Unintended Result Of The New CBA

C

clvclv

<B>"What is a clvclv"</B>
DMGM is likely to begin his next rebuild in Kansas City now. With QO free-agents no longer netting you 1st round picks, Hosmer, Cain, and Moustakas (most interesting to us) likely just became quite a bit more available than they were yesterday.

Still think Moustakas would be a perfect fit for us as an inexpensive bridge to Riley/Demeritte/potentially Maitan.
 
clvclv said:
DMGM is likely to begin his next rebuild in Kansas City now. With QO free-agents no longer netting you 1st round picks, Hosmer, Cain, and Moustakas (most interesting to us) likely just became quite a bit more available than they were yesterday.

Still think Moustakas would be a perfect fit for us as an inexpensive bridge to Riley/Demeritte/potentially Maitan.
Click to expand...

Absolutely would love to grab Mous.
 
clvclv said:
DMGM is likely to begin his next rebuild in Kansas City now. With QO free-agents no longer netting you 1st round picks, Hosmer, Cain, and Moustakas (most interesting to us) likely just became quite a bit more available than they were yesterday.

Still think Moustakas would be a perfect fit for us as an inexpensive bridge to Riley/Demeritte/potentially Maitan.
Click to expand...

The new CBA appears to be a real kick to the groin for small market teams.
 
Do we know that it's not a 1st round comp pick that they get? From what was posted in the other thread it's the team signing a player with a QO doesn't give up a 1st rounder and that the team losing the player gets a comp pick determined by their market size. So how would that translate to KC?
 
I know there is going to be a change in the draft pick(s) that a team signing a FA with a QO will be giving up.

But is there also a change in the draft pick that a team losing a FA with a QO?

The two are not the same, though often linked in popular thinking.
 
nsacpi said:
I know there is going to be a change in the draft pick(s) that a team signing a FA with a QO will be giving up.

But is there also a change in the draft pick that a team losing a FA with a QO?

The two are not the same, though often linked in popular thinking.
Click to expand...

All that's been said is that compensation will be determined by market size. I haven't read any details on that yet.
 
smootness said:
Why is that? I think it actually helps small-market teams now more than it hurts them.
Click to expand...

I agree with the OP in that teams are going to have to sell low by trading impending free agents (especially mid-level free agents) instead of getting an assured draft pick. I may be jumping the gun, but one thing I see developing here is a problem for mid-tier free agents. If the total value of the contract (Years times AAV) must exceed $50 million, I think we're going to see a ton of 3 year/$16 MM contract offers. The big ticket guys will still go over that, but I think mid-level FAs are going to see a lot of "take it or leave it" offers.
 
thewupk said:
Do we know that it's not a 1st round comp pick that they get? From what was posted in the other thread it's the team signing a player with a QO doesn't give up a 1st rounder and that the team losing the player gets a comp pick determined by their market size. So how would that translate to KC?
Click to expand...

If you're in DMGM's shoes and don't know how Moustakas will bounce back, would you be willing to roll those dice? If he's not the player he was over the next two seasons, he's not really likely to get a $50 million plus offer. If you could get a Wisler/Blair/Sims plus offer for him now, would you turn it down?
 
clvclv said:
If you're in DMGM's shoes and don't know how Moustakas will bounce back, would you be willing to roll those dice? If he's not the player he was over the next two seasons, he's not really likely to get a $50 million plus offer. If you could get a Wisler/Blair/Sims plus offer for him now, would you turn it down?
Click to expand...

That is a good question. Also you have to think that even under the old agreement you would have similar thoughts. If he doesn't turn into the player he once was do you offer him a QO anyways? By the time he's a FA the one year deal is likely to exceed 20 million.
 
thewupk said:
That is a good question. Also you have to think that even under the old agreement you would have similar thoughts. If he doesn't turn into the player he once was do you offer him a QO anyways? By the time he's a FA the one year deal is likely to exceed 20 million.
Click to expand...

I guess I see a lot of one- or two-year deals becoming the norm for mid-level free agents. That's been happening already, but this might cement that.
 
Chico said:
If we're trading with the Royals I'd love to get Duffy
Click to expand...

Can't see us with much interest in Duffy even though that'd be a great one year contract to add to our staff - he'd cost at least Newcomb, so what's the point? Not that I wouldn't love to have him, but we'd have to extend him if we were going to give up a piece like that, and Duffy needs to prove last season wasn't a fluke - still questions whether he sticks as a starter IMO.

Moustakas OTOH wouldn't need to be extended because he'd buy you two years to see whether Riley can stick defensively and if Maitan shows what Callis expects (Top 10 prospect by the end of 2017) he arguably could be ready in late 2019 - meaning you could stopgap 3B with Riley for a half-season to one season (like with Garcia) in the event you need to move him to LF to replace Kemp.

CF- Inciarte, SS- Swanson, 1B- Freeman, LF- Kemp, 3B- Moustakas, C- Flowers, RF- Markakis, 2B- Jace/Rodriguez

Not necessarily world-beaters, but with the upgrades to this year's staff that lineup should be able to keep you in the mix past the deadline.
 
50PoundHead said:
I agree with the OP in that teams are going to have to sell low by trading impending free agents (especially mid-level free agents) instead of getting an assured draft pick. I may be jumping the gun, but one thing I see developing here is a problem for mid-tier free agents. If the total value of the contract (Years times AAV) must exceed $50 million, I think we're going to see a ton of 3 year/$16 MM contract offers. The big ticket guys will still go over that, but I think mid-level FAs are going to see a lot of "take it or leave it" offers.
Click to expand...

But this seems to help small-market teams to me. They're out on the big ticket guys anyway, so if the mid-tier offers are generally more modest, it allows smaller-market teams to be more competitive for those guys when they want them.
 
Based on the information now available it appears that the compensatory picks that a team like KC will get should it lose a free agent with a QO is the same under the new CBA as it was under the old CBA. Or am I missing something?
 
clvclv said:
With QO free-agents no longer netting you 1st round picks, Hosmer, Cain, and Moustakas (most interesting to us) likely just became quite a bit more available than they were yesterday.
Click to expand...

The information I'm seeing with respect to teams losing a QO FA is as follows:

In terms of compensation, an organization which loses a QO-declining player who signs for $50MM or more will pick up a draft choice “after the first round.” If a QO-declining player inks for under $50MM with another organization, the draft compensation slides to “after competitive balance round B.” There’s a different set of rules for teams that are over the luxury tax line; any compensatory picks they receive will take place after the draft’s fourth round.

I believe almost all FA with QO will be able to get deals over 50MM under the new rules. No?
 
nsacpi said:
Based on the information now available it appears that the compensatory picks that a team like KC will get should it lose a free agent with a QO is the same under the new CBA as it was under the old CBA. Or am I missing something?
Click to expand...

The new rules are pretty confusing. The compensation for losing a QO FA is related to how much the player signs for, and whether or not the team is above or below the luxury tax threshold:

"In terms of compensation, an organization which loses a QO-declining player who signs for $50MM or more will pick up a draft choice “after the first round.” If a QO-declining player inks for under $50MM with another organization, the draft compensation slides to “after competitive balance round B.” There’s a different set of rules for teams that are over the luxury tax line; any compensatory picks they receive will take place after the draft’s fourth round."

The amount of the contract signed by the FA has nothing to do with how the signing team is penalized. The penalty for signing a QO FA is determined by the team's revenue sharing status:

"Revenue-sharing recipients would lose their third-highest selection (not necessarily a third-round choice). Revenue-sharing contributors would lose their second and fifth-highest selections and also sacrifice $1MM in international signing availability. And all other teams would stand to give up their second-highest pick along with $500K in international bonus funds."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top