One Last Thing on Matt Purke
A few last words on the Matthew Purke situation, which is still gnawing at me. Something just doesn’t add up. The Rangers knew what the Purkes’ demand was going into the draft and as late as last weekend, GM Jon Daniels said that whatever idea the Rangers got about Purkes bonus demands before the draft had not shifted upwards at any time during the negotiations. The Rangers knew what he wanted and drafted him anyway. To not get him signed, especially for a team that has put so much emphasis lately on draft success, is a real blow.
I have no personal knowledge of anything surrounding this, but am willing to bet that what happened was that Purke was telling folks before the draft he wanted $7 million to sign, and the Rangers drafted him thinking that when it came down to nut-cutting time, he'd take $4 million, particularly given that he'd be playing for the team he rooted for, and that has Nolan Ryan as the team president.
I suspect that when the deadline came, Purke stuck to his guns, said he wanted $7 million (or something close to it), and when he didn't get it, he didn't sign.
90 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Me, too. I heard he had gone to 6 mil. A real bargain.
Nothing against Purke but I think he over-valued his talent.
I'm tired of hearing about team chemistry. You are telling me these fuckers wouldn’t like to have a teammate that could actually help the team win, instead of being down 2-4 spots.
by diamond_dave on Aug 20, 2009 2:34 PM CDT up reply actions
where did they get the idea
that he’d sign for 4 mil though? Did Sanders assure Nolan of that? I know they have a top farm and recoup the pick next year, but it seems like a pretty stupid gamble to say “we think he might possibly do this” without any concrete affirmation.
$4 million
It would have been the 5th highest bonus handed out this year.
$7 million would have given Purke the second highest deal, behind only Strasburg.
I suspect that the idea came from observing over the past decade the separation between what guys say that they want to sign pre-draft, and what they actually end up signing for.
by Adam J. Morris on Aug 20, 2009 2:39 PM CDT up reply actions
No it was reported later it less than that..sorta
The Seattle Mariners and No. 2 overall pick Dustin Ackley have agreed to a five-year contract worth at least $7.5 million.
Ackley’s deal could be worth $10 million, depending on how quickly he arrives in the big leagues. Sources familiar with the contract told ESPN.com’s Jayson Stark that Ackley will collect a $6 million signing bonus, payable in five annual installments of $1.2 million each. And from 2010-14, he could earn anywhere from $1.5 million to $4 million in salaries, depending on whether he’s in the minor leagues or major leagues.
"He will not coddle them. Nolan Ryan doesn’t coddle." - Jeff Passan
by Dirk Diggler on Aug 20, 2009 2:53 PM CDT up reply actions
fwiw
ackley > purke
Scout: He was a first-round pick right? Got a huge bonus?
KG: Oh yeah.
Scout: Well, he spent a lot of it on milkshakes.
-
"Taking steroids is only gonna make him whiff on those sliders in the dirt with more fury." -thedirkatron
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2009 3:15 PM CDT up reply actions
obviously
"He will not coddle them. Nolan Ryan doesn’t coddle." - Jeff Passan
by Dirk Diggler on Aug 20, 2009 3:23 PM CDT up reply actions
This makes a lot of sense to me.
If I were a kid with a golden arm, I’d probably think “whatever team I sign with is going to try to lowball me, so I’d better start high no matter what.” If I really want $4M, I’d probably start out asking above that and then acquiesce to a lower payment as negotiations came down to the wire.
Don't a lot of picks shoot for the moon and then settle for less?
If he had $6M out there as a first offer, and slot is around $2M, then thinking you might get him for $4M isn’t the dumbest idea ever.
The Texas Rangers have been synonymous with explosive firepower ever since they emptied 130 rounds into Bonnie Parker and Clyde Barrow in 1934. - Alyssa Milano
yeah, what Adam said above..
The Texas Rangers have been synonymous with explosive firepower ever since they emptied 130 rounds into Bonnie Parker and Clyde Barrow in 1934. - Alyssa Milano
yeah they shoot for the moon
but it sounds like Purke was shooting for the moon and fully expecting it. I would think that with Nolan’s ties to the agency they could’ve gotten a more concrete idea before the draft.
I'm thinking his ties to the agency might be overrated...
Also, wouldn’t it be a breach of duty if the agency were to give Nolan the inside scoop before the draft. "Yeah, he’s saying $6M but he’ll take $x, so don’t offer him $6M.
The Texas Rangers have been synonymous with explosive firepower ever since they emptied 130 rounds into Bonnie Parker and Clyde Barrow in 1934. - Alyssa Milano
see matzek, tyler
asks for 7+ mil
signs for mmuch less
Scout: He was a first-round pick right? Got a huge bonus?
KG: Oh yeah.
Scout: Well, he spent a lot of it on milkshakes.
-
"Taking steroids is only gonna make him whiff on those sliders in the dirt with more fury." -thedirkatron
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2009 3:15 PM CDT up reply actions
the other horse was gone if he was the horse
I can't help it. I’m an asshole.
-brettgardner on Jul 7, 2009 10:55 PM EDT
x
we get a compensatory pick. the blow to the org is limited.
I agree.
We won’t likely pick a player as good as Purke with the comp pick, but we will likely pick a player comparable to a player we could have taken this year that didn’t have signability issues.
by Adam J. Morris on Aug 20, 2009 2:37 PM CDT up reply actions
We threw a Hail Mary and it didn't work, next year we will just try to get the 1'st down.
I'm tired of hearing about team chemistry. You are telling me these fuckers wouldn’t like to have a teammate that could actually help the team win, instead of being down 2-4 spots.
by diamond_dave on Aug 20, 2009 2:43 PM CDT up reply actions
No, that's not the lesson
signability is not the most important factor.
G G G E-flat_______ F F F D__________....
Fail
You always take the player you want the most. Sometimes it just doesn’t work out even in the perfect setting like Purke would’ve had.
It's not a perfect setting. Fuckin' team is broke
by oc on Aug 20, 2009 2:54 PM CDT up reply actions
they're so broke
that they’re spending heavily in latin america, offered Purke 4 mil, and went significantly over slot for several late picks? they might not have much money, but they aren’t bankrupt.
if the team were sans financial issues
would we have given purke $6 mil? doubt it
by Smoakin in the Boys Room on Aug 20, 2009 3:02 PM CDT up reply actions
perfect setting for the player
if they legitimately offered 4 mil. apparently it wasnt so perfect for the Rangers
because he wanted a ML deal
Roster management is an entirely different animal for me. I’m not giving a high school kid a spot on the roster.
BPA, every time.
Scout: He was a first-round pick right? Got a huge bonus?
KG: Oh yeah.
Scout: Well, he spent a lot of it on milkshakes.
-
"Taking steroids is only gonna make him whiff on those sliders in the dirt with more fury." -thedirkatron
by knockoutking on Aug 20, 2009 3:16 PM CDT up reply actions
If that was most important...
…we wouldn’t have drafted Smoak, Ross, or Borbon.
by Adam J. Morris on Aug 20, 2009 2:57 PM CDT up reply actions
I don't get this
It seems like people here are always up for taking the riskier, higher ceiling player in the draft, trade, or w/e, but then are shocked when things don’t work out perfectly. This is how things work. You try your best to get the best talent you can get in any situation. Things don’t always work out in the end, but sticking to that strategy is how you end up with top of the rotation pitchers and elite hitters instead of a bunch of back of the rotation/bullpen pitchers and replaceable hitters.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
i'm hoping the lesson learned
is that its okay to take the Alex White type player when the Matt Purke type player is asking for 6m+…The Whites of the world may have less upside (and that’s arguable) but they will sign.
What is this, Horseville? Because I'm surrounded by naysayers.
I hope they don't learn that lesson..
Granted, you can never have enough prospects, but when you have a system as reputed to be loaded as ours, you shouldn’t “settle” for guys. If you have a reasonable belief that you can land a high-risk/reward guy that falls to you, you take that chance from time to time.
The Texas Rangers have been synonymous with explosive firepower ever since they emptied 130 rounds into Bonnie Parker and Clyde Barrow in 1934. - Alyssa Milano
but next year
when we have two first round picks, do we have to hear about how that impacts our international FA budget? will we take obvious slot guys early to make the finances work. there is also a time value associated with picks that we lost, and we have less leverage with a comp pick.
the impact may not be huge, but it will be noticeable.
What is this, Horseville? Because I'm surrounded by naysayers.
well it seems they've already
spent some of that money on the new LA pitcher. Hopefully we’ll see a few more signings this winter as kids turn 16.
Your first round pick in baseball
is not like a first rounder in football. In football, you expect the player to have an impact in the up coming year. Baseball 1st rounders are an expensive crapshoot. You hope they make it to the MLs.
Elvis Andrus - 2009 AL Rookie of the Year
Mitch Moreland -Tom Grieve Rangers Minor League Player of the Year
Martin Perez - Nolan Ryan Rangers Minor League Pitcher of the Year
I think the unpredictability of baseball draft picks is a bit overblown
But I basically agree with you.
I don’t really buy the player valuation algorithms you see on Fangraphs and BtB, and the like. But ultimately there is some $ value to performance conversion. But what people often forget is that you have to factor in risk and present day value. For a HS pitcher like Purke, maybe there is a 10% chance he becomes a TORG type pitcher, and a 30% chance on top of that that he becomes a good, though not great, major leaguer. In either case, the $4 million, or $6 million even, would be a good investment – an exceptional one if he TORGed. But there is a 50-60% chance with almost any HS kid that in 5 years we’d look back on that bonus as a lost cause.
Ultimately, paying off bonuses like this is a risk/reward calculation. And if you really consider that most of the reward upside is contained within a 10% chance of exceptional success, it probably isn’t worth paying out $6 million (especially since funds are limited, so that risk you would have bought with Purke can’t be spread out elsewhere, say on that $500K Perez kid they signed today). It is fully reasonable that $4 million was their threshold. Even that could be argued to be excessive for a HS pitcher. Really, what the Rangers did with Beavan, Main, and NeRa was a better strategic move (obviously possible due to the # of picks).
Go Rice Owls!
Busts in the draft
While the overall numbers don’t look good for most players contributing, that is the result of other teams doing a poor job of scouting or drafting in the first place. Take a look at Jason Castro last year with the Astros. Lets say he never has much of a professional career and ends up as only a back-up player. He’d go down as another statistic describing how risky even 1st round picks are, but the reality is that it was an overdraft by the Astros and/or bad scouting on their part. With the bonus demands of players now, signability also plays a part. So while the draft is an expensive crapshoot, the teams that scout players well and draft accordingly are going to beat the odds very often.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
Matt who?
I didn’t realize this was a TCU fan site? It’s time to move on, we’ve got Derek Holland pitching tonight!
"You build 1000 bridges and suck 1 dick, you are not a bridge builder, you are a cocksucker." SaltyGoesYard
by Pocket Ninja on Aug 20, 2009 2:40 PM CDT reply actions 5 recs
It seems
if he said he wanted 7 or 6 million and the Rangers didn’t want to get close to that, they should have drafted someone else.
yup
thats the part i really dont get, its the reason other passed, i just dont see how you are 3M apart at the end of the other day. how does that happen?
I can't help it. I’m an asshole.
-brettgardner on Jul 7, 2009 10:55 PM EDT
The Nats were apparently $35M apart...
and they got it done for a LOT less than the player wanted initially. It really isn’t THAT hard to grasp how “ask high and settle in the middle” works, is it?
The Texas Rangers have been synonymous with explosive firepower ever since they emptied 130 rounds into Bonnie Parker and Clyde Barrow in 1934. - Alyssa Milano
I also think the Rangers should be aggressive
with this pick next year.
If you have a BPA situation again next year and they want a lot of money (5-6M), I say will still draft them. If we lose out, so be it. There’s not too many players that would pass up #5 money at the 14th spot. I rather do that a chance losing the pick then going for a reach that doesn’t have high upside.
Everytime this comes back up
I am boggled by the idea of an 18 year old kid turning down 4 million to go to TCU. Yeah, ok maybe there is opportunity cost if he stays healthy in the next two years. But aside from injuries… what if he has plateaued in ability? What if they go hard slot?
Crazy stuff.
kling klang king of the rim ram room
Hard to believe an 18 year old turned down $4,000,000
I know baseball players get ass in college, but wow.
by GhostofGaryHogeboom on Aug 20, 2009 3:08 PM CDT up reply actions
Playing Chicken
I know the draft and the negotiations following is just playing chicken and all, but if the gap was $3 million dollars you’d hope that Nolan’s pull would be greater or you had a better sense of how willing Purke was to budge. If the Purkes set the 7 mill as a hard ask and the Rangers still took him then I have an issue with the FO hedging their bets a little too much.
If the $7 mill was NOT set as a hard ask, then I fault the Purkes for misleading the Rangers knowing that they weren’t gonna sign for a penny less than $7 mill.
Either way, the way it went down is a little fishy
What's the rumpus?
Scheppers
Provided he signs, he definitely cushions the blow. Having him in the system still gives the Rangers’ 2009 draft the type of high upside arm you like to see. Getting him, in my mind, softens the loss of Purke more than anything else. They just need to get him signed.
They were both rated Top 10 (9 & 10 I believe) so if we get one with our highest pick being 14'th is not a bad consolation.
I'm tired of hearing about team chemistry. You are telling me these fuckers wouldn’t like to have a teammate that could actually help the team win, instead of being down 2-4 spots.
by diamond_dave on Aug 20, 2009 2:51 PM CDT up reply actions
Not to mention
If healthy Scheppers should make it through the farm fast.
2009 Texas Rangers: Why The Hell Not Us?--ghtd36 on May 13, 2009
what's the usual timetable on a guy like this signing though?
it seems counterproductive to all involved for him to get close to next draft before he signs. does selig give a damn about slots for guys not subject to the august deadline?
by Smoakin in the Boys Room on Aug 20, 2009 3:08 PM CDT up reply actions
I want to hear the org say something about Galloway's $2.3m quote.
It coincides too much with Hicks’ shaky financial reputation.
If it’s true the $4m was solid, I think he refused because he wanted college or felt hesitant about turning pro, and had enough confidence he’d perform come 2011 to stomach the risk.
I still think adequate scouting could’ve turned up this information. And if they did nothing more than survey asking and settling prices of HS pitchers in recent draft history, that is piss poor.
"[Font} doesn't turn 19 until the end of May and his heater can already hit 99 on the gun. That's baseball porn." - Jason Parks
http://www.star-telegram.com/284/story/1545407.html
"[Font} doesn't turn 19 until the end of May and his heater can already hit 99 on the gun. That's baseball porn." - Jason Parks
by hightowersmith on Aug 20, 2009 2:57 PM CDT up reply actions
Why is he greedy?
Let’s say MLB discovered a snafu with his paperwork (a la Travis Lee and John Patterson a few years ago) and declared him a free agent right now.
How much do you think he’d get as a signing bonus?
It would be more than $2.3 million. Hell, it would be more than $4 million.
by Adam J. Morris on Aug 20, 2009 3:09 PM CDT up reply actions
I see what you're saying
If you put the entire draft class out there with the international free agent class, and combine the budgets of the draft/international free agency do you still think he gets 4-6 mil? I can’t see it
Probably
The entire purpose of instituting the draft was to reduce the bargaining power of the amateur players and institute a form of price-fixing.
by Adam J. Morris on Aug 20, 2009 3:16 PM CDT up reply actions
Fair enough
Though I still think turning down 4 mil to go to college where you could hurt your value is insane and stupid.
Sure
That’s why most of these guys that are asking for $7 million end up taking less.
No one wants to be the next Matt Harrington.
by Adam J. Morris on Aug 20, 2009 3:23 PM CDT up reply actions
Say what???
The entire purpose was to keep the haves from signing everybody they wanted, hence the reverse draft order.
Directly from Wikipedia
In 1947, Major League Baseball implemented the bonus rule, a restriction aimed at reducing player salaries, as well as keeping wealthier teams from monopolizing the player market.9 In its most restrictive form, it forbade any team which gave an amateur a signing bonus of more than $4,000 from assigning that player to a minor league affiliate for two seasons. If the player was removed from the major league roster, he became a free agent. The controversial legislation was repealed twice, only to be re-instituted.10
The bonus rule was largely ineffective. There were accusations that teams were signing players to smaller bonuses, only to supplement them with under-the-table payments.7 In one famous incident, the Kansas City Athletics signed Clete Boyer, kept him on their roster for two years, then traded him to the Yankees just as he became eligible to be sent to the minor leagues. Other clubs accused the Yankees of using the Athletics as a de facto farm team, and the A’s later admitted to signing Boyer on their behalf.11
Major League clubs voted on the draft during the 1964 Winter Meetings. Four teams — the New York Yankees, St. Louis Cardinals, Los Angeles Dodgers, and New York Mets — attempted to defeat the proposal, but they failed to convince a majority of teams, and in the end only the Cardinals voted against it.[
Notice that the four teams voting against it were either large-market or deep pocket teams.
The Texas Rangers have been synonymous with explosive firepower ever since they emptied 130 rounds into Bonnie Parker and Clyde Barrow in 1934. - Alyssa Milano
Drafts aren’t about making sure weaker teams get the best players — they are first and foremost about controlling costs by limiting the leverage that amateurs have by locking them into only one team to negotiate with.
by Adam J. Morris on Aug 20, 2009 3:31 PM CDT up reply actions
Umm, yeah ok....
There’s no doubt that is a pleasurable side effect for the owners, but all you have to do is look at the state of baseball player acquisition prior to the draft to see that it was flawed as hell.
if they were all about locking players in, wouldn’t there would be more controls in place preventing players from simply not signing and re-entering in later years?
The Texas Rangers have been synonymous with explosive firepower ever since they emptied 130 rounds into Bonnie Parker and Clyde Barrow in 1934. - Alyssa Milano
Baseball had the reserve clause up until 71(ish) to control player movement..
so they would have had similar controls in place to prevent amateur movement too, no?
The Texas Rangers have been synonymous with explosive firepower ever since they emptied 130 rounds into Bonnie Parker and Clyde Barrow in 1934. - Alyssa Milano
Well
I’m not sure what you are asking, here.
by Adam J. Morris on Aug 20, 2009 4:37 PM CDT up reply actions
My point is that if it's all about controlling guys..
wouldn’t they attempt to limit their leverage by some sort of “draft rights reserve clause”?
They had something similar to that prior to the draft with the two-year rule, but actually reduced that restriction when they went to the entry draft.
Also, weren’t the bonus babies of the early 60’s mostly snapped up by large-money teams?
The Texas Rangers have been synonymous with explosive firepower ever since they emptied 130 rounds into Bonnie Parker and Clyde Barrow in 1934. - Alyssa Milano
Maybe I'm way off base..
and don’t want to sound naive. I KNOW the owners control player costs wherever they can, but the pre-draft chaos was horrible. The farm club the Yankees maintained in KC that masqueraded as a ML team was an open joke.
The Texas Rangers have been synonymous with explosive firepower ever since they emptied 130 rounds into Bonnie Parker and Clyde Barrow in 1934. - Alyssa Milano
x
Parity certainly plays a huge rule in the purpsoe for a draft, but it’s absolutle a cost control thing as well. The baseball draft was invented almost solely for cost control purposes after the run on bonus babies in the early part of the decade.
Joe Sheehan:
by Adam J. Morris on Aug 20, 2009 4:41 PM CDT up reply actions
In the grand scheme of things
This sucks, but it’s been a long while since Jonboy really screwed up, and if Purke was this greedy, it’s hard to really knock the guy. I was calling for his head 3 years ago, but I’ve got to admit he’s put together a good team that loves to play baseball. Unlike the Showalter teams…
by GhostofGaryHogeboom on Aug 20, 2009 3:07 PM CDT reply actions
Has there been any statement from the Purke camp?
Either from the family or the agents? I haven’t seen one, Is that normal? It would certainly end a lot of speculation if someone on that side said something.
"What ... 92 miles per hour?" Feldman scoffed. "That's not gas. Feliz throws gas."
by NorCalRangersFan on Aug 20, 2009 3:15 PM CDT reply actions
Today there is
“It’s a business and they made a decision they thought was best for their ownership,” Lawrence Purke said. "We were very happy to be a part of it.
“We told all 30 teams in the beginning what it would take and at the midnight hour, Aug. 17, the Texas Rangers and Matthew were not able to agree.”
While Purke acknowledges there is no animosity between the Rangers and his family, he said he was very open with Texas officials from the moment the process began.
“We said at the beginning we wanted a deal similiar to (those given to Detroit Tigers pitcher) Rick Porcello and (Boston Red Sox pitcher) Josh Beckett,” Lawrence Purke said. "We are talking (about contacts worth) around $7.2 million to $7.5 million.
“We mean what we say and we say what we mean.”
Purke said he and his son came away from the process with great respect for the Texas Rangers.
“It’s every player’s dream to be a part of a process like that and we are grateful to the Rangers and their organization,” Lawrence Purke said.
by Adam J. Morris on Aug 20, 2009 3:17 PM CDT up reply actions
So I take back my latest post
What a bunch of morons. Good luck getting that after the 2011 draft. He’s going to have to be a top 3 pick at least to get that kind of deal.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
So, if you take $7 million in $100 bills and stack it, how high would it actually be?
Would it reach Hicks’ chest?
Side note: a recent study found that 90 percent of US currency has slight traces of cocaine on it.
They've been publishing surveys saying the same thing for 10 years...
The Texas Rangers have been synonymous with explosive firepower ever since they emptied 130 rounds into Bonnie Parker and Clyde Barrow in 1934. - Alyssa Milano
I don't buy the 7 million dollar demand from Purke
That might have been pre-draft, but we were hearing that the Rangers and Purke were about a million dollars apart towards the end of negotiations and ended up offering him 4 million dollars. There was also someone that said that Purke wanted 4.7 (can’t remember where I read that though). I think Purke’s camp was highly unrealistic in their demands if 4 million wasn’t enough, but I don’t think it was as bad as 7 million.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw

by 

















