Minimum Contract Lengths for Extensions

[Colby]

Ah, gotcha Aubrey.  Then that makes my clarificatiion moot.  Seems like a good idea as is then.

The subject title threw you off.  I changed it to reflect that the minimum length is only there for extensions.

[Canada8999]

Guys,

I was thinking about some of the big names whose contracts will expire after the 2010 season like Lincecum, Pujols, Fielder, and Hamilton.  Unless I'm missing something, we have MAXIMUM lengths for contracts that are extended in the off-season, but we don't seem to have MINIMUM lengths.  For example, the way the rules currently read, Pujols could be re-signed indefinitely to a series of 1 year contracts.  That doesn't seem realistic, because the last big name free agent I can remember that signed multiple 1 year contracts was Roger Clemens, and he was constantly coming in and out of retirement.  IF I haven't missed something in the current rules, I would propose something like the following in terms of MINIMUM contract lengths for free agents whose contracts expire in 2010:

20m+     5 years
16-20     4 years
11-15     3 years
5-10       2 years

Roy
 

I agree with you on the premise, numbers seem okay at first glance.

I thought about this before for the same reason.  Contract extensions could be abused for the big names.  Having a minimum and a maximum number of years per annual salary in contract extensions would be worthwhile.  I support Roy's proposal for this upcoming off-season if others agree.

I'm not sure I agree on implementing this for next season - I for one was certainly considering extending some of my big names on shorter contracts, so is it fair to change those rules now?  Maybe it is, but I think when this rule is implemented should be part of the discussion.

[Mr.TradeKing]

Well my opinion on the matter of when to implement the rule is this: In previous rules we have decided to "grandfather" them in because they are what I call "in-season rules" or rules that would have an immediate effect on this season. However this is more of an "off-season" rule so I feel as if half a season is plenty of time to read through and understand this rule. In previous rules, there has been a "gray area" as far as players go such as the FA rule that was recently passed which made a case for players to "grandfathered" in. However I believe their isn't a gray area in this rule. I say that this rule should be implemented at the beginning of this upcoming off-season which would allow GMs to sign players to extensions in-season before this rule went into effect. Case in point, Ryan Howard didn't sign a 1-yr deal this yr, in fact like Roy said; no superstar has signed a 1-yr deal in recent memory except for Roger Clemens who kinda pulled a Bret Farve and fell under special circumstances.

~MTK

[Mr.TradeKing]

I would like to add that in today's game, offering a 1-yr deal to a franchise player would be interpreted as a slap in the face and would more than likely anger the player and make them more likely to look at other offers and/or raise their asking price...

~MTK

[Colby]

It may be fair to put this rule in place starting next season (i.e. when OFA starts in January).

[Mr.TradeKing]

It may be fair to put this rule in place starting next season (i.e. when OFA starts in January).

Well I'm on Roy's side and believe that would just allow more time to abuse the system. If this is not in effect, when I go to resign Martin Prado this offseason, then he will more than likely be signed to a 1yr deal and I'll take my chances next yr.

~MTK

[Canada8999]

Well I'm on Roy's side and believe that would just allow more time to abuse the system. If this is not in effect, when I go to resign Martin Prado this offseason, then he will more than likely be signed to a 1yr deal and I'll take my chances next yr.

~MTK

Well that's kind of the idea - I was already planning on re-signing some of my top players to 1-year deals, and have had that in mind for some time now.  If we are not allowed to re-sign a player after our 2010 contracts have ended (aka cap space freed up) on a 1-year deal, then this may have significantly changed my plans (I don't have the cap space to do it until after then, so I can't just decide to do it today instead).

I agree that the current rules should be amended, and I will not ask for an exception just for my team... but I do realize that putting this rule into affect this off-season will negatively affect my plans and so I raise the point in case it will also affect other teams.  If we do chose to implement this for the 2010 off-season, it will not be grandfathered in as other potentially impacting rules have been.

[Canada8999]

Well that's kind of the idea - I was already planning on re-signing some of my top players to 1-year deals, and have had that in mind for some time now.  If we are not allowed to re-sign a player after our 2010 contracts have ended (aka cap space freed up) on a 1-year deal, then this may have significantly changed my plans (I don't have the cap space to do it until after then, so I can't just decide to do it today instead).

I agree that the current rules should be amended, and I will not ask for an exception just for my team... but I do realize that putting this rule into affect this off-season will negatively affect my plans and so I raise the point in case it will also affect other teams.  If we do chose to implement this for the 2010 off-season, it will not be grandfathered in as other potentially impacting rules have been.

It is also worth noting that this is not a new realization of a 'loop-hole', as the rule was used in this way during the 2009 off-season.  For example, I re-signed Ethier to a 1-year deal: $14.5m (2010), now on the White Sox.

[rcankosy]

Guys,

Since the 2010 free agent class appears to be rich with talent, I would NOT be in favor of delaying the implementation of this rule.  Also, we should try to make a decison on this prior to the trade deadline to allow owners the opportunity to move players that they do not plan on re-signing.

[clidwin]

I do love your guys agreement, but he does have a excellent argueement. Ben probably had this in mind for some time now. I think this rule should be passed, but I feel Ben's pain! I agree to pass this rule.