November 10, 200421 yr Dont know if this was posted... http://www.cleveland.com/tribe/plaindealer...82623218052.xml
November 10, 200421 yr I wouldn't mind the Indians getting him. They have the 13th pick in next years draft. :mischief
November 10, 200421 yr Why should anyone here be surprised that teams are lined up around the block to bid on guys like Benitez (and Pavano)? The tone of the piece indicates what we all know, that Benitez' services will be in great demand this off-season. The only good news about a Cleveland landing Mando is he'll be out of the National League.
November 10, 200421 yr Cleveland is reloading fast. This rebuilding of theirs is very impressive. I hope they are serious contenders soon, don't like seeing jacobs field empty.
November 10, 200421 yr Can you imagine the badassness of Sabathia and Benitez? Throw David Ortiz in there and you've got the most badass trio in baseball :lol .
November 10, 200421 yr Look, 'Mando HAS to be offered arby. If he's not, Beinfest needs to be fired, that'll be two offseasons in a row he's let good closers go to bad teams with nothing to show for it. But, I'm still incredibly in favor of keeping 'Mando. Pavano's obviously declined our offer, some of that money has to and should be at least offered.
November 11, 200421 yr Look, 'Mando HAS to be offered arby. If he's not, Beinfest needs to be fired, that'll be two offseasons in a row he's let good closers go to bad teams with nothing to show for it. But, I'm still incredibly in favor of keeping 'Mando. Pavano's obviously declined our offer, some of that money has to and should be at least offered. 612508[/snapback] Exactly. Let Pavano walk and spend the $$$ on Benitez and a more reasonably priced #3 or 4 starter.
November 11, 200421 yr I wouldn't mind the Indians getting him. They have the 13th pick in next years draft. :mischief 612393[/snapback] :o Not good. If a team loses an A or B-type free agent to a team with the 15th or lower pick, they can't receive the high pick. They get the team's second round pick.
November 11, 200421 yr Look, 'Mando HAS to be offered arby. If he's not, Beinfest needs to be fired, that'll be two offseasons in a row he's let good closers go to bad teams with nothing to show for it. But, I'm still incredibly in favor of keeping 'Mando. Pavano's obviously declined our offer, some of that money has to and should be at least offered. 612508[/snapback] Correct me if I'm wrong (as if there wouldn't be a flood of posts rushing to do so) but I don't believe that Benitez is anything other than an unrestricted (soon to be) free agent and thusly, there is no "arbitration". He either signs with the Fish in the allotted time or offers his services on the open market.
November 11, 200421 yr I think 2003 is right. He's a FA. We're now just another team in the bidding. If Mando leaves (which I think ihe will), I really hope he goes to some AL team we never face.
November 11, 200421 yr Yeah, the Marlins don't have the option of offering him arbitration. He's a free agent, not arbitration eligible.. As is Pavano.
November 12, 200421 yr You can offer any of your free agents arbitration. If you don't it means you can not negotiate them from that date (last year it was December 20th, I think) til May 1st.
November 12, 200421 yr Look, 'Mando HAS to be offered arby.? If he's not, Beinfest needs to be fired, that'll be two offseasons in a row he's let good closers go to bad teams with nothing to show for it. But, I'm still incredibly in favor of keeping 'Mando.? Pavano's obviously declined our offer, some of that money has to and should be at least offered. 612508[/snapback] Correct me if I'm wrong (as if there wouldn't be a flood of posts rushing to do so) but I don't believe that Benitez is anything other than an unrestricted (soon to be) free agent and thusly, there is no "arbitration". He either signs with the Fish in the allotted time or offers his services on the open market. 612892[/snapback] Nope, you're wrong. If a player has more than 6 years of service time, arbitration has to be offered before November 15th, otherwise the team loses negotiating rights with that player. However, if the team does offer the player arbitration, the team and the player can continue to negotiate and the player can opt for arbitration where he then plays for a one year deal with a salary awarded by an arbiter who evaluates the performance of the player and value relative to other players of the same position with reasonably similar production. Also, if arbitration is offered, and the player signs with another team, the team who lost the player gains the signing team's draft pick as compensation. In the case of players with under 6 years of experience, arbitration occurs after the 3rd year of service, and simply equates to the team "tendering" a contract.
November 12, 200421 yr Look, 'Mando HAS to be offered arby.? If he's not, Beinfest needs to be fired, that'll be two offseasons in a row he's let good closers go to bad teams with nothing to show for it. But, I'm still incredibly in favor of keeping 'Mando.? Pavano's obviously declined our offer, some of that money has to and should be at least offered. 612508[/snapback] Correct me if I'm wrong (as if there wouldn't be a flood of posts rushing to do so) but I don't believe that Benitez is anything other than an unrestricted (soon to be) free agent and thusly, there is no "arbitration". He either signs with the Fish in the allotted time or offers his services on the open market. 612892[/snapback] Nope, you're wrong. If a player has more than 6 years of service time, arbitration has to be offered before November 15th, otherwise the team loses negotiating rights with that player. However, if the team does offer the player arbitration, the team and the player can continue to negotiate and the player can opt for arbitration where he then plays for a one year deal with a salary awarded by an arbiter who evaluates the performance of the player and value relative to other players of the same position with reasonably similar production. Also, if arbitration is offered, and the player signs with another team, the team who lost the player gains the signing team's draft pick as compensation. In the case of players with under 6 years of experience, arbitration occurs after the 3rd year of service, and simply equates to the team "tendering" a contract. 613156[/snapback] Well, I'm sure someone here can look it up in the MLBPA collective bargaining agreement but where I believe you have it wrong is the "six years" thing. It's more than three and LESS THAN six. Benitez has eleven years, signed a one year contract and is free, without fear of being dragged into arbitration, to sign wherever he wants.
November 12, 200421 yr Benitez wouldn't have to go to arbitration unless he wanted to. However without offering him arbitration the Marlins receive no compensation. Did you not remember the Pudge fiasco last year? Boras asked for the arbitration provision taken out of the contract, forcing him and the Marlins to make a negotiate deal early. After the Orioles signed Javy Lopez there was talk about the Marlins signing Pudge, but they could not because they did not (could not) offer him arbitration.
November 12, 200421 yr Look, 'Mando HAS to be offered arby.? If he's not, Beinfest needs to be fired, that'll be two offseasons in a row he's let good closers go to bad teams with nothing to show for it. But, I'm still incredibly in favor of keeping 'Mando.? Pavano's obviously declined our offer, some of that money has to and should be at least offered. 612508[/snapback] Correct me if I'm wrong (as if there wouldn't be a flood of posts rushing to do so) but I don't believe that Benitez is anything other than an unrestricted (soon to be) free agent and thusly, there is no "arbitration". He either signs with the Fish in the allotted time or offers his services on the open market. 612892[/snapback] Nope, you're wrong. If a player has more than 6 years of service time, arbitration has to be offered before November 15th, otherwise the team loses negotiating rights with that player. However, if the team does offer the player arbitration, the team and the player can continue to negotiate and the player can opt for arbitration where he then plays for a one year deal with a salary awarded by an arbiter who evaluates the performance of the player and value relative to other players of the same position with reasonably similar production. Also, if arbitration is offered, and the player signs with another team, the team who lost the player gains the signing team's draft pick as compensation. In the case of players with under 6 years of experience, arbitration occurs after the 3rd year of service, and simply equates to the team "tendering" a contract. 613156[/snapback] Well, I'm sure someone here can look it up in the MLBPA collective bargaining agreement but where I believe you have it wrong is the "six years" thing. It's more than three and LESS THAN six. Benitez has eleven years, signed a one year contract and is free, without fear of being dragged into arbitration, to sign wherever he wants. 613165[/snapback] Huh? Yes, there are "six year free-agents" but arbitration can and does happen for players who have more than six years of experience, however, the player must be offered arbitration and elect to go to arbitration with the team. Mostly, teams don't offer fringe players arbitration because players get more through arbitration (on a one year deal) than they would negotiating on the open market. However, players that are a lock to sign elsewhere (Beltran, Pavano, Pedro) generally are offered arbitration, decline it, and get long-term deals elsewhere, but the team that loses it's player at least has something to show for it.
November 12, 200421 yr Look, 'Mando HAS to be offered arby.? If he's not, Beinfest needs to be fired, that'll be two offseasons in a row he's let good closers go to bad teams with nothing to show for it. But, I'm still incredibly in favor of keeping 'Mando.? Pavano's obviously declined our offer, some of that money has to and should be at least offered. 612508[/snapback] Correct me if I'm wrong (as if there wouldn't be a flood of posts rushing to do so) but I don't believe that Benitez is anything other than an unrestricted (soon to be) free agent and thusly, there is no "arbitration". He either signs with the Fish in the allotted time or offers his services on the open market. 612892[/snapback] Nope, you're wrong. If a player has more than 6 years of service time, arbitration has to be offered before November 15th, otherwise the team loses negotiating rights with that player. However, if the team does offer the player arbitration, the team and the player can continue to negotiate and the player can opt for arbitration where he then plays for a one year deal with a salary awarded by an arbiter who evaluates the performance of the player and value relative to other players of the same position with reasonably similar production. Also, if arbitration is offered, and the player signs with another team, the team who lost the player gains the signing team's draft pick as compensation. In the case of players with under 6 years of experience, arbitration occurs after the 3rd year of service, and simply equates to the team "tendering" a contract. 613156[/snapback] Well, I'm sure someone here can look it up in the MLBPA collective bargaining agreement but where I believe you have it wrong is the "six years" thing. It's more than three and LESS THAN six. Benitez has eleven years, signed a one year contract and is free, without fear of being dragged into arbitration, to sign wherever he wants. 613165[/snapback] Huh? Yes, there are "six year free-agents" but arbitration can and does happen for players who have more than six years of experience, however, the player must be offered arbitration and elect to go to arbitration with the team. Mostly, teams don't offer fringe players arbitration because players get more through arbitration (on a one year deal) than they would negotiating on the open market. However, players that are a lock to sign elsewhere (Beltran, Pavano, Pedro) generally are offered arbitration, decline it, and get long-term deals elsewhere, but the team that loses it's player at least has something to show for it. 613175[/snapback] I was quoting MLB...but what do they know? If you go to page 60 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement, and beginning there read through page 69 it should be clear that Benitez, or any other player who signed a one year contract, and had equivalent service time, has no right to, nor does the club have any right to, use arbitration as a way of negotiating. They are free agents and as such arebound by the agreement between MLB and the MLBPA. Arbitration can be found in a separate section, Article Six, F, and clears says it is for players with less than six years of service time.
November 12, 200421 yr Tswift 25 is correct here. Remember the 2002-03 off-season? The Braves offered Maddux arbitration thinking he would NEVER be in a situation where zero teams would offer him a contract to his liking and they thought they would get a pick or two once he signed elsewhere. What happened? Maddux never got an offer to his liking from another team, took the Braves to arbitration and collected 15 million $ in 03.
November 12, 200421 yr I wouldn't mind the Indians getting him.? They have the 13th pick in next years draft. :mischief 612393[/snapback] :o Not good. If a team loses an A or B-type free agent to a team with the 15th or lower pick, they can't receive the high pick. They get the team's second round pick. 612817[/snapback] :banghead
November 12, 200421 yr Speak of the devil, guess what was in the Sun-Sentinel this morning: Should the Marlins pursue a Type A free agent (as ranked by the Elias Sports Bureau), they stand to lose the 16th pick in the amateur draft if that player's former club offers him salary arbitration. Conversely, the Marlins could gain first-round selections if they lose Carl Pavano and Armando Benitez. The risk in offering salary arbitration is that if the player accepts, he is guaranteed no less than 80 percent of his previous year's salary and could end up costing considerably more. In addition to offering them salary arbitration, the Marlins hope Pavano and Benitez sign with teams that aren't picking in the top 15 because those selections are protected. For example, if the Indians, who pick 14th, sign Benitez, the Marlins would get a supplemental first rounder and the Indians' second-round pick instead. Elias also ranks players as Type B and C free agents for compensation purposes. For losing a Type B guy, a team would receive the signing team's first-round choice (or second-round if the pick is a top 15). Losing a Type C free agent potentially could yield a supplemental second-round selection. The deadline to offer free agents salary arbitration is Dec. 7. Teams often wait until after that date to sign players and possibly avoid losing a first-round selection. http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/basebal...-sports-marlins Seems like they're agreeing with what I said yesterday. I'm quoting the Sun-Sentinel...but what do they know?
November 12, 200421 yr Well if it came down to 6 million a year for Armando or 8 million a year for Pavano, I would easily take the Pavano deal. We have alternatives in house for Armando leaving.
November 12, 200421 yr Perhaps you (and others) misunderstood what I said or in the alternative, I might have chosen my words more carefully, but my point was, and is, that neither party can unilaterally use arbitration to bind a player to a team or in the alternative, bind a team to a player once that player has more than six years of service time. Both parties could, for their own reasons agree to arbitrate. As was the case with Maddux. But neither party is bound by the other's actions to accept. Arbitration results only in a one year contract. Neither Pavano or Benitez, coming off the years they've just had would be willing to go to arbitration knowing a career-ending injury could derail their chances of the "big" multi-year contract and the guarantee of a fat paycheck for years to come. And the team is placed in the unsettling position of having to cede control over payroll to a third party. It remains inconceivable (to me) that either of these players will go through the arbitration process this off-season. They have too little to gain and too much to lose to do so.
November 12, 200421 yr Last year we lost key players. I just hope this year isnt the same. While we still have Miggie, Lowell, Pierre and the rest, loosing Benitez and Pavs may hurt us. I like the numbers that Benitez put up, and when he was on the mound, I was at ease. It'll suck if hes not there in 05, and it doesnt look good.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.