Tanaka

[Cdaniel]

Japanese officials are coming to the US to figure out posting fee and set Tanaka free per John Heymann.

[Cdaniel]

Here is the tweet.

@JonHeymanCBS: top Japanese baseball officials coming to U.S. to try to resolve posting issue & free Tanaka. http://t.co/1RDGDCaw5u

[Redondo]

He sure would look good in our rotation.

[Cdaniel]

We need to make it happen.

[sneaky_flute]

That dudes gonna get 25 million per year as a #3 starter

[Stradling]

No he's not.

[Cdaniel]

Sneaky_flute is smoking something

[Lhalo]

Free Tanaka!

[Cdaniel]

Let's get t-shirts made.

[sneaky_flute]

No he's not.

What part of my comment are you addressing? the 25 million a year?

 

It wouldn't surprise me to see someone like the Dodgers offer him such a ridiculous deal.

[Stradling]

He may cost $25 million if you factor in the posting fee, but his salary will be closer to $12-15 million.

[tdawg87]

Darvish got 6/52 or whatever it was. While Tanaka will probably get more, I can't see it going higher than 6/60. That's a lot of money to pay what is essentially a top prospect.

[IowaAngels27]

Highly unlikely this happens. But I guess never doubt Jerry.

[jsnpritchett]

Highly unlikely this happens. But I guess never doubt Jerry  Arte.

 

I think you meant...

[IowaAngels27]

I think you meant...

My mistake. Thanks for the correction!

[Torridd]

That dudes gonna get 25 million per year as a #3 starter

Does this really matter? When I read posts from many of you guys, I think are they bookkeepers? My premise is if the team can afford it and acquring a player doesn't stop them from getting others, then go for it.

 

Like someone said, all these guys are overpaid so if the market value for Joe Smith (love that name) is 12 million, but you want him why not give him extra money?

 

IT ISN'T MY MONEY. Let the team spend its money. That's what money is for. You can't take it with you. Etc. etc.

 

If they have to spend 100 million to get Tanaka, I'd be happy.

[jsnpritchett]

Does this really matter? When I read posts from many of you guys, I think are they bookkeepers? My premise is if the team can afford it and acquring a player doesn't stop them from getting others, then go for it.

 

Like someone said, all these guys are overpaid so if the market value for Joe Smith (love that name) is 12 million, but you want him why not give him extra money?

 

IT ISN'T MY MONEY. Let the team spend its money. That's what money is for. You can't take it with you. Etc. etc.

 

If they have to spend 100 million to get Tanaka, I'd be happy.

 

Others share your opinion, for sure.  The problem is, it does eventually come back to haunt you.  There are only so many "over-pays" that a single team can bear--and then you get to situation like the Angels might be in, in which you're left with very little spending room (unless they want to go over the luxury tax limit), but several holes to fill.

 

With that in mind, sure, you can make a pretty compelling argument that committing almost $16 million to a guy who might throw 180 innings combined for you over the life of the contract perhaps isn't the wisest use of limited resources.

Edited November 25, 2013 by jsnpritchett

[gotbeer]

The big problem with Tanaka now is that they may not get this posting thing resolved till sometime in December.  Even if something is agreed upon, it still has to be reviewed and voted on by both leagues.  

 

And judging from the sounds of it, the small market teams want part of the posting to count towards the luxury tax.  If that goes through, that won't be a good thing for us.

[Hubs]

I don't think the posting fee is as high. When the BoSox got Matsuzaka, they paid more than any other team by $15M. When they Yankees got Igawa (huge bust) they paid $10 M more than any other team. And when the Rangers bid on Darvish, they paid more than any other team by a substantial amount. 

 

Japanese players typically want to pitch on the West Coast or big market East Coast teams, so that they can get direct / semi-direct flights to Japan. 

 

If they were granted free agency after a shorter time period, they'd be able to choose. Since nearly every NPB pitcher gets 9 years of club control when they sign a professional contract, (which really seems like a lot, but if you factor in that most high school players sign when they are 18, then reach the majors at 21-22, at the earliest. Then the MLB team has six or seven years of control, it's essentially the same thing. The three arbitration years at the end of the contract are the difference.

 

Still, I like the idea of open bidding for two reasons. 1) More money goes to the player instead of the team that signed the 18 year old kid. 2) A team can intelligently bid on a player instead of throwing a huge sum at the blind auction.

 

I'd say the three top teams should get a shot at the player, and if it's a blind auction, they all have to agree to pay the average of the three top bids, so that the NPB team doesn't have a say.

 

Sill, Tanaka is 24, and may be worth the money. I'd think he'd sign for $10-12 Million on a 6 year deal. The Angels can get this room under the CBT if they non-tendered everyone except Trumbo and Freese.