoken in two weeks.
The switch-hitting catcher was rated by some as the second-best high school catcher in the draft, but concerns about his right elbow and his signability dropped him to the fifth round.
Nieto seeks a signing bonus similar to that of a second-round pick, which would be upward of $350,000, while the Nationals have offered only slot money - in Nieto’s case, roughly $185,000.
The source said the Nationals are calling themselves a “slot team” - in other words, a team that won’t pay above slot value for its draft picks. Washington paid $1.8 million to its 2007 sixth-round pick, high school left-hander Jack McGeary.
Washington has until Aug. 15 to sign its top five picks, none of which are in the fold yet.
Though Bowden declined to comment on specific negotiations, he said “the market is pretty clear” and added “as soon as they want to pick up the phone and agree, it’s done. It’s easy.
“They clearly know we’re being very fair on negotiations based on the marketplace, and we’re hoping our players want to play.”
Depending upon who that source is, that is discouraging news. Given the stated goal of rebuilding the organization from the ground up, the Nationals cannot blindly abide by the slotting system. They need to demonstrate their commitment by getting their top draft picks under contract.
If that means exceeding the slot recommended bonus, then so be it.
This does not mean they should simply give into whatever demands the drafted player has, but it does mean that there have to be circumstances where the Nationals have to be willing to bend in order to get a deal done.
Dick, a regular commenter here, had the following ”If our picks want more than slot, it is WAY too early to budge. “
I agree with him on that. It’s too early to budge on amounts significantly above slot. In the case of Nieto, his expectations are for nearly double the slot recommendation. While $180K is not a tremendous amount of money, if a typical major league team is going to exceed slot, they aren’t going to do it right now. It will happen closer to August 15.
JD | 10-Jul-08 at 8:21 am | Permalink
The actions do date clearly indicate that the team is only offering slot to the top 5 picks. I guess I am a little surprised that the first 5 guys they drafted wanted more than slot. Do you think that was a strategy of the Nats or lack of preparation?
Brian Oliver | 10-Jul-08 at 8:33 am | Permalink
It’s not a lack of preparation. That I can tell you. The folks who put together the draft are experienced enough to know what the bonus expectations are. The conventional wisdom after the first day of the draft was that the Nationals selected themselves some tough negotiations. Crow had rumored bonus demands well above slot for the 1st overall pick (along with a major league contract). Hood was another tough one given his football scholarship to Alabama. Espinosa is “advised” by Scott Boras so there is that they have to work with. Hicks is still an unknown to me. And Nieto had so many rumors swirling about him about pre-draft handshake deals that he was going to be a tough negotiation.
I’m always reluctant to believe any source 100% because there is always going to be a vested interest one way or another. If it’s a team source, they are going to imply things that help cap bonuses. While if it’s a drafted player source, they are going to try and maximize bonuses.
At this point in early July, holding close to slot as a team makes some sense. Restricting yourself to only slot and not a penny more does not.
Tofu Dog | 10-Jul-08 at 8:38 am | Permalink
If I remember correctly, Bowden made similar low-balling comments last year at about this time. It is his style of play, but I cannot imagine they will let Crow slide. That would be a disaster.
Chris | 10-Jul-08 at 8:45 am | Permalink
Agreed on the patience mantra.
Still, I know they got ripped by the commissioner’s office last year. And in the meantime, they’ve petitioned for an All-Star Game. Selig can certainly hold that out as a carrot if they’d cooperate with his slotting plans a bit more.
We’ll see.
Ric | 10-Jul-08 at 8:48 am | Permalink
If Crow doesn’t sign, at least they get pick 9A (in other words, 10th overall) in 2009. That would mean two picks in the top 10. I would characterize a failure to sign Crow as unfortunate, but not a disaster.
Chris | 10-Jul-08 at 8:55 am | Permalink
Not signing your first round pick would be a disaster for the team with the worst record in baseball
However, I’ll go on the record and say the top 5 get signed. Bowden played this game with Burgess last year. Hicks is the only suprise for me so far, I thought that would get done quickly. Crow is going to get a huge deal (prob major league) and Hood and Nieto will get over slot deals late. Espinosa is a little confusing too, I dont think theres much more he could improve next year at long beach
Andrew F | 10-Jul-08 at 8:59 am | Permalink
The PR hit would be monstrous, though, despite any proclamations the organization would make to save face. While they very well may be in the right when it’s all over, they have to consider how this will all play out publicly. They shouldn’t let the fear of bad press dictate they go buck wild and over-slot with everybody, but I think there has to be some give. Just a little.
That said, it’s still early. Not worried yet.
Marc | 10-Jul-08 at 9:02 am | Permalink
Not signing Crow is a disaster - most draft boards had his value at above the #9 pick, so you’re not likely to get him or quite equal value back again at 9A. Two picks in the top ten is nice, but once you’ve established that you’re unable to sign the guy at 9 last year, all of a sudden you’re looking at making a possible “signability” pick.
More to the point, not signing any of the top picks is pretty much a disaster - on a team as talent-deprived as the Nats, they need every highly-rated prospect they can get, to say nothing of the good PR generated by implementing the plan they say they’re following.
Not saying that they need to cave now and pay whatever the draftee demands, but by Aug 15, they need to get the deals done, even if it means going signficantly over slot in some cases.
EdDC | 10-Jul-08 at 9:16 am | Permalink
Yeah, playing hardball is fine. But a pronouncement that “we are a slot team” means the Nats are drawing a line in the dirt. Either they cave and show themselves never to be trusted in anything they say, or they hold fast and lose a player or two. Bad strategy to stick your chest out like that.
I guess I do not mind the Nats being cheap with their 2008 product, which is unwatchable. But to sacrifice the future on top of it would be a big disaster.
For me, just signing the #1 and letting some others go would be unacceptable. After all, they have leverage over Crow. Forget the All-Star Game. The Nats need their own stars in this town.
Either there is a hard rule on giving slot money or there isn’t. Soft rules are meant to be broken. What is the point of having voluntary rules in the first place?
Brian Oliver | 10-Jul-08 at 9:23 am | Permalink
Ed - The only problem is we don’t know who is saying the Nats are a slot team.
If it is the Nationals as the source for that quote then there is certainly something to be concerned with. With the product they are offering at the major league level, there is an expectation that they invest in the future if they are not investing in the present.
If it’s someone associated with a player who is stating that, there is a huge grain of salt we need to take reading that quote. From the point of view of a player negotiation, getting the word out that the Nationals are being cheap given the current state of team is certainly an advantage a player has in these discussions. By turning public sentiment in their favor, they can potentially get more concessions from the team in a “face-saving” sort of way.
Tofu Dog | 10-Jul-08 at 9:28 am | Permalink
Bowden is the one who said the Nationals are a slot team as I saw it. He is the face of the Nationals so all said above about sticking your chest out and having to either stand by it or slink off stands. Standing by it of course would be stupid and Bowden has never backed up most of his unfortunate comments in the past.
Brian Oliver | 10-Jul-08 at 9:33 am | Permalink
TD - That’s not how I read it.
That reads to me that someone is relating what they have been told/have heard about the Nationals. Was this in fact something someone in the Nationals said or implied? I have no idea. I would hope any MLB team, let alone the Nationals, would never state anything like that in a negotiation because then in my opinion it’s no longer a negotiation but a contentious blinking contest.
The only thing I can attribute to Bowden is the nebulous, “the market is very clear”
(your miles may vary)
Andrew F | 10-Jul-08 at 9:38 am | Permalink
We can’t forget the team does have some leverage of its own, as bleak as things are currently with the organization and its evolving public perception. The team can’t abandon its stance five weeks from the deadline. It’s all about posturing at this point, on both sides.
EdDC | 10-Jul-08 at 9:55 am | Permalink
Posturing is one thing. Painting yourself in a corner you can’t get out of is another.
In the Soriano trade deadline talks, Bowden went out with public statements that he would take nothing less than can’t-miss top prospects, #1 guys in the organization. When the market became very clear, then Bowden could not back off, or risk losing face with other GMs and never to be believed again.
So hopefully the slot team boast is fabricated by an agent, because if it isn’t, the strategy could very well backfire.
Getting an All-Star game provides a temporary monetary burst. Pennant contenders and a World Series provide more serious money to ownership.
Brian Oliver | 10-Jul-08 at 10:06 am | Permalink
Let me make one thing clear about my thought on this specific scenario.
Given the numbers we have been provided with regards to the Nieto negotiations, the Nationals need to get that deal done. I’m willing to wait it out until August 15th but $180K is not something the Nationals should go to the mat over.
e | 10-Jul-08 at 10:16 am | Permalink
question about Nieto (and others that may fit this criteria). If there weren’t any concerns about his elbow and/or signability, where do you think he would have been drafted? 2nd round? 3rd? Perhaps both sides could find a way to agree on where he may have been drafted and give him the money comparable to that round.
Marc | 10-Jul-08 at 10:20 am | Permalink
Brian,
That’s sort of where I am too - ultimately, except with Crow, the entirety of the difference between the two positions on all these guys combined is likely to be less than Paul Lo Duca’s contract - if they can spend $5m on Flores Insurance in January, then they can spend the same to make sure they are getting these guys signed. Crow’s a bit of an exception because there they might be millions apart, but even still, eventually, the deal’s gotta get done.
That said, I think I see less nebulousness (nebulousity?) in Bowden’s “the market is very clear.” The very concept of a draftee “market” is nonsense, and smacks of slotting - the truth of the matter is that there is no draft “market” - there are just hundreds and thousands of individual deals - the Nationals, for instance, aren’t allowed to outbid the Rangers on Smoak, or pick up players on the cheap who other teams have decided not to sign. Other deals signed by other prospects could be guideposts, but no more and saying “the market is very clear” sounds to me like “You’re going to take slot and like it.” But I’ve had problems with Bowden’s negotiating style all the way along, so it’s not surprising that he’d rankle me now.
Brian Oliver | 10-Jul-08 at 10:25 am | Permalink
e - I always saw him as a late second round guy at worst. Right now Nieto is pricing himself as a mid-3rd round guy while the Nats are offering fifth round slot. That is part of the reason I’m an advocate of getting that deal done.
Marc - I completely agree with you about how Bowden handles negotiations. That is one thing I’ve never been a fan of in his style (and never will be). It just seems to me that most other teams GMs don’t come across the way he does in many of his quotes. I’m sure my personal feelings color that but there is little I can do to change that.
EdDC | 10-Jul-08 at 10:32 am | Permalink
Bending for $180K on Nieto won’t cost an All-Star game, if the Nats prove themselves to be good boys otherwise.
What do you do about Destin Hood, who wants first round money or he plays WR or DB for Alabama? Sounds like Hood is bluffing now, so something can probably be worked out. Bama has signed lots of 4 star wide receivers.
Likely, Hood’s leverage gets him somewhere in between the first round money he wants and his second round slot. That can be negotiated. But can the Nats compromise, or say slot-or-the-highway?
Seems like the big teams always find ways to get around the slot. The Red Sox or others will take nasty calls from the MLB offices, say they are sorry, hang up the phone, and then have themselves a hearty laugh.
Moe Greene | 10-Jul-08 at 10:33 am | Permalink
Brian,
Who are we taking with the #1 pick next year? In other words, who are the top prospects heading into 2009?
expo_ram | 10-Jul-08 at 10:35 am | Permalink
FO is probably not too concerned about signing another catcher. With Flores, Nieves, Montz, Rooney, Norris, we’re pretty stacked there.
The FO is not stupid - I think they have a plan for this. As has been pointed out, you can’t set a precedent for caving to every pick’s demands - those agents know the Nats need to sign young talent too! But you can’t set a precedent for being a “slot team” either.
All that being said, it’s early - all but maybe Nieto will get their’s. Besides, with the way our prospects have been playing, where would you put these guys in the long-term plan anyway - trade fodder?
Brian Oliver | 10-Jul-08 at 10:51 am | Permalink
Moe - The clear favorite for #1 in 2009 is San Diego St RHP Stephen Strasburg. He is that rare breed, a big power pitcher who can throw strikes. 6′4″ 220lbs. Four solid to above average pitches. Mechanics appear to be clean. As of today, it’s honestly him and then a chasm before #2. Someone at Ballpark Guys put it this way Strasburg is an A+, #2 on start at A.
Other names to watch from college are UNC RHP Alex White & 1B Dustin Ackley, Missouri RHP Kyle Gibson, USC CA/RHP Robert Stock & SS Grant Green, and UCLA LHP Gavin Brooks.
High schoolers of note are FL SS Mychal Givens, TX RHP Matt Graham, CA LHP Tyler Matzek, GA OF Donovan Tate and TX LHP Matt Purke
Ronny | 10-Jul-08 at 11:44 am | Permalink
Brian- So would you say that next years draft is much deeper than the one this year? Like this year the draft was loaded with first base prospects, so I guess next year will be loaded with pitching prospects.
Brian Oliver | 10-Jul-08 at 11:47 am | Permalink
Ronny - Correct, it appears that this will be a pitching strong 2009 draft early on.
Tofu Dog | 10-Jul-08 at 11:54 am | Permalink
Tangent, but what do you think Leonard Davis’ upside is. He has really come on, is it for real and where do they play him? He looks like he can play all three OF slots and the corner infield. Anything else?
Berndaddy | 10-Jul-08 at 11:55 am | Permalink
Brian
Riddle me this batman. Yesterday I took a look at our signed players in the top ten rounds and it looks like we’re (Jimbo) is slotting or going less than slot pay for those signees. This doesn’t look go, eh.
I agree with your assessment of Jimbo. There’s something very fake about him. Hug him to find a dagger in his back pocket kind of guy, oh well…
Mjames | 10-Jul-08 at 11:59 am | Permalink
I concur with the majority of posters that the Nats need to sign their top picks. I really do not want to hear issues as “we are a slot team “or the market speaks”. If Kasten and company are basing the team’s future on the Plan, then they have to execute the Plan. We do not want to hear issues concerning money or the Commissioners office. Detroit , Boston, New York do not have issues with their draftees. They execute.
The Nats performance aside, what is most disconcerting is the reputation that the team seems to be developing outside of Washington. I am in the New York market and here the Nats are considered a poorly run organization. Bowden has a less than trust worthy reputation with other GM’s. I am concerned he is developing or has developed the same reputation with agents and draftees. I really do not think it is wise for the Lerners to have a person such as Bowden representing their team. He neither appears nor acts professional. His reddish puffy complexion suggest activities other than managing a sports franchise.
I truly believe this team will reach new lows if Bowden remains in charge.
I am hoping that the Lerners protect their investment and hire a professional to manage its operation.
Andrew F | 10-Jul-08 at 12:02 pm | Permalink
Jim Bowden is Mark Lerner’s Vinny Cerrato. I think getting rid of JimBo is a tougher proposition than many think.
Pilchard | 10-Jul-08 at 12:52 pm | Permalink
Echoing others comments, but there is simply no way that the Nats can finish with one of the worst records in baseball and not sign their top picks in the draft. There are a ton of skeptics about the “plan” as it is; punting the draft would be indefensible.
That said, I expect the Nats to say that they are a slot team as negotiations continue to attempt to put pressure on the unsigned picks. Agents and advisors only get paid if a contract is signed and payment is made; so other than those represented Scot Boras, will be feeling pressure to negotiate as August 15 approaches.
EdDC | 10-Jul-08 at 1:09 pm | Permalink
Pilchard,
I agree the draftees will “feel pressure to negotiate” as August 15 approaches. What is of concern is a stance that the Nats may take that they won’t negotiate–that the player must take the slot or go away. That’s not negotiation.
I have been a Bowden supporter. Flores, Dukes and Milledge are examples of his creativity. But his FA signings of Young, Lo Duca, Estrada, Mackoviak, and Harris are now starting me to question. Dropping the ball on signing draftees might lead many of us into the anti-Bowden crowd.
Take Dustin Hood. The Nats bent on McGeary. Are they going to stay firm on Hood? Maybe they feel McGeary had more leverage since his family has money and Hood’s does not. But still, it is the same situation (each having college as an option), only one year later.
The collective bargaining agreement has to correct this voluntary slotting. In the NBA, you don’t see some teams observing the slot, and others not. Meanwhile, the Nats have to sign the kids, with no excuses.
Nats fan in NJ | 10-Jul-08 at 1:33 pm | Permalink
I’m ok with where the Nats are today with signing their picks.
I don’t understand what options Crowe has. I appreciate that he still has a year of eligibility left, but in a pitching heavy draft next year, along with the “stigma” of being a hard sign, does he really think he’ll go higher?
Hood is a risk, but his quotes & articles from when he visited the DC area were all “going to sign, just a matter of time” while the quotes now are about his options. I think he ends up signing, but we are just playing chicken now.
Espinosa also has another year of eligibility left but I’m not sure what he’s thinking. This is the one the surprises me the most.
Hicks just needs to decide if he wants to be a pro player or hit the minors. I like his upside, but giving this kid slot money plus bonus money in 6 years if he is NOT on the 40-man roster so he can get a college education makes sense to me.
Nieto will get done. The difference in what each wants isn’t enough for this to not get done, imho.
It’s still a month away. We managed to pick all tough signings, but believe at least 4 will get done.
But, if Crowe isn’t signed, the PR disaster can’t be understanded considering the tough product that folks have to watch this year at the MLB level.
DJ | 10-Jul-08 at 2:13 pm | Permalink
I’ll hold off on bashing anyone until we’re closer to the signing deadline, but I must say if the Lerners don’t pay up then fans will be very ticked off.
The main ingredient to the Plan’s success is developing young talent. Well to develop young talent you must sign them!
Negotiating their asking price down a bit, I understand; but if you’re not going to spend money @ the MLB level (which the Lerners should be doing) then you better d@mn should on draft picks. If you have to overslot a little bit, so be it.
Last year’s draft was awesome and I loved the signings and the progress with our prospects. Let’s not make it a one year deal though.
Dick | 10-Jul-08 at 2:25 pm | Permalink
Brian: Thank you for citing me in your write up.
I, too, believe it would be disasterous to not sign all of the top five picks. I still wring my hands over Sean Black! I wouldn’t sign Nieto for $1 million based on what I’ve read, though.
I don’t know what Hood is waiting for. He is probably more comparable to Burgess than McGeary. Burgess waited to sign on 7/3 (after Bowden threatened to sleep in his house until he signed, I guess many of you get that threat). Hood was rated to be close to where he was picked, Burgess maybe a little higher, McGeary MUCH higher than his pick. McGeary’s slot would have been around $100,000, clearly not worth walking away from Stanford over. Hood isn’t even going to Bama on a baseball scholarship!
Hood’s offer appears fair and he should be given time to see that he has no other (rational) baseball alternative. If they want to go over slot and, say, throw in money for a car, then do it in August. Above all, Bowden should camp out on his living room floor like last year with Burgess!
As Brian points out, the unnamed source regarding ’slot team’ could be anyone from Mark Lerner, Stan Kasten or Jim Bowden to Scott Boras or Destin Hood’s dad. Clearly, the Nats are NOT a slot team! See McGeary, J; King, S. and others.
SlowPitch63 | 10-Jul-08 at 3:51 pm | Permalink
Being a Glass-Half-Full guy I am hoping that this is an instance of the Nats just reaping what they sowed last year with McGreary. Every agent and player would like over slot money and many appear to be ready to wait for it. As 15 August approaches hopefully there will be some meeting of the minds when it becomes apparent that the Nats are not going over slot by an order of magnitude but may (BETTER) go slightly over.
Let’s play two!
RD | 11-Jul-08 at 4:27 pm | Permalink
Everything will work out fine.
Neither side is going to budge this early in the game.
The Nationals will not allow Crow, Hood, or Nieto get away. All 3 will be signed.
Hood is not going to college. He’ll be so far behind training with the other freshman they have coming in that he won’t crack the field as a true freshman. He’s going to sign.
Espinosa will sign as well. He gains nothing by going back to school, other than possibly sliding in the draft. The 3rd round is as high as he’s going to go.
I really know nothing about Hicks, so I won’t even begin to comment on him.
Im confident we’ll get all the guys sign, with the possible exception of Hicks and thats because I know nothing about him.