ProFSL: Pro Fantasy Sports Leagues
Fantasy Leagues => Franchise GM: Transactions => Franchise GM => MLB Leagues => Franchise GM: Invalid Transactions => Topic started by: rcankosy on January 15, 2010, 12:26:43 PM
-
From the league rules on FA prospect contracts:
"He accumulate 40 IP for his career by 2006. He may stay under a prospect contract until three years after 2006. As of the beginning of the 2009 season (or end of 2008 season), he will be considered a free agent unless signed to a new deal."
Shouldn't the above had read?
As of the beginning of the 2010 season (or end of 2009 season), he will be considered a free agent unless signed to a new deal."
-
Good catch Roy... I'll fix the wording and highlight the example.
-
I'd like to combine what we've said about FA prospect contract so we have one clear example of how this would work. Let's say I have the winning bid of $3 million on Player X who is a prospect in rookie ball. I choose to spread the money over 3 years which works out to a $1 million salary for 2010 through 2012. As of 2013, he has not yet played one game in the majors. Does his salary go back down to 500K per season *until* 3 years after he has exceeded limits of 40 IP or 50 games when he becomes a free agent?
-
I'd like to combine what we've said about FA prospect contract so we have one clear example of how this would work. Let's say I have the winning bid of $3 million on Player X who is a prospect in rookie ball. I choose to spread the money over 3 years which works out to a $1 million salary for 2010 through 2012. As of 2013, he has not yet played one game in the majors. Does his salary go back down to 500K per season *until* 3 years after he has exceeded limits of 40 IP or 50 games when he becomes a free agent?
Correct... once the MLB contract has expired, the player can be extended on a prospect contract. The 50% of the previous contract would have to apply in to a bonus for the player.
-
Ryan Wheeler and Alex Liddi should have prospect contracts even though I chose to spread their signing bonuses over two years, right?
-
You can't spread a signing bonus over several years. It is a one shot deal. So no, they don't have prospect contracts. If you put - 2 mil for 2 years for Wheeler when asked what you wanted his contract to be, then that is guaranteed money and he no longer constitutes as a prospect. If you had taken the hit of 3.5 mil at once, then yes he would still be a prospect. So to answer your question, no those two are no longer prospects, and if you release them you take a cap hit.
-
OK, but according to Colby's earlier post I retain their rights and they return to a salary of 500K in 2012, right?
-
Please copy and paste that post in response to this post. But once someone makes a certain amount of money, their following contract can be no less than half of what they made in their previous contract. Unless of course they are more valuable than the contract they just finished, therefore you have to pay them accordingly. For instance if Liddi is making 2 mil a year for the next 2 years (hypothetical - not checking his salary) when his contract is up, you have to at least pay him 1 million. That is the resigning rule. I am not aware of someone regaining prospect status. I assume that if they haven't crossed that threshold by the time their contract is over, then they could still be considered prospects. But if they are already making more than 1 mil a year, then you cannot resign them for .5 mil.
-
Adding to what I just said after reading Colby's post. If they are making more than 1 mil a year, then yes they can return to prospect status and make 500K, but you have to make up the difference in their signing bonus on their new contract. So if what I understand is correct (from what Colby is saying) Ryan Wheeler can return to prospect status once his contract is up, but since he is making 2 mil a year now, you would have to give him a .5 mil signing bonus when he is resigned. That is if he is still eligible.
-
This 'interpretation' seems fair, but we should make sure its clearly known to everyone and clearly stated in the rules (I'm not sure that's the case right now).
Personally, this seems more like a new rule rather than an interpretation of the existing rules (since I don't think our existing rules cover this), and should be subject to the same process as other new rules (sent to the RC for debate and voting). Like I said, I think this is fair, but we've been passing more and more rules 'on the fly' IMO and we should be careful about that as we move along.
-
I agree with you Ben. I also happen to think any prospect signed should get a prospect contract and a signing bonus. It just makes it easier that way.
-
I like the signing bonus method better. In case the regular contracts system is also accepted I would suggest that whomever signs him with this type of deal cannot change it to a prospect contracts and that the only way a player could regain the prospect status would be through FA and as long as he still hasn't met the requirements.
-
I don't think you can change the rules mid-stream. I asked the question PRIOR to the draft, and it was answered. Colby's ruling formed the basis for my current draft, and it also guided my long-term salary planning.
-
I meant free agency, not the draft.
-
Understandable Roy, and you're likely not the only one - whatever we decide to do will need to work with/around that.
-
How would you treat a player such as Ryan Wheeler if he hasn't played a game in the majors when his contract expires at the end of the 2011 season since he's not currently signed to a prospect contract? On what basis, would you determine his salary if I wish to re-sign him?
-
I'm not really sure what a good answer to that question is...
Personally, I don't think I agree with signing a player to a salaried contract, letting it run out and then re-signing them to a prospect contract - they were not a prospect before, how can they go back to being one? Is that realistic, or within the intention of a prospect contract?
I'm not in favor of affecting transactions that have been made by owners operating under the assumption that they could follow the above interpretation - this wouldn't be fair.
I don't think having any kind of grandfather clause where existing 'salaried' prospects can be extended as prospects, but anyone signed after this FA period will be treated by a different rule - this would be messy.
I'm stuck on this... ideas?
-
I'll offer you a real life analogy. Andrew Brackman has a *major* league contract, not a minor league one like most prospects. However, he is still a prospect and will have no major league service time accrued when his current deal runs out if he has not been promoted to the majors. Also, his service time did not begin when he signed his major league contract for arbitration or free agent eligibility.
-
I think we're also getting too wrapped up in the verbige of what constitutes a prospect versus a standard contract. I simply look at it as signing a prospect and spreading or pro-rating his signing bonus. It would be simpler if we classified it as a prospect contract from the beginning with an ending year such as Ryan Wheeler (P-2011). That way we identify the player as a prospect and clearly identify when his signing bonus ends. After 2011, his signing bonus has been paid off, and his salary goes down to 500K. He loses prospect status 3 years after pitching 40 innings or playing 50 games. From a records standpoint, it's no harder than tracking other prospects. The only tricky part would be if he passed the 40 IP or 50 games played prior to the end of the 2011 season when his signing bonus would have been paid off. If that happened, he would still cease to be a prospect exactly 3 years after the season in which that occurred. The real question is whether anyone cares whether the signing bonus is paid off in 1 year or multiple years. I liked Colby's ruling, because it allowed a small market team like mine to be able to sign good prospects wihout having to shell out the entire amount in 1 year.
-
The way the salary system is set up is so that you have to at least pay for half the salary of a player once his contract is over. If we make the exception for prospects then, we will have to make further exceptions down the road. Each team has a budget, and each team is given options when they sign a player. Take the hit up front, or spread it out. That is left up to a teams particular GM. In the case of Ryan Wheeler, you beat out several people that also wanted him and didn't want to go higher. Neither team was in the higher echelon of salaries, so they would have been given the same opportunity as you, as to how to sign him. Taking signing bonus hits up front, allows to clear up space the following year, and then you have a player under control and minimum for several years. Also it allows you to release them if they don't ever reach their promise, without costing you their salary. The alternate option is spreading the money out, in that instance you loose all other benefits of taking the hit up front. If he is still a prospect at the end of his guaranteed contract, then he can be signed as a prospect, but he is due a salary bonus to make up the difference. Others are in the same boat as you with several prospects that have gone for a lot more than anyone expected they would have. This is all part of running a team. Believe me I am not trying to be a prick here, but we are all operating under the same rules, and more than a few of us, under the same budget constraints.
-
I simply look at it as signing a prospect and spreading or pro-rating his signing bonus.
I think this is the sticking point - if it's a prospect contract you need to pay the signing bonus up front, a signing bonus cannot be pro-rated. If you instead chose to spread the winning bid amount over the length of a contract, then it's a salary and the player is not on a prospect contract.