Hicks activated, Cowser optioned

[MCO'sFan]

3 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

So next year, Adam Hicks agent has no incentive to find his client a contact above minimum unless it exceeds the Yankee money?    Doesn’t sound right to me.

Unless something changed with this CBA (I don't think it did) then yes, Hicks is paid by the Yankees for the entirety of his contract minus whatever his current club pays him. Therefore, there is no incentive by his current club or Hicks for them to pay anything above minimum. This is not new and it has been this way for many years. The same back and forth took place on the board when he was first acquired. Hicks was signed by the O's as a free agent and can sign with any team for next year. But it will still likely be at the minimum because of the above. I don't remember off the top of my head when the NYY contract expires but I think its after the 25 season. I was surprised because folks on this board are usually on top of this stuff. 

[RZNJ]

Ok.  Learn something new everyday, I guess.  Mea culpa!

 

[wildcard]

I think you will find that in the Collective Bargaining Agreement it states the player released from a multi year agreement recent the remainder of they compensation under the agreeement.  And if another team signs him it reduces that amount paid by the original club.

The Basic Agreement is over 400 page of legal wording.  I am not going to search through it.

But Cots Contracts shows how the Basic Agreement handles the situation.

[sportsfan8703]

I think Hicks will resign with us. He can have the same role next year with us. Cowser is ready and he’ll step in for Santa. Hicks would be a bridge to Kjerstad as well. Overall, he’s the cheapest option too. It’s a win-win. He’s got good vibes here, there is no reason for him to go somewhere else, hit the 10 day IL, and have the same old Hicks sentiments. 

Edited September 12, 2023 by sportsfan8703

[jabba72]

11 minutes ago, sportsfan8703 said:

I think Hicks will resign with us. He can have the same role next year with us. Cowser is ready and he’ll step in for Santa. Hicks would be a bridge to Kjerstad as well. Overall, he’s the cheapest option too. It’s a win-win. He’s got vibes here, there is no reason for him to go somewhere else, hit the 10 day IL, and have the same old Hicks sentiments. 

I agree chances are good he'll want to return if Elias wants him back. Since there is no extra money to be made elsewhere.

[LTO's]

14 minutes ago, sportsfan8703 said:

I think Hicks will resign with us. He can have the same role next year with us. Cowser is ready and he’ll step in for Santa. Hicks would be a bridge to Kjerstad as well. Overall, he’s the cheapest option too. It’s a win-win. He’s got good vibes here, there is no reason for him to go somewhere else, hit the 10 day IL, and have the same old Hicks sentiments. 

Santander is better than Cowser. And Hicks. Neither of them should be making a 26 man at his expense. 

[24fps]

4 minutes ago, jabba72 said:

I agree chances are good he'll want to return if Elias wants him back. Since there is no extra money to be made elsewhere.

Playing time. 

[jabba72]

Just now, 24fps said:

 

He seems to get alot here but your'e right. I was just thinking Hicks valued making the playoffs and didnt think of playing time.  I guess if a team promised him an everyday job that could sway him over being on a playoff team. 

[baltfan]

1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:

What's odd is I don't think any team really overpaid at the deadline.

Crazy that the O's were subjected to these crazily unfair trade proposals when no one else seemingly was.

Almost like that wasn't actually happening.

 

I do think the White Sox were asking too much for Cease but that's a White Sox thing, not an O's thing.

Given what the Orioles gave up for Flaherty imagine what the price was from them for Montgomery.  

[RZNJ]

6 minutes ago, jabba72 said:

He seems to get alot here but your'e right. I was just thinking Hicks valued making the playoffs and didnt think of playing time.  I guess if a team promised him an everyday job that could sway him over being on a playoff team. 

Hard to believe anyone is going to guarantee him a much more expanded role than he’d likely have with us as the 4th outfielder.  Unless there’s some geographical preference the Orioles seem like a good fit for him.

[MCO'sFan]

18 minutes ago, LTO's said:

Santander is better than Cowser. And Hicks. Neither of them should be making a 26 man at his expense. 

I think he is saying that Santander gets traded. 

[baltfan]

1 hour ago, Frobby said:

Let the lawyer provide a little Contracts 101.   A homeowner hires a painter to paint his house on a specific day.  It’s going to be an all day job and the painter agrees to do it for $1000.   Then the homeowner changes his mind and breaks the contract.   In that situation, the painter has a duty to mitigate his damages.  If he finds another house to paint for $1000 that day, the original homeowner owes him nothing.  If he finds another house to paint for $750, then the original homeowner owes him $250.   If he tries to find other work but can’t, the original homeowner owes him $1000.  If he doesn’t try to find work, and the homeowner can prove he couid have found another house to paint for $1000 that day, then the homeowner owes him nothing.  That is slightly oversimplified, but basically what you learn in your first semester of law school.  Now, a written contract can specify something different from what I just described, but those are the default rules if the contract doesn’t say otherwise.  

I know what you are trying to explain here regarding offsets/credits, but I doubt the duty to mitigate applies to Hicks (you might not be trying to say it does) for a personal services contract.  Once he is waived, he can choose to never play again, so why wouldn't he be able to just agree to play for the minimum, especially in light of the fact that players choose teams based on more than compensation?  His duty to perform was to the Yankees, not to anyone else.  Accordingly, he doesn't have a duty to perform for anyone else.  Now, under the terms of the contract and the collective bargaining agreement, it is likely that it says that should he perform for anyone else and be paid, they get a credit for the amount he is paid.  

Anyhow, not trying to sharpshoot you, I just want to prevent any confusion for any non-lawyers as to the applicability of the principle.  

[baltfan]

1 hour ago, Sports Guy said:

Zero people have problems with vets on the team.

The problem people have is the roles some of these vets have and those vets blocking/taking a lot of at bats away from younger, more talented players.

More than fine to have guys like Hicks and Frazier in part time roles coming off the bench. 
 

 

Plenty have argued they never should have signed Frazier and that once Cowser was back Hicks shouldn't have been on the team.  

[Sports Guy]

2 minutes ago, baltfan said:

Plenty have argued they never should have signed Frazier and that once Cowser was back Hicks shouldn't have been on the team.  

Frazier Bever should have been signed for his salary and the promise(which was essentially given to him) of 400+ at bats.

2-3M and 200+ at bats was fine.

The Hicks/Cowser thing is a bit of a misleading conversation in the context I’m saying though.

Hicks as a part time player is fine. Hicks as an everyday player is not. So, the Hicks vs Cowser argument was based off of that because that was the role that was “up for grabs”.

Hicks on the team as a bench player with Cowser as the starter would be fine.

Again, it’s all about the role and how they are used. No one cared when the Os acquired McCann as long as he wasn’t going to DH and play a lot. More than happy to have the vet back up C who made a little bit of money. Same premise here. 

[baltfan]

7 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Frazier Bever should have been signed for his salary and the promise(which was essentially given to him) of 400+ at bats.

2-3M and 200+ at bats was fine.

The Hicks/Cowser thing is a bit of a misleading conversation in the context I’m saying though.

Hicks as a part time player is fine. Hicks as an everyday player is not. So, the Hicks vs Cowser argument was based off of that because that was the role that was “up for grabs”.

Hicks on the team as a bench player with Cowser as the starter would be fine.

Again, it’s all about the role and how they are used. No one cared when the Os acquired McCann as long as he wasn’t going to DH and play a lot. More than happy to have the vet back up C who made a little bit of money. Same premise here. 

There is no evidence Frazier would have signed for $2-$3mm or that they could have gotten his equivalent for that price.

At the end, it all comes to issues re: playing time.  It's pretty obvious that Westburg before injury had moved past Frazier in the pecking order.  Hicks is killing it at the plate.  If the goal was to win, I don't see how you can argue very hard against a team with the best record in the AL.  The idea that they would have been better with lesser roles from Frazier or Hicks seems terribly speculative and silly given the results.