You are absolutely correct. Only Japanese professional players are able to obtain free agency after expiration of their contract. All amateurs, even international free agents, are under a club's control for the requisite six years.Originally Posted by paulrichjr
"No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda
Somebody was able to sign and only have 5 years recently, I think maybe Puig.
Puig has 7 year deal
Bench Bomb (10-17-2013)
So with the expected value of $4.5M to $5 a year for Guerrero, we would be basically offering a $30M contract for 6 years?
Isn't that very near to the same deal Chapman got?
2015 Attendance 2-1 (4/6, 4/7,4/24)
2014 Attendance 1-3 (3/31, 4/12, 8/14)
2013 Attendance: 6-0 (4/3, 4/16, 4/17, 8/3, 8/21, 9/7)
Yep, but because Chapman wasn't called up until August 31 he didn't meet several clauses that would have escalated the value through arbitration+bonuses.
Hugs, smiling, and interactive Twitter accounts, don't mean winning baseball. Until this community understands that we are cursed to relive the madness.
Players can sign as short of or as long a contract as they want. Heck, a club could sign Guerrero to a 1-year deal if they want, but they'd still have the player under control until he reaches six years of service.
"No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda
If that is the case then I think the Reds signing him will be that much better. $4.5M a year is not that much. We basically make that up using the money the we paid Masset and Izturis this past year. And this is for a 26 year old who scouts say is an MLB talent. If he pans out then he is a pretty good bargain.
2015 Attendance 2-1 (4/6, 4/7,4/24)
2014 Attendance 1-3 (3/31, 4/12, 8/14)
2013 Attendance: 6-0 (4/3, 4/16, 4/17, 8/3, 8/21, 9/7)
No that's what I'm saying, somebody successfully negotiated out of one of those 6 years of control down to 5. It was discussed on here when it happened, nobody could understand how it worked given the CBA, but I'm pretty sure it happened.
EDIT: I think it might be Cespedes. I think the A's only keep him for 4 years.
http://www.redszone.com/forums/showt...espedes&page=2
Last edited by Wonderful Monds; 10-17-2013 at 02:47 PM.
Apparently you're right. I just checked and Cespedes did indeed negotiate a clause to rid of arbitration, meaning he would become a free agent after expiration of his 4-year deal in 2015. That right was inherent for Japanese professionals but I admittedly wasn't aware it could be negotiated out of deals for anyone else. Usually the union is a stickler about not opting out of things not collectively bargained.
"No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda
Foreign players aren't in the union until they sign a deal. They've got some flexibility (and I'm guessing the union doesn't mind when a player carves a few years off his free agency clock, makes for a nice precedent).
If you're a mature ballplayer ready to step directly into the majors, then I would assume you'd take the Cespedes approach. Teams have got to compete with one another for your signature and you can quickly weed out the ones who won't waive arbitration rights.
There really isn't a single good reason a team should get ownership beyond contract length on players that haven't been developed at all by the MLB system. I expect Scott Boras or some enterprising agent to try this some day with a college player who can jump straight to the majors.
I'm not a system player. I am a system.
Amateur players aren't in the union until they sign a Major League contract either, so that really doesn't tell us anything. You don't join the union until your minor league contract is purchased by the big league club.
The point is, when you go to sign the MLB contract, unless you're a Japanese professional, you're binding yourself by the terms of the CBA (it says that right on the contract even for international free agents). So for any player other than previous Japanese professionals, you'd need a waiver from the player's union for any clause that releases a player from arbitration. Come to think of it, that has certainly been done even by a few MLB players in recent years that were on their second or third professional contract, so I suppose it's not uncharted territory, but you do need a waiver from the union before the contract is ratified.
Last edited by Brutus; 10-17-2013 at 04:40 PM.
"No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda
So, would it be to a team's advantage to offer a three-year deal?
Financially it's certainly a lesser risk to do so. That way if the player is hurt or, sucks, you aren't on the hook for guaranteed money. The arbitration process will mostly just mean you a reduced rate of the actual market value and only on a year to year basis.
"No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda
Posting Permissions
|
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please. |
Reply With Quote