Report: Morosi says a source links us with Hamilton and Ross

[TradeAngelos]

What nobody really wants to discuss is the fact that we have a lot of our current payroll tied up into good but not great guys. Roberts is a lot of dead money, but Kakes and Jones will be paid like stars but may not be. This hinders our ability to pay for a true MOO bat or TOR pitcher. I'd rather see a major shake up involving signing a guy like McClouth, trading Jones and Markakis and ending up with a guy like Upton/Hamilton. It would take many moves to totally realign how our payroll is distributed, but at least we'd hopefully be investing in better star players. As it stands, we're simply investing in good to very good players, depending on the month, and that limits our ability to acquire the true difference makers.

Roberts is off the books after next year, and Markakis is off the books after 2014. They are non factors as to whether we can "afford" to sign anyone.

Matter of fact the ONLY contract we have on the books after that is Jones. That is it.

I think I am going to start a salary projection thread if I have time to clear this up and show how little payroll we have, even with Arb eligible players for the next 4 years or so. It seems like a lot of people are under this impression that we have some type of real money on the books or something, and it just isn't true.

[OrioleMagic79]

4/100 M, with 2 option years vesting on games played, to bring it to 6/150 M

fine by me, but I don't think Josh is going to sign anything that only pays him 2/3 of his contract unless he plays a certain number of games...that's like saying "We'll pay you 67% of your contract unless you don't get hurt...then you can have the rest..."

I realize that our big worry isn't injury, it's more about a litany of issues that could prevent him from playing games, but still...too risky, even for Josh...

If you are him, you are an ideal citizen, put up for Saint-hood by the Catholic Church, but you twist your knee in your 4th season and miss 100 games, you are out $50 million...yeah, probably not going to happen...if it does, both he and his agent need their heads examined...

[scOtt]

fine by me, but I don't think Josh is going to sign anything that only pays him 2/3 of his contract unless he plays a certain number of games...that's like saying "We'll pay you 67% of your contract unless you don't get hurt...then you can have the rest..."

I realize that our big worry isn't injury, it's more about a litany of issues that could prevent him from playing games, but still...too risky, even for Josh...

If you are him, you are an ideal citizen, put up for Saint-hood by the Catholic Church, but you twist your knee in your 4th season and miss 100 games, you are out $50 million...yeah, probably not going to happen...if it does, both he and his agent need their heads examined...

Have to agree with with this. I think it was said that JH has only reached 145 games twice in his career. He and his agent will be very reluctant to sign somewhere with too many clauses. Still I wholeheartedly agree with Gordo. You have to have those protections! Sign it Josh or buh bye.

[TradeAngelos]

Have to agree with with this. I think it was said that JH has only reached 145 games twice in his career. He and his agent will be very reluctant to sign somewhere with too many clauses. Still I wholeheartedly agree with Gordo. You have to have those protections! Sign it Josh or buh bye.

There are no "protections" in MLB contracts, never have been and never will be as long as the MLBPA cartel is running things.

[El Gordo]

Have to agree with with this. I think it was said that JH has only reached 145 games twice in his career. He and his agent will be very reluctant to sign somewhere with too many clauses. Still I wholeheartedly agree with Gordo. You have to have those protections! Sign it Josh or buh bye.

I think 130 G is a reasonable number. Also the number of G played is a good indicator for his other issues as well as health. The main problem with JH is the length of contract. I think few teams will offer more than 4 or 5 years. So it could be that the extra two option years for 50M would have some appeal. Say the O's offer 4/100 M with 2 option years to bring it to 6/150M, and Seattle offers 6/130 M, I believe he'd think about our offer. Seattle will quash his offense and aggravate his nicotine addiction. With the O's he has a good shot to get a ring.

[DrungoHazewood]

There are no "protections" in MLB contracts, never have been and never will be as long as the MLBPA cartel is running things.

I don't think "cartel" means what you're implying it means.

And there many, many predecences for clauses that protect a franchise from a risky player. Magglio Ordonez had a clause in his $85M deal with the Tigers that allowed for a termination with a minimal buyout if he reached a certain number of DL days. It's common to see automatic vesting options based on games played. I'd almost expect Hamilton's deal to have escalators or vesting options based on games played and termination clauses that reference drug use.

[Pedro Cerrano]

I don't think "cartel" means what you're implying it means.

And there many, many predecences for clauses that protect a franchise from a risky player. Magglio Ordonez had a clause in his $85M deal with the Tigers that allowed for a termination with a minimal buyout if he reached a certain number of DL days. It's common to see automatic vesting options based on games played. I'd almost expect Hamilton's deal to have escalators or vesting options based on games played and termination clauses that reference drug use.

How the hell do you negotiate that?

"So, uh, good job on your rehab and all but just in case you decide to go on a heroin binge we need to add this in here."

[TradeAngelos]

I don't think "cartel" means what you're implying it means.

And there many, many predecences for clauses that protect a franchise from a risky player. Magglio Ordonez had a clause in his $85M deal with the Tigers that allowed for a termination with a minimal buyout if he reached a certain number of DL days. It's common to see automatic vesting options based on games played. I'd almost expect Hamilton's deal to have escalators or vesting options based on games played and termination clauses that reference drug use.

"Protections" is a relative term, as far as the money and the player.

1/3 of the contract being protected is not happening in this lifetime, and that is what most are talking about.

[Can_of_corn]

I don't think "cartel" means what you're implying it means.

And there many, many predecences for clauses that protect a franchise from a risky player. Magglio Ordonez had a clause in his $85M deal with the Tigers that allowed for a termination with a minimal buyout if he reached a certain number of DL days. It's common to see automatic vesting options based on games played. I'd almost expect Hamilton's deal to have escalators or vesting options based on games played and termination clauses that reference drug use.

Depends on the market. The cooler the market the more likely, and severe, the clauses. Multiple well heeled suitors means minimal clauses.

[Mr Snuffleupagus]

How the hell do you negotiate that?

"So, uh, good job on your rehab and all but just in case you decide to go on a heroin binge we need to add this in here."

I don't know how you do that either. I would think these things come up more for insuring the contract. Gotta assume insurance on JH's contract will be steep.

[gallden]

Really don't think(I'm always wrong however) Boston makes any noticable splashes this offseason. John Henry isn't soon so well in the stocks currently, and he certainly isn't spending any money on Liverpool.

[waroriole]

How the hell do you negotiate that?

"So, uh, good job on your rehab and all but just in case you decide to go on a heroin binge we need to add this in here."

If you can't be honest about your need for protection, then you shouldn't be negotiating a contract like that. If he's not willing to accept that this might be a part of the negotiation there are some serious denial issues.

[DrungoHazewood]

How the hell do you negotiate that?

"So, uh, good job on your rehab and all but just in case you decide to go on a heroin binge we need to add this in here."

You say something like, here, we'll give you a 5/150 deal making you one of the highest paid athletes in the world. But, as a bit of insurance given your well-known backgound, we want a termination clause - if you violate the league's substance abuse policy we have the right to buy out the rest of the deal for $5M. Trust, but verify.

I think he agrees to that if the clause is part of the highest bid in a good team situation.

[weams]

There are no "protections" in MLB contracts, never have been and never will be as long as the MLBPA cartel is running things.

I don't think "cartel" means what you're implying it means.

And there many, many predecences for clauses that protect a franchise from a risky player. Magglio Ordonez had a clause in his $85M deal with the Tigers that allowed for a termination with a minimal buyout if he reached a certain number of DL days. It's common to see automatic vesting options based on games played. I'd almost expect Hamilton's deal to have escalators or vesting options based on games played and termination clauses that reference drug use.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/G2y8Sx4B2Sk" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Prepare to die

[paulcoates]

Rob Bradford of WEEI.com reports that the Red Sox' interest in Josh Hamilton is "overblown."

CBS Sports' Jon Heyman reported earlier Thursday that many believe the Sox will make a big play for the top free agent hitter, but Bradford says Hamilton "doesn't appear to be near the top of the team's list of players it hopes to target." He adds that Boston, like other teams, is hesitant to commit to the number of years Hamilton is looking for. The Mariners, Brewers, Orioles and Braves reportedly have some interest in Hamilton, but where he ends is totally up in the air at this point.

Source: WEEI.com Nov 15 - 10:43 PM