Qualifying offer

[Detroit]

I agree 100% Minny! We are going to adopt a new rule. The league is in favor of it and we can figure out the terms of it.

Thank you for agreeing with my comment. I am also guilty of this at times, but not when it comes to fantasy baseball or football! This is my hobby now. It used to be playing sports, but I’m too geezer and fragile for that now! That and I travel too much...

I can still throw a baseball pretty hard tho. I hit 79 on the gun a couple of years ago!

[Boston Red Sox]

I think I have a simple solution. I’ve suggested this already, but this more straight up.

2 types of QOs. You can choose 1 per season to be submitted with final roster.

rookie deal QO - $10m flat

Veteran deal QO - 3m flat increase (ex: Trout makes $30m, QO offered at $33m).

We need to keep this simple. To me it’s the only way to do it.

[Detroit]

By the time players come off their rookie contract, they already have 5 years in the league. To me, this makes them veterans.

Define the terms of “a rookie contract”? Not all “rookies” are signed thru our minor league system.

I also don’t like the idea of a 9+M increase for rookies, while guys like Trout only cost an extra 3M. This seems backwards to me.

[Boston Red Sox]

So you think if I want to give Bregman or Seager, a QO after next year $10m is too much?

Anyone you likely want to to extend a QO to is likely going to be a good player and should be paid as such. The QO should be worth it, but also fair.

There has to be different options for players who are their original rookie deal, 5 years 600k, then there is for stars making $20m who have already received their first free agent deal after the rookie deal.

On the open market bregman cost $20-30m, so a $10 QO for someone like him is a fair jump up. I’m gonna go out on a limb and say that most of us will be considering the QO for quality players, not the Amir Garrett’s of the world.

Veterans should have a increase, but you are probably already paying them a good salary so jumping it too high isn’t worth it.

I was simply saying come up with a flat QO number increase for each type of deal, and then there is no confusion.

[Detroit]

To your first question, no I don’t think 10M is too much.

My point here is there HAS TO BE definition to a “rookie contract”. Not all players are signed to a rookie contract ( 5/600k). Some are found thru FA. Some players hit their threshold mid season and are signed to a 1 yr deal. So, you must easily define what constitutes a rookie contract. To that point, players in the league on a rookie contract that expires have already been in the league for 5 years, or perhaps longer...I would not consider these players rookies after 5 years. Definition here is everything.

I also think their should be a higher premium for keeping “higher premium players”. Why should Mike Trout have LESS of an increase than Alex Bregman? You are paying them a higher salary because they are proven commodities, perennial All Stars and signed to a high $ because they are wanted by EVERY team. Why should you get to keep them cheaper? It doesn’t make sense. To keep competitive balance, teams should pay a higher premium for higher premium players.

That’s my opinion. Perhaps it’s not consensus. Definition is going to have to be spelled out clearly as we institute this rule. Defining it is important or you open this rule up to personal interpretation if things are not stated and defined clearly.

[Minnesota Twins]

A rookie contract to me is 600k for however many years signed when they became majors from the minors.

In past discussions we talked about franchising for avg of top 5 at the position or something.

Right now it is 150% of last year of deal so 10 mil would be an increase

[Boston Red Sox]

Honestly I regret proposing the idea

It was a simple suggestion that went way off the rails. I’m really not interested in it anymore.

I propose keeping the status quo

[Texas Rangers]

Dec 24, 2020 1:05:00 GMT -5 Boston Red Sox said:

Honestly I regret proposing the idea

It was a simple suggestion that went way off the rails. I’m really not interested in it anymore.

I propose keeping the status quo

Regret nothing.  Good or bad if anyone has alternative ideas we need to hear them now.   All owners need to make their voices heard on this now instead of waiting until this is about to actually affect the league 10 months from now.  You could do this QO idea about 100 different ways, and i'd rather talk through it, even if some are getting fatigued on the issue.  

Personally i like the % rule with a built in minimum.  I think that is a happy medium for all the ideas we have heard so far, but their are pros and cons to every argument so im all ears.  It really comes down to which players you want this to effect and how.  

[Detroit]

As I sat on this new rule change over the holidays and tried to figure out a clever and fair way to “modify” this new adaptation, since the majority of the league is in favor of adopting this QO rule, I came up with the same ideas that I previously had...and nothing new. Perhaps the best way to approach this is to just adopt the proposal AS IS for 1 year and then revisit it at the end of the 2021 season to see if we should / need to change something.

I would like to put this topic to bed now rather than let it linger. Not all of us are going to agree to a specific set of terms on this, so perhaps a trial by fire is the best way to approach it and modify it, or reject it after a trial run.

-Flat 150% increase of last contracted year’s salary.
-Limited to 1 player per team, per year.
-Can only extend a given player 1 time (cannot be extended in consecutive years) and MUST be throw back into the player pool, regardless of being traded to another team.

My only suggestion is that we MUST revisit this topic next offseason. As a league, we are terrible at revisiting these kind of things. Is there some way to set a reminder on the boards, or some other way we are prompted to revisit this topic in the future?

Does anybody else feel like this is the way to proceed? Should we add this to our charter? I say let’s make Cashman history!

[New York Yankees]

So Rookie contracts will b extended for just over $1M? I thought we all agreed that there should at least b some MINIMUM amt for all contracts???

[Detroit]

“All of us” is not an accurate statement. A few of us think this is the best idea, however, a majority of the league agreed to the original terms laid out by Minny.

There have been 12 or so different ideas when it comes to terms on this idea. If you wanna keep beating a dead horse, go right ahead. If people wanna keep proposing ideas and have the league vote on them overriding this version, I think that’s fine. Either way, it’s time to adapt a rule and give it a try, or can it altogether.

IMO, it’s not productive to have 10 different versions of this adaptation thrown around by multiple teams. All of us in the league will never agree unanimously on a singular idea (or at least the odds are overwhelmingly against it).

[Minnesota Twins]

forget all of us I thought it was a small miracle we got a majority on something!

[Detroit]

Amen Minny!

[LA Dodgers]

I agree with Det. How we voted on in it with the Majority Favor is how it should go into affect for the upcoming season. How the rule worded and all. After the 2021 season we can go back to it and make and adjustment if it is needed.

[Boston Red Sox]

I agree also, I’m fine with the majority vote for one year. Let’s see how it’s rolls out and if it needs to be tweaked we can always do that.

Let’s give it a go with the proposal everyone voted on