Buehrle Fest

[Gregory Pratt]

So I take it that Buehrle/Agent were being coy and dishonest (but not necessarily in a bad way) and that ESPN1000 was wrong?

[LVSoxFan]

Errr, whatever. Can we get back on topic here? This waiting is killing me.

 

Question: do we think that if this deal happens or not, it would be wrapped up before tonight's game either way?

[CanOfCorn]

Right after he digs it out and dusts it off. Seriously, those rings mean more to us than they do to them.

 

 

That may be true...but if someone was calling me stupid, and I had something like that to back it up, I WOULD take it out and dust it off.

 

And you know why? Cuz I'm petty.

[greasywheels121]

--BUZZZZZ--

 

Wrong answer.

 

Nobody's impressed with the baseless conjecturing on Collective Bargaining Agreements. If you are fluent in the Major League Baseball Players Association bylaws, then, by all means, let your voices be heard. If you are fluent in collective bargaining matters and how it might relate to a specific Buehrle hang-up, again, fire away.

 

If not, take it elsewhere.

 

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sp...tesox-headlines

 

One of the potential stumbling blocks, according to one of the sources, could be the Major League Baseball Players Association, which might hesitate to approve the deal because it believes Buehrle could command more on the free agent market this winter.

[Chisoxfn]

--BUZZZZZ--

 

Wrong answer.

 

Nobody's impressed with the baseless conjecturing on Collective Bargaining Agreements. If you are fluent in the Major League Baseball Players Association bylaws, then, by all means, let your voices be heard. If you are fluent in collective bargaining matters and how it might relate to a specific Buehrle hang-up, again, fire away.

 

If not, take it elsewhere.

Last I looked...you are not running this site. If you want to whine or tell the world what we can and can't post in here, than go build your own site and tell the people there.

 

That said, this thread can continue on as is.

[GreatScott82]

i think something will get done before 5 pm. Buerhle is just sick of talking about his contract status and he wants to stay... 4 years @ 56 million just might get it done. However to be safe i think it will have to be around 58-60 million to get the deal done today.

[fathom]

Errr, whatever. Can we get back on topic here? This waiting is killing me.

 

Question: do we think that if this deal happens or not, it would be wrapped up before tonight's game either way?

 

If there's a deal, it won't be announced until Monday. Between the Bulls draft and the big Cubs series, Monday would be the perfect time to announce it prior to Buehrle taking the mound at the Cell.

[Steff]

That may be true...but if someone was calling me stupid, and I had something like that to back it up, I WOULD take it out and dust it off.

 

And you know why? Cuz I'm petty.

 

I'd never put it away..

[BearSox]

Last I looked...you are not running this site. If you want to whine or tell the world what we can and can't post in here, than go build your own site and tell the people there.

 

That said, this thread can continue on as is.

Is it okay if I say that he has just been GAGED!

[Kalapse]

If there's a deal, it won't be announced until Monday. Between the Bulls draft and the big Cubs series, Monday would be the perfect time to announce it prior to Buehrle taking the mound at the Cell.

Noah, Gray and Curry are going to be introduced to the Chicago media on Monday.

[toasty]

If there's a deal, it won't be announced until Monday. Between the Bulls draft and the big Cubs series, Monday would be the perfect time to announce it prior to Buehrle taking the mound at the Cell.

 

 

 

i dont think they could stand to wait over the weekend if the deal has been reached... too much speculation.

[EvilJester99]

i dont think they could stand to wait over the weekend if the deal has been reached... too much speculation.

I doubt that many of us can wait over the weekend either....

[southsider2k5]

And he can sit back, kick up his feet and blind them with the luster that is his 2005 World Series Championship ring.

The exchange rate isn't that bad anymore. At least not like it used to...but the taxes there are still high.

 

And the lack of a State Income Tax in Texas and Florida is why a lot of athletes have homes in those states. I believe Scottie Pippen had a home in Houston, as did Shaq before he went to the Heat.

 

Which is funny, because with the lack of income taxes in Texas, they have some of the highest property tax rates in the country.

 

Noah, Gray and Curry are going to be introduced to the Chicago media on Monday.

 

I thought that was at one PM today?

[Kalapse]

Which is funny, because with the lack of income taxes in Texas, they have some of the highest property tax rates in the country.

I thought that was at one PM today?

Noah missed his fight out of New York (reason #1,546 to trade his ass) so Paxson announced they'll be pushing it back to Monday.

[southsider2k5]

Noah missed his fight out of New York (reason #1,546 to trade his ass) so Paxson announced they'll be pushing it back to Monday.

 

Wonderful.

[Chisoxfn]

i dont think they could stand to wait over the weekend if the deal has been reached... too much speculation.

Well if Jose is moved before the weekends end than I think we will already know a deal has been reached

[Gene Honda Civic]

Noah missed his fight out of New York (reason #1,546 to trade his ass) so Paxson announced they'll be pushing it back to Monday.

 

How annoying was that guy last night? Or anytime he gets in front of a microphone/camera? He was trying to talk about how marketable he was going to be while not being able to put together a single intelligent sentence.

 

The big winner of the night, which almost goes without saying, was Greg Oden. He was the best of Tim Duncan and Shaq all rolled into one. He had that non-threatening black man thing going on that advertisers love so much, and he had a genuinely great personality. Kid made himself millions of dollars by proving he wasn't a doofus in front of millions of people.

 

Noah will get a local TV spot for some car dealership that makes him dress up and dance around all funny.

 

And that's not even bringing up the different class of player they are on the court.

 

[WCSox]

I'd love to be a member in a union that works for a racket.

 

The antitrust exemption continues to boggle my mind when it comes to MLB.

 

The MLBPA is the exact opposite of the NFLPA. And that may partially explain why the NFL is so much more popular than MLB.

 

I still think that 4/56 is BS. If JR really doens't want to give Mark a five-year deal, methinks that he would have to compromise by paying him a higher yearly salary. If the four-year part is true, I'd expect it to be more like 4/62.

Edited June 29, 2007 by WCSox

[Wedge]

If WGN is trying to put Bozo's Circus back on the air, I have candidate #1:

 

[iamshack]

I would imagine the MLBPA would have to show, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Buehrle could get more years AND more money on the open market. Which would be IMPOSSIBLE to do since GMs aren't going to come out before then and say, "Suuuurrrrrre, I'll give him 7/126 just like Zito!!!"

 

The MLBPA has absolutely no right under the current CBA to reject a contract signed by a player as long as it fulfills the basic requirements of the "uniform player contract." The commissioner can reject a contract for other reasons, but the MLBPA can only reject a contract for a few reasons, one being if a contract contains a salary schedule whereby a player receives 20% less one year than he did the year before, or 30% less than than the two previous years. So for instance, Mark's contract could not pay him $14 million in 08', $14 million in 09' $15 million in 10', and then $8 million in 11'. That contract could be rejected by the MLBPA. Outside of such a reduction from year to year in a multi-year player contract, as long as Mark's contract fulfills the requirements of a basic player agreement, it is a legitimate and valid contract.

 

Now this isn't to say they don't have influence over what the players do. Certainly they can lean on Mark and Jeff Berry and try them to get the best possible terms because it may be in the best interest's of all players, but they certainly have no explicit legal rights to reject a contract or file a legitimate grievance if Mark were to sign a hypothetical 4/56 extension. That power simply does not exist under the current CBA.

 

One more thing, I would have to believe that the MLBPA is sophisticated enough to realize that the market this past offseason was somewhat extraordinary. If the current and future free agent market were to continue to produce contracts the same or higher than those given this past offseason, there will be future ramifications that will have negative financial effects upon veteran free agents. There is a ton of cash in baseball, but MLB cannot bare the kind of rapid escalation of salaries that last year's free agent market experienced. Barry Zito's contract, for instance, can not be used as some form of a benchmark for current salaries. It is simply too high. One would expect that the MLBPA would consider the contracts of the past three years or so as benchmarks, and the economic climate in MLB over that same time period, as opposed to simply last season. If that is the case, Mark's hypothetical extension of 4/56 would fit well within acceptable parameters

Edited June 29, 2007 by iamshack

[greasywheels121]

If WGN is trying to put Bozo's Circus back on the air, I have candidate #1:

 

 

I got a nice chuckle out of that.

[Gene Honda Civic]

The MLBPA has absolutely no right under the current CBA to reject a contract signed by a player as long as it fulfills the basic requirements of the "uniform player contract." The commissioner can reject a contract for other reasons, but the MLBPA can only reject a contract for a few reasons, one being if a contract contains a salary schedule whereby a player receives 20% less one year than he did the year before, or 30% less than than the two previous years. So for instance, Mark's contract could not pay him $14 million in 08', $14 million in 09' $15 million in 10', and then $8 million in 11'. That contract could be rejected by the MLBPA. Outside of such a reduction from year to year in a multi-year player contract, as long as Mark's contract fulfills the requirements of a basic player agreement, it is a legitimate and valid contract.

I don't believe they enforce it like that... Carlos Delgado famously went from $19M in his final season with the Blue Jays to $4M in his first year with the Marlins... But MLBPA wasn't going to stop him from signing a deal which paid him 13M/yr (or more) over the life of the contract.

 

In fact, they're not really going to say anything about any free agent contracts that fail to meet the above requirements. Think AJ Pierzynski... He had to take a 30+% pay cut to come to the Sox. But he had been non-tendered by the Giants and nobody wanted to touch him.

 

Unless the MLBPA wants to guarantee Mark (and his family) the $56M should he get injured (on or off the field) only then can they have a beef with him taking "too little."

[The Beast]

If WGN is trying to put Bozo's Circus back on the air, I have candidate #1:

 

I read the paper and I thought, boy, these are the kind of people Chicago sports teams bring in. Not to mention another guy is troubled that the Bulls drafted and I bet he'll end up like Tank Johnson.

[iamshack]

I don't believe they enforce it like that... Carlos Delgado famously went from $19M in his final season with the Blue Jays to $4M in his first year with the Marlins... But MLBPA wasn't going to stop him from signing a deal which paid him 13M/yr (or more) over the life of the contract.

 

In fact, they're not really going to say anything about any free agent contracts that fail to meet the above requirements. Think AJ Pierzynski... He had to take a 30+% pay cut to come to the Sox. But he had been non-tendered by the Giants and nobody wanted to touch him.

 

Unless the MLBPA wants to guarantee Mark (and his family) the $56M should he get injured (on or off the field) only then can they have a beef with him taking "too little."

 

No, they don't enforce any salary cuts from contract to contract. Certainly players can decline or become injured, and sign contracts that are of lesser value than they once were able to command.

 

What I am referring to is a salary decrease in the middle of a mulit-year player contract. AJ took a pay cut, but that was in the form of a new contract. Delgado did the same- took a new deal that started offering less money than his previous contract, but that rapidly esacalated from the start of his new contract. Also keep in mind that it is allowable to have compensation deferred- as long as the actual annual salary number does not decrease by 20% from the previous year.

[Greg The Bull Luzinski]

If WGN is trying to put Bozo's Circus back on the air, I have candidate #1:

 

 

I would for Pax to tell him, before you sign, "No headbands, and do get a haircut."