PDA

View Full Version : Sign and Trade


pearso66
02-17-2009, 11:06 AM
I didn't see anything here, possibly it was in another thread that I missed, but it seems like people are pushing for the MLB to allow sign and trades to get Type A free agents jobs. I found it on MLBtraderumors so take it for what it's worth, there are a couple of links with it but here's where I saw it. http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2009/02/mlb-to-lend-a-h.html

Anyway, my question is, if a team is unwilling to sign a type A because they don't want to give up a 1st or even 2nd round draft pick, why would they trade anything of value, or a player or 2 with professional baseball experience for these players. On the other side, if the team receiving the type A via trade isn't giving up anything of value, why would the original team even care if their free agent isn't signed? I didn't read the whole articles, but it seems like a poorly thought out idea to me.

CashMan
02-17-2009, 11:13 AM
I think you would have to work in a cap, and work it like the NBA, where you do sign and trades for expiring contracts. But that will never happen with Selig at the helm.

oeo
02-17-2009, 11:19 AM
I think you would have to work in a cap, and work it like the NBA, where you do sign and trades for expiring contracts. But that will never happen with Selig at the helm.

Nor should it; a salary cap isn't needed. It's been proven that it's not how much you spend, but how you spend it.

anewman35
02-17-2009, 11:20 AM
Anyway, my question is, if a team is unwilling to sign a type A because they don't want to give up a 1st or even 2nd round draft pick, why would they trade anything of value, or a player or 2 with professional baseball experience for these players. On the other side, if the team receiving the type A via trade isn't giving up anything of value, why would the original team even care if their free agent isn't signed? I didn't read the whole articles, but it seems like a poorly thought out idea to me.

Well, a team might have some players they don't especially want, but the other team might. Like, let's say Oakland wanted Orlando Cabrara but didn't want to give up a draft pick. Under this scenario, maybe there's some pitcher they've mostly given up on, but Kenny likes him (a Matt Thornton type, say). That way, the A's get who they want, get rid of somebody they don't need, keep their draft pick, and the White Sox get something (which is better than nothing). Will it work? That remains to be seen.

Moses_Scurry
02-17-2009, 01:06 PM
Sign Cabrera and trade him for a signed Juan Cruz! Everybody wins!

[/Garth] It's almost TOO easy [/Garth]

russ99
02-17-2009, 02:24 PM
I didn't see anything here, possibly it was in another thread that I missed, but it seems like people are pushing for the MLB to allow sign and trades to get Type A free agents jobs. I found it on MLBtraderumors so take it for what it's worth, there are a couple of links with it but here's where I saw it. http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2009/02/mlb-to-lend-a-h.html

Anyway, my question is, if a team is unwilling to sign a type A because they don't want to give up a 1st or even 2nd round draft pick, why would they trade anything of value, or a player or 2 with professional baseball experience for these players. On the other side, if the team receiving the type A via trade isn't giving up anything of value, why would the original team even care if their free agent isn't signed? I didn't read the whole articles, but it seems like a poorly thought out idea to me.

Ain't gonna happen, that circumvents the CBA. If they want to change the draft pick compensation rules, they need to do that at the bargaining table, just like they did with removing the May 1 restriction for non-arb FA players re-signing with their original teams.

DSpivack
02-17-2009, 02:26 PM
I thought if you signed a free agent, you couldn't trade him until June 1?

Daver
02-17-2009, 02:33 PM
, just like they did with removing the May 1 restriction for non-arb FA players re-signing with their original teams.

When did they do this?

I thought if you signed a free agent, you couldn't trade him until June 1?

It's in June, I don't remember the exact date, and I don't have time to look it up right now.

spiffie
02-17-2009, 04:30 PM
When did they do this?

http://stlcardinals.scout.com/2/583281.html

This mentions it, and reading through the CBA I don't see any mention of the May 1 deadline anymore.

dickallen15
02-17-2009, 04:38 PM
When did they do this?



It's in June, I don't remember the exact date, and I don't have time to look it up right now.

Its June 15 that you can't trade them without their permission.

Daver
02-17-2009, 05:07 PM
http://stlcardinals.scout.com/2/583281.html

This mentions it, and reading through the CBA I don't see any mention of the May 1 deadline anymore.

Interesting, MLB actually did something that makes sense, quite a rarity.

russ99
02-18-2009, 02:21 PM
http://stlcardinals.scout.com/2/583281.html

This mentions it, and reading through the CBA I don't see any mention of the May 1 deadline anymore.

Last time the CBA was up for renegotiation, they removed the May 1st re-signing restriction for FA's who were not offered arbitration, or who refused arbitration.

I had a sneaking suspicion at the time it was due to Roger Clemens, because his annual holdouts for more cash would be longer and more protracted.

Lip Man 1
02-18-2009, 02:31 PM
Says Twins want Cruz and adjusting the rules may help them get him:

http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/news...=.jsp&c_id=mlb (http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20090218&content_id=3843216&vkey=news_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb)

Lip

chaerulez
02-18-2009, 03:02 PM
Ironic that sign and trade which was a way for teams to go around the cap in the NBA might become a thing in MLB where there is no cap, but because teams seem to be putting more value in draft picks.