DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Bleacher Bums Forum
HTML https://bbf.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Archives
*****************************************************
#Post#: 426523--------------------------------------------------
Re: Today's Game - 2021
By: Reb Date: March 10, 2021, 12:46 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=davep link=topic=573.msg426490#msg426490
date=1615326059]
The CBA establishes the rules, and both sides should adhere to
it. The agreement was that the player can only be held in the
minors for a certain period of time, and after a certain number
of MLB years, becomes a free agent. They even agreed on the
specific number of games that comprises a "year", for free agent
purpose. Any team that does not maximize the value they get out
of those specified six years is doing themselves and for that
matter the fans, a disservice.
[/quote]
What you’re really saying is that if a party can get away with
undermining what they agreed to, they are doing a disservice
when they fail to undermine.
You may notice that baseball management NEVER say what you just
said they should do: Player X was sent to minors because the
club wants to “maximize the value” of the six years. The one guy
who actually said it recently (Mariners CEO) got fired for
saying it.
Every contract in every transaction in every industry contains
what lawyers call an implied covenant of fair dealing, meaning
you can’t purposely undermine what you agreed to. If you agree
to six years, you can’t undermine six years by making decisions
so as to avoid six years. When a guy is sent out for
non-baseball reasons so as to avoid reaching six years had the
decision been based on baseball factors, it undermines the basic
agreement that the parties reached.
The problem for the union is a failure of proof. No arbitrator
is going to substitute his own judgment for a roster decision
made by a baseball professional, so you actually need the club
saying what you just said they should say—a smoking gun showing
intent—which they try very hard to avoid saying.
#Post#: 426524--------------------------------------------------
Re: Today's Game - 2021
By: Tuffy Date: March 10, 2021, 1:08 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Video of the Ortega slam:
HTML https://twitter.com/Cubs/status/1369424452245667845
#Post#: 426530--------------------------------------------------
Re: Today's Game - 2021
By: JeffH Date: March 10, 2021, 9:47 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Alec Mills on the bump for Cubs today. Listed as available to
work behind him: Chafin, Fenter, Gámez, Little, Nance,
Rodríguez, Stock, Winkler, Workman. - Jordan Bastian
#Post#: 426534--------------------------------------------------
Re: Today's Game - 2021
By: craig Date: March 10, 2021, 11:29 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Tuffy link=topic=573.msg426524#msg426524
date=1615360085]
Video of the Ortega slam:
HTML https://twitter.com/Cubs/status/1369424452245667845[/quote]
Ortega's big-league record is bad, but his minor-league career
is .292-.361-.424-.785. Not too bad.
A guy can change over some time, and perhaps add some strength,
so maybe in some ways he's better now than some of his numbers
reflect. The flip is that coming up with a west team, his minor
league numbers include stops in the Cal (A+), Texas (AA) and PC
(AAA) leagues, all leagues that are rather hitter friendl.
Perhaps .292-.361 in those leagues is more like .250-.320 in the
Cubs leagues, beats me.
Guess I'm thinking that he looks like he might potentially be
anti-awful if an injury necessitated him getting some action?
#Post#: 426553--------------------------------------------------
Re: Today's Game - 2021
By: davep Date: March 10, 2021, 4:08 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Reb link=topic=573.msg426523#msg426523
date=1615358801]
What you’re really saying is that if a party can get away with
undermining what they agreed to, they are doing a disservice
when they fail to undermine.
You may notice that baseball management NEVER say what you just
said they should do: Player X was sent to minors because the
club wants to “maximize the value” of the six years. The one guy
who actually said it recently (Mariners CEO) got fired for
saying it.
Every contract in every transaction in every industry contains
what lawyers call an implied covenant of fair dealing, meaning
you can’t purposely undermine what you agreed to. If you agree
to six years, you can’t undermine six years by making decisions
so as to avoid six years. When a guy is sent out for
non-baseball reasons so as to avoid reaching six years had the
decision been based on baseball factors, it undermines the basic
agreement that the parties reached.
The problem for the union is a failure of proof. No arbitrator
is going to substitute his own judgment for a roster decision
made by a baseball professional, so you actually need the club
saying what you just said they should say—a smoking gun showing
intent—which they try very hard to avoid saying.
[/quote]
Exactly. There is no proof. At no time did I say that they
should announce their intentions or reasons. But I certainly
expect both sides to act in their own interests when working
within the structure of the contract. As I understand (I have
not personally seen or read the CBA, but have read reports about
it) the contract spells out exactly how many years it takes for
a player to become a free agent, and spells out exactly how many
days on the 40 man roster comprise a "year", in sufficient
detail that it was known by both sides at what point they start
counting years.
I have not seen any report that indicates that the contract
specifies that a player MUST be called up to the majors when he
is ready, nor any report that the CBA defines "readiness" in
sufficient detail that an impartial arbiter can determine a
player's state of "readiness". If this is important to the
players (and I do not deny that it is) then they should ensure
that such specific language is contained in the next CBA.
Without such specific language, it should be the burden of the
aggrieved party to prove that a decision was made in "bad
faith". In the case of Bryant, it appears that the aggrieved
party was not able to prove it.
In contract law, an ambiguity is a contract is usually resolved
in the favor of the party that had the least power in the
negotiation (such as the boiler plate provisions written by one
party in which the other party must either accept or not enter
into a contract (few bank loan provisions are seldom negotiable
by the non-bank party). But in this case, it would be hard to
convince anyone that the players union did not have bargaining
power equal to that of the owners. In order to eliminate
ambiguity of time requirements for free agency, the two sides
agreed to the above mentioned length of time spelled out in the
CBA to the exact number of roster days required, and the team
complied with the requirements. If there is a "spirit of the
contract" ambiguity when it comes to a players state of
"readiness", they should hammer that out in the next contract
negotiation.
#Post#: 426557--------------------------------------------------
Re: Today's Game - 2021
By: Reb Date: March 10, 2021, 4:27 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Dave is, of course, correct that it's a good thing for the club
(and the fans) to have the extra year of control over a player
via service time manipulation, as in Cubs are better off having
control over Bryant in 2021. It's just that the service
manipulation is really bad for the relationship between owners
and players and unethical.
Dave, of course, doesn't actually contend that Bryant was sent
to AAA for anything other than service time manipulation--to
avoid having 2015 count as a full year of service time. No
serious person would argue that the reason he was sent to Iowa
was for any other reason.
Funny thing is that just about everybody knows that the Bryant
to AAA had nothing to do with player development while, at the
same time, most everybody knew he would lose the service time
manipulation grievance. MLBPA pretty much knew it would lose,
as it made no effort to remove the permanent arbitrator after
the decision. Indeed, for the reasons I noted in the earlier
post, the arbitrator really had no choice given the absence of
direct proof of intent. Absent that, it would be silly and
presumptuous for a non-baseball evaluator like the permanent
arbitrator to overrule a Theo Epstein roster decision.
So, we have the perverse incentive for baseball decision-makers
to undermine the cba to keep up with some of their colleagues
who do the same thing. Theo did this for his entire career in
Boston too as to opening day roster decisions, which the
arbitrator found actually supported the Cubs decision with
Bryant. Very unfortunate when a stand-up guy like Theo is
incentivized to misrepresent his decision-making process. "Oh,
no, it was a baseball decision not based on service time." Give
me a break. Maybe Theo will come clean when he writes his
memoirs a few decades from now.
Presumably, this will be addressed in some fashion in the next
cba.
#Post#: 426559--------------------------------------------------
Re: Today's Game - 2021
By: JeffH Date: March 10, 2021, 4:32 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Manuel Rodriguez makes his spring debut.
Starts out with a 96 mph fastball.
#Post#: 426561--------------------------------------------------
Re: Today's Game - 2021
By: JeffH Date: March 10, 2021, 4:36 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Rodriguez as fast as 98, according to the Giants broadcasters.
Slider at 88.
#Post#: 426563--------------------------------------------------
Re: Today's Game - 2021
By: JeffH Date: March 10, 2021, 4:56 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Stock up to 99.
#Post#: 426564--------------------------------------------------
Re: Today's Game - 2021
By: JeffH Date: March 10, 2021, 4:59 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Now Stock at 101.
*****************************************************
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page