Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Red Sox potential tampering

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by ChrisLDuncan
    Actually no, A-Rod wanted to go the Players Union and MLB said that he couldn't take less money. Also if you're taking on a player like that you need to pay the man what he's due, which in this case was his full contract.
    Not to be a wonk, but watch the punctuation. I read that as "A-Rod wanted to go [to] the Players' Union..." which would have justified your contradicting my overall post. What I said was that Larry tried to mess around with the numbers and MLB put a stop to it. You are right, however, to include the Players' Union as a big player in the collapse.

    From Boston.com

    But Cynthia Rodriguez had her doubts, which she expressed to Epstein as he was about to leave.

    "Gene will never go for this," she recalled saying.

    The next day, Cynthia's prediction was proven true. Gene Orza, associate general counsel for the players' union, rejected the Red Sox' proposal on the grounds that it violated collectively bargained rules against reducing the value of an existing contract. Red Sox CEO Larry Lucchino blasted the union a day later, after the Sox had turned down a union counterproposal, and pronounced the deal "dead." Hicks, furious at what he perceived as being misled by Lucchino, blew up at the Sox CEO, having lost confidence in Lucchino's ability to close the deal, and refused to talk further with Lucchino, dealing with Sox chairman Tom Werner instead.
    My comment about blaming A-Rod was only that many less savvy fans chose to 'misremember' how the deal fell apart, especially after the Yankees turned around and signed him. But this thread isn't about blaming anyone but the one guy whose bad faith dealing seems to be getting the Sox into a lot of trouble: Lucchino.

    2007 World Series Champions
    The Boston Red Sox

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by SoxSon
      I guess I'm always cautious about posting feelings on something like this when I really have no clue. There are legalities involved in the situation that make too much speculation seem inappropriate, but I also know that's just me and my quirks.
      I don't think this is much different than talking about possible trade scenerios or free agent signings. It's all speculation, and it's all fodder that fuels the hot stove.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by pesky6
        I don't think this is much different than talking about possible trade scenerios or free agent signings. It's all speculation, and it's all fodder that fuels the hot stove.

        That's why it's just me and my quirks.
        "Anything less would not have been worthy of me. Anything more would not have been possible." - Carl Yastrzemski

        Comment


        • #34
          Obscene spending of money= Red Sox, Yankees, Cubs and Dodgers. When you live by the sword, you die by the sword.
          Hitting is timing. Pitching is upsetting timing. ~Warren Spahn
          Some people are born on third base and go through life thinking they hit a triple. ~Barry Switzer
          Life will always throw you curves, just keep fouling them off... the right pitch will come, but when it does, be prepared to run the bases. ~Rick Maksian

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by ted P.
            Obscene spending of money= Red Sox, Yankees, Cubs and Dodgers. When you live by the sword, you die by the sword.
            That's a different issue than the tampering, Ted. Are you talking about the contract with Drew, or just money in general?
            "Anything less would not have been worthy of me. Anything more would not have been possible." - Carl Yastrzemski

            Comment


            • #36
              this isn't there first time being accused.

              i don't really care whether its true or not, i don't like it coming out as an accusation. i don't want to let this FO turn into the duquette one, where teams didn't do business with us just because of waht jerks they thought we were. whether its our fault or not, i just don't want to see that happen.

              hopefully teams around the majors will be professional enough to realize there's no evidence, and move on. but that doesn't look too likely, seeing as it was in fact multiple ML teams pressuring the dodgers to file charges, not the dodgers doing it on their own.

              out of curiousity, what would the punishment be if they were found guilty?
              Gelatin Fernandalism

              Comment


              • #37
                I was buzzing around the web. I thought I'd seen an article on the NY Times about Epstein and Lucchino. It mentioned something along the lines that Boras felt that there was no law or rule against a team contributing a portion of the posting fee to artificially deflate the player's contract, so as to lessen the lux tax liability the team then faces.

                I know that Bora$ hasn't got many scruples, but hopefully, this never sees the light of day, nor are there any attempts to have this.

                I'll have to dig up the article.
                Please read Baseball Fever Policy and Forum FAQ before posting. 2007-11 CBA
                Rest very peacefully, John “Buck” O'Neil (1911-2006) & Philip Francis “Scooter” Rizzuto (1917-2007)
                THE BROOKLYN DODGERS - 1890 thru 1957
                Montreal Expos 1969 - 2004

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by ChrisLDuncan
                  Well it seems like that's about what happens every year; every year he wants out and every year they want to dump him.
                  The Red sox are not stupid. If they wanted to dump Manny, they would have done it long ago. He is the best right handed hitter of his generation IMO, so they are not just going to give him away.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    it is very difficult to prove tampering charges...i say it is a non issue

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by PhilWings24
                      this isn't there first time being accused.

                      i don't really care whether its true or not, i don't like it coming out as an accusation. i don't want to let this FO turn into the duquette one, where teams didn't do business with us just because of waht jerks they thought we were. whether its our fault or not, i just don't want to see that happen.

                      hopefully teams around the majors will be professional enough to realize there's no evidence, and move on. but that doesn't look too likely, seeing as it was in fact multiple ML teams pressuring the dodgers to file charges, not the dodgers doing it on their own.

                      out of curiousity, what would the punishment be if they were found guilty?
                      That is a good point about burning bridges with many teams that won't trade with us anymore. We'd be left with either signing free agents or making trades that were not in our favor.

                      If LA really felt they had a beef I would have expected them to address it within 48 hours. As far as a punishment goes, a fine would be one option. Exile Island is another. The commish could nullify the transaction "in the best interests of baseball". Does anyone know of a case where a club was penalized before?
                      "He's tougher than a railroad sandwich."
                      "You'se Got The Eye Of An Eagle."

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by TonyK
                        That is a good point about burning bridges with many teams that won't trade with us anymore. We'd be left with either signing free agents or making trades that were not in our favor.

                        If LA really felt they had a beef I would have expected them to address it within 48 hours. As far as a punishment goes, a fine would be one option. Exile Island is another. The commish could nullify the transaction "in the best interests of baseball". Does anyone know of a case where a club was penalized before?
                        I figure that perhaps LAD didn't want to create any ruffled feathers of their own. I think it's called the "Don't urinate in the pool" theory, if you'll allow my language. Anyway, they're all in the same pool.

                        I don't remember the exact circumstances, but Tom Seaver's 1966 agreement was voided by the NCAA, allowing several teams to bid on his services:

                        http://www.baseballlibrary.com/ballp...om_Seaver_1944
                        Seaver came to the Mets via a strange lottery: In 1966, the Braves offered him $40,000, but the NCAA and baseball commissioner William Eckert voided the offer and made Seaver, still at USC, available to any team willing to match the Braves' offer. The Phillies, Indians, and Mets were willing and, in a drawing held in the commissioner's office, the Mets were picked out of a hat. Seaver was an immediate star, picked to the All-Star team in his first season when he won 16 games for a Met team that won just 61 games, and captured Rookie of the Year honors.
                        Please read Baseball Fever Policy and Forum FAQ before posting. 2007-11 CBA
                        Rest very peacefully, John “Buck” O'Neil (1911-2006) & Philip Francis “Scooter” Rizzuto (1917-2007)
                        THE BROOKLYN DODGERS - 1890 thru 1957
                        Montreal Expos 1969 - 2004

                        Comment

                        Ad Widget

                        Collapse
                        Working...
                        X