Take your frustration level and multiply it by about million the day that I got the call that Miguel Sano was signing (with the Minnesota Twins). Quite simply, I didn't get it done because the player is not a Pittsburgh Pirate. I relied on the agent to live by his word that he would come back to us and give us a chance to make our final bid. That never happened.
We were the only team that made an offer to him on July 2, the first day he could sign. We were told that he wasn't ready to sign, and the agent would get back to us when he was ready to sign because there were questions about his age and his identity. We were told that, when those issues were resolved, he would be ready to negotiate. . . . His identity came back as accurate. . . . His age came back unresolved. We don't know for sure if he's 16 1/2 (years old).
We made another aggressive offer, bidding against ourselves, increasing our offer significantly. Once again, the agent said, 'I'm not ready to negotiate. When I am ready to negotiate, I'll come back to you.' I got a call with the team in Chicago that he had signed somewhere else. We never got a chance to offer our highest bid.
Neal Huntington, as quoted by Paul Ladewski in East Liverpool, OH's The Review
[Relatively clear and unambiguous remarks, worth noting given the frequent citation of the team's failure to sign Sano as an example of the franchise's cheapness. -Vlad]
about 2 years ago
Vlad
41 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
cheapness
The people who are beside themselves that Nutting didn’t take up Lemieux are the same people who decry him for being cheap. If you think he’s cheap and only cares about money, why would you think he’d take a lowball offer?
Ahhh, forget it. Some people don’t want to be edumacated.
Huntington seems like someone who will learn from this.
There’s a GM learning curve, and even then everyone is going to make a mistake. This clearly was that.
I hope so
One major reservation I have about the current FO is their ability to conduct high profile negotiations. With both Sano and Alvarez, they seemed to think they could maneuver around the agent. It backfired in one case and almost did in the other.
by WTM on Feb 1, 2010 7:04 PM EST up reply actions
I’m with you there. I was also upset about how they conducted the Freddy/Jack negotiation/non-negotiation. From what I’ve seen Huntington is pretty honest when dealing with mistakes or potential mistakes. We’ll see if there’s an improvement in that regard.
The impression I get is that Huntington has a rep of being a very good evaluator of talent, but that the human relationship side of things was where he was lacking in Cleveland.
I agree...
it would certainly seem to be a weakness from what we have seen so far. I have to admit that I’m afraid of negotiating with a tough sign pick this year at #2. Coonelly made a remark in one of the Q&A’s about how NH is even tougher when it comes to adhering to internal valuations than he is. Sticking to the plan is great but I’d hate to lose out on a top talent over a couple hundred thousand dollars.
i also agree
the man has dirt and ice water running through his veins. he is a horse trader though. he is a tell it like he see’s it guy. people hate the truth, he tried to back door sano’s agent, he got shafted.
by karreemofwhite on Feb 1, 2010 11:57 PM EST up reply actions
I don't get this
Why would you want him to pay more for something than it’s worth?
There are always lots of good players out there to spend money on. “Losing” one isn’t going to kill you.
by Vlad on Feb 2, 2010 7:07 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
i think he’s just saying that a small difference shouldn’t warrant a “i can’t do anything till you lower your demands by a $100K.” approacj, depending on how much you like him. If you’re willing to pay him 3.5M an he wants 3.7M, you should not just stop negotiations till he comes down.
It also works the other way as well
Why would the player sit out a whole year just because he wanted $4.5M and could only get $4.4M? There’s actually a lot more at stake for the player. He’s losing a whole year of his professional life, and if you sit out a year, there’s almost no chance you’re going to get the same amount of money the next year.
So, it’s very unlikely that the sides would be an insignificant amount of money apart and still not get it done.
by MarkInDallas on Feb 2, 2010 11:22 AM EST up reply actions
True...
but there are few impact players out there and we don’t have money in the system. I would argue that we have one. All I meant is that I would hope that Huntington would be a little flexible on his internal valuation for the right type of talent. Example, we draft the next Strasburg who wants to sign for $8milliond dollars but our internal valuation is capped at $7.7 million. I would hate to think we would lose out on an impact talent for a gap so little. But like I said below, that’s easy for me to say because it is not my money.
As a general rule of thumb I agree with you. I don’t think it’s a good practice to constantly overpay for players.
Let's say, for the sake of argument...
…that they should be flexible about internal valuations on matters of a couple hundred K.
What, exactly, is the upside to Huntington making a public statement that they’ll do this? All it would do is encourage players to take a harder line in negotiations, without bringing back any benefit in return.
Regardless of what they actually believe, the answer they gave is the only one that makes any sense, once you consider their position and interests.
Never said they should make it public...
you’d have to be pretty foolish to make a statement like that publicly. I just said that I hope he’s flexible when it comes to his internal valuations. I have no problems with the answers they gave in the Q & A (as you pointed out there’s not a lot they can say), it just makes me a little nervous after having watched how NH handled is only 2 major negotiations so far. I’m basically just repeating the setiment above in that I hope he can learn from past mistakes.
There's always a line above which things don't make sense.
Everyone deals with those decisions every day. At what line does the artisan cheese become too expensive? Why not pay just $50 more a month for your car payment?
So far, Huntington’s internal valuations have proven to be pretty good. Not going higher on Capps and Freddy, for example.
When Huntington has gotten burned or almost so, it hasn’t been because he refused to go over the internal valuation, it has been because he was trying too hard to not go up to it.
That’s what happened with Sano – he didn’t want to immediately go up close to his limit because then there would be no place to negotiate.
Scheppers is one you might mention, but I think the injury issue was the main deal breaker there. Plus, the fact that the Pirates would get a supplemental pick in the same range as that pick the next year. So, they theoretically weren’t losing any value by not signing him.
Of course, in reality, Scheppers might turn out to be better than Victor Black, but that will only be seen in hindsight.
All good points...
and I’m not to upset with the way the Scheppers thinged turned out. He’s still a huge injury risk IMO and you’re right in that that was most likely the reason NH refused to get closer to Scheppers asking price. And to your point I think NH has been pretty accurate with his valuations but I alsoI have to agree with DK , when you are talking about signing special talents like Sano or Alvarez, when he said you can’t get a bargain every single time (or something like that). I don’t want them operating like the Royals or the Astros or even the Tigers but not every signing can be a steal.
From what I recall...
…the biggest issue with Scheppers was that his rehab was behind schedule at the signing deadline (he wasn’t able to throw breaking balls, for example), and as such they weren’t comfortable giving him as much guaranteed money as he wanted.
Maybe, but..
…at the end of the day, the agent was an unethical jackass who cost his client money in order to send a message to other teams that they had to deal with him and not the client.
I can’t imagine how he was able to persuade the parents of this poor kid that they should leave hundreds of thousands of dollars on the table in order to protect his — the agent’s — future bargaining power with other clients, but apparently he did.
Or maybe he just lied to them about there being other offers out there.
Rob Plummer is a DICK
Period! Pont blankity blank!
by BadAndy on Feb 1, 2010 10:27 PM EST via mobile reply actions
I've gotta say...
I’m more on the agent’s side on this one. He told Huntington at what price he could get Sano. It was the price the Twins paid. Huntington didn’t want to “bid against himself”. Plummer said, “This is what I feel he warrants and if you pony up he’s yours”. Huntington said “When you are ready to negotiate, call me back.” Plummer said, “OK”.
Then the Twins called Plummer and he told them the same thing. They said, “OK. We’ll take it.” Plummer never went back to find out of Huntington would go $1.50 over his asking price because Huntington wouldn’t go that high in the first place.
Now, let’s say you are Plummer and Sano is a car you are trying to sell. You would go back to the first guy who wouldn’t give you what you thought your car was worth and ask if he wanted to raise the offer?
Obviously, Plummer felt it was better to treat the guy right who respected his ask. He didn’t feel he was going to get significantly more money by playing one against the other, and now he is better positioned when there’s another prospect with a specific price.
I'm fine with Plummer not just taking the team's first offer...
…but if he wasn’t going to give us a chance to beat the best offer on the table, he shouldn’t have agreed to let us have a chance to beat the best offer on the table. Going back on his word like that was very unprofessional, and it also probably cost his client money, in that agreeing to come back provided us with incentive to not make our last, best offer at that time.
by Vlad on Feb 2, 2010 7:13 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
I think there’s a lot of truth in your comment, Mark, but I still think there’s enough blame to go around to both parties. For one, I thought Plummer did shop the Twins offer around to other teams like the Orioles, but not the Pirates.
Secondly, I just find it a bit too coincidental that the Twins were the very team that asked MLB to investigate Sano right before July 2 when it appeared the Pirates were the only team with a seat at the table. After Sano signed, it comes out that Plummer was good buds with one of the Twins front office people from back in the day. It just has all the appearances that the two sides stalled until Plummer could steer Sano to the team Plummer wanted him to sign with.
One of the larger consequences of the Sano mess is that the bridge may be burned (on either end) between Huntington and Plummer. If the agent, from what I gather, represents a pretty big chunk of the young talent in the region then that’s one of the talent-rich arteries (although I’m sure there are quite a few more).
In Plummer’s infamous stint in the PBC blog comments, he claimed that he’d work with Neal again for his next batch of players. Our GM might not feel the same way, however.
I disagree
Another one of the problems Nutting had with Littlefield was that he didn’t want to deal with Boras. When Huntington came in, he made it clear that he would deal with whoever had the talent, and he wasn’t going to let the player’s choice of agent hamper his acquisition of talent.
For whatever it's worth...
…I was looking at Arangure’s Twitter feed the other day, and at one point he said that the Red Sox and Yankees were out on Sano in part because they don’t like dealing with Plummer. So if that bridge is burned, we may not be alone on the other side of it.
by Vlad on Feb 2, 2010 7:17 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
Yes, I had heard that before. Of course, those teams have a few avenues that the Pirates don’t have to make up for it. I do realize that Plummer has a rep for being a jerk. I have dealt with people that I really haven’t felt like being buds with. In the end, you just figure out their angle so you can get what you want from them.
by MarkInDallas on Feb 2, 2010 11:30 AM EST up reply actions
I don't think it's as much about him being a jerk...
…(though he may well be, I don’t really know) as it is about them not feeling that they can do business with him, or that he is a trustworthy partner in negotiations.
OK, fair enough.
I thought you just meant in terms of being abrasive or just personally unpleasant. There are people like that who are still OK business partners, if their word is their bond.
I grew up in East LIverpool.
I can’t believe The Review had anything of value quoted on here, or anywhere else for that matter.
That being said, hopefully Neal will learn from any mistake he may have made in this specific negotiation. If it was about Plummer just having Sano sign with the Twins to spite NH for some reason, hopefully this didn’t burn any bridges for either side. I’d like to think, how ever this went down, it will be a learning experience for our FO on what not to do…..if they actually did anything wrong that is.
"So you think 25 percent of the country is retarded?! Yea. Atleast 25 percent. Well lets so a sample. There are 4 of us an you're retarded. Thats 25 percent." Southpark; Mystery of the Urinal Deuce
I had seen the quote run elsewhere...
…but none of those sources used a byline, which I thought was important as far as attribution goes, in case someone decided to walk the remarks back later.
by Vlad on Feb 2, 2010 7:15 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
Ah, I see. Either way, it was cool to see them mentioned.
I first saw the quote at work and The Review as the source and was shocked. Their entire three page sports section is usually cut, paste, credit. You had me thinking they actually had someone interview NH. Oh well, nice thought anyway. =)
"So you think 25 percent of the country is retarded?! Yea. Atleast 25 percent. Well lets so a sample. There are 4 of us an you're retarded. Thats 25 percent." Southpark; Mystery of the Urinal Deuce
by gorillakilla34 on Feb 2, 2010 9:16 AM EST up reply actions
The comment was supposedly made...
…during an open Q&A with fans at PirateFest. The Review’s writer was presumably in the crowd.
From Washington Post 2001
http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/sports/dominican-ballplayers.htm
I thought the article was interesting in general but about half way down this comes up:
“Plummer told people he aspired to be the “Scott Boras of the Dominican”
That’s kind of telling.
Well, he's got the sleazy and deceitful part down.
Now all he needs to do is learn how to get the best possible deal for his clients, and he’ll be golden.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Photo: Padres fan regrets letting mother capture moment with Trevor Hoffman
- Marlins agree to unretire No. 5 for Logan Morrison, who will honor his father’s favorite player
- Weatherman Derek Holland does Dallas TV
- Ask Alex: Will Julio Teheran or Matt Moore win rookie of the year?
- Ku Klux Klan, umpires and bowling: Why the minor leagues tossed out Jim Evans academy
Certain photos copyright © 2012 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.
