southsider2k5

Could be, I seem to recall him doing something like that back in the day.

We are talking about something like $30 million per team in franchise fees. I am sure they are going to want to expand, which is why they are working so hard to get OAK and TB stadiums taken care of first.

I will be honest, seeing what the Mets are doing, I have no idea what the hell they are thinking, so who knows.

Say he hits .300/30/100 next year. He is a free agent after the 2019 season. If he hits .240/30/80 next year? Also a free agent. Keep in mind we are already going to be saving a spot for Eloy who will be up shortly after the start of the season. Avi can't play CF, so that position is immaterial to him. We are also chasing Bryce Harper. If that fails, we still have some evaluations to do on Delmonico and Palka. Past that, the Gonzalez/Robert/Adolfo group will have another year of experience in the minors to tell us if they could be ready for 2020. If we REALLY want Avi's services for 2020 and beyond, we can sign him as a free agent. Let someone else deal with all of the risk of 2019. If he really does blossom into a superstar that we want back long term in a year because we have no better options and it is time, offer him a free agent contract next year, the same as we would have if he had played for us in 2019. We've done the Avi experience for 5 years now. He hasn't earned a long term contract, or even one that is fitting of going to arbitration over. Non-tender him and move on.

Again, notice how that didn't happen. Notice how there are absolutely zero examples of it happening. But please, continue to pull irrelevant examples of not what is being discussed here.

Have you read this thread at all? Another poster said the Sox should offer him a contract that falls underneath where he would be protected at under the arbitration rules, and threaten to non-tender him if the didn't accept it.

Because a non-tender is OK under the labor agreement.

Games played by year 2013-72 MLB 47-MiLB 2014- 46 in Chi, 13 in AAA 2015-148 2016-120 2017-136 2018-93 For the record that is 33% of his years less than 100 games due to injuries, and one season of 140 games or more. 67% of seasons under 120 games.

Read the rest of the thread. This is someone's idea of how to negotiate. Also of note, with all of the players who are being DFA'd and non-tendered this week, there hasn't been a single one signed for more than 20% below their previous years salary. They are all being non-tendered or DFA'd. If this was really a thing, it would be happening all over MLB right now.

Threatening a player with non-tender if they don't accept a below market standards contract? You don't see how that could be an issue? All I have to say is I hope you guys have your lawyers paid up if this is how you do business.

They are the same intentional manipulation of the system. The system is set up the way it is set up by a labor agreement between the players and the teams. Any intentional manipulation of those terms can see a grievance filed. That is what happened there, and could very well happen here. There is a process in place which was agreed to by both sides. Attempts to get around those rules can and will cause problems.

Apparently it is his aldermadic office, and not his law office. https://wgntv.com/2018/11/29/federal-agents-raid-office-of-powerful-chicago-ald-ed-burke/?fbclid=IwAR3GrVed1stv7NOqmJry-IkwOIgdFsaVUABJ0EOZ1P7sy16IXrzgSPbWeFU

Witch hunt.

So why then did Bryant and Harper file grievances?

He can. And if the team goes into a negotiation with a thread to cut him if he doesn't sign a sub-arbitration contract, he has the protection of a labor union. Again, because of this you don't see players signing deals to the types of contracts which are being talked about here before the arbitration process takes place. They either offer them something in that ballpark, or they non-tender them and they become free agents. I have yet to see a single example of otherwise.

Here, straight from MLB. http://m.mlb.com/glossary/transactions/salary-arbitration

I get that you don't understand as I have explained it multiple times and you still keep coming up with examples that aren't applicable.

I spelled out the reason. Manipulation of the process is the issue. Trying to force someone to take less than what they are technically owed, without allowing them to become a free agent isn't in the spirit of the agreement, just like intentionally keeping someone down ONE more day than the service time allows for to get another year of control is violating the spirit of service time.

Again, unless it was 20% less than their previous year salary (not the projection), it isn't the same.

Kris Bryant and Bryce Harper for two. Obviously not the same thing related to the process, but the intentional manipulation of the process is exactly what is being talked about here, and it is what they fought.

Like who? It is one thing for MLBtraderumors to write it, but has it been done in practice and vetted? If it hasn't, that there is probably a pretty good reason for it. When you involve labor unions in these types of things, how you negotiate is incredibly important. If they find you weren't negotiating within the bounds of your contracts, that can cause all kinds of problems for management. Grievances are filed for exactly these types of negotiations if they feel the integrity of the deals is being violated.

That is actually the entire point. You either get the arbitration process or a contract that respsects it, or he gets to be a free agent.