It doesn't necessarily need to be a straight up trade, but the demands need to be decreased. Say we trade ramirez and a couple prospects, either from our system or via a trade

Sorry Bob Lobel said that Tom Warner is expected to talk with the Rangers owner Mr Hicks about working out a deal, Plus Arods agent Mr Boras is going to meet with the players union to on behalf of arod. Which in translation this deal is far from dead!

Guys/Gals,

I used to be a broker and knew a few sports agents. Believe me, Scott Boras would not be wasting his time if there was no hope. This deal will get done....just let it run its course. Once I heard Peter Gammons say that Boras was still there working on this, I grabbed a Fenway Frank and a Beer.

klapisch/ silverman/ dallas writer guy on "will the trade happen?" on sportscenter:

Yes
Yes
Yes.

I've relieved some of the frustration I have in wishing for a quicker resolution of whether the ARod or Nomar deals are ever really going to happen by imagining Curt and Keith, in action, and doing what they do...so well...AHHHHHhhhhhh! It's going to be SOooooooo nice!

Also, though I have the utmost faith in rotoworld, has anyone been able to confirm Stark's doubt and Gammon's decreased optimism? Last I checked on ESPNews, Gammons was on record as thinking it was going to get done. I dont see Stark's definite no anywhere- any help?

Stuart Scott just interviewed Michael Silverman from the Boston Herald and two other baseball writers (one from Texas whose name I know and can't remember, another from a NY paper who I didnt' recognize).

Each was unequivocal in their belief that this deal would get done. No hestitation. No doubt. Nothing.

Art- quick question- are the rumblings youre hearing regarding talks ongoing, or a deal nearing likelihood? Any new word?

Ok, after we all heard DEAD just about every single sports person said yes it will happen. I would say if we want anything for nomar it has to happen before Sunday, teams aren’t going to wait for nomar if there are some non-tendered out there. I think if we hear nothing by Saturday night the chances of this thing going down get lower everyday.

Can someone please stop the rollercoaster...I think I'm going to be sick.

I saw that too, dag, and was moved. I think this is going to happen. I can go to bed a lot happier than i was 5 hours ago, and tomorrow I'm off to see Lord of the Rings, hopefully coming home to some good news. But that's neither here nor there.

This deal will get done. The MLBPA looks horrible in this mess, and if this were ever brought into court, the MLBPA doesn't stand a chance. All it requires that that a renegotiated deal has an added potential value to the player.

1. Potential: allowing A-Rod to declare for free agency at an earlier date allows a potential increase in monetary value for A-Rod. It's extremely unlikely in this depressed market that he would get $30 million a year, but it only says a potential increase. It's possible, ain't it?

2. Value: What exactly is value? According to the MLBPA it is monetary value, nothing else. But improving the quality of life is certainly a value to most people, and it is very likely that a court of law or an arbitrator will agree. Having the ability to win a championship, getting out of the hellhole that is Arlington Texas, his wife loves the shopping on Newbury Street. It can be any of these things. I certainly value the fact that Boston has the best health care in the world and some of the finest educational institutions. This is not value? Of course it is.


The clause is so open-ended that the owners would love to take it to court, but the hold up is that there isn't enough time to go to arbitration and have the involved teams build their rosters for the upcoming season. The non-tenders are tomorrow so this needs to be resolved soon and bringing it to arbitration just won't work. So the posturing may continue for a few days, but eventually everyone will realize that this is a deal that NEEDS to get done. And it will.

Agree - Straight up is wishful thinking - Bob Kraft (pretty good at deals himself once said) : You know you've got a good deal when no-one is happy

ARod wouldn't be able to file for free agency any earlier, he can already opt out of his contract in 2008 so that argument obviously wouldn't work, and there is no way an arbitrator would rule against the MLBPA especially when it is stated in a Labor Agreement.

If the Rangers drop their request money, does this deal get done?

I don't think the MLBPA would lose this in court either. IMO the only way this gets done is if the Sox and Rangers come to an agreement w/out restructuring A-Rod's deal. Texas appears to be willing to lower their asking price so if the sox throw in a couple of prospects they should be able to complete the deal.

Sorry, but that's a ridiculous statement. A significant purpose of an arbitrator is to interpret ambiguous provisions in the CBA. If a clause is subject to differing interpretations, then the arbitrator must step in and declare what each party's rights are under the agreement. So, no, it's not a slam dunk for the union unless there is some record of the talks that led up to the final agreement wherein it states the intent of the provision.

Yes.

Yep. But dropping it completely would defeat the purpose in their eyes.

My suggestion is that A-Rod makes no give-backs but then he makes $30 million in "bad investments" in John Henry's Fund.

-Devin

One thing we (consumers, fans and readers) never can go wrong with is Tom Boswell. I have not read this yet, but attach a link here....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...-2003Dec18.html

I can't imagine this to be recontructed so that the Rangers drop their request and there are too many other factors that the Red Sox have to take into account like Magglio Ordonez. The White Sox aren't going to wait around for several more days.

It isn't a case of an arbitrator going against the provisions of the labor agreement, it's interpreting the plain meaning of the words contained in it.

Allowing A-Rod to opt out a year earlier gives a POTENTIAL value to A-Rod. Unlikely, but potentially. Do you think that an arbitrator can honestly project 100% that the market will remain depressed until after the 2007 season? No way. No one can predict that 100%. Thus it is a POTENTIAL value to the player.

Greetings all,

This being a first post let me say, in newbie fashion, that this board is fantastic. The passion we have for our team is truly outstanding.

My 2 cents: We cannot lose in this deal. Theo & Co. have a plan and will stick to it to the letter. They will not over-extend the budget and put the team in a tough position down the road. If the deal makes sense, they will pull the trigger. If not we get “stuck” with Manny and Nomar.

Hicks and Hart are the ones with something to really worry about. No flex in the budget means fighting to stay out of the cellar for the next few years.

My feeling is that this deal has a really good shot at going through.

From the SFGate.com (via AP):

"There is a likelihood the deal is dead," Texas general manager John Hart said. "But at the same time, we haven't issued a statement that it's completely dead."

Rangers owner Tom Hicks will probably speak to the Red Sox to try to work out an agreement after all, Hart said.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?...2256EST0664.DTL

The entire restructing was a necessity of paying the Rangers additional funds for the Ramirez contract. If the demand was down to 5 mil for 3 years earlier as reported it only makes sense that we can come to some compromise and one that

a. does not require the union

b. does not require Arod to restructure prior to consemating the deal


Once the deal is done, the sox can and likely will renegotiate the Arod deal to be more flexible, yes it will still require a union buy in, but we will have zero interferance from any outside sources, ie no deadlines.


edit: spelling

IMO this deal will get done. EVERYBODY involved wants it to happen. In the end the Sox may pay some money or add prospects but it will get done. IMO the bigger problem may be the impending Nomar/Ordonez deal. Kenny Williams won't just sit around. If the ARod thing isn't tied up by the end of the weekend, we may not get Mags, and may have to settle for less value for Nomar.

Since ARod's contract is not to be fudged around with anymore, this fiasco ends when Texas blinks, says: "Alright, you pay us 5 million bucks next year," and the Red Sox say "Done." The union no longer is a party in any of these talks, and ARod's contract will have to be taken as is. If reports about Hicks feeling the heat are true, then it should only be a matter of time. (Saturday night, perhaps, after the Pats beat the Jets. )

The old Sox management would have done that. This Sox management doesn't overpay, so if it means chipping in a bit more, the deal won't get done. My bet is that Hicks drops his request for money or significantly pares it down. It was a ridiculous request in the first place given all the money he's saving on the back end of this deal.

midnight passes, no updates from dd....

Hey, who needs Schilling or JWH ? We've got Bob Zupcic !

Seriously, good points Bob. I wonder why it is that the MLBPA doesn't
consider quality of living as a "benefit" that could be covered in the CBA.
I suppose it's open to a lot of interpretation.

Pete

Not sure if anyone saw the roundtable on the 11 o'clock SC. Three experts, all said that it will get done. Gammons is stating that by Christmas

I thought Texas had already said that today.

Rome is doing a sox v yanks analysis on ESPN. As for TX saying it this afternoon. I 'm unsure. But if they did, then SC re-iterated it. Isn't it great to finally have a mgmt group working with us?

Okay, forgive me if this hasn't already been suggested, but what if A-Rod were allowed to opt-out of his contract in any offseason following 2004. Keep the salary as-is. A-Rod then opts out next offseason (a handshake deal with Sox brass), becomes a free agent, and then gives the Sox the old "hometown discount", resigning a new contract at a lesser annual salary?

This way, the value of the contract is not reduced. It adds potential value to A-Rod (he can go anywhere he wants next year if he's unhappy), and it frees the Sox from the hefty long term obligation.

Obviously, A-Rod could decide not to go along with it next offseason, so there is still a lot of financial exposure for the Sox, but isn't this worth it to get the deal done?

Or, maybe I'm just overthinking this thing because I've been hanging on any new news each time I've hit "Refresh" over the course of the last week. I really have been held hostage by this thing.

I think he's on central standard time or he's organizing the collapse of the Players Association

Why are we even killing ourselves to figure out ways to get this deal done anyways if we were to stick it out with Manny and Nomar we have 2 guys who combined for over 200 RBI's last year. I'll leave the HR's especially in a smallball park like Fenway.

Under normal circumstances I would agree with you. However, I think John Henry has painted himself in a bit of a corner on this deal (although Texas still needs this trade to happen more than the sox do). I don't think Nomar will resign after '04 and Henry has to replace him with a SS who is at least his equal. The only person who fits this criteria (and is available) is A-Rod. If it comes down to $5 million, I think the sox will do it. On the other hand, I agree with your assessment of Hicks and I think he will drop the request entirely.

I believe this is too wide open for interpretation. Texas has no state income tax so that will obviously be a factor in the quality of living. I think texas also has a lower crime rate so Although we could argue A-Rods baseball QOL would improve from an actual location stand point perhaps not.

No, IIRC, Texas said 5 million for the next 5 (3?) years. In any case, it wasn't just once.

It seems like the PA's definition of "value" is limited to tangible & quantifiable things -- money, contract length, etc. Hapiness, and to a lesser extent QOL related to location and baseball atmosphere, doesn't seem to cut it.

DD update, It's alive... no kidding Lobel told us that an hour ago.

I agree, this is a problem. I'm really worried that there is such little demand for Nomar. I do think he's on the decline and has been since the wrist surgery, but he's still an amazing player at the moment. And the more I look at the Ordonez deal, the more I like it, even though I don't want to give up Williamson. There's no question that we will get ARod for Manny, but if this falls through we could very well be screwed on the Nomar front. As for LF replacements, we can always look to Tampa Bay where they have plenty of young talent. They need pitching. There's also some big steps down in LF that don't solve our #4 vacancy; I like Brian Jordan if we must go cheap. Oh and Gerald Williams is a FA...think Pedro would like to have him at the locker next door?

Damn, Yankees just scored on Giambi's hr in alcs game 6. I love the EEI replays. I wish I knew how to record them...

I doubt the Red Sox would go for this as it gives them no guaranteed discount at all. A-Rod would unlikely ever exercise such an option either Already being on the team he wants, why would he choose to take less at that point?

It is open for interpretation but I don't think income tax and crime rate (yeah, ARod's gonna be affected by crime rate in his multi million dollar home in his nice safe millionare neighborhood) are what anyone's talking about when they say QOL. It's about ARod having a fulfilling career that is competitive, exciting, gives him the credit and stage he deserves, allows him to win, and of course that whole happiness factor. Apparently the PA thinks money is more important than emotional health though. Oh, what about all the extra advertising income ARod will get?

Speaking of, what about ARod agreeing to redirect all endorsement deals to the Sox pockets? It would have to be done undercover of course. Or there's him paying for the Sox charities. There are many underhanded ways to save the money on this.

Of course that's the Players Association's definition, but that doesn't mean it's right. It says simply potential "value" with no quantification of what constitutes "value". What is to stop a judge or arbitrator from interpreting "value" as being more of the intangible type?

Let me pose a question;

Which of these 2 jobs would you rather?

1. Compensation 80K; but every morning you seriously contemplate driving off a cliff because you hate everything about that job.

2. Compensation 70K; and you love to go to work everyday.

Most people would consider that job #2 has more value. But not the MLBPA, they would actually force you to remain in job #1, and would not allow you to improve your quality of life.

That's not what the Union would define Quality of Life as. Their definition would center more on cost of goods, average home prices, etc - and Boston is definitely more expensive than Arlington, TX.

Wrong, I think.

ARod has a no-trade clause that has to go (llike Schilling's did). Probably requires union or league approval.

Update on Dirt Dogs

Here's a link to a New York Times Article where a distinguished baseball law professor (I didn't know they had those) rips apart the MLBPA's stance on the issue.

Hope Trickles away from Thirsty Red Sox Fans

"This is not an industrialized union that negotiates everyone's salary," said Paul Finkelman, the Chapman professor at the University of Tulsa Law School, who has written numerous articles on baseball labor. "The fundamental goal of the players association should be to protect the rights of the players to negotiate contracts they want for themselves.

"I understand the union wanting to protect vulnerable players who might be coerced into giving something up. But in this case, there is no one being harmed. The union is undermining the ability of a player to negotiate."

You get points if you can get anyone related to the deal to consider it in that fashion.

It's more like this:

1) 80K compensation: you go to work, and you love your job, but there's some jerk giving you crap. His name is Buck Showalter.

2) 70K compensation: you go to work, and you love your job, and there's no jerk giving you crap.

To say ARod hates his job is belittling baseball! Or so he'd tell you.

AZSoxFan: All trades require league approval, IIRC, but if his contract isn't touched, the union has nothing to do with it. His no-trade clause is his to exercise.

Edit: No, AZSoxFan, you're right. I know what you mean now.

Just a quick question. Is Red Sox management totally opposed to any of their players having a no trade clause? I may be wrong, but I was under the impression that Schilling's clause had to go because Manny has a clause in his contract that gives him a no trade clause if any other member of the team has one.

If we are trading Manny for A-Rod, do we need to get rid of the no-trade clause?