White Sox Interactive Forums
What's The Score?

Welcome
Go Back   White Sox Interactive Forums > Baseball Discussions > What's The Score?
Home Chat Stats Register Blogs FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #136  
Old 11-03-2019, 11:57 PM
TDog TDog is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Modesto, California
Posts: 18,656
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blandman View Post
These are very organization centric views. As an employer who hires from several different trade unions in the city...I just don't see that perspective winning out.

Mine is certainly not an organization-centric view. I simply don't why Jimenez would want out of his contract. If Jimenez is arguing he was coerced into signing his contract, his legal remedy would be to be released from his contract. This could reduce his pre-free agency earnings substantially. It isn't as if releasing him from his contract releases him from the White Sox. His service-time clock started in 2019, and his contract is set up to pay him substantially more prior to what would be his earliest free-agent year than the White Sox would be obligated to pay him without the contract.

It makes no sense to suggest that Jimenez would be granted any sort of relief based on an arbitration ruling concerning Bryant's allegations of service-time manipulation because Jimenez lost no service time. If he wants to argue he was coerced into signing the contract, he would be arguing to be released from the contract. For a minor-leaguer who have never appeared in a major league game, it was a substantial contract.
Reply With Quote
  #137  
Old 11-04-2019, 05:03 PM
blandman blandman is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,116
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TDog View Post
Mine is certainly not an organization-centric view. I simply don't why Jimenez would want out of his contract. If Jimenez is arguing he was coerced into signing his contract, his legal remedy would be to be released from his contract. This could reduce his pre-free agency earnings substantially. It isn't as if releasing him from his contract releases him from the White Sox. His service-time clock started in 2019, and his contract is set up to pay him substantially more prior to what would be his earliest free-agent year than the White Sox would be obligated to pay him without the contract.

It makes no sense to suggest that Jimenez would be granted any sort of relief based on an arbitration ruling concerning Bryant's allegations of service-time manipulation because Jimenez lost no service time. If he wants to argue he was coerced into signing the contract, he would be arguing to be released from the contract. For a minor-leaguer who have never appeared in a major league game, it was a substantial contract.

The Sox controlled his rights for 6 years, 3 of which would have salaries determined in arbitration based on production the previous years. If the Sox leveraged the start of his service time clock to secure a team friendly extension, that would mean years 4-6 he could argue they owe him more money. It would also invalidate team options after year 6.
Reply With Quote
  #138  
Old 11-04-2019, 05:31 PM
Mohoney Mohoney is online now
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Palos Hills, IL
Posts: 12,355
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blandman View Post
These are very organization centric views. As an employer who hires from several different trade unions in the city...I just don't see that perspective winning out.
Trade unions also have specific policies that dictate exactly when an apprenticeship ends, and MLB is no different. In baseball terms, the end of an apprenticeship is represented by option years. Players are guaranteed either a 25-man roster spot or the right to declare free agency only after the 3rd option year ends.

Since there are no specific minor league performance benchmarks that dictate exemption from the option process, I see the case going nowhere.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Horsemaster Fred
This is the major leagues so get it how you live and letís fight tomorrow.
Reply With Quote
  #139  
Old 11-04-2019, 09:08 PM
blandman blandman is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,116
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mohoney View Post
Trade unions also have specific policies that dictate exactly when an apprenticeship ends, and MLB is no different. In baseball terms, the end of an apprenticeship is represented by option years. Players are guaranteed either a 25-man roster spot or the right to declare free agency only after the 3rd option year ends.

Since there are no specific minor league performance benchmarks that dictate exemption from the option process, I see the case going nowhere.

You're really stretching to ignore that salary arbitration is a given for talented players. Literally to make that case you'd have to get into the hearing six years from now and argue that the White Sox would have released Eloy in year 4 instead of going to arbitration. That's absurd, and you'd lose that case 101 times out of 100.
Reply With Quote
  #140  
Old 11-05-2019, 04:47 PM
TDog TDog is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Modesto, California
Posts: 18,656
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blandman View Post
The Sox controlled his rights for 6 years, 3 of which would have salaries determined in arbitration based on production the previous years. If the Sox leveraged the start of his service time clock to secure a team friendly extension, that would mean years 4-6 he could argue they owe him more money. It would also invalidate team options after year 6.
According to contract law, what happens if a party successfully argues he/she was coerced into signing a contract? Now ask yourself if Jimenez has at any point suggested that he was coerced into signing the contract, which pay him substantially more in his pre-arbitration years than the White Sox would be obligated to pay him and which already pays him substantially more than his major league achievements have earned him.

Jimenez didn't lose any service time. His contract was the highest guaranteed contract ever given a prospect who had never played a major league game, and it was signed after he had a poor spring training that would have justified the White Sox in not calling him up. His poor spring had more to do with his willingness to sign an extension than any unfair labor practices could have.

If Jimenez believes he got a raw deal with his record-setting contract that began his service-time clock before he clearly earned it, and this belief only appears in your suggestion that the White Sox took advantage of him, his complaint should be with his agent. That, too, could be a weak argument.
Reply With Quote
  #141  
Old 11-05-2019, 05:22 PM
Mohoney Mohoney is online now
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Palos Hills, IL
Posts: 12,355
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blandman View Post
You're really stretching to ignore that salary arbitration is a given for talented players. Literally to make that case you'd have to get into the hearing six years from now and argue that the White Sox would have released Eloy in year 4 instead of going to arbitration. That's absurd, and you'd lose that case 101 times out of 100.
Iím not ignoring arbitration. Iím ignoring the date of initial promotion.

The arb years are coming anyway. In fact, that extra year of team control is at an arb 4 salary, which is pretty close to the AAV for upper-echelon players anyway. The real question here is whether or not teams can use options as they see fit.

I think itís a non-starter for the MLBPA. The service time manipulators are doing nothing that runs afoul of the CBA.
Reply With Quote
  #142  
Old 11-05-2019, 05:24 PM
asindc asindc is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Washington, DC area
Posts: 9,180
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mohoney View Post
Iím not ignoring arbitration. Iím ignoring the date of initial promotion.

The arb years are coming anyway. In fact, that extra year of team control is at an arb 4 salary, which is pretty close to the AAV for upper-echelon players anyway. The real question here is whether or not teams can use options as they see fit.

I think itís a non-starter for the MLBPA. The service time manipulators are doing nothing that runs afoul of the CBA.
And that is the crux of the matter.
__________________
"I have the ultimate respect for White Sox fans. They were as miserable as the Cubs and Red Sox fans ever were but always had the good decency to keep it to themselves. And when they finally won the World Series, they celebrated without annoying every other fan in the country." Jim Caple, ESPN (January 12, 2011)


"We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the (bleeding) obvious is the first duty of intelligent men." ó George Orwell
Reply With Quote
  #143  
Old 11-06-2019, 01:46 PM
Hitmen77 Hitmen77 is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 13,432
Default

There's still a long way to go until February, but no carriage deal in place yet with Comcast for the Marquee Network.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/busin...3ga-story.html


I know this is wishful thinking, but as a customer I hope Comcast plays hardball on this and makes Marquee an a la carte option. Let the Cubbie faithful (since the size of their following is supposedly "legendary") pay for this service themselves and not force all other customers to subsidize this network.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Forum Jump




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:13 PM.




Design by: Michelle

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Site-specific editorial/photos Copyright ©2001 - 2008 White Sox Interactive. All rights reserved.