Contraction Compensation

[nyy26wc]

Originally posted by BuzzBuzzard


To me, this is the very issue, the player's contract at the time of contraction. What of it? Is it valid, is it void? Talk about bogging down the negotiating table.

There are those who think a lock out could last two full seasons. I don't think it is outside the realm of possibility.

As a former attorney, I could tell you that's most likely not a problem.

Legally, players are not traded, but rather their contract rights are traded. Of course, we don't think of hearing news reports like the A's traded Mark McGwire's contract to the Cardinals for the contracts of Blake Stein and a few others, but from a legal point of view, that was exactly what happened.

There is no reason why a contradiction draft wouldn't work the same way as trades. Expansion drafts work that way. The new team just picks up the player, with the rest of his contract being transferred to that team.

In terms of a contradiction draft, there are 2 possibilities--

1) Make the draft long enough to ensure that every player under contract to the old teams must be drafted. Then, a team claiming a player they didn't want would just try to trade him somewhere or release him and pay the termination cost.

2) Any player not drafted would have to be released and the old team would owe him the termination cost, or MLB would agree to pay the termination cost as part of the deal that terminates the franchises.

[nyy26wc]

Originally posted by ChrisCary
The players union however is going to have issues with some of these stars getting drafted to teams that they specifically have no trade clauses to protect themselves from landing on.

This is a question of contract law.

The question is whether a no trade clause is be taken literally and only applies to trades or whether it would apply to all transactions involving the player.

That question can be answered pretty easily, even though I don't have the exact answer at my disposal.

We just have to look at the rules regarding waivers. If a can not be claimed by a team who he has a no trade clause to, then we know the "trade" part isn't be to read literally.

If a player can be claimed, we know the clause only applies to trades.

It's my gut feeling that it has to also apply to waiver claims, or we would be seeing teams exploit that loophole by making gentleman's agreements that other teams wouldn't claim the player and they would just make the trade via that means. But, since I am still officially a lawyer and still officially licensed, I have to sound like one and say I can't say anything definitively.

[NetShrine]

A notion - screw the re-entry draft, fold the 30th and 28th worst teams, and give the players to the 27th and 26th worst teams. Let 'em trade the ones they can't keep or afford for prospects and money.

BTW, I'm only kidding. No flames please.

[nyy26wc]

The interesting part of that idea is it creates an incentive for a team to finish 29th, rather than 28th.

I know it was a typo, but I couldn't resist.

[NetShrine]

Originally posted by nyy26wc
I know it was a typo, but I couldn't resist.

Yup, no more late night posts for me - esp. after doing the Yankee Stadium to S. NJ shuffle (like tonight) - - all that time on the road is affecting my typing!

[gyb13]

This thread is still relevant and raises several good issues about what would happen were contraction to take place.
I see the biggest dilemma in creating a framework for this to happen in the methodology of a 'dispersal draft.'

On one hand, Bud can lay down the ground rules ahead of time, say, teams select based on their L-W record of the previous year. Now a team who is out of contention may want to lose games in the hopes of picking up a Vlad, Vazquez, Vidro, or Tatis.

On the other hand, if you want to avoid that kind of behavior by bad teams by keeping the rules for the draft secret until after the season, everyone will cry foul.

Anyone care to propose an alternative solution that could be set ahead of time and prevent teams from losing games on purpose?

How about a draft lottery type system (as is used in the NBA draft)? Teams with worse records might have a better chance at getting higher picks but would not be guaranteed of them.

[SmedIndy]

How about we forget the whole thing ever came up??

Actually, the ABA and WHA used to have teams go under quite a bit. Sometimes, especially in the WHA, one of the teams would buy players off the insolvent teams (especially during the season).

The ABA had dispersal drafts, but sometimes they were based on putting key players in key cities.