Today was the last day for teams to issue qualifying offers to eligible free agents, as teams had to make their decisions by 4pm CT. With the deadline now behind us, here are the players who were issued the one-year, $18.4MM offers…
- Brandon Belt, Giants (link)
- Nick Castellanos, Reds (link)
- Michael Conforto, Mets (link)
- Carlos Correa, Astros (link)
- Freddie Freeman, Braves (link)
- Raisel Iglesias, Angels (link)
- Robbie Ray, Blue Jays (link)
- Eduardo Rodriguez, Red Sox (link)
- Corey Seager, Dodgers (link)
- Marcus Semien, Blue Jays (link)
- Trevor Story, Rockies (link)
- Noah Syndergaard, Mets (link)
- Chris Taylor, Dodgers (link)
- Justin Verlander, Astros (link)
This is the highest number of qualifying offers issued since the 2015-16 offseason, when a record 20 players received the QOs. Only six players received qualifying offers last winter, which was the lowest ever issued in an offseason, yet not really surprising given the pandemic’s impact on the 2020 season and league revenues.
These 14 players now have until November 17 to decide whether or not to accept the offer. If they accept, they’ll receive $18.4MM next season, and can’t be traded until June 15, 2022. They also won’t be eligible to receive a qualifying offer in any future trips to free agency (players are also ineligible for the qualifying offer if they haven’t spent at least one full season with their current team). Since the qualifying offer system was introduced in the 2012-13 offseason, 10 of the 96 players to receive a QO have taken the deal.
If a player rejects the qualifying offer, draft pick compensation is now attached to their market, unless they re-sign with their former team. Teams who sign a QO free agent will have to surrender at least one draft pick, and potentially some international bonus pool money depending on their status as revenue-sharing recipients or whether or not they exceeded the luxury tax threshold. (Here is the list of what every team would have to give up to sign a QO free agent.)
If a QO free agent signs elsewhere, that player’s former team receives a compensatory draft pick based on this criteria….
- A draft pick after Competitive Balance Round B will be awarded if the team losing the free agent did not receive revenue sharing or if the free agent in question signed a contract worth less than $50MM in guaranteed money.
- A draft pick after Round 1 will be awarded if the team losing the free agent received revenue sharing and the free agent in question signed for more than $50MM.
- A draft pick after Round 4 will be awarded if the team losing the free agent paid luxury tax penalties in the preceding season.
As always, several factors are weighed by both teams and players about whether or not to issue or accept qualifying offers. This winter provides yet another wrinkle — this could be the final year of the current qualifying offer system due to the expiration of the current Collective Bargaining Agreement on December 1. It is widely expected that the owners could lock out the players if a new deal isn’t reached by that date. In the event of a lockout, MLB would institute a roster freeze on all transactional business involving Major League players, thus bringing the free agent market to a halt.
With this deadline looming, it is possible we could see some QO recipients (those less certain of landing big multi-year contracts) choose to accept the one-year deal in order to guarantee themselves some financial and contractual security prior to a possible lockout. By that same token, this could make teams warier about extending the qualifying offer to certain players due to a larger suspicion that they would accept…or perhaps a player’s willingness to accept could make a team more inclined to issue a QO to a so-called borderline case.
The way they decide what kind of draft pick is awful. So when Houston loses Correa because someone offers him 300+ million, they will get a competitive balance B round pick instead of picking after the first round just because they are not a small enough team to be apart of the revenue sharing? That’s a joke
They should bang on some trash cans about it…
Eff the TrashAtros. Go Braves.
I have to thank the Braves for putting the Trashtros where they belong in the trash can!
Ahhh, are the asterisks & their delusional fans gonna cry cause they feel they’re being “cheated” Ahahahahaha!!
Being the second best team, better than all others but one is “in the trash can”? Yeesh.
Yep, may favorite team, the Cardinals were a playoff team but failed to finish as good as the Astros. I’d be happier with a trip to the World Series as opposed to a Wild Card loss.
look… let’s not bring up the cardinals in a conversation about revenue sharing – it is a joke that the cardinals are considered a small market team
I think he was making a broader point about compensation picks as opposed to the Astros and their cheating scandal.
@Cosmo: “If you’re not first, you’re last”.
– Ricky Bobby’s Daddy
Gotham, it’s not crying when cheaters have benefitted. As a Sox fan, I’ve made it clear that I don’t want Papi in the HOF because I believe he cheated and hurt those who played without PEDs. Cheating is fraud and with sports betting now so prevalent, it won’t shock me to finally see a district attorney go after players or teams that cheat.
Baltimore too. Why are the Orioles in it where’s Washington is not? Same marketm
dewey – We have discussed this many times but I don’t think I have ever asked you this. If I could prove to you that the steroids had NO IMPACT on Papi’s or any other player’s numbers would you vote for Papi to be in the HOF based on his accomplishments?
Also, guys like Ricky Henderson got in and he took steroids along with many other players in the HOF. What would you do if you were commissioner to correct the wrongfully admitted players based on banning anyone who took steroids (whether they helped them or not).?
You can’t prove what isn’t correct, CAPS or not.
@mister guy – St. Louis is a small market. They shouldn’t be punished for doing a great job of marketing the team to a fanbase over a large region.
mrmackey = Yes I can. The numbers don’t lie.
What is your expectation of a player taking steroids? Is it a higher number of home runs because the idiot commissioner Selig commissioned a bunch of scientist to calculate what extra muscle mass would do to the distance fly balls were hit?
You simply need to look up the HRS/GAME/YEAR since 1871 to 2021 to see that growth in Home Runs has no correlation to steroids or the steroid era. Then, go back and correlate the home runs to the juice in the baseball and you will see that most home run hitters have a high correlation between the home runs hit in a season and the juice in the baseball. I did an extensive analysis comparing Bonds and Aaron and it proved that Aaron came in during a highly juiced ball era and ended at time when the ball juice level was low. Bonds came in during a low period for juice in the ball and ended during the highest period in history. Blame the ball for Bonds beating Aaron not steroids.
So, you can complain about guys taking steroids as an attempt to cheat but there is absolutely no conclusive documentation that the cheating led to more home runs. On the other hand, you can correlate the juice in the baseball to the prolific jumps in HRs during the 1920s, 1950s, 1990s and late 2010s.
Like it or not steroids were not why the rise in home runs happened in the 90s any more than some other excuse would explain the changes in the 1920s, 1950s or late 2010s.
That’s called conclusive PROOF. No growth in HRS/GAME/YEAR during the steroid era suggests that when more and more users took steroids there was no corresponding jump in HRs. That is conclusive evidence contradicting the myth the media created to discredit an entire generation of ball players about to surpass the legends of the previous generation. It was a hoax generated by Congress based on bad information and perpetuated by a commissioner wanting to become a legend. Selig didn’t save baseball, he ruined the credibility of an entire generation. He should have been banned from baseball for his selfish actions. Saving baseball will probably be written on his tombstone he wanted it so badly at any cost. This is the same guy that approved of steroids being used by his Milwaukee Brewer players when he was the owner!.
You may not like the stat facts that prove exactly what I stated but they are the facts.
The Braves have a history of loose ethics themselves.
They lost 14 prospects and had an executive permanently banned for their cheating scandal in 2015. Astros, Yankees and Red Sox combined to only lose 5 picks and a few suspensions for their 2017-2018 cheating.
@mr. The difference is it was a Braves GM who like you mentioned was permanently banned and rightfully so. The Braves paid deeply for it even losing Kevin Maitan who at the time was a huge prospect but now looks like a bust (ironically it was Maitan the Braves GM at the the time was doing underhanded things with like furnishing Maitan a apartment). By many accounts it seems many teams at the time were using shady recruiting methods, it seems the Braves were the scapegoat. You are comparing what a disgraced GM did to what actual MLB players did.
Weird you throw in “by many accounts it seems many times at the time were using shady recruiting methods, it seems the Braves were the scapegoat.” You realize that’s the exact argument many Astros fans use when idiots bring up the Astros cheating? It’s a copycat league and if something was working the majority of the league was doing it, whether it is PEDs, illegals sign stealing, or illegal amateur signings. Neither team was alone in what they got caught doing and very likely both were doing what the other was caught doing, too.
@jj. Did you miss the part where I said the previous Braves GM was permanently banned and rightfully so? I am a avid MLB baseball fan for over 30 years and I do lots of research baseball stuff wise. Feel free to believe the Braves GM was the only guy doing that type of stuff. Fact is the Braves GM got caught cheating the system and the Braves paid massively for it.
Springer was quick to Jump out of it !
The entire system is a competitive imbalance joke. The wealthier teams have much longer competitive windows than the less wealthy. Of course the Dodgers go far every year.
Only sports is set up where a company/team has to provide assistance to it’s competitors. Nowhere else in this country does this asinine way exist for good reason.
Can’t make it on their own? Fold, or go out of biz. it’s easy.
Johnsilver, the entire income tax system is set up this way. I’m not saying it is the correct way, but it clearly does exist in this country in places other than sports
MLBPA would never let any team go
Out of business. To lose membership? Cut the total revenue of money paid to mlb players ? It is the recipe for the rich get richer. They are all making money. Competitive sports need the lesser of their brethren around, or you would get the Harlem Globetrotters.
When you are a team in a sports league, your revenue is dependent upon there being opponents to play. It makes sense that some of your revenue is shared with the opposing teams. How to allocate that revenue, along with league revenues–is up to each league. This isn’t a free market. Different economic principles apply. It’s a cartel that must compete against other cartels (other sports leagues) as well as other forms of entertainment.
WHeltzman, Company was what I posted. Government and Lincoln’s “supposedly” temporary “war tax” that was supposed to end after hostilities ended in the War between the States is yet another example of why we DO NOT EVER give the government more money. They NEVER cease taking it.
Johnsilver, other teams are really only competitors on the field, otherwise it is all one industry with each team depending on the other. How you can fail to realize that these teams are not competing entities the way, say Coke and Pepsi are is beyond me. You are comparing apples to bowling balls here.
“entire tax system . . .” Is it? Jeff Bezos paid $873 in taxes in 2018. Find a better analogy.
The top 5% also own over 90% of the wealth built off the backs of the lower 50%. They should get taxed more. Hell, even some of the richest people in the world agree with this.
“They” are us.
@johnsilver it’s more complex than that. It’s not that many of those teams couldn’t be profitable. It’s that the super profitable teams need the others to even have a league. And the smaller teams need a fan base, which would be difficult if the Dodgers, Yankees, Red Sox, Giants, Cubs always had the resources to spend $300MM on payroll and the Twins, Royals, Guardian, Reds couldn’t come close.
Can’t make it on their own? Fold, or go out of biz. it’s easy.
============================================
You have to think of the leagues as a single company, with 30 different outlets. The NYY and RS wouldn’t last long if they didn’t have 330M people watching their games. Home team fans will only take you so far.
Joebrady: So you think 28 teams would go out of business if they stopped profit distribution? Most teams make money. Its the 6 or so teams that are constantly not trying to improve themselves, These same teams take money, each year. Teams like the Orioles and Mets are always trying to improve, but make poor decisions. Teams like the Pirates, Marlins and (until recently) Padres, are farm systems, just waiting around for their yearly welfare check.
The league would be better off reduce to 24 teams. Talent would greatly improve through consolidation, and would stop the desparity.
Well, that’s about the dumbest thing I’ve read. Other sports and businesses see expansion as the way to profitability, but you want to contract, therefore cutting tv and gate revenues while also pissing off millions of fans. That’s a winning formula if I’ve ever seen it. And they wonder why mlb is starting to be a third tier sport. Look out nhl…here we come!
Major League Baseball and its teams are partners. Their competitors are not each other, but other sports and concerts and shows whose seasons overlap, and strive to take the entertainment dollar of the baseball fan. If the smaller markets aren’t successful, NY and LA wont be successful. They would have fewer team to play. How much revenue NY and LA take in is much more about location than how well they run their franchise. And they are just that, Franchises. If MLB did not limit how many teams could be in a market, you can bet that there would be a half dozen NY teams vying for that cities dollars. Then we would really see who would go out of business.
Redmatt: Do you seriously think MLB isn’t in third place behind NFL and NBA. No thats the “dumbest thing” ever said. Get with the times. MLB is already behind, so contraction would have nothing to do with it, because its already happening. Besides would many people be upset if the Marlin vs. Pittsburgh series was eliminated (outside of those two towns).
“cutting gate revenue” What are you talking about. The teams that would be removed would be the teams that are losing money. So if the rest of the league has to give them money at the end of the year, how is any revenue from their gates helping the other teams.
National TV contracts would need to be worked accordingly, but clearly the teams we’re considering are the least interesting teams in the league. ESPN isn’t going to be hurt if the Sunday night game wasn’t Yankees vs Royals.
Not in the U.S. Billionaires pay little in taxes. Billionaires got stimulus checks.
Nonsense. MLB will be less competitive if the A’s, Rays, and Marlins don’t relocate or fold. Revenue sharing is wrong. The A’s, Marlins, and Rays should compete on their own without money from other teams.
Not one rich person agrees with this. They help write the laws, which always leave loopholes for themselves, so they can’t virtue signal. Don’t think for a second that a rich person is like us.
If those teams fold there will be 4 less teams. Revenue sharing us needed to keep the whole industry afloat.
This sentence makes little to no sense. You may want to rewrite it.
johnsilver – HL Mencken had you in mind when he said… “There is always an easy solution to every human problem—neat plausible and wrong.”
Who needs a league? The Yankees could play themselves and Yankee fans would be happy. Same for Red Sox fans, and as we all know, baseball is all about the Yankees and Red Sox.
“MLBPA would never let any team go
Out of business.”
Being the Major League Baseball Players Association, the MLBPA have 0 involvement/power re: Team revenue/solvency.
“To lose membership?”
If a team you are on folds, you remain a major league baseball player. A team “going out of business” would have no effect on player membership in the MLBPA.
Cut the total revenue of money paid to mlb players ?
What?
” It is the recipe for the rich get richer. ”
Revenue sharing is the recipe for the rich get richer?
“They are all making money. ”
With no proper noun, hard to agree/disagree.
“Competitive sports need the lesser of their brethren around, or you would get the Harlem Globetrotters.”
Oh sweet, this actually approaches making sense/reflecting reality, especially if you assume “lesser brethren” means “small market teams.”
NFL shares revenue and small markets can thrive. In the NFL, teams do well when they are well managed. Market size has no baring on success and failure. One only has to look at the New York teams for proof of that. When the Dodgers get the benefits of over $200M in local TV money and other teams get in the 20 – 50M range, baseball is broken.
No teams are losing money. Not one.
The national television deals pay every team nearly $100M ($91M in 2018 and the deals have only gotten bigger), and the revenue shared between all teams for local television (every team kicks 48% of their local tv revenue into a pot and split it evenly) is more than that.
Before a single fan shows up at the gate, every team has greater than $200M in revenue. Only a couple teams have payrolls greater than that, and they’re huge markets.
No MLB team is losing money.
Billy Beane of the A’s said it best: MLB is punishing the wrong teams. What they should do is punish teams that tank by not rewarding them with draft picks, etc. When they start doing that, teams will actually try to win.
dennyd
Teams like the Pirates, Marlins and (until recently) Padres, are farm systems, just waiting around for their yearly welfare check.
================================================
The Marlins have been an issue, but I am willing to give Jeter some time to have the changes take effect.
The Pirates maybe, and of course, the Padres are #2 in spending now.
I have no issues with small market teams. As you mention, I don’t think it is the fact that they don’t want to improve as much as some teams are poorly run. The Angels, the NYMs, the Rockheads have been poorly run. The Orioles, Tigers, and Pirates are still recovering from previously poorly run FOs.
@no major league team is losing money.
I don’t have the information necessary to agree or disagree with that “opinion?” The payroll numbers are available. How much did it cost the Florida Marlins to operate their stadium? How much did Pittsburgh have to pay for insurance on their facilities? How much did TB pay for airflights, hotels, and other transportation? How much did Baltimore pay to operate their farm teams? How much did Cleveland pay for their scouting dept? How much did Cincinnati pay in employee benefits? How much did Milwaukee pay their other employees? How much money did KC pay for advertising? How much did Detroit spend on stadium upgrades? What did Colorado spend to operate their spring training complex?
Help me with these questions and I will decide if I agree with you.
Nobody outside of these organizations really knows for sure, because franchise revenues and profits are completely private. Meanwhile player salaries are completely public (just try to explain that). Anyway money-losing businesses are headed for that little thing called bankruptcy, and it can’t be kept a secret, so that’s when we know a team’s financial condition for a fact. And we all know how that worked out the last time it happened, so I don’t see how any pleas of poverty coming team owners can be greeted by anything but guffaws.
Tampa Bay Rays: Hold my beer.
I have as many WS rings as the Rays do
And Rockies mariners and rangers for that matter
Yeah but unlike you, the Rays don’t live in the basement.
Dodgers go far every year because they are the best drafting team in baseball
With the most lucrative TV deal in professional sports.
The TV deal didn’t make 23 teams pass on Walker Buehler
Amm1920, you’re wrong. When Kershaw gets to free agency the Dodgers re-sign him. When a star on a low revenue team has such a free agent they likely lose him and insert a rookie. The Dodgers instead keep the talent and trade such a rookie for more talent, oftentimes from a lower revenue team. A vicious cycle. The system is broken and causes a competitive imbalance. You really think Jeter would have spent his entire career with the Pirates?
I like al conin
Disagree. If you look at the roster construction of past years a huge part of the Dodgers success is due to the younger players developed at the farm (Bellinger, Seager, Buehler, Urias, May, etc.) and failed projects from other teams that have been acquired like Muncy, J Turner, C Taylor. Those players produced at a much higher rate than they were paid. No matter how rich a team is you always need to blend in much cheaper talent to field a WS team. The Dodgers weren’t able to find those cheaper players last year and my guess is that the overall talent level will trend down if they can’t find those type of players going forward. As these younger players hit the free agent market you can only keep a fraction of those players.
This is the same for most teams, not sure how this is unfair for the Astros. They were less than $1M away from the luxury tax, so it’s not like they’re unduly punished.
Of the 7 currently listed, only 2 would draw the highest picks, Castellanos and Story for the Reds and Rockies, respectively.
In any event, the only people feeling sorry for the Astros will be Astros fans. Most everyone else won’t cry like this when they face the same situation most teams face and have to follow the rules.
It’s not about punishing revenue sharing payor teams…. it’s that they’re giving something extra to the teams in the smlest markets.
Glass half empty or half full sort of deal.
You’re the kind of guy I think you might complain wild card teams play one game series. Saying their playoffs are unfairly short.
I look at it like the NCAA tourney, you gotta play to get in as the final seeds.
The 4th and 5th best teams in each league get a one game play-in to decide who represents in the wildcard slot of the divisional series is my view.
It’s all how you choose to look at it.
Keep the one game series, but do away with divisions and base seeding on record.
Keep divisions. Basing it solely on record takes away a lot of intrigue. There’s no way to make it all completely “fair” anyway so keep the excitement of divisional rivals going.
Idiot.
Expand to 32 teams. Go to four 4-team divisions per league. Do away with inter-league play. Balance the schedules so that everyone plays everyone outside their division an equal number of times.
@bham. While I usually agree with most you post (except politically) I personally believe contraction would be more beneficial. The talent is already diluted at the MLB level and has been for years. Expansion would only mean 50 more guys playing at the MLB level that in reality are only AAA level talent players. I myself like competition and bringing on yet more teams will do the opposite. There already are 3-4 teams with almost no fan base. MLB would be wise to relocate at least a couple of those to areas they will get higher fan bases to show up which means more revenue which leads to better players.
No one will offer more than $180m
Cry me a river, they drafted him where they did by purposely losing and tainting the draft system to begin with.
How did they taint the system? And most of the league rebuilds at one point. Rebuilding is losing on purpose.
Rebuilding is not losing on purpose. Not even close. It’s a plan that acknowledges the future is more important than the present due to the unlikelihood of competing in the now, so current assets are sold off for future ones. Talent is sacrificed now in order to increase the talent potential in the future. Intentionally losing has nothing to do with it.
What do you think they are doing when they get rid of their major league talent? They aren’t trying to win.
South Park Guy: Yes, that’s precisely why this system of major markets supporting the smaller markets, so they can win, is stupid.
Why should they get anything? He’s a “free agent”.
Here’s a gamesmanship question…
Jd Martinez has until 5pm to opt out of his deal via declining his option…
But qualifying offers must be tendered also by, you guessed it, 5pm.
If boras chooses to wait to submit JDMs election to opt out until, say, 4:59pm EST, it would be a logical impossibility for the red sox to communicate a QO in time.
Likewise. A preemptive tag by Boston would be invalidated because JDM wasn’t a free agent yet, and thus, not eligible yet to be tagged, right?
So, effectively, can’t JDM play the game in a way that prevents himself from being saddled with the QO?
You make a fair point. Dick move? Yes. But logically makes sense
Did JD receive a QO his last time they free agency?? I imagine he would have. He’d be ineligible. Not trolling. Genuinely curious.
Brerpo4;
JD Martinez was traded mid season last time Tigers to Diamondbacks so he wasn’t eligible for a qualify offer.
The 5PM question is a good one, that’s the type of question I’d like to see asked in the chats.
@fever pitch, maybe @mark polishuk will see this and chime in with an update to the article of he has any insight.
I don’t make it into the chats much these days, not a ton of time when they happen. For a while I wasn’t even on the board much, things get busy for a few months at a time for me unfortunately. Get spread thin and need to prioritize.
But you know, if there isn’t something buried somewhere preventing it, maybe it’s a move players like JDM need to make this year to throw a little fuel on the negotiating fire of the CBA talks…. I’m trying to think who else might be in a similar situation, he’s just the guy who comes to mind especially since boras reps him.
@FPG The writers would rather answer questions about who Texas’ backup third baseman next year will be. Hardly anything of substance goes on in those chats
Not sure what chats you’re reading, but I’ve found them fairly informative.
Found Steve Adams’ burner account. Interestingly, rondon muted me based off of that one comment. SAD!
Cmon Fletch. How about the ketchup or no ketchup on ballpark hotdogs or pancakes versus waffles questions?
Is a hot dog a sandwich?
And the one time someone asks a legit question the writer just posts a Simpsons gif and moves on
I think it’s possible that JDM’s contract allows for something like the Red Sox automatically have the QO in place as soon as he opts out if it goes that late. Probably a clause where they can say at any time after he signed the opt out immediately results in a QO by default. So he would be agreeing to a QO if he opted out. These teams have really good attorneys so my guess is they made sure they couldn’t be outsmarted that way. Great point though. I love thinking about stuff like that just to see what happens. I hope they didn’t have that clause in and that exact same thing happens just so we could see how it would work out. Better yet… Screw 4:59. Make it 4:59:59. If they don’t have it accounted for let’s see them work it out in 1 second, not 1 minute.
I gotta talk to you more @GASoxFan. This is my kind of conversation and my kind of questions. There are loopholes everywhere and I love finding out exactly where they are.
Loopholes are the spice of life.
@Mets Missed WAR – The reason I think it may have been a missed contingency in the contract is in a bit of history…. the fact the opt outs were a give and take add-on into his contract after physical concerns… it was the something they lined up from the get go.
Back in the day Boston started with a term of years, no options, no opt outs. After they decided there were questions related to foot issues in the past Boston asked to switch from guaranteed years to having am ability to opt out for the later term of the deal given certain circumstances were met
Boras came back with the idea that ok, they would agree, but in exchange for Boston having the right to opt out of later years of the contract should JD miss significant time due to complications from the prior injury issues, JD gained opt out rights on a yearly basis for the last few years of the deal as well.
When you add all that up… it really wouldn’t surprise me if the idea of an auto-vesting QO didn’t come up – particularly because Boston might not want the QO to go out based on triggering penalties.
Think about it like this. The CBT itself says if you’re a multi-year offender you actually drop draft pick compensation you receive for any QO you make, and even lose draft picks in the rule 4 plus intl bonus money.
Now, think about FA players Boston has had during JDMs tenure. If JD opted out, and an auto QO went in place that forced Boston to be a third year payor in the year leading up to guys becoming FAs, then Boston could’ve lost a draft pick, lost intl signing money, and wound up with 5th rd comp picks instead of 2nd round for guys headed to free agency the year after JDM would opt out…. such as the known Mookie Betts, JBJ, and others having FA years coming in years that followed chances JDM had to opt out
All those penalties outweigh the return a jdm QO might have brought, should he opt out then accept the offer after all once gauging the market a few weeks.
So, for all those reasons, no, I don’t think JDm would have a clause triggering an auto-QO being issued
Very interesting. I meant it more from a paperwork standpoint. As in the Red Sox would be able to choose at any time what they prefer to happen in the future in either circumstance and just had to file the correct paperwork with JD’s attorneys. That way they could have decided a few days or weeks ago to have that auto QO put in place if he opts and and until he does opt out they still have the right to revoke that auto-QO. My guess is that before the opt out occurs the Red Sox have something in place where they preemptively get to choose but that choice doesn’t have to be fixed until he decides to opt out. Great point though. My guess is I am correct and it won’t be an issue at all even if JD pushes it to the last second. That’s just because I know how attorneys are and they always plan for the future to an obsessive extent when it comes to contracts. I hope you are right though. I would love to see that play out. Like the Red Sox want to QO him but they just run out of time. That would be great to watch.
@Mets – you’ve got a good number of thoughts rolling in my brain, but I’m afraid they may prove boring and excessive in length to many here.
If you don’t mind my asking, have you previously worked in any depth with attorneys/the legal field? Then I wouldn’t worry about throwing around terms of art, otherwise I might explain a few thought in more or less depth – should you be interested in some back and forth.
I will say this though to start lest I forget.. if the CBA dictates a time and manner in which notices and QOs must be issued, I’m not sure it allows teams to dictate changes to the collectively bargained provisions in individual contracts. I can think of a variety of reasons ranging from consistency, grievances, preservation of the CBA and having it not be carved apart without consent of the union, etc etc… I’d assume there’s a CBA provision about dominance in governing mlb operations, much like federal laws are deemed to supercede state laws except in areas explicitly reserved to said states.
If this JD question is a loophole, and he’s allowed to escape QO, then Red Sox got tooled in negotiations. They should’ve seen this during talks, and required him to make his decision an hour earlier. More likely, the contract spells this exact scenario out, and league is on board with QO if he opts out.
The RS could send in their decision right now. “If JD opts out, we QO him.”
Interesting concept. But I have to believe there is no way in Hell JDM enters free agency this offseason without a QO attached to him.
The league will accept transactions past 5.
I’m guessing they can conditionally offer Martinez a qualifying offer and MLB would support it.
I’d also suspect that Boras knows Boston’s decision already.
If you could get around the QO that way every agent would wait to submit to the final second and QO’s wouldn’t work with players that have options.
I think there is a system setup for this exact scenario or someone like Boras would be all over this. One of two things would happen either Boston would be given five days after to offer a qualifying offer or they can make the QO before the deadline and if he did opt out he would have QO attached one way or another you can’t game the system. It doesn’t matter in this case JD opted in.
It’s an interesting question but perhaps the Red Sox can make a conditional QO – make an offer that would apply only in the event that Martinez opts out. If Martinez doesn’t opt out, the condition isn’t satisfied; if he does opt out, the QO would be effective.
As a general rule of contracts, there’s no reason why that wouldn’t be valid – although it’s possible that there may be some special rules for QOs that would apply instead.
Ltully, your idea popped up while I was typing to @Mets Missing War above… and given how threads work, I’ll drop an idea here too I basically said there.
I think the problem is the CBA should allow any kind of unilateral changes to be voidable, if not void, at the request of the moving party to the extent a provision runs contrary to a collectively bargained provision that specifies a date, time, and manner in which the QO has to be presented.
Now, im saying that not knowing exactly what all the different related parts of the CBA covers on that point beyond the basics we all know as to when value is set and the last day an offer can be made.
But, it’s the same idea of how a state or town can’t rewrite laws of the US federal govt, a team, or a player, likely can’t decide to expand upon or override the framework for manner and time things that were collectively bargained in the CBA have to be done within.
Otherwise the teams and players could just slice and dice away in patchwork contracgs and leave a bigger mess than we already get to see work as it is, sometimes forcibly so.
GA: No clue what your saying. Your not talking to lawyers. ‘unilateral changes to be voidable’ ‘moving party to the extent a provision runs contrary’. Learn normal speak. First, present your point clearly, in layman’s terms. Which is when we’ll all stop reading. Then you can go nuts with your lawyer speak.
all this could change, depending on next cba
The two Mets players on this list should accept the QO, bet on themselves. The rest should reject the offer…
I kinda feel for the Blue Jays. They get career years out of some players but that’s not enough to put them over the top.
Then there’s the fact that they probably can’t resign those players (Ray and Semien) because bigger money teams will likely offer more.
And they’re in the toughest division.
“in order to guarantee themselves some financial and contractual security prior to a possible lockout.” LMMFAO!
Like any of those players aren’t secure financially for generations already…
Why are players like Freeman and Correa ineligible to receive QOs?
I think Freeman and Correa are both eligible to receive a QO but they’re still in negotiations with their teams so aren’t yet on this list. If they don’t work out an extension today they’ll get a QO.
Both have been offered one, its in the article.
It’s been updated since the question was asked.
NYM are so dumb.
Can the Mets get anyone better that Conforto for 18.9 M? Thor probably takes it for one year.
i dont think Thor is worth it either. you can find better players for less in this market.
Like who? Lol
@mlbnyyfan Starling Marte, call up Veintos/Baty/Lee, trade for an outfielder like Buxton/Marte, or sign Joc/Rosario, moving nimmo/mcneil to left is also an option
What’s the deadline for offering a QO? There are obviously names from that list still.
Never mind. It was in the article. It’s today.
Interesting that Houston has yet to offer the QO to Correa. Seems like they’d have already done it, regardless of the contact offer status.
Pure guess is that Boras and Bloom have already spoken, and that JD agrees to opt out in exchange for Bloom not offering a QO.
Why would the RS want that? Is he not wanted back?
Not allowed.
And JD already decided against opting out anyway.
Conforto would be crazy not to take it. He’s like a journeyman type OF, every day player good for 2-3 WAR in a mostly healthy season. What a mistake a franchise would be making giving him a long deal or 100M+
You don’t understand what a journeyman player is.
Wow, the Dodgers didn’t offer anything to Chris Taylor?
@ja. Chris Taylor is a good player and they got very lucky in heisting him from Dipoto and the Mariners in a trade. I don’t think he’s worth the 18.4 million qualifying offer (he would probably accept). He will probably do okay in free agency and I expect him to sign a multi year contract to stay with the Dodgers.
I think you’re on the money re Taylor. Seager was offered because they know he’ll turn it down.
I don’t think he signs a multi year with the Dodgers– they don’t have to. They’d rather overpay him by 3-5MM for a prime season then be locked in for 4-years. If someone gives him that type of deal they’ll take the pick and use the money to replace him… they’re smarter than the average bear.
You’re overlooking one, big thing: it isn’t up to the Dodgers whether Taylor takes the one year, it’s completely up to the player. If he’s looking for multiple years (and no question he is) he’d turn down the QO. So very fair chance if the Dodgers really want to retain him, they will have to offer 3-4 years. I believe they will, or my name isn’t Otis Criblecoblis.
The Dodgers did extend a QO to Taylor
@itully. It appears so evidently the post just got edited. I would expect Chris Taylor to take it.
I think the market for Taylor will be strong. The QO tag will depress it somewhat but there will be a handful of teams willing to go hard after him.
Yup. Taylor was a lock to get one, and no, I don’t think he takes it. The surprise omission from this list is Kershaw. My guess is he and the Dodgers already have something worked out.
Waited until late in the game I guess.
No Jon Gray?
No Iglesias?
If you mean rasiel on the angels, they just offered him a qo. Should. Have extended him..
They trying to extend to him, but if they can’t they’ll come away with an extra pick– a pick they’ll most likely need to replace the one they’ll lose signing a free agent.
Conforto a QA, seriously? Mets issues run deep
It’s the right move. Very good player, one off year, gets on base. Many if not most agree with the move, no issues here.
No Gray and no Rodon. They and their agents are thrilled.
White Sox were not going to promise Rodon that much money. They’re not even sure that his late season arm problems were temporary. Had he stayed healthy, maybe. Still, I’m sure Boras is happy.
They just spent nearly that much money for a reliever who pitched fairly poorly as their 8th-inning guy. A year of Rodon at $18 million makes more sense than a year of Kimbrell at $16 million.
Yeah, I’ll agree that was a head scratcher. They say they want to flip him, but I can’t see other teams wanting to give him $16M, AND give up talent too. Still, two wrongs wouldn’t make a right, and giving Rodon $18M would be a huge gamble that I wouldn’t think it wise to take.
I actually don’t think a one-year commitment to Rodon is that big a gamble but it’s a moot point now.
Belt had a good year but that guy is NOT worth signing. Injuries and history just shows he is mediocre at best.
His production over the last two seasons is hardly “mediocre.” Given the Giants’ strong financial situation, a QO to Belt was an easy decision.
Ahahaha….mediocre at best? History shows a gold glove caliber first baseman, and great numbers over the last two and even through his injuries still contributed to 2 rings.
Imagine wanting to leave your job, to work for another company. Then imagine your new job being told they would owe compensation to the old one. You’d be less likely to get hired, and you’d hate it. So it’s not true free agency right now, and I bet it comes up in the impending CBA negotiations.
I completely agree with you, but the owners have used the QO as a way to distract MLBPA from more important issues like service time, major league minimums, CBT levels, drafting, etc. If the best they get out out of the new CBA are some small changes in the QO, the owners will do handstands.
MLB teams have full control over players for six years and they have those players at below-market prices. There should be no compensation attached once they are free agents.
I think this is the first time the Angels have ever extended a QO. I still can’t stand that system.
Hard to extend QOs when your team is built off of FAs
Plus the only year they’ve been in the race since the QO system was instituted was 2017 so most of their pending FA’s with value probably get traded instead.
That’s the problem. Why do teams like the Dodgers constantly come away with extra picks? They don’t fall in love with players– they’re pragmatic.
Erod, Verlander, and Syndergaard to me are the most likely to accept. Conforto and Belt should probably seriously consider accepting the offer as both could be hampered by the QO attachment
Agreed. Rodriguez, Verlander, Thor and Conforto were the 4 who jumped out as the most likely to accept. If I were betting, I’d also wager that Belt will accept.
Seems to me that other than the “elite ” players, the QO prevents some from getting decent offers. I really expect the MLBPA to try to put a massive dent in it, if not eliminate it.
Coming off TJ, I can’t imagine Verlander not taking it. Belt must know he’s worth more to SF than anyone else because they’ve learned to live with his inevitable injuries, so he accepts. Conforto should jump all over it because he had a horrific walk year. Syndergaard should take it to build his value in 2022. There will be some surprises this month.
Very smart move by the Dodgers on Chris Taylor. If they keep him they are willing to overpay for a prime year and not be locked in long term. If another team wants to give him a long term deal they come away with a draft pick– they win either way.
I don’t see how Taylor can pass that up. He’ll never make that in any year going forward. This is his big payday.
I can. His value is high right now. What if he accepts, and has a bad year? He’s then one year older with a lower platform season. Players highly value security. It’s why you can sign a guy to a lower AAV with extra years. Players will turn down 1/$18.4M for something like 4./$48-$60M. If Taylor thinks he can get a 4 0r 5 year deal, and his agent should know before he has to decide, I think he could decline it.
But I wouldn’t be surprised if he did accept it. It’s a tough decision. It’s not a sure thing, I don’t think.
He passes it up if someone gives him 3 for $45MM– and someone could.
Exactly right…Taylor gets $15m/year for three to four years…
I think he could get something like 4/60. The Giants, Phillies and White Sox are logical suitors, as well as LA.
Belt, conforto, rodriguez, noah, taylor, and verlander are head scratchers for me.
At least you’re busy
Sentimentality, I was hoping JV would end up with the Tigers. I can’t believe Astros qualified a 38 year old pitcher contiguous TJ surgery. I guess they are betting on his hard work to pay off
If I’m Noah Syndergaard I’m definitely taking that QO, because with his history of injuries idk that any team will really pony up anything higher than a 1 yr 10-15mil. Maybe someone will give him team option or a mutual option for a second year or something like that to “sweeten” the deal, but I honestly cannot see him getting anything better value-wise than the QO the Mets will give him.
Maaaaybe a team like the Blue Jays, Phillies, White Sox, Red Sox, Dodgers, or Yankees just offer him a straight up 2 yr deal for 30 or even go 3/45, but I see that as highly unlikely given his last injury history.
Also, I think, if Noah feels he’s healthy, he may just want the 1 yr deal to stay where he’s comfortable, and he believes he can rebuild his value and re-enter the market next season looking for a big payday. Thats the case, especially with the new CBA needing to get reworked here soon.
Yankees should try to get most of those.
I see 3 guys that should take these deals right? Or at least 1 with 2 that should strongly consider it. Rodriguez is the obvious, you take it. I’d think Noah prob falls into that same category being young and coming off an injury, but maybe not. Then verlander is the wild card. At his age and coming off an injury, seems like a no brainer… but he’s been legit for a while and still might be able to command more. Idk
Why is Verlander getting a QO when he hasn’t played for 2 seasons.
I hope the next CBA gets rid of the QO. It’s a drag on fair free agency and overly complicated to boot.
Some team is gonna offer Freddie Freeman a whole lot of cheese. Could you see him playing in the Bronx with the short fence in right? Freddie loves the Braves and the Braves love Freddie, but the Braves aren’t gonna pony up $300 million. Don’t know if any other team will, but if one does, what will Freddie do?
Lastly, and my apologies to those of you in OC land. The Angels offered Iglesius a QO? If there’s one thing a losing team doesn’t need it’s a veteran closer. Most consider a losing team rostering a veteran closer for big bucks as being unwise. However, “Unwise” is an apt descriptor for the Angels. You Angel fans ought to pray Artie sells the team. Ain’t ever gonna win with him calling the shots. Truth be told, I think they offered Iglesius the QO in hopes he’d reject it and then they could pick up an extra draft pick when he signed elsewhere.
However, like most decisions the Angels make, this could blow up in their face if Iglesius accepts the $18.4 million. Hey, I would not be shocked if he did. That’s a whole lotta money and a nice payday while he waits to become a FA again next year.
No team will need to offer $300M for Freeman. Look for the Paul Goldschmidt contract as a comp. 5/130.
Eduardo Rodriguez should take the Red Sox up on their $18 million QO, He’s not gonna get that AAV anywhere else, or maybe he will