Email a copy of 'Veterans On Minors Deals In Line For $100K Bonus' to a friend
Loading ...
By Mark Polishuk | at
Email a copy of 'Veterans On Minors Deals In Line For $100K Bonus' to a friend
MLB Trade Rumors is not affiliated with Major League Baseball, MLB or MLB.com
hide arrows scroll to top
Here's the answer
Wouldn’t Bill Hall be included with the Yankees?
John W
I think Hall doesn’t qualify because he was released by the Astros during the season.
go_jays_go
Instead of having an automatic opt-out clause by June 1, the rules should be changed accordingly:
‘By June 1st, if the player is not promoted to the 25man roster, he/she has 10 days to decide whether or not to opt-out of their contract’.
My reasoning:
Whether or not this clause is exercised, the player gets to decide if he/she wants to stay with their current team.
If the clause is not exercised by June 11th, the player will remain with their team until the end of the season. It’s not a big difference, but at least the team has the chance to hold onto their players for a little while longer.
Lunchbox45
curious as to why you included ‘/she’
johnsilver
Maybe the poster thinks Eri Yoshida will come to the US and be the 1st lady to pitch in the US 😉
Devern Hansack
This is an absolutely absurd policy. Players who sign onto minor league contracts a) sign voluntarily and b) sign knowing that they may well spend all year in the minors. This is the kind of rule that is really going to hurt small-market clubs as well as the veterans that this policy is supposed to protect.
Lunchbox45
how does it hurt small market clubs and how does it hurts veterans exactly
Matthew
Judging by your other replies to this article you appear to be a troll, but, just this once, I’ll bite. It’s pretty simple, clubs don’t want to spend $100k for minor league back-up depth that may not be there when they need it and since no one wants to spend $100K for back-up depth that may not be there when they need it there will be fewer opportunities for these veterns to sign a minor league deal prior to spring training.
Take Rodrigo Lopez for example, he’s a borderline replacement level player. He has no business being on a major league roster for an entire season but, in a pinch, he can make a few adequate spot starts when his team is in a bind. Under this clause, the Cubs will, if they want Rodrigo to pitch for them this season, have no choice but to either put him on the major league roster (where he can’t be sent to the minors when not needed) or send him to the minors and pay $100k and risk him leaving on June 1st when the Royals need a spot starter. If he leaves the team on June 1st, not only will he not be availiable for the Cubs when they need a spot starter in mid-August they will have wasted $100k.
Lunchbox45
judging by your response.. in which you use the cubs as an example.. you don’t really understand the business side of the game and should stop talking.. seriously..
Do you have any comprehension in how much small market teams earn in revenue sharing? Doesn’t sound like, but believe me, they can handle a few hundred grand more if they really need some veteran help.
This deal gives the player some more leverage and a bit of options instead of being signed and left on a minor league roster. its a respect thing.
I’ll never understand the whole ohh woes me, smallest violin, for the small market teams over incidents this small. The marlins and a few other violators have pocketed revenue money for years. but when a rule changes in favour of the players financially, all of a sudden its “unfair” to small market teams.
Oddly enough, you didn’t reallly answer my question above regarding how this rule hurts small market teams (you used cubs as an example) and you didn’t mention how this would hurt a veteran. so who’s really trolling?
notsureifsrs
the lowest payroll in 2011 was $38M. 100k represents about two-tenths of one percent of that payroll
Redsox33
Are you the baseball player devern hansack?
Devern Hansack
I’m not. I’m just a huge fan of the guy and the six inning no-hitter he had a while back. The dude had a devastating slider, as well.
Redsox33
I remember watching him play for Portland he was pretty good back then.
David Skurnick
I fully agree with Devern_Hansack. This new rule discourages teams from taking a chance on a questionable veteran free agent player.
Lunchbox45
lol wut
Joe Metz
I think it’s very possible that clubs will factor in the $100K if they believe the carrier holds particular value to have available during the season. I suspect there may be ways to incorporate sidestepping this provision in an agreement, but that’s
“above my paygrade.”
Also, I believe Brett Tomko should be on this list this season.
dwarfcatt
Doesn’t the season start March 28th in Japan? (Mariners & A’s)
Does that mean Kevin Millwood needs to have a decision by the 23rd?
jondogg2010
People tend to forget that players are also employees of the MLB. It would be nice that in most other employers you get more recognition for loyalty. Money aside, that’s pretty much what’s going on here.