Trout signed a six-year extension in 2014. Were I the Angels’ lawyer, I’d argue that signing an extension restarts the seven-year clock.
Seriously, I can’t imagine how the Angels, or any California team, would lose such a case.
In actual hot stove news, Rajai Davis signed with Oakland for 1 year, $6M. He didn’t have a great year in Cleveland, but I’m a little surprised they didn’t keep him for that money.
Apparently the A’s are also interested in Mark Trumbo. He turned down 4yrs / $52M from Baltimore. Not sure how much more he can get based on Encarnacion’s deal.
Not for the life of me can I understand what Trout’s case would be. Here is the actual text:
“…a contract to render personal service, other than a contract of apprenticeship as provided in Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 3070), may not be enforced against the employee beyond seven years from the commencement of service under it.”
So I don’t understand what’s special about 2017. Trout’s contract was signed in 2014. 2017 will be three years into the contract, not seven, if you count from when he signed the contract he’s working under. If you count from the start of Trout’s employment with the Angels, he has worked for them since 2009, so technically if the law applies from that point he’s eligible to invoke it already.
[QUOTE=Barkis is Willin’]
Apparently the A’s are also interested in Mark Trumbo. He turned down 4yrs / $52M from Baltimore. Not sure how much more he can get based on Encarnacion’s deal.
[/QUOTE]
People aren’t exactly clamoring to sign Jose Bautista, either.
Trumbo is not anywhere near the player Encarnacion is. He was crazy to turn down an offer like that.
I admit that i don’t exactly understand how this would go if Trout tried to exercise the option, but i’m not sure i understand, either, the confidence of the armchair lawyering going on here.
I’m sure that OldGuy is right that the Angels’ lawyers would argue that signing an extension restarts the seven-year clock. But the article linked by Superdude says, quite explicitly, that:
And if you go to the original Fangraphs article, which is much better and much more fully explained than the one linked by Superdude, you’ll see it gives specific reference to a case which found that “employees may opt-out of a contract under California law even in the middle of a voluntarily signed contract extension.”
The issue has not been tested in court recently, though, and the Fangraphs piece also notes that it has never before been tested by a unionized employee. meaning that a test by Trout or another baseball player would have to consider the collective bargaining agreement, something that was not an issue in previous cases.
Trout signed on July 2, 2009, meaning that the seven years were up just before last season’s All-Star break. What is special about this year, i guess, is that we are now in the first off-season since the seven years expired. It’s one thing to contest a contract through the courts (something i doubt Trout is considering); it’s another to try it right in the middle of the season.
The point related to the series of one year contracts is only pertinent to those with renewable options, presumably, in the case of an athlete, a team option. So, if Trout signed a one year contract in 2009 that had a team option in '10, '11, '12, and on and on, then he’d have a case.
Otherwise, any contract signed with a California team that covers a length of time beyond 7 years, even if signed in year 6 with that team, basically has a player option in the 8th year and beyond.
Trout’s current deal will pay him $34M/yr in '18-'20. I don’t know how much better he’d do in the market anyway on a yearly basis. Sure, he could lock in for more years. If Trout was dead set on fighting it, maybe he’d win. I don’t know. Just doesn’t seem like it would be worth the financial cost, PR hit or loss of negotiating in good faith.
Well, how about that; the Blue Jays resign Jose Bautista for a year for just over the value of a qualifying offer. There are mutual option years but those don’t really count.
Given the team’s huge outfield holes this is a good signing. It’s low risk, Bautista is still an effective hitter even when people think he’s hitting badly, and it’ll make the fans happy. If he falls apart, oh well, it’s just one year.
The problem is he has to play the outfield, which he’s very bad at. Assuming the Jays plan on playing Justin Smoak and Kendrys Morales every day, there’s no room at 1B/DH. If Smoak blows up there will be, but then they’re short an outfielder.
And the Padres will spend a franchise record $83M over 6 years on…Wil Myers. Now there’s a guy where I never understood the fascination. He’s young and he’s had some injuries, but he posted his best season yet in 2016 with a WAR of 3.2. The yearly average money doesn’t sound terrible, but it looks like they loaded up the back end of that contract pretty heavily. I’m sure they won’t come to regret that in about 3 years.
Myers was just such a beloved prospect, and honestly, he LOOKS great. He’s the classic prospect - he’s a tall, handsome,m charismatic guy with a smooth swing and good raw tools.
This is a high risk move, but the upside is more substantial than you might be giving them credit for. Myers is only 25, a great year if you’re even going to do it to sign a guy long term; in 3 years he’ll be way younger than Edwin Encarnacion is today, and Encarnacion got $20 million a year coming off a 3.7 WAR. I’ll grant his track record is a lot more impressive, but… I think there is something to be said for the notion that you have to take risks; if you only hire sure things, you’ll either be mediocre or have to spend $400 million.
Regarding Myers’s track record, you miss time to injury it can get you out of a groove and ruin your rate stats. His strikeout rate last year was alarming, but maybe that will come down.
What I find intriguing about San Diego’s commitment to Myers is the fact they made him a full time first baseman last year. I assume that’s not going to change, even though they managed to dump Melvin “Don’t Call Me B.J.” Upton. On one hand that reduces the contextual value of Myers’s bat, since first basemen hit better as a group than outfielders. But on the other, maybe they’re on to something. A can think of a number of hitters who, when moved to a less demanding position,
- Stayed healthier, and
- Showed improvement as hitters.
Myers got moved to first base last year and sure enough, he played every day and had his best season. Maybe he’s going to roll off a string of productive seasons now.
Michael Kopech, the hard throwing righty the Red Sox traded for Chris Sale,hit 110mph on the gun yesterday.
Well, kind of. He was essentially throwing out of a running crow hop, not a pitcher’s mound. Still, we knew he could hit north of 100. I don’t remember if I said it at the time, but I wouldn’t be surprised if he turns out to be a bigger star than Yoan Moncada, the other (and more highly touted) piece of the Sale trade.
I cannot imagine that they intend to give regular playing time to Smoak, given how utterly useless he is. I have no idea why they gave him that extension. I was under the impression that the plan was to play Morales and Pearce at 1B and DH.
Pearce is projected to mostly play against lefties and is the only person in this line of conversation who can play passable outfield; if he plays first you’re forcing a terrible defensive player into the outfield, and if he DHs you have terrible defensive players at both first and in the outfield.
Smoak can “hit” lefthanded and can play first base, so expect to see him a lot, at least until August, at which point, if they’re in contention, he’ll vanish.
I would be more surprised if he didn’t go through a Tommy John or two and just disappear.
Hall of Fame Vote 2017
Ballots Cast: 442 Needed for Election: 332
Votes Percentage
381 Jeff Bagwell 86.2%
380 Tim Raines 86.0%
336 Ivan Rodriguez 76.0%
327 Trevor Hoffman 74.0%
317 Vladimir Guerrero 71.7%
259 Edgar Martinez 58.6%
239 Roger Clemens 54.1%
238 Barry Bonds 53.8%
229 Mike Mussina 51.8%
199 Curt Schilling 45.0%
151 Lee Smith 34.2%
105 Manny Ramirez 23.8%
97 Larry Walker 21.9%
96 Fred McGriff 21.7%
74 Jeff Kent 16.7%
59 Gary Sheffield 13.3%
45 Billy Wagner 10.2%
38 Sammy Sosa 8.6%
17 Jorge Posada 3.8%
3 Magglio Ordonez 0.7%
2 Edgar Renteria 0.5%
2 Jason Varitek 0.5%
1 Tim Wakefield 0.2%
0 Corey Blake 0.0%
0 Pat Burrell 0.0%
0 Orlando Cabrera 0.0%
0 Mike Cameron 0.0%
0 J.D. Drew 0.0%
0 Carlos Guillen 0.0%
0 Derrek Lee 0.0%
0 Melvin Mora 0.0%
0 Arthur Rhodes 0.0%
0 Freddy Sanchez 0.0%
0 Matt Stairs 0.0%
Yay Bagwell!
Trevor Hoffman at 74%?
Man, these HoF voters are clueless.
That could be taken two ways…
Good for Tim Raines.
I’m happy for Raines, and note the BBWAA was able to elect Ivan Rodriguez, who is obviously one of the greatest catchers of all time, but the SDMB could not.
I am surprised Jorge Posada failed to quality for future ballots. I’m not saying he’s a Hall of Famer, but he was a cornerstone of one of the greatest teams ever. There are worse players in the Hall of Fame. He was sure as hell a better player than Billy Wagner.
They should just get over themselves and elect Bonds and Clemens.
[QUOTE=markdash]
Trevor Hoffman at 74%?
Man, these HoF voters are clueless.
[/QUOTE]
If one looks past the 75% cutoff line, the BBWAA basically, within a smal margin of error, believes Trevor Hoffman was as great a player as Ivan Rodriguez. That is, to say the least, a ridiculous position.
The HOF discussion should be its own thread.
In what way do you mean that? Because I can see some saying he should absolutely be in and others saying he shouldn’t even come close.
Personally, I’m all for relievers being in the HOF. Especially Hoffman and Lee Smith, too. It’s a position like any other. WAR won’t do it justice, though. Hoffman and Smith’s WARs are 28.0 and 29.4, respectively. Looks like pretty weak sauce for the HOF.
Orioles sign Mark Trumbo.
3 years/$37.5 million