Minimum Contract Lengths for Extensions

[Canada8999]

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.

If we delay the rule, affected players are resigned to 1-year deals, and then next season this is no longer allowed - it is not like this free agent class will slip through the cracks permanently, they will be exposed to the new rule as soon as it is in place, regardless of when it is put into place.

[Canada8999]

If we delay the rule, affected players are resigned to 1-year deals, and then next season this is no longer allowed - it is not like this free agent class will slip through the cracks permanently, they will be exposed to the new rule as soon as it is in place, regardless of when it is put into place.

If I really am the only affected team then so-be-it, put the rule in place.  If others are also going to be negatively affected if we don't grandfather this in (as we have with other rules), then maybe we should discuss a compromise (ex: each team can use this on 1 or 2 players max, etc.)

[rcankosy]

It seems as if we need some others to weigh in on this since it's a fairly large issue.  I would be open to compromising on prospect contracts that are expriring like Hamilton and Lincecum, because they were not eligible for the new rule on extending prospects (their contracts expired this year).  However, I would not like to make an exception for vets like Pujols. 

[Mr.TradeKing]

Yeah, I can see someone getting shafted either way. I think this may be an issue where you can't please everyone. I will be ok with it either way b/c if this rule is delayed, then I will benefit. However I feel as if the right thing to do is to put into effect this off-season.

~MTK

[Colby]

Yeah, I can see someone getting shafted either way. I think this may be an issue where you can't please everyone. I will be ok with it either way b/c if this rule is delayed, then I will benefit. However I feel as if the right thing to do is to put into effect this off-season.

~MTK

We could always put a rule like this in place at the trade deadline.  It gives teams some time to see if they want to give out the short extensions or not.

[Mr.TradeKing]

Yeh that is a good idea Colby.  I think the fact of the matter is that there isn't one time that is convenient for everyone. The best thing to do is to, go ahead and set the rule in place sooner rather than later and just let everyone adjust and get used to it. I will be hit just as hard as anyone else since I have Prado and Dunn.

~MTK

[Canada8999]

Yeh that is a good idea Colby.  I think the fact of the matter is that there isn't one time that is convenient for everyone. The best thing to do is to, go ahead and set the rule in place sooner rather than later and just let everyone adjust and get used to it. I will be hit just as hard as anyone else since I have Prado and Dunn.

~MTK

The issue here is that's the opposite thinking of all other rules we have passed - we have purposefully put them out far enough such that they will not impact anyone's immediate plans. 

I really want to hear more on the argument for why this rule should not be grandfathered in (meaning we complete the phase of this season that it will affect before it is put into place)... Roy's argument is that allowing owners to do this again this off-season will let big names be re-signed for 1-year, but I'm still not sure I understand why that is an emergency, or why this wasn't an issue when used last year.

[lp815]

The issue here is that's the opposite thinking of all other rules we have passed - we have purposefully put them out far enough such that they will not impact anyone's immediate plans. 

I really want to hear more on the argument for why this rule should not be grandfathered in (meaning we complete the phase of this season that it will affect before it is put into place)... Roy's argument is that allowing owners to do this again this off-season will let big names be re-signed for 1-year, but I'm still not sure I understand why that is an emergency, or why this wasn't an issue when used last year.

Ben makes a point stating that implementing a rule immediately after it has been approved hasn't been typical protocol with the league.  However, we HAVE still approved a couple rules that were effective right after approval (the 60 day hold on players, the latest being, keeping bonuses with original teams, etc.).  While this ruling probably affects Ben's team moreso than others, it will probably affect every mid market to large market team, as well as a couple small market ones. 

I feel that this is a very important rule to have, as the argument that top players signing 1 year contracts constantly is very unrealistic.  With that said, I would recommend a compromise of some sort, as some(many?) teams might have planned this strategy, and this would change their format dramatically.  I'd recommend that the 1 year rule be allowed until the trade deadline this season.  If a team plans on making an extension, then they should do it now, with 2008 stats included. 

By allowing the extensions to actually be made (instead of immediately illegal), this gives those teams with those plans for 1 year deals to do them, at the cost of using 2008 stats (which might increase values to some players) AND having to make the extension prior to the end of the season.

To me, this might be a decent compromise...I fully support this rule, but we have no idea how many teams were wanting to use this strategy for next year.

[Canada8999]

The issue is that many of the cases where teams are looking to re-sign big-name players will not be able to do so until the season ends, and the 2010 expiring contracts and bonus money is removed from the cap (as we move on to 2011).  That is my biggest issue with putting this in before the start of the 2010 off-season.

[Mr.TradeKing]

Ben makes a point stating that implementing a rule immediately after it has been approved hasn't been typical protocol with the league.  However, we HAVE still approved a couple rules that were effective right after approval (the 60 day hold on players, the latest being, keeping bonuses with original teams, etc.).  While this ruling probably affects Ben's team moreso than others, it will probably affect every mid market to large market team, as well as a couple small market ones. 

I feel that this is a very important rule to have, as the argument that top players signing 1 year contracts constantly is very unrealistic.  With that said, I would recommend a compromise of some sort, as some(many?) teams might have planned this strategy, and this would change their format dramatically.  I'd recommend that the 1 year rule be allowed until the trade deadline this season.  If a team plans on making an extension, then they should do it now, with 2008 stats included. 

By allowing the extensions to actually be made (instead of immediately illegal), this gives those teams with those plans for 1 year deals to do them, at the cost of using 2008 stats (which might increase values to some players) AND having to make the extension prior to the end of the season.

To me, this might be a decent compromise...I fully support this rule, but we have no idea how many teams were wanting to use this strategy for next year.

Well said, Jake. I think I will be one of the harder hit teams since I have Dunn and Prado. However, I see the reason for this rule and believe it is necessary.

~MTK