Tanner Scheppers
...is broken.
4 months ago
ThundaPC
47 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
The best part is they used their compensation selection to get him
So if they don’t sign him they will lose the pick.
by OlSalty on Jun 19, 2009 2:30 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Will they?
I’ve heard teams do get the pick next year if they fail to sign the player in the compensatory round
by Scrupio on Jun 19, 2009 4:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nope, that doesn't apply to compensation picks, it's either sign 'em or lose 'em
by OlSalty on Jun 20, 2009 3:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually, I believe you get the pick back next year
for everything thru the second round. So yes, they would get the pick back.
by bilbo on Jun 21, 2009 10:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes this is true except for the compensatory round.
by acblue on Jun 21, 2009 12:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd like to point out that this rule is all kinds of stupid
but whatever, it’s MLB
by seattlebruin on Jun 21, 2009 9:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not 100% that this is true
I’ve heard a tonne of different interpretations of the rule, which says ‘failure to sign first and second round picks results in a compensation pick,’ and I’m hoping to get a definite answer one way or the other next week
by Graham on Jun 21, 2009 10:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Except that
we know that it isn’t a chain — you get one time of compensation, and if you take a player with a compensation pick and they don’t sign, you don’t get another bite at the apple. (Reason, I suppose, that the M’s went for people they thought were safe signs at #27 and #33.)
by The Ancient Mariner on Jun 22, 2009 7:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
We will get another pick should we fail to sign Nick Franklin
by seattlebruin on Jun 22, 2009 10:33 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
But we took Franklin with our first round pick, so that's different
If we don’t sign Baron, we don’t get that pick back because we picked him with our compensation pick at #33. Unless I’m mistaken the same would apply to the Rangers if they fail to sign Scheppers, who they took in the compensation round at pick #44.
by OlSalty on Jun 23, 2009 2:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Our second* first round pick, that is
Even though we received the #27 pick as compensation it technically was the Phillies first rounder that we got from them, so it counts as a normal first round pick and if we didn’t sign Franklin we would get that pick back next year. The same rules don’t apply to the sandwich picks though, I believe if you don’t sign those you do not get them back next year.
by OlSalty on Jun 23, 2009 3:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The sandwich pick non-signings do get re-compensated (but only the following year like the other non-signed comp picks).
It applies to the first two rounds, including the sandwich “round” — and similarly, if you fail to sign a 3rd or 4th round pick, there’s a 3rd-4th sandwich round for that, too. At least according to Wiki and a few other sources. I’ve asked several different people and the info on Wiki confirms the answer I’ve been given most frequently.
This signature space for rent.
by PositivePaul on Jun 23, 2009 4:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually the Wiki article you cited does not say 'including the sandwich round' at all
by Graham on Jun 24, 2009 7:49 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
However it does say
Teams can also earn compensation for unsigned picks from the previous year’s draft. If a team doesn’t sign a first or second round pick, they will get to pick at the same slot plus one the following year. For example, if the team with the #5 pick does not sign that player, they would have the #6 pick the following year. The regular draft order would continue around those picks. For compensation for not signing a third round pick, teams would get a pick in a supplemental round between the third and fourth rounds. If a team fails to sign a player with one of these compensated picks, there is no compensation the following year.
by OlSalty on Jun 24, 2009 9:19 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Though that probably just means that if you don't sign your first pick or the pick +1 you get as compensation two years in a row you loseit
The question is whether if you fail to sign a sandwich round pick specifically you get another pick in the sandwich round (+1) the next year if you fail to sign them. That article was actually pretty specific in saying “If a team doesn’t sign a first or second round pick” and didn’t mention the rules for sandwich picks at all.
by OlSalty on Jun 24, 2009 9:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think DePodesta knows stuff...
And he says (in the context of discussing the picks from the sandwich round) ANY pick in the first three rounds is compensated:
If a team does not sign any pick in the first three rounds, they receive the next pick in next year’s draft. In other words, if we didn’t sign our number 3 pick, we would get the 4th overall selection in the 2010 draft.
The “sandwich” round is considered part of the first round on BB ref (i.e. if you look up a draft, there’s no separate record for the sandwich round – it’s lumped within the first round picks).
I’m 99.99999999% sure that un-signed sandwich round picks are re-compensated if you don’t sign them.
This signature space for rent.
by PositivePaul on Jun 24, 2009 9:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
But it's not actually a part of the first round under MLB rules
It’s compensation round A
by Graham on Jun 24, 2009 9:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right, but it's part of the "first three rounds"
And damned if I couldn’t for the life of me find SOMEWHERE on the web with the answer in writing. Fin-a-freakin’-ly!
I knew this was the case, since I’ve asked several people verbally, but since I’m friends with Churchill, no one takes my word for anything…
This signature space for rent.
by PositivePaul on Jun 24, 2009 11:25 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
There's also
If a team does not sign its pick in the first two rounds (including the supplemental round between the two), it receives a compensatory selection in the following year’s Rule 4 Draft that is one pick after the slot of the player who did not sign.
This signature space for rent.
by PositivePaul on Jun 24, 2009 9:41 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
See that's the one you probably should have quoted to begin with
by Graham on Jun 24, 2009 9:42 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Google didn't suck so much, it would've been...
This signature space for rent.
by PositivePaul on Jun 24, 2009 9:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Seriously. It was on page 6 of a Google search.
This signature space for rent.
by PositivePaul on Jun 24, 2009 9:46 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I couldn't find it anywhere either
It sure would be nice if the compensation rules in general were more readily accessible to the public.
by OlSalty on Jun 24, 2009 9:48 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And Bing doesn't even have it at all...
Good gravy when will a good search engine come out…
I mean, if your Cambridge-educated ass can’t find it, then something’s wrong with the search engines.
This signature space for rent.
by PositivePaul on Jun 24, 2009 11:30 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Okay that's what I was looking for
I guess it’s less of a bummer if Baron doesn’t sign then.
by OlSalty on Jun 24, 2009 9:46 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Who is now asking for 1.3 million instead of what he agreed on before the draft.
Yay!
by Mariner Melee on Jun 19, 2009 7:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Take that money and give it to Griggs.
I could watch YouTube videos of Baron’s defense for a long time without getting bored, but if we can’t get him to agree and instead turn around and decide to spend the same amount on Griggs, our draft grade goes up a notch.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett http://mvn.com/marinersminors/
by JY on Jun 19, 2009 7:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's my hope
if the kid proves a bloody(-minded) Baron.
by The Ancient Mariner on Jun 21, 2009 9:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
So if the Rangers do not sign him this time around, does he become an unrestricted free agent next June?
Or does he go back into the draft for a third time?
by Wilder. on Jun 19, 2009 3:28 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Woops.
The Rise of a Superstar:Justin Upton-.422 wOBA, 21 years old.
by Goose on Jun 19, 2009 3:44 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I want a show of hands from everyone who was here on draft day
salivating over him.
I think Graham gets to serve out a lot of crow.
Paris Hilton, Burberry plaid, reality TV, mullets, Zima, Dubya, and the Sonics being sold to Oklahoma City. - Yahoo Answer results for "7 Signs of the Apocalypse"
by bluemax on Jun 19, 2009 3:55 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Ok I'll eat my serving of Crow
But then again I would rather have Aaron Crow anyway
by Scrupio on Jun 19, 2009 4:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Graham can't cook crow to save his life.
by Sec 108 on Jun 19, 2009 4:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He's English, none of them know how to cook anyway
Nice Guys Finish Third - My semantics are a waste of time.
by pdb on Jun 19, 2009 5:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm more concerned...
with the tendency to cook meat until it becomes gray and buttering both sides of the sandwich, even when it was PB&J (my grandma did this, it was disgusting)
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett http://mvn.com/marinersminors/
by JY on Jun 19, 2009 7:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
No self respecting Briton would ever make a PB&J sandwich anyway
by Graham on Jun 20, 2009 9:10 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That may have been the problem.
The concept was so foreign that the consequences were not properly considered.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett http://mvn.com/marinersminors/
by JY on Jun 20, 2009 10:24 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Great Men only.
I was at Shea for the Felix-Slam!
Personal M's record: 5-4.
by EnglishMariner on Jun 21, 2009 2:22 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wait...
Isn’t this old news? I mean, yeah, this report was available pre-draft. It was pretty common knowledge within baseball circles that Scheppers’ shoulder was pretty ugly, and that it was supposed to have some sort of tear in it. I may be missing something, but this story really doesn’t point out anything new. Every team in the league knew his medicals were shaky at best.
This signature space for rent.
by PositivePaul on Jun 21, 2009 10:27 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
