PDA

View Full Version : Who are the Six?


bobowhite
12-01-2005, 08:53 AM
PK's new contract contains a limited no-trade clause. Supposedly, he cannot be dealt to six teams without his explicit permission. So who are these unlucky six?

My guess: 1) Yankee$ 2) Met$ 3) Yankee$ 4) Met$ 5) Yankee$ and 6) Yankee$

fuzzy_patters
12-01-2005, 10:26 AM
PK's new contract contains a limited no-trade clause. Supposedly, he cannot be dealt to six teams without his explicit permission. So who are these unlucky six?

My guess: 1) Yankee$ 2) Met$ 3) Yankee$ 4) Met$ 5) Yankee$ and 6) Yankee$

Money does not have anything to do with it. His contract is guaranteed, so he will get it no matter who he gets traded to.

I think Paulie probably listed teams that he knows can win. He already said that trading for Thome was the best thing KW could have done to bring him back. He wants to play on a winner. I am guessing the list probably looked something like this:

Yankees
Red Sox
Angels
Cardinals
Braves
Astros

These are the teams that are perenially in the playoffs.

NorthSideSox72
12-01-2005, 10:29 AM
Money does not have anything to do with it. His contract is guaranteed, so he will get it no matter who he gets traded to.

I think Paulie probably listed teams that he knows can win. He already said that trading for Thome was the best thing KW could have done to bring him back. He wants to play on a winner. I am guessing the list probably looked something like this:

Yankees
Red Sox
Angels
Cardinals
Braves
Astros

These are the teams that are perenially in the playoffs.

Actually, the list works the other way around. Read the original post - these are the six teams which he has veto rights for. In other words, he CANNOT be traded to these six teams without prior consent. It would be the six teams he does not want to play for.

I made the same mistake when i first read it too.

Crede_Fan
12-01-2005, 10:36 AM
The Six teams that he can Veto:

Marlins
Orioles
Devil Rays
Cubs
Blue Jays
Nationals

Just my guesses.

mweflen
12-01-2005, 10:36 AM
I would imagine they are crap teams or crap cities that no one would want to play for, a la:

Tampa Bay
Florida
Pittsburgh
Detroit
Colorado
Kansas City

yessssssss
12-01-2005, 10:37 AM
1. Cubs

2. Cubs

3. Cubs

4. Cubs

5. Cubs

6. Cubs

antitwins13
12-01-2005, 10:38 AM
Tampa Bay, Kansas City, Toronto, Baltimore, Cincinnati, Seattle.

Ol' No. 2
12-01-2005, 10:58 AM
I don't think he has to specify them now. If/when they want to trade him, that's the time they will ask for his list of 6 teams.

Frater Perdurabo
12-01-2005, 11:19 AM
And before the contract is half-over, Paulie will have earned 5-and-10 rights, which means he'll have the right to veto ANY trade to any team whatsoever.

NorthSideSox72
12-01-2005, 11:26 AM
I don't think he has to specify them now. If/when they want to trade him, that's the time they will ask for his list of 6 teams.

The articles i read pretty said his contract contained a specific 6 teams. If he could pick them later, then that would be the same as a full no-trade clause.
:?:

Ol' No. 2
12-01-2005, 11:36 AM
The articles i read pretty said his contract contained a specific 6 teams. If he could pick them later, then that would be the same as a full no-trade clause.
:?:This is a common clause in contracts and I've never seen one where it has to be picked at the outset. Witness Javier Vazquez' situation in Arizona. How is picking them later a full no-trade clause?:?: He still just gets to pick 6 teams.

DenverSock
12-01-2005, 11:46 AM
And before the contract is half-over, Paulie will have earned 5-and-10 rights, which means he'll have the right to veto ANY trade to any team whatsoever.

I too think the 5-and-10 rights are more important. Basically, I think it boils down to this: Paulie wants to stay with the Sox because players who play on one team have a greater chance at being considered all time greats, election to the hall, etc. Also he believes that there is to be more than one championship for the Sox. Look at his recent public statements, It's a shrewd gamble.:sunshine::sunshine:

Tekijawa
12-01-2005, 11:49 AM
My guesses:

1.) Cubs
2.) Diamondbacks
3.) Angels
4.) Padres
5.) Dodgers
6.) ?????


All around his home/family/someplace he is familiar with. I don't think Boston, because I heard he wouldn't want to play there.


EDIT: I'm Sorry I thought that he only got to pick 6 teams that he could be traded too... I guess I read the Article Wrong.

I'll Change mine to:

1.) Baltimore
2.) Tampa
3.) Kansas City
4.) Toronto
5.) Colorad
6.) Seattle

BNLSox
12-01-2005, 12:00 PM
If I had to guess which teams he pre-vetoed I would go with:

1) Kansas City
2) Tampa Bay
3) Florida (Las Vegas) Marlins
4) Detroit
5) Milwaukee
6) Pittsburgh


Purely speculative... It doesn't matter, we'll have Paulie for many years to come.

NardiWasHere
12-01-2005, 12:00 PM
Even though we may dislike the Cubs/Yankees/Mets, I think that as a baseball player, these are definitely not bad places to play. My list would look like this...
6. Toronto
5. Pitt
4. Minn
3. Fla
2. Tampa
1. KC

NorthSideSox72
12-01-2005, 02:28 PM
This is a common clause in contracts and I've never seen one where it has to be picked at the outset. Witness Javier Vazquez' situation in Arizona. How is picking them later a full no-trade clause?:?: He still just gets to pick 6 teams.

Well, let's see....

KW: "Hey Paul, we're about to trade you. What teams do you not want to be traded to?"
PK: "Hm. Well, says here in the paper that the teams you are talking with are X, Y and Z. I think I'll pick X, Y and Z."

Do you understand? It would be the same as a complete NTC for all practical purposes. The teams have to be set in the contract, or else it's worthless to have the 6 team limit. If you (the team) let him (the player) pick it later, when the cards are on the table, you screw yourself.

bobowhite
12-01-2005, 02:45 PM
I would think he would have to identify these teams now. I can't imagine it is somewhere in the contract. Overseas I heard of people who surrendered and faced extradition on condition that they not be turned over to certain states (death penalty states) and they always had to name the states in advance.






((Not really sure if that is an appropriate comparison.))


I just can't picture the Sox tolerating PK being able to sit back and rattle off names to kill specific deals that they thought were going through.

On the subject of playing in New York, it's a much higher pressure situation than elsewhere. Some guys love it, some hate it. Seeing how PK has family in Mass. and AZ, I'd think he'd not want to go to the Yanks, probably not the Mets and I'm sure he's got 4 others in mind.

Ol' No. 2
12-01-2005, 02:49 PM
Well, let's see....

KW: "Hey Paul, we're about to trade you. What teams do you not want to be traded to?"
PK: "Hm. Well, says here in the paper that the teams you are talking with are X, Y and Z. I think I'll pick X, Y and Z."

Do you understand? It would be the same as a complete NTC for all practical purposes. The teams have to be set in the contract, or else it's worthless to have the 6 team limit. If you (the team) let him (the player) pick it later, when the cards are on the table, you screw yourself.That's only if you're dumb enough to wait until you've got a deal almost made before you ask him to name the six teams.

Again, I call your attention to the Javier Vazquez situation in which he's just now named the teams he gets to veto.

NorthSideSox72
12-01-2005, 02:50 PM
I would think he would have to identify these teams now. I can't imagine it is somewhere in the contract.

If he has to say it now, and it isn't in the contract, where would it be? Or was this a typo?

NorthSideSox72
12-01-2005, 02:54 PM
That's only if you're dumb enough to wait until you've got a deal almost made before you ask him to name the six teams.

Again, I call your attention to the Javier Vazquez situation in which he's just now named the teams he gets to veto.

It would be a ridiculous idea to just leave it open. It's logically flawed, unless you just really want to give them a virtual complete NTC.

Besides, as articles in the Trib have stated, the teams were indeed specified, as they would have to be.

Ol' No. 2
12-01-2005, 02:57 PM
It would be a ridiculous idea to just leave it open. It's logically flawed, unless you just really want to give them a virtual complete NTC.

Besides, as articles in the Trib have stated, the teams were indeed specified, as they would have to be.That all hinges on a single word - "has" - in the story. I wouldn't necessarily count on Gonzalez' checking out that particular point. If it's not a complete NTC in Vazquez' case, I fail to see how Konerko's case would be any different.

bobowhite
12-01-2005, 03:04 PM
Regardless of if he's named them or if not, if I was KW, I would ask PK to give me at least some of the names or his criteria. I mean if he says, "No New York and nothing else on the East Coast except Boston" or "no Florida training teams" then I think he'll have a pretty clear idea. Of course, if KW is any good at his job anyways, he already has a good idea of what appeals to his star first-baseman and what doesn't.

NorthSideSox72
12-01-2005, 03:08 PM
That's only if you're dumb enough to wait until you've got a deal almost made before you ask him to name the six teams.

Again, I call your attention to the Javier Vazquez situation in which he's just now named the teams he gets to veto.

:o:
Well I'll be damned. I looked up Vazquez' contract information (what of it was available), and I see what you are referring to. Wow. Hard to say when it's invoked (when he has to list the teams), but that is ridiculous. Why would you ever sign a contract like that, from a team's perspective?

In his case, of course, he had to list them because he filed a trade request/demand. Obviously you would need to then.

Someone explain this to me - if you are a team, I could see why you would be willing to give an NTC, or a limited NTC. But why on earth would you allow the player to pick the teams later? Am I the only one who sees this as idiotic?

Anyway, looked at the Trib again too. Still sounds like he had to select them already.

But I stand corrected - apparently, such deals exist. How bizarre.

Flight #24
12-01-2005, 03:16 PM
That's only if you're dumb enough to wait until you've got a deal almost made before you ask him to name the six teams.

Again, I call your attention to the Javier Vazquez situation in which he's just now named the teams he gets to veto.

Vazquez's situation is NOT an NTC. He's requesting a trade under the rules regarding trading of a player in a multi-year contract. (i.e., if traded during a multiyear deal, the player has the right to demand a trade at the end of the season).

In that clause, it states that the player has the right to ID 6 clubs which he can not be traded to. This is per the CBA, not per his individual contract.

I believe that with NTCs in player contracts, that the teams are spelled out ahead of time.

Ol' No. 2
12-01-2005, 04:05 PM
Vazquez's situation is NOT an NTC. He's requesting a trade under the rules regarding trading of a player in a multi-year contract. (i.e., if traded during a multiyear deal, the player has the right to demand a trade at the end of the season).

In that clause, it states that the player has the right to ID 6 clubs which he can not be traded to. This is per the CBA, not per his individual contract.

I believe that with NTCs in player contracts, that the teams are spelled out ahead of time.Well, I guess you're right about Vazquez. But I'm not convinced Konerko had to pick them already just on the basis of one word in Gonzalez' article. It makes no sense to me to have to pick the teams now when the potential trade is years away. Who knows what the situation might be with those teams 3 years from now? There are lots of ways this could be handled without seriously affecting trade possibilities. For example, the player could be asked for a new list at the beginning of each year. It all depends on the contract language. More details will come out about this as time passes.

Flight #24
12-01-2005, 04:09 PM
Well, I guess you're right about Vazquez. But I'm not convinced Konerko had to pick them already just on the basis of one word in Gonzalez' article. It makes no sense to me to have to pick the teams now when the potential trade is years away. Who knows what the situation might be with those teams 3 years from now? There are lots of ways this could be handled without seriously affecting trade possibilities. For example, the player could be asked for a new list at the beginning of each year. It all depends on the contract language. More details will come out about this as time passes.

Every time I've seen this mentioned, it's set in the contract at signing. So Paulie will have to do his best to pick the 6 now knowing that things might change in the next few years. It will probably still be safe to assume the DRays & Royals won't be contending and that the Blue Jays & O's won't be having ST in Arizona.

IggyD
12-01-2005, 09:21 PM
Detroit
Nationals
Astros
Cubs
Tampa
Kansas City

Only because I would not want to play for these teams

PAPChiSox729
12-01-2005, 09:29 PM
Royals
Devil Rays
Orioles
Rockies
Pirates
Reds


That's my guess.

Brian26
12-01-2005, 09:48 PM
Well, I guess you're right about Vazquez. But I'm not convinced Konerko had to pick them already just on the basis of one word in Gonzalez' article. It makes no sense to me to have to pick the teams now when the potential trade is years away. Who knows what the situation might be with those teams 3 years from now? There are lots of ways this could be handled without seriously affecting trade possibilities. For example, the player could be asked for a new list at the beginning of each year. It all depends on the contract language. More details will come out about this as time passes.

It appears the teams are specifically mentioned in the contract. Did you listen to the Kenny Williams conference call yet on Whitesox.com? It's pretty interesting. One of the reporters asked if Kenny would comment on the six teams, and he said (I'm paraphrasing here) he'd refrain from doing that out of respect for those franchises.