Yoennis Cespedes

[gorillagogo]

In today's Trib, Beertemple says the Bucs are likely to bid on Cespedes. He also notes the Yankees, Marlins, Blue Jays or Red Sox are also going to be bidding, and mentions the dreaded "internal value" the Pirates have placed on him. It will be interesting to find out what the Pirates eventually bid on Cespedes once it's all said and done. Starting next year, the CBA will limit the amount teams can spend internationally and there's been speculation that the Pirates might try to do what they did in the draft last year, namely drop a bunch of cash on a high upside prospect before the rules change. No telling how many other teams might have the same idea.

Beertemple also speculates the Bucs might turn their attention to 19 year old Jorge Soler if (after?) the bidding for Cespedes gets too high. I don't know anything about him other than what Beertemple says in the article, so who knows if this guy would be worth the potentially steep price.

Finally, in a side note he mentions that Charlie Morton is recovering well from hip surgery. He quotes NH saying "He's on as good of a schedule as we could've hoped for".

www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/sports/pirates/s_774870.html

[RJReynolds]

"internal value" is code for "not a bargain...not a chance!".

RJR

[Xiga]

I remember worries about the Pirates not getting Heredia because of their "internal value" and similar teams were in on him too. For that matter, people brought those concerns up with Bell as well. It doesn't seem like they're as rigid with that as they're made out to be. I still don't expect them to sign him, but I think there's a difference between bidding legitimately being too high for them to risk it and them stubbornly sitting at an internal value that is not a realistic offer.

[SammyKhalifa]

"internal value" is code for "not a bargain...not a chance!".

RJR

To be fair in this one case, the numbers flying around for this guy are nuts. 

[Will]

I remember worries about the Pirates not getting Heredia because of their "internal value" and similar teams were in on him too. For that matter, people brought those concerns up with Bell as well. It doesn't seem like they're as rigid with that as they're made out to be. I still don't expect them to sign him, but I think there's a difference between bidding legitimately being too high for them to risk it and them stubbornly sitting at an internal value that is not a realistic offer.

This.

My memory is hazy, but is the whole "internal value" thing derived almost entirely from the Sano fiasco?

[RJReynolds]

I remember worries about the Pirates not getting Heredia because of their "internal value" and similar teams were in on him too. For that matter, people brought those concerns up with Bell as well. It doesn't seem like they're as rigid with that as they're made out to be. I still don't expect them to sign him, but I think there's a difference between bidding legitimately being too high for them to risk it and them stubbornly sitting at an internal value that is not a realistic offer.

There is a vast chasm between shelling out $4-5 Million on someone and shelling out $40 million or more. Giving $4-5 million to someone with great talent should be a no brainer every time. The "internal value" will always be a bargain at that price. But their internal value computer (hopefully not using a Commodore Vic-20) does not seem to work the same on pricier free agents.

RJR

[gorillagogo]

I remember worries about the Pirates not getting Heredia because of their "internal value" and similar teams were in on him too. For that matter, people brought those concerns up with Bell as well. It doesn't seem like they're as rigid with that as they're made out to be. I still don't expect them to sign him, but I think there's a difference between bidding legitimately being too high for them to risk it and them stubbornly sitting at an internal value that is not a realistic offer.

This.

My memory is hazy, but is the whole "internal value" thing derived almost entirely from the Sano fiasco?

I seem to recall the phrase coming up when they drafted Tony Sanchez, and again during "Lowballgate", i.e. the extensions offered to Jack Wilson and Freddy Sanchez.

[bradlej31]

Refresh my memory, has there been a Cuban that really was worth all the hype?  Morales seemed decent until he got injured for two years straight.

[Xiga]

I remember worries about the Pirates not getting Heredia because of their "internal value" and similar teams were in on him too. For that matter, people brought those concerns up with Bell as well. It doesn't seem like they're as rigid with that as they're made out to be. I still don't expect them to sign him, but I think there's a difference between bidding legitimately being too high for them to risk it and them stubbornly sitting at an internal value that is not a realistic offer.

This.

My memory is hazy, but is the whole "internal value" thing derived almost entirely from the Sano fiasco?

I think people just took it when it was said, ran with it, and have applied to any situation where they're potentially going to sign someone or failed to sign them.

I don't really remember any times when it was the reason they didn't sign someone. Maybe Matt Capps, although they had plenty of performance-related justification for not tendering him, and in the end, they signed Dotel instead who got them McDonald. That worked out fine in the end, although the return Washington got for Capps was good too. People griped about internal value when they declined all those options earlier in the offseason, but they've clearly been justified in doing so. Doumit signed for far less than his option and the other three have yet to sign, all garnering little interest. It's very likely that all three of the remaining players they let go will get far less than their options. So if that was a result of their internal value, it appears that it was right on.

They failed to sign Sano because they botched the negotiations and tried to go behind his agent's back. I'd say that's easily the biggest mistake NH has made so far. But it wasn't because they were being cheap. If I recall, they allege that they would have matched or exceeded the offer the Twins signed him on but weren't given the opportunity, which was their fault.

I'd like them to be in on this guy within reason. But like any free agent situation, things can easily get to the point where it's not a good risk to take because the Pirates can handle the effects of a bad contract a lot worse than larger market teams.

[steve19981]

I think the pork sandwiches would be worth $40 million alone. If he can hit, it would be a bonus.

[CentralCABucsFan]

Two years after the Reds splurged on Aroldis Chapman, they are still waiting for a major league contribution.  If he doesn't succeed in a big way this season, that contract will be considered a terrible one.

[gorillagogo]

Two years after the Reds splurged on Aroldis Chapman, they are still waiting for a major league contribution.  If he doesn't succeed in a big way this season, that contract will be considered a terrible one.

He was a setup guy for them last year, striking out 71 guys in 50 innings. He would've been with the team all season except he missed about a month between May and June, presumably with an injury. The Reds probably have higher hopes than that, but it's still a major league contribution.

[CentralCABucsFan]

Headline News:
Reds sign part-time setup man with shoulder issues to 4-year, $30 million contract.

71 K's in 50 innings, and 41 BB's.

I actually think he still could make the contract decent if he starts for the next 2 seasons, but I predict that his arm won't hold up.

[The Moose]

They failed to sign Sano because they botched the negotiations and tried to go behind his agent's back. I'd say that's easily the biggest mistake NH has made so far.

I don't know. I'd say wasting 1044 plate appearances on Andy LaRoche was a real doozy, too.

[Xiga]

They failed to sign Sano because they botched the negotiations and tried to go behind his agent's back. I'd say that's easily the biggest mistake NH has made so far.

I don't know. I'd say wasting 1044 plate appearances on Andy LaRoche was a real doozy, too.

The Bay trade turned out bad but at the time it didn't seem like a bad return. If I recall, people were more enthusiastic about that one than the Nady/Marte trade. A mistake, still, but a different kind of mistake. I put Bautista in the same category. At the time of that trade, nobody made much of a stink about their giving up on him, and a lot of people seemed to think Diaz was a fair return. Obviously that went horribly wrong. But I categorize those are reasonable moves that didn't work out. The Sano fiasco was simply a complete botch from the start and it should still be considered a botch even if he doesn't amount to anything.