Hey look, Justice wrote another "Drayton sucks" article

But none of this argues that McLane didn't sign him because of its slotting - in fact, the evidence in that article suggests that McLane was ready to sign him for more, and that he does in fact do it here and there. This tells me that the slotting was NOT the reason for the no-contract. Instead, what makes this situation unique was the call from the commish. So while blaming McLane is fun, what do we know about the call? Is it a common thing? Is it rare and done for specific reasons? Do most owners generally cave? If owners generally cave when called, maybe the commish is wielding lots of power here to keep costs under control - something good for MLB as a whole. If so, who's the right party to "blame" for this?

 

Some people may be predictable but that does not refute the underlying premise in this article nor does it make Justice's piece trashy or unworthy or merely a head hunting venture.

The fact that Stubbs will probably be picked higher and for more money also supports Justice's ultimate conclusion - that Drayton botched the deal.

 

If it's not slotting what is it? The purpose of slotting is to minimize signing bonuses.

The article cites the source that clearly states some players who were paid higher than their slots probably flew under the radar and did not receive calls because of it (Bartheimer).

The league's oversight does not mean that owners aren't aware of the intended purpose of slotting.

Signing a 13th round pick for $750k was ok but a 3rd round pick for $900k was a no-no. What does that mean exactly?

Is Drayton so naive to think that the commissioner would be happy about the former and unhappy about the latter?

Completely illogical and highly doubtful for a man whose business acumen has made him billions.

 

It means that it wasn't just the slotting that was guiding McLane...

Perhaps his business acument taught him it's a good idea to be in good favor with the head of your organization and thus not to piss off Selig.

 

Then what was it? Completely baffled by where you're going with this.

If he felt he wasn't a good player, then he shouldnt have drafted him -especially knowing his contract demands in advance.

If you're talking about the "call", once again how would he be in good favor with Selig by not paying a 3rd round pick $900k but then a few years later paying $750k for a 13th round pick.

 

Because the commish didn't ASK him not to pay the 13rd rounder. He got a call from "the boss" and decided to follow his guidelines. Seems pretty simple to me. What do you think it was?

 

To further expand on this, it's likely that the commish's office doesn't care about 13th round pick money, because that wasn't going to lead to wage inflation. If a 13th rounder gets paid out of whack, it's not going to lead to other 13th rounders saying they deserve that kind of money.

However, the top few rounds are a different issue. Besides the fact that these guys are more visible, the top wage earners tend to also set the bar. Other 2nd rounders would start setting their wages demands higher, etc. That's why the commish is most likely more involved in high-round picks but not so much later. If 9th rounders are getting paid $100,000, then the 13rd rounders aren't going to start demanding $750,000 consistently.

 

That's exactly what I stated earlier. The fact he didn't get a call for the 13th round pick was because it was an oversight. It flew under the radar. It didn't mean McLane didn't understand the purpose of slotting and bonus control.

Why do you think the commisioner called him in the 1st place?? Because he was paying the 3rd round pick the same money as most 2nd round picks.

Assuming this premise to be true (3rd picks should not get 2nd round money), wouldnt the logical flow be that the commissioner would be even more pissed off that a 13th round pick received 2nd/3rd round money?

But it's about "the call". Apparently the call is completely random and has no rhyme or reason.

 

From a business standpoint do you see how this model would never work. Can you imagine agents and their clients threatening clubs not to take their 2nd round prospect early in the draft and they'll only sign if they're picked in round 13 so they can avoid the scale or fly below the commissioner's radar.

 

That's simply not realistic. Players aren't going to risk that, because if the club does decide not to pay, the player is going to get 13th round money. There are very few players that this kind of stuff applies to - most people that can realistically get that kind of money would go earlier anyway - but there are real issues with the "baby bonus" money at the top of the league that's gotten out of hand in recent years with people like JD Drew. That's what the goal is to stop.

 

That's exactly the issue I would want a reporter covering this story to explore. Was it only a call on Stubbs - or has the league called about other attempts to pay over the slot? If not, why did the league choose this time in particular to call? If so, why did the Astros heed this call and not others? etc, etc, etc.

 

As an aside...One positive about Richard Justice is that he tends to respond to reasonably written emails.

 

wow..this thread blew up! where did that come from???

RIET -- here's the deal with Justice. every article he writes, i second-guess. whether it's about the astros, or not. he has no credibility with me. none at all. so i'm perfectly willing to admit that i come into every justice article with a bias. no doubt about it. i think he's very much earned that.

among many subjects/people that he seems to have no integrity with is Drayton. on one hand, he'll come on the radio and talk about how great drayton is. about what an amazing person he is. about what an amazing businessman he is...and, yes, about what a good owner he is. he does that quite regularly. then he writes stuff like this, using smoke, mirrors and innuendo on statements for which he provides zero context. this is HIS m.o. over and over again.

i can certainly see why you'd see this as an example of me defending mclane....but what i'm telling you is that i'm not. i'm telling you i don't have enough information to jump to the conclusion that you and richard want to jump to in this situation. and so i go by track record. in the years that drayton has owned the astros, their payroll has grown nearly every year. he's made legit offers to keep guys around, and then gets criticized for overpaying and underpaying, depending on the context. that's called monday morning quarterbacking in football. i was born in 1974. the astros won a grand total of two division titles by the time i was in junior high. they didn't win one again until i was a first year law student. since then they've won 5 times, in a much more compact period....with drayton as the owner. these are easily the best years in astros history. he has put a team on the field CAPABLE of winning titles. and they've been competitive virtually every year since 1994, save a couple of exceptions. i look around the rest of the league, and there are few equals to that. very few. given that track record...i'm willing to give some benefit of the doubt...or rather, at least entertain a burden of proof beyond just, "where there's smoke there's fire."

and richard justice still sucks.