PDA

View Full Version : Compensation Rules re: Declining Options


rdivaldi
11-18-2004, 10:52 AM
This was a point of discussion a couple of days ago, don't know if anywone came up with the definitive answer, but BA just posted the official ruling on such cases:

"There's a misconception apparently circulating on message boards everywhere that declining an option is the equivalent of non-tendering a player, and that a team that does so forfeits its right to free-agent compensation. That's not the case. A player whose option is declined is in the same situation as one whose contract runs out. He's a free agent whose former club will receive compensation if he meets the Type A/B/C requirements, is offered arbitration and signs elsewhere."

http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/columnists/askba.html

Ol' No. 2
11-18-2004, 10:56 AM
This was a point of discussion a couple of days ago, don't know if anywone came up with the definitive answer, but BA just posted the official ruling on such cases:

"There's a misconception apparently circulating on message boards everywhere that declining an option is the equivalent of non-tendering a player, and that a team that does so forfeits its right to free-agent compensation. That's not the case. A player whose option is declined is in the same situation as one whose contract runs out. He's a free agent whose former club will receive compensation if he meets the Type A/B/C requirements, is offered arbitration and signs elsewhere."

http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/columnists/askba.htmlSo BA is reading WSI?

rdivaldi
11-18-2004, 10:57 AM
So BA is reading WSI?
LOL! I thought the same thing when I read that....

southsider17
11-18-2004, 11:02 AM
So since Cleveland did not offer arbitration (last I heard) have they forfeited their chance at picks from the San Fran? :?:

rdivaldi
11-18-2004, 11:09 AM
So since Cleveland did not offer arbitration (last I heard) have they forfeited their chance at picks from the San Fran? :?:
Nope, they can still offer arbitration up to December 7th.

From the same article:

Vizquel is a Type A free agent, so the Indians will get the Giants' first-round pick (No. 22 overall) and a supplemental first-round pick after they officially offer him arbitration, a no-brainer because there's no way now that he can accept.

Ol' No. 2
11-18-2004, 11:09 AM
So since Cleveland did not offer arbitration (last I heard) have they forfeited their chance at picks from the San Fran? :?:They don't have to offer it. They automatically get the picks if their player signs elsewhere before Dec 7.

gosox41
11-18-2004, 12:19 PM
This was a point of discussion a couple of days ago, don't know if anywone came up with the definitive answer, but BA just posted the official ruling on such cases:

"There's a misconception apparently circulating on message boards everywhere that declining an option is the equivalent of non-tendering a player, and that a team that does so forfeits its right to free-agent compensation. That's not the case. A player whose option is declined is in the same situation as one whose contract runs out. He's a free agent whose former club will receive compensation if he meets the Type A/B/C requirements, is offered arbitration and signs elsewhere."

http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/columnists/askba.html
I thought that was the case. Luckily we don't lose any compensation on a guy like Vizquel.


Bob

rdivaldi
11-18-2004, 12:34 PM
I thought that was the case. Luckily we don't lose any compensation on a guy like Vizquel.


Bob
True.

One more thing to note is that we will NOT lose our first round draft pick if we sign a free agent due to the fact that our pick is within the first 15 picks. (#15 to be exact) So we will have a decent first round pick no matter what.

Jabroni
11-18-2004, 12:40 PM
Wow, interesting stuff. Good post! :thumbsup:

DrCrawdad
11-18-2004, 12:54 PM
So, what is the situation with Magglio, will the Sox get draft compensation for Magglio? I know this has no doubt been discussed here at WSI but I missed it. Can someone summarize the final answer?

rdivaldi
11-18-2004, 01:00 PM
So, what is the situation with Magglio, will the Sox get draft compensation for Magglio? I know this has no doubt been discussed here at WSI but I missed it. Can someone summarize the final answer?
In short, we have to offer Magglio salary arbitration by December 7th to get compensation.

Since Borass will not let anyone medically examine the soundness of Maggs' knee until December 10th, my guess is that we will not roll the dice. Thus, we won't get any compensation for Maggs unless someone decides to sign him beforehand.

Ol' No. 2
11-18-2004, 01:00 PM
So, what is the situation with Magglio, will the Sox get draft compensation for Magglio? I know this has no doubt been discussed here at WSI but I missed it. Can someone summarize the final answer?They will get draft compensation only if 1) someone signs him before Dec 7, or 2) they offer arbitration by Dec 7. Neither is likely to happen, IMO.

pearso66
11-18-2004, 08:12 PM
I dont know. I wouldnt be upset if the sox offered Maggs arbitration. If its a 1 year deal at 11.2 mil big deal, sure its a lot of money, but if he does come back great we have a good RFer again. If he declines it we get supplemental draft picks. If he honestly thinks he is healthy, then he will probably decline the option. I say give it to him, i cant see him being awarded more than 11.2 with an unknown injury

and if he does come back and turns out healthy, we can always try to resign him or trade him. I vote on #2 since he probably would want vlad money again

johnny_mostil
11-18-2004, 08:42 PM
In short, we have to offer Magglio salary arbitration by December 7th to get compensation.

Since Borass will not let anyone medically examine the soundness of Maggs' knee until December 10th, my guess is that we will not roll the dice. Thus, we won't get any compensation for Maggs unless someone decides to sign him beforehand.
... which is unethical and which the White Sox should insist calls for relief from MLB. It's called "buying a pig in a poke". Boras insists he's healthy; if I'm the GM of the White Sox I offer arbitration and press charges if he's not and I get stuck with him.

Rex Hudler
11-18-2004, 08:52 PM
So BA is reading WSI?
There's a misconception apparently circulating on message boards everywhere

That's pretty arrogant to think that only people on WSI were smart enough to discuss this. FWIW, I know of at least three message boards where this question came up.

Rex Hudler
11-18-2004, 08:59 PM
I dont know. I wouldnt be upset if the sox offered Maggs arbitration. If its a 1 year deal at 11.2 mil big deal, sure its a lot of money, but if he does come back great we have a good RFer again. If he declines it we get supplemental draft picks. If he honestly thinks he is healthy, then he will probably decline the option. I say give it to him, i cant see him being awarded more than 11.2 with an unknown injury

and if he does come back and turns out healthy, we can always try to resign him or trade him. I vote on #2 since he probably would want vlad money again
I don't think there is any way the Sox offer Maggs arbitration. Even though $11.2 million is the least Maggs could get, it is VERY unlikely that would be the Sox offer, because players rarely get docked because of an injury. The likelihood of an arbitrator awarding Maggs just $11.2 million is very small.

cleogogo
11-18-2004, 09:01 PM
I Agree, Offer Arbitration, If He's Good To Go We Will Know On Dec 10.
And Hopefully We Get A Healthy Maggs At A 1 Year Reduced Price. If He Signs Elsewhere So Be It. We Get Our Draft Picks. If He's Still Injured, Cry Fowl About Boras Misrepresenting The Goods. Get A Refund.

Rex Hudler
11-18-2004, 09:30 PM
I Agree, Offer Arbitration, If He's Good To Go We Will Know On Dec 10.
And Hopefully We Get A Healthy Maggs At A 1 Year Reduced Price. If He Signs Elsewhere So Be It. We Get Our Draft Picks. If He's Still Injured, Cry Fowl About Boras Misrepresenting The Goods. Get A Refund.
Boras can drag out the process all he wants. The Sox can cry foul all they want, but it won't do any good.

jabrch
11-19-2004, 08:52 AM
Problem is - if we offer him arbitration, and he accepts, and he is not healthy, and we file a grievance, it will possibly go nowhere. Owners signing players based on the promise of health from their agents may not be protected by a court or an arbirator, regardless of if he took a physical or not. It's a bad risk for a franchise that financially budgets at levels that dictate they be risk adverse.