The argument to keep Avi Garcia

[Dick Allen]

8 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Here, straight from MLB.

http://m.mlb.com/glossary/transactions/salary-arbitration

 

 

 

Notice how that says arbitration. Signiing a lesser contract or being non tendered avoids arbitration.  Avi can sign for the minimum today if he wished. But keep your ridiculous argument up.

[turnin' two]

30 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

I spelled out the reason.  Manipulation of the process is the issue.  Trying to force someone to take less than what they are technically owed, without allowing them to become a free agent isn't in the spirit of the agreement, just like intentionally keeping someone down ONE more day than the service time allows for to get another year of control is violating the spirit of service time.

That isn't what the situation is here though.  The Sox can't force Avi to sign for below what MLBTR projects his salary.  They can present him with an offer and tell him if you don't sign at this level we will non tender you.  That would make him a free agent.  It would give him the choice on whether he wants the deal the Sox are offering or make him a free agent.  Those two situations are not similar at all, unless you point is there can be contract disputes.  Which, in that case, bravo to you.  A hand well played.

And the spirit of the agreement doesn't matter for spit.  It is what is in writing that counts.  

[southsider2k5]

19 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

Notice how that says arbitration. Signiing a lesser contract or being non tendered avoids arbitration.  Avi can sign for the minimum today if he wished. But keep your ridiculous argument up.

He can.  And if the team goes into a negotiation with a thread to cut him if he doesn't sign a sub-arbitration contract, he has the protection of a labor union.  Again, because of this you don't see players signing deals to the types of contracts which are being talked about here before the arbitration process takes place.  They either offer them something in that ballpark, or they non-tender them and they become free agents.  I have yet to see a single example of otherwise.

[southsider2k5]

Just now, turnin' two said:

That isn't what the situation is here though.  The Sox can't force Avi to sign for below what MLBTR projects his salary.  They can present him with an offer and tell him if you don't sign at this level we will non tender you.  That would make him a free agent.  It would give him the choice on whether he wants the deal the Sox are offering or make him a free agent.  Those two situations are not similar at all, unless you point is there can be contract disputes.  Which, in that case, bravo to you.  A hand well played.

And the spirit of the agreement doesn't matter for spit.  It is what is in writing that counts.  

So why then did Bryant and Harper file grievances?

[turnin' two]

14 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

So why then did Bryant and Harper file grievances?

Their situations are not even remotely similar to Garcia's.  To hold them up as an example is either ignorance or dishonest.  But in case you are as ignorant as you are pretending, they filed their cases because, in their view, the teams held them out of the major leagues to exploit the service time rules in the CBA, so the team can have an additional season of control over the player before the player becomes a free agent.  They filed because they felt misused.  They were angry.  They were grasping at straws.  The better question is, what happened to their filings?  The answer?  Nothing.  That is what should be read into them.

In this hypothetical situation the Sox would be saying to Avi, we will sign you for 6 million (or whatever number, just to be clear so you can't formulate another fake scenario), if you don't take it, then the organization will not tender you a contract and you will become a free agent.  

I don't see how those things are similar.  They appear, to almost be direct opposites.  

Edited November 29, 2018 by turnin' two

[Dick Allen]

11 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

He can.  And if the team goes into a negotiation with a thread to cut him if he doesn't sign a sub-arbitration contract, he has the protection of a labor union.  Again, because of this you don't see players signing deals to the types of contracts which are being talked about here before the arbitration process takes place.  They either offer them something in that ballpark, or they non-tender them and they become free agents.  I have yet to see a single example of otherwise.

So the White Sox say, Avi, sign this contract for $4 million or become a free agent. And you are saying that is grounds for a grievance. Ridiculous.

 

And here I thought all along players loved free agency. 

Edited November 29, 2018 by Dick Allen

[Thad Bosley]

1 hour ago, ChiSox59 said:

Or the Sox jusy say, "Hey Avi, look dude - your arbitration figure is just too high for us.  We'll offer you $5M for next year, or we're going to non-tender you.  With where the market is right now for a guy with your services, you're going to be hard pressed to exceed that, but we certainly understand if you feel exploring the market is the best opportunity for you." 

Frankly, I don't think the Sox want him at any price.  They're trying to get something for him, and if (when) they fail, he's just going to get non-tendered tomorrow.  

Voila!  This.  This is how the process works, and has worked for a very long time.  

[southsider2k5]

33 minutes ago, turnin' two said:

Their situations are not even remotely similar to Garcia's.  To hold them up as an example is either ignorance or dishonest.  But in case you are as ignorant as you are pretending, they filed their cases because, in their view, the teams held them out of the major leagues to exploit the service time rules in the CBA, so the team can have an additional season of control over the player before the player becomes a free agent.  They filed because they felt misused.  They were angry.  They were grasping at straws.  The better question is, what happened to their filings?  The answer?  Nothing.  That is what should be read into them.

In this hypothetical situation the Sox would be saying to Avi, we will sign you for 6 million (or whatever number, just to be clear so you can't formulate another fake scenario), if you don't take it, then the organization will not tender you a contract and you will become a free agent.  

I don't see how those things are similar.  They appear, to almost be direct opposites.  

They are the same intentional manipulation of the system.  The system is set up the way it is set up by a labor agreement between the players and the teams.  Any intentional manipulation of those terms can see a grievance filed.  That is what happened there, and could very well happen here.  There is a process in place which was agreed to by both sides.  Attempts to get around those rules can and will cause problems.

[turnin' two]

2 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

They are the same intentional manipulation of the system.  The system is set up the way it is set up by a labor agreement between the players and the teams.  Any intentional manipulation of those terms can see a grievance filed.  That is what happened there, and could very well happen here.  There is a process in place which was agreed to by both sides.  Attempts to get around those rules can and will cause problems.

How is offering Avi a contract, and if he rejects it, non-tendering him against the rules?  How is it a manipulation?

[southsider2k5]

Just now, turnin' two said:

How is offering Avi a contract, and if he rejects it, non-tendering him against the rules?  How is it a manipulation?

Threatening a player with non-tender if they don't accept a below market standards contract?  You don't see how that could be an issue?

All I have to say is I hope you guys have your lawyers paid up if this is how you do business.

[Thad Bosley]

6 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Threatening a player with non-tender if they don't accept a below market standards contract?  You don't see how that could be an issue?

All I have to say is I hope you guys have your lawyers paid up if this is how you do business.

How are you coming up with the scenario of a "threat" potentially going on with any of this?  If the Sox offer him what they think he's worth at this point in time, which could be below the 20% cut threshhold, he can either accept it or get non-tendered, at which point he's free to go out into the world and try and get a better offer than the one the Sox offered him.  No manipulation there whatsoever, just plain, 'ol market economics at play.  

[southsider2k5]

1 minute ago, Fan O'Faust said:

How are you coming up with the scenario of a "threat" potentially going on with any of this?  If the Sox offer him what they think he's worth at this point in time, which could be below the 20% cut threshhold, he can either accept it or get non-tendered, at which point he's free to go out into the world and try and get a better offer than the one the Sox offered him.  No manipulation there whatsoever, just plain, 'ol market economics at play.  

Read the rest of the thread.  This is someone's idea of how to negotiate.

Also of note, with all of the players who are being DFA'd and non-tendered this week, there hasn't been a single one signed for more than 20% below their previous years salary.  They are all being non-tendered or DFA'd.  If this was really a thing, it would be happening all over MLB right now.

[ChiSox59]

8 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Threatening a player with non-tender if they don't accept a below market standards contract?  You don't see how that could be an issue?

All I have to say is I hope you guys have your lawyers paid up if this is how you do business.

How are you still going on this?

It's literally a courtesy. Hey bud, we're gonna non-tender you - but here's a deal we'd be willing to do.  Take it or leave it, doesn't matter to us.  Its your prerogative to see the open FA market if you so chose. 

[vilehoopster]

This is the guy who started this thread. Sorry about the bold. I typed it in google docs to have spell check, and when I copied and pasted it, it came out bold and I didn't notice. 

After discussing the concept of arbitration and sub-abritration to death, let's back on the original topic of is Avi worth keeping for 8 million. I still say absolutely yes. Again if Nate Jones is worth taking a chance on for 4.65 million, than Avi worth is chancing 8 million on with all his potential

People complain that he is oft injured, but only the last couple years. I don't remember him having health problems his first three years with the Sox when he was a .250 hitter. The reason why he didn't play more was because he wasn't good enough to be a full-time player, not health. (If I'm wrong on this correct me.)  But don't come on and implied he's been injured his entire career because that's not true. He's been injured a lost less the last couple years than Luis Robert. Do we get rid of him?

Also, many people are saying that he's terrible on defense. That's not true; three years ago he was terrible on defense. The MLB.com article describes his defense as "servicable". I would agree with that; he's average, adequate. Now if we are playing Palka or Delmonico in the outfield, they are terrible. And I have news for you: Eloy is not going to be to be playing defense as well as a healthy Avi will be next year. 

Others are bringing up this or that metric that seems to show that Avi was lucky batting .330 in 2017. So what does that mean, without what luck or chance this metric seems to show, would he have only batted .315 or .310?? That still sounds excellent to me.  That .330 average was in 2017. I say it again, are our memories really that short that we can't see beyond last season and the disappointment we feel about Avi, as well as the entire team?

Also, people keep bringing up where is he gonna play when Harper gets here. Really, really??? Do you really think Harper will be here next year? Look at the history of the White Sox. Any time you look at any rumors online on who is most likely to sign Harper and five or six teams as mentioned, I have never seen the White Sox listed. Sure if Harper were coming, I would say let Avi go, but come on people, let's return to the real world in which exists the White Sox as we know them. 

 

[turnin' two]

10 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Threatening a player with non-tender if they don't accept a below market standards contract?  You don't see how that could be an issue?

All I have to say is I hope you guys have your lawyers paid up if this is how you do business.

Oh the high an mighty.  Aren't you just advocating for cutting him?  How is that better?  They aren't threatening him.   They are being honest with where they value them.  If he doesn't like that offer, he gets to become a free agent.                               

[fathom]

If and when they non-tender him, it better not be to bring in Adam Jones

[Dick Allen]

10 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Threatening a player with non-tender if they don't accept a below market standards contract?  You don't see how that could be an issue?

All I have to say is I hope you guys have your lawyers paid up if this is how you do business.

So you are saying his agent and the union would rather the team offer nothing than something they may deem to be market appropriate. 

The team has no obligation to offer him anything. There is nothing illegal about offering him a contract as long as it is minimum. There isn't a gun to his head. He becomes a free agent if he doesn't like the deal. 

Lawyers paid up. That's a good one. 

[ChiSox59]

1 minute ago, vilehoopster said:

After discussing the concept of arbitration and sub-abritration to death, let's back on the original topic of is Avi worth keeping for 8 million. I still say absolutely yes. Again if Nate Jones is worth taking a chance on for 4.65 million, than Avi worth is chancing 8 million on with all his potential

Your question has been answered many times, but I will answer again.

He has no upside.  Yes, he has potential.  Yes, he could magically lead the league in BABIP again and hit .330.  But no one is going to give you anything of value for him even then, and then what? He is a FA after 2019.  Are you prepared to then pay him $15M AAV for his huge 2019?  Absofuckinglutely not. 

$8M is not a lot in today's game.  I agree.  But Avi would be lucky to get half that if he is gets non-tendered.  There are better players on the FA market, now and many more will join after tomorrow, that the Sox could sign for less, that would have more upside to the org.  

Its really not that complicated.  

[southsider2k5]

 

1 minute ago, vilehoopster said:

This is the guy who started this thread. Sorry about the bold. I typed it in google docs to have spell check, and when I copied and pasted it, it came out bold and I didn't notice. 

After discussing the concept of arbitration and sub-abritration to death, let's back on the original topic of is Avi worth keeping for 8 million. I still say absolutely yes. Again if Nate Jones is worth taking a chance on for 4.65 million, than Avi worth is chancing 8 million on with all his potential

People complain that he is oft injured, but only the last couple years. I don't remember him having health problems his first three years with the Sox when he was a .250 hitter. The reason why he didn't play more was because he wasn't good enough to be a full-time player, not health. (If I'm wrong on this correct me.)  But don't come on and implied he's been injured his entire career because that's not true. He's been injured a lost less the last couple years than Luis Robert. Do we get rid of him?

Also, many people are saying that he's terrible on defense. That's not true; three years ago he was terrible on defense. The MLB.com article describes his defense as "servicable". I would agree with that; he's average, adequate. Now if we are playing Palka or Delmonico in the outfield, they are terrible. And I have news for you: Eloy is not going to be to be playing defense as well as a healthy Avi will be next year. 

Others are bringing up this or that metric that seems to show that Avi was lucky batting .330 in 2017. So what does that mean, without what luck or chance this metric seems to show, would he have only batted .315 or .310?? That still sounds excellent to me.  That .330 average was in 2017. I say it again, are our memories really that short that we can't see beyond last season and the disappointment we feel about Avi, as well as the entire team?

Also, people keep bringing up where is he gonna play when Harper gets here. Really, really??? Do you really think Harper will be here next year? Look at the history of the White Sox. Any time you look at any rumors online on who is most likely to sign Harper and five or six teams as mentioned, I have never seen the White Sox listed. Sure if Harper were coming, I would say let Avi go, but come on people, let's return to the real world in which exists the White Sox as we know them. 

 

Games played by year

2013-72 MLB 47-MiLB

2014- 46 in Chi, 13 in AAA

2015-148

2016-120

2017-136

2018-93

For the record that is 33% of his years less than 100 games due to injuries, and one season of 140 games or more.  67% of seasons under 120 games.

 

[Dick Allen]

4 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Read the rest of the thread.  This is someone's idea of how to negotiate.

Also of note, with all of the players who are being DFA'd and non-tendered this week, there hasn't been a single one signed for more than 20% below their previous years salary.  They are all being non-tendered or DFA'd.  If this was really a thing, it would be happening all over MLB right now.

Because most of those guys are making near minimum anyway. Avi and Schoop are in a pretty unique situation. 

[Balta1701]

6 minutes ago, vilehoopster said:

This is the guy who started this thread. Sorry about the bold. I typed it in google docs to have spell check, and when I copied and pasted it, it came out bold and I didn't notice. 

After discussing the concept of arbitration and sub-abritration to death, let's back on the original topic of is Avi worth keeping for 8 million. I still say absolutely yes. Again if Nate Jones is worth taking a chance on for 4.65 million, than Avi worth is chancing 8 million on with all his potential

People complain that he is oft injured, but only the last couple years. I don't remember him having health problems his first three years with the Sox when he was a .250 hitter. The reason why he didn't play more was because he wasn't good enough to be a full-time player, not health. (If I'm wrong on this correct me.)  But don't come on and implied he's been injured his entire career because that's not true. He's been injured a lost less the last couple years than Luis Robert. Do we get rid of him?

In 2014, Avi missed more than 1/2 the season because he dove for a ball incorrectly and shredded his shoulder after none of the coaches could be bothered to teach him how to slide through all of spring training. He made it back at the end of the year.  In 2016 he hit the 15 day Disabled list with a knee injury. In 2017 he hit the 10 day DL with a thumb injury.

Also, isn't it true that Nate Jones will only make $2.6 million this year,  that the White Sox had an option to pick up at a lower dollar value if he did get hurt?

[southsider2k5]

4 minutes ago, turnin' two said:

Oh the high an mighty.  Aren't you just advocating for cutting him?  How is that better?  They aren't threatening him.   They are being honest with where they value them.  If he doesn't like that offer, he gets to become a free agent.                               

Because a non-tender is OK under the labor agreement. 

[turnin' two]

7 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Because a non-tender is OK under the labor agreement. 

So is offering him a deal before arbitration.  So is offering him a deal before the non-tender deadline.  Do you not understand that?  I don't get where you think there are threats. 

Edited November 29, 2018 by turnin' two

[Dick Allen]

Craig Stammen made $2.25 million in 2015. Had surgery and was non tendered by Washington. San Diego signed him to a $900k contract. 

 

Just think how awful it would have been had the Nats offered him $1.5 million and gave him a 33% cut. Lawyer up. Grievance time.

[vilehoopster]

He has no upside.  Yes, he has potential.  Yes, he could magically lead the league in BABIP again and hit .330.  But no one is going to give you anything of value for him even then, and then what? He is a FA after 2019.  Are you prepared to then pay him $15M AAV for his huge 2019?  Absofuckinglutely not. 

$8M is not a lot in today's game.  I agree.  But Avi would be lucky to get half that if he is gets non-tendered.  There are better players on the FA market, now and many more will join after tomorrow, that the Sox could sign for less, that would have more upside to the org.  

First of all, I am absolute stumped on the difference between upside and potential. In this context, doesn't upside mean potential to do well and help the club win games . . . upside? Avi has a ton of upside/ potential if he can bat over .300 again and hit 25 or 30 homers. That would help the White Sox win a lot of games. . .  ie upside.

And I got news for you, if he bats over .300 next year and hits about 30 home runs, abso-stinking-lutley I would pay him 15 million a year so he can come back and do that again the next year, and so on. And there are not better players in the free market for 8 million. 

And I don't want trade value for him. I don't want to trade a guy batting over .300 for another who maybe, in a couple years might end up batting .300. I want him to keep batting over .300 for the Sox and hitting over 25 home runs. That to me is serious upside. I don't see how that is complicated.