Jump to content

Pedro Alvarez not signed by Pirates????


Recommended Posts

Has it been said what the realistic outcome would be if the ruling goes against MLB? There isn't any real possibility of the outcome being either Pedro goes back into the draft or the signing stands is there? I don't have access to bp.com so my apologies if the article does answer that question.

Again, according to KG, every other case that can be said to be remotely similar has always been ruled against MLB. The problem exists in the fact that the punishment has always been some variation of "don't do this again". KG is stating the union is going to make the case that they have seen this behavior from MLB before (see: JD Drew) and they continue to break the rules because they know the punishment (i.e. there is none) is worth the "risk".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, according to KG, every other case that can be said to be remotely similar has always been ruled against MLB. The problem exists in the fact that the punishment has always been some variation of "don't do this again". KG is stating the union is going to make the case that they have seen this behavior from MLB before (see: JD Drew) and they continue to break the rules because they know the punishment (i.e. there is none) is worth the "risk".

Interesting. From my limited understanding I don't see any parallels between the allegations with Alvarez and JD Drew. I thought the JD Drew situationwas MLB changing the rules of the draft without negotiating it with the MLBPA. This isn't a changing of the rules so I guess I'm totally confused why this becomes anything other than a determination of whether or not the signing happened after midnight... If it did, he should be back in the draft for next year. If it didn't he should be a Pirate. I guess I'll have to go renew my subscription to BP to follow this better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting. From my limited understanding I don't see any parallels between the allegations with Alvarez and JD Drew. I thought the JD Drew situationwas MLB changing the rules of the draft without negotiating it with the MLBPA. This isn't a changing of the rules so I guess I'm totally confused why this becomes anything other than a determination of whether or not the signing happened after midnight... If it did, he should be back in the draft for next year. If it didn't he should be a Pirate. I guess I'll have to go renew my subscription to BP to follow this better.

The MLBPA is arguing EXACTLY that the MLB changed the rules of the draft without renegotiating it first.

KG explains it better than I do:

Two key points to the union's argument could be:

1. We've Been Here Before, And To No Avail. Because we have been. On multiple occasions, MLB has been brought in front of an arbitrator due to the draft. Time and time again, the arbitrator has ruled in favor of the union, and at the same time has provided little or no real remedy to the situation, other than repeated stern warnings to not do it again. Yet, they did do it again, and the union will argue that the teams, in conjunction with MLB, decided to go this extension route with full knowledge that they were in violation of the CBA, and that they didn't care, as the arbitrator's response to such action in the past has been little more than a slap on the wrist. In other words, the crime was pre-meditated because when weighed against the expected punishment, it would be well worth it. One goal here is to anger the arbitrator, and to show that MLB has no respect for his judgment or for the process—and as anyone who has been through a legal proceeding knows, you do not want to be on the wrong side of a judge who feels that she or he is not receiving proper respect.

2. The Concept Of 'Best Interests Of All Parties' Is A Farce. MLB has all but admitted to providing extensions in this year's draft, but they have argued that doing so was in the best interest of both sides. On the surface that makes sense: it's good for the team to sign their draft picks, it's good for the player to get his career going, and it's good for MLB to add more talent to the pool. However, the union will argue that there are a pair of key issues in the granting of an extension that proves that such an action was not in the best interest of the union.

*

If MLB was so convinced that granting extensions was an innocent act in the best interests of all parties, why did they at no time call the MLBPA and inform them of the decision? If it was such a no-brainer, the union would have surely agreed to it, correct? Wrong, as the union understands that extensions add imbalance to negotiations once the deadline becomes a moving target with only one side having real knowledge of when that new deadline expires, and only one side having the ability to get such extensions in the first place.

*

The second that the extensions were granted, MLB took the right of representation away from the players. Agents are not part of the union, but they are certified by them, and that certification requires agents to follow the rules of collective bargaining in their dealings with a team. That means that technically they could not negotiate on behalf of their clients after midnight without breaking their own rules. Now what happened between the Pirates, Boras ,and Alvarez, only those three parties truly know, but the union has a pretty compelling case on this issue, and there is little argument that Pedro Alvarez agreed to the deal, and that the Pirates were no longer talking to Boras (who was with Alvarez in his California office) when the deal was agreed upon.

Another open question involves the connectedness of other players, primarily number three overall pick Eric Hosmer. Stories here differ, as some believe that the union will claim that Hosmer agreed to terms before the deadline, but that the deal was not communicated until after the deadline, while other versions of Hosmer's night point to him signing well after the deadline. MLB will stick to that side of the story in order to provide the linkage. While Alvarez has been placed on the restricted list, Hosmer's status within MLB's eBIS information system is "pending active," which is normally reserved for players who have agreed to terms but have not had their contract approved by the commissioner's office.

http://baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=8078

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The MLBPA is arguing EXACTLY that the MLB changed the rules of the draft without renegotiating it first.

KG explains it better than I do:

Two key points to the union's argument could be:

1. We've Been Here Before, And To No Avail. Because we have been. On multiple occasions, MLB has been brought in front of an arbitrator due to the draft. Time and time again, the arbitrator has ruled in favor of the union, and at the same time has provided little or no real remedy to the situation, other than repeated stern warnings to not do it again. Yet, they did do it again, and the union will argue that the teams, in conjunction with MLB, decided to go this extension route with full knowledge that they were in violation of the CBA, and that they didn't care, as the arbitrator's response to such action in the past has been little more than a slap on the wrist. In other words, the crime was pre-meditated because when weighed against the expected punishment, it would be well worth it. One goal here is to anger the arbitrator, and to show that MLB has no respect for his judgment or for the process—and as anyone who has been through a legal proceeding knows, you do not want to be on the wrong side of a judge who feels that she or he is not receiving proper respect.

2. The Concept Of 'Best Interests Of All Parties' Is A Farce. MLB has all but admitted to providing extensions in this year's draft, but they have argued that doing so was in the best interest of both sides. On the surface that makes sense: it's good for the team to sign their draft picks, it's good for the player to get his career going, and it's good for MLB to add more talent to the pool. However, the union will argue that there are a pair of key issues in the granting of an extension that proves that such an action was not in the best interest of the union.

*

If MLB was so convinced that granting extensions was an innocent act in the best interests of all parties, why did they at no time call the MLBPA and inform them of the decision? If it was such a no-brainer, the union would have surely agreed to it, correct? Wrong, as the union understands that extensions add imbalance to negotiations once the deadline becomes a moving target with only one side having real knowledge of when that new deadline expires, and only one side having the ability to get such extensions in the first place.

*

The second that the extensions were granted, MLB took the right of representation away from the players. Agents are not part of the union, but they are certified by them, and that certification requires agents to follow the rules of collective bargaining in their dealings with a team. That means that technically they could not negotiate on behalf of their clients after midnight without breaking their own rules. Now what happened between the Pirates, Boras ,and Alvarez, only those three parties truly know, but the union has a pretty compelling case on this issue, and there is little argument that Pedro Alvarez agreed to the deal, and that the Pirates were no longer talking to Boras (who was with Alvarez in his California office) when the deal was agreed upon.

Another open question involves the connectedness of other players, primarily number three overall pick Eric Hosmer. Stories here differ, as some believe that the union will claim that Hosmer agreed to terms before the deadline, but that the deal was not communicated until after the deadline, while other versions of Hosmer's night point to him signing well after the deadline. MLB will stick to that side of the story in order to provide the linkage. While Alvarez has been placed on the restricted list, Hosmer's status within MLB's eBIS information system is "pending active," which is normally reserved for players who have agreed to terms but have not had their contract approved by the commissioner's office.

http://baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=8078

Thank you... Fascinating stuff...

If the arbitrator does rule against MLB and applies sanctions it'll be fun to see how he tries to dance around the Hosmer situation. It seems to me whether or not Hosmer's deal was agreed to before the deadline should not be a factor in the decision since the rules state that the commisioners office has to be notified of a deal before midnight. Giving an extension on the negotiation or giving an extension on the communication of an agreement are both either a change of the rules that required negotations or they aren't. It's illogical IMO to claim one is and one isn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to Kevin Goldstein of Baseball Prospectus:

"In case you missed it, the Pirates and Pedro Alvarez have reached a deal tonight, one that pays him $6.355 million and makes him the highest paid player in the 2008 draft. So a little more money, and this time it’s a major league deal. The grievance hearing will likely be dropped with this development, and we’ll have a post-mortem this week. "

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to Kevin Goldstein of Baseball Prospectus:

"In case you missed it, the Pirates and Pedro Alvarez have reached a deal tonight, one that pays him $6.355 million and makes him the highest paid player in the 2008 draft. So a little more money, and this time it’s a major league deal. The grievance hearing will likely be dropped with this development, and we’ll have a post-mortem this week. "

Thanks for the update.

Alvarez is now the most hated man in Pittsburgh. :laughlol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to Kevin Goldstein of Baseball Prospectus:

"In case you missed it, the Pirates and Pedro Alvarez have reached a deal tonight, one that pays him $6.355 million and makes him the highest paid player in the 2008 draft. So a little more money, and this time it’s a major league deal. The grievance hearing will likely be dropped with this development, and we’ll have a post-mortem this week. "

Gotta give Boras credit, he had MLB by the short hairs and used it to its fullest advantage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to Kevin Goldstein of Baseball Prospectus:

"In case you missed it, the Pirates and Pedro Alvarez have reached a deal tonight, one that pays him $6.355 million and makes him the highest paid player in the 2008 draft. So a little more money, and this time it’s a major league deal. The grievance hearing will likely be dropped with this development, and we’ll have a post-mortem this week. "

Thank you... I'm just glad it's over. Or is it?! :mwahaha:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you... I'm just glad it's over. Or is it?! :mwahaha:

Not me. I wanted both Hosmer and Alvarez back in next year's draft. Not only would they both have likely remained top flight players, the Pirates (at a minimum) would have likely shyed away from Boras clients in next year's draft. They may anyway.

If he didn't sign, there would have at least been a chance that he fell to the O's.

Also, sitting at 6 or 7 wouldn't be so bad with Crow, Alvarez and Hosmer adding to the already nice talent pool at the top of the draft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm disappointed in the Pirates and MLB... What a ridiculous outcome. Avoid determining whether or not the CBA was violated by violating the CBA in a way that Boras and the Players Association is willing to accept.

This is how I see it to. It's a shame the Pirates are in such need for Alvarez and that it did not happen to a team more willing to wait a year for a top prospect.

It also goes to show, as much as people want a hard slot, not just how much leverage the players have, but, more important, how much these prospects are really worth to the teams involved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not me. I wanted both Hosmer and Alvarez back in next year's draft. Not only would they both have likely remained top flight players, the Pirates (at a minimum) would have likely shyed away from Boras clients in next year's draft. They may anyway.

If he didn't sign, there would have at least been a chance that he fell to the O's.

Also, sitting at 6 or 7 wouldn't be so bad with Crow, Alvarez and Hosmer adding to the already nice talent pool at the top of the draft.

While I understand your view on the matter, it was only fair that those players will be remaining with the teams that took them. It's not like Pitt and KC didn't want the yougsters. From an Oriole fan's take, it would have been great to have Alvarez and Hosmer available... it would've been very nice indeed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm disappointed in the Pirates and MLB... What a ridiculous outcome. Avoid determining whether or not the CBA was violated by violating the CBA in a way that Boras and the Players Association is willing to accept.
This is how I see it to. It's a shame the Pirates are in such need for Alvarez and that it did not happen to a team more willing to wait a year for a top prospect.

It also goes to show, as much as people want a hard slot, not just how much leverage the players have, but, more important, how much these prospects are really worth to the teams involved.

Yeah, the whole situation stunk to high heaven... and all party's should be embarrassed. They're not, but again, should be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Posts

    • Have you seen the game threads?  We're never going to make the post season w/ those kind of fans.  We might as well just give them all pink hats.
    • I think Burnes gets 5 days rest because of the off day tomorrow so it seems like a good spot to push him a little.  He only threw 107, so its not like we went Dusty Baker on him.   I mentioned that I think Hyde has to manage our starters a little less delicately with our bullpen sucking.  It looks Hyde is inclined to agree with this.
    • Have you seen the lineups? They are a joke. Hyde has to go too.     😎 Insomnia in progress. 
    • I have to admit I am all for resigning Burnes too, I just can't remember the last time the O's signed a free agent the other top teams wanted.  I don't think even Chris Davis fits that category because the O's were bidding against themselves.  Albert Belle?  I guess I'll just try to be hopeful.  I can't see Rubenstein making himself the public face of the franchise and then turning around and basically saying this is going to be my cash cow.  I guess we'll soon find out.  I have to admit I am looking forward to this way more than the election.  lol
    • It seems to me they should probably change their approach or the season will end up a disaster.  It’s frankly unexplainable they haven’t demoted/traded/DFA’d the players that aren’t performing.  It’s a joke management thinks this group of players has any chance of winning anything.  Imagine if they could just walk more..
    • Sorry I’m not Gretzky fan , lol . And don’t know any of his quotes. But I would love to hear it , if you can share.    Speaking of bullpen, I agree that ours needs to be augmented and upgraded.  The trade deadline is coming soon so……..
    • I agree. He's a major factor in our odds to win a World Series. Gotta go for it while you can and keep him if we can. I generally don't like big contracts and view them as over pays. I criticized the Albert Belle signing, I hated the Ubaldo Jimenez signing, and I didn't feel comfortable with the Chris Davis extension. But to me those players did not have a solid consistent careers as a pure Ace player like Burnes does. Burnes is a player I feel confident that you know what you're getting, even if we can expect a decline by age 35. Up to that point, you're getting a perennial Cy Young competitor to anchor your entire Pitching Staff and give you a chance to win when you need it most just like he did tonight in the game 3 rubber match in a series against division rivals. This series against the Red Sox, Burnes was effectively the Stopper and got us back on track. I'm all for resigning Corbin Burnes! It's on my Christmas wish list!
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...