2K24: Houston Astros

[Kevin Seitzer]

There are probably two reasons for this: the college season is still going on, so when could they do it? and silly NCAA rules are bound to be interfering as well.

And the huge numbers of players involved in the draft (over 1200 players drafted, probably twice that number of players are considered and many more times that think they should have been considered). I suppose you could make it voluntary and at the expense of the player, so that guys who are likely to be drafted in the 30th round or unlikely to be drafted at all won't participate. Otherwise it would be a huge logistical effort and mostly wasted cost. But I'm not fond of putting the expense on the player, either.

[Hornsby]

There are probably two reasons for this: the college season is still going on, so when could they do it? and silly NCAA rules are bound to be interfering as well.

I would think that the NCAA wouldn't automatically be against something like this...it's not like a potential MLB player is getting something of intrinsic value, it's a physical. It's certainly something that would be worth of discussion.

And you set things up regionally, specific Doctors are certified, specific facilities as well. And you make the tests that are done standard and available to ALL members of MLB...MRI's, X-Rays, and any various and sundry boilerplate tests a ballclub might be interested in. Nothing special, nothing specific for a specific club. Hell, you may even save a few lives in the process by spotting health issues early on...I think that it's a win-win.

As far as when it could be done, make a 3 month window before the draft when a prospective player can get it taken care of. If a player suffers an injury after the physical and before the draft...THEN another, more specific test could be done on the injured area.

[Hornsby]

Houston fails to sign both Aiken and Nix...lots of acrimony and accusations from both Houston and the MLBPA. Sad for both of the kids that they get sidetracked in this pissing contest, they're the real losers.

[james33]

Nix is the lower-round guy who may have been promised he'd get above-slot money, right, and now it's not available? If that's the guy, I do feel bad for him - he really got shafted. I wish there was a way for MLB to grant an exception to allow above-slot offer in this one case, but I'm sure that would set a precedent for similar arguments.

Aiken - I don't know; a medical exam came up with an issue with a potential issue with his arm. He still was offered a few million bucks. I keep reading how the Astros screwed him by dropping their offer, but what they did seems quite reasonable to me.

[wannabegriffey]

Nix is the lower-round guy who may have been promised he'd get above-slot money, right, and now it's not available? If that's the guy, I do feel bad for him - he really got shafted. I wish there was a way for MLB to grant an exception to allow above-slot offer in this one case, but I'm sure that would set a precedent for similar arguments.

Nix, the kid who would NOT sign unless it was OVER slot?

I don't feel sorry for him in the slightest.

[james33]

Nix, the kid who would NOT sign unless it was OVER slot?

I don't feel sorry for him in the slightest.

But isn't this fairly common and understandable move - school so I can boost my draft position unless I get above-slot money. Happens all the time.

[Hornsby]

As I understand it, both Nix and Aiken agreed to contracts that would have allowed the Astros to sign them. Aiken about a million and a half below slot, and Nix somewhat above slot. Again, and I could be wrong here, but Houston COULD have signed Nix 1st and avoided this whole mess, but for some reason decided that the players would be linked. Maybe they were afraid that if Nix signed and Aiken decided that he wanted slot money after all, they'd lose Aiken? As it was they ended up losing both players and getting next years #2 pick overall as compensation.

There is some speculation that Houston decided to cut it's original offer to Aiken not because of the elbow issue, but to free up money to entice their 21'st rounder to sign, a kid named Mac Marshall, who committed to LSU. In the end, it was a game that everyone lost, and probably will have some pretty severe repercussions on the next union contract negotiations.

[heyelander]

they needed Aiken to sign underslot to pay Nix. If you don't sign a player, all that slot money goes away. So slot for #1 was 7.3M. they were going to sign him for 6.5M and take the rest of that money and pay Nix. When Aiken doesn't sign, the whole 7.3M goes away from what they can pay out and now they no longer have money to pay Nix's overslot. If they sign nice overslot and end up breaking their budget they lose their #1s for the next 2 years I believe.

As for college, they have dropped both player's adviser's/agent's name(s) and their eligibility may be in question now.

[Hornsby]

they needed Aiken to sign underslot to pay Nix. If you don't sign a player, all that slot money goes away. So slot for #1 was 7.3M. they were going to sign him for 6.5M and take the rest of that money and pay Nix. When Aiken doesn't sign, the whole 7.3M goes away from what they can pay out and now they no longer have money to pay Nix's overslot. If they sign nice overslot and end up breaking their budget they lose their #1s for the next 2 years I believe.

As for college, they have dropped both player's adviser's/agent's name(s) and their eligibility may be in question now.

They had an agreement with both players (represented by Casey Close) to sign for the slot money for both players, just allocated a little differently. And since both guys were Close clients, it's highly doubtful that he would have screwed things up by suddenly asking for slot for Aiken, even if Nix did sign 1st. So all was in place until??? Something happened and the whole deal went belly up, and Houston ends up with 3 players who didn't sign, and a potential union problem.

They're best bet is to go the JC route so they can qualify for the draft next year...NCAA doesn't matter then, from what I understand. If they go to UCLA (both are committed there), they're stuck for 3 years...

[heyelander]

They had an agreement with both players (represented by Casey Close) to sign for the slot money for both players, just allocated a little differently. And since both guys were Close clients, it's highly doubtful that he would have screwed things up by suddenly asking for slot for Aiken, even if Nix did sign 1st. So all was in place until??? Something happened and the whole deal went belly up, and Houston ends up with 3 players who didn't sign, and a potential union problem.

They're best bet is to go the JC route so they can qualify for the draft next year...NCAA doesn't matter then, from what I understand. If they go to UCLA (both are committed there), they're stuck for 3 years...

Yeah, they had an agreement to pay Aiken 6.5 (800k underslot) and Nix 1.5 (800k overslot?). but when you don't sign a player, the whole slot amount goes away. They lose 7.3M toward they money that can pay their top 10 picks, so not only did Aiken's 6.5 go way, they lost the 800k that they would have used to pay overslot on Nix. You pay nix his 1.5 upfront and then fail to sign Aiken, suddenly you're 800k overslot for what you are allowed to pay your top 10 picks and you lose future draft picks.

[Hornsby]

Yeah, they had an agreement to pay Aiken 6.5 (800k underslot) and Nix 1.5 (800k overslot?). but when you don't sign a player, the whole slot amount goes away. They lose 7.3M toward they money that can pay their top 10 picks, so not only did Aiken's 6.5 go way, they lost the 800k that they would have used to pay overslot on Nix. You pay nix his 1.5 upfront and then fail to sign Aiken, suddenly you're 800k overslot for what you are allowed to pay your top 10 picks and you lose future draft picks.

Right, I get that, but with Close representing both players, there was no incentive for Aiken to change his mind and demand the whole slot amount. Not for Aiken and not for Close. The deal was already set and done, it was Houston who changed the parameters as I understand it.

[heyelander]

Again, and I could be wrong here, but Houston COULD have signed Nix 1st and avoided this whole mess, but for some reason decided that the players would be linked.

right... I think this is what I was arguing against. Houston did change the deal for Aiken when they decided he was a potential injury risk. At the point that they decided to change their deal with Aiken, it jeopardizes their deal with Nix. Signing Nix first and then trying to renegotiate with Aiken would have shifted all the leverage to Aiken's side since they are royally screwed if they don't sign him now.

[Hornsby]

right... I think this is what I was arguing against. Houston did change the deal for Aiken when they decided he was a potential injury risk. At the point that they decided to change their deal with Aiken, it jeopardizes their deal with Nix. Signing Nix first and then trying to renegotiate with Aiken would have shifted all the leverage to Aiken's side since they are royally screwed if they don't sign him now.

Ok, since they decided to basically cut the deal in half by offering the minimum (40% of the slot money I believe) to qualify for the compensatory pick next year, whay would it matter if they signed Nix for over slot? Even at their highest reported offer, (5 million or so), they would have been below the money allocated for the 2 slots. So they could have had Nix, the 2nd pick next year, and only lost Aiken, correct?

[cardboardbox]

The Astros decided that Aiken+Nix+Mac was worth the risk but that they'd rather have the #2 pick next year than Aiken+Nix. To add Mac, they needed to drop Aiken's offer.

The Astros look like bumbling fools for the way they negotiated.

Aiken+Close look like bumbling idiots for not taking the $5M which is likely higher than Aiken will get in whatever draft he enters.

[heyelander]

Ok, since they decided to basically cut the deal in half by offering the minimum (40% of the slot money I believe) to qualify for the compensatory pick next year, whay would it matter if they signed Nix for over slot? Even at their highest reported offer, (5 million or so), they would have been below the money allocated for the 2 slots. So they could have had Nix, the 2nd pick next year, and only lost Aiken, correct?

No... if you don't sign someone the slot money for that pick is subtracted from the total pool you can pay your top 10 picks. They needed to sign Aiken for 800k underslot to pay Nix. When Aiken doesn't sign, it's as if he signed for full price. They had 7.3M less they could spend on their top 10 picks.