MLB 2011!!

[rah]

I know. That's why I don't like the process.
Our free agents don't tell teams that they have to pay 50 million just to get the right to offer them a deal.

[Imran Siddiqui]

They AREN'T Free Agents!

[rah]

I've covered that previously.

If the player is under contract, we shouldn't be able to raid them. If the player is not under contract they should be free to move, just like our players.

[Imran Siddiqui]

So when why should we be able to trade for players under contract in the US? Isn't it raiding when a rich team makes a trade with, say, the Royals and part of it is a salary dump? Why allow it?

[rah]

And I would only consider it more like a trade if the players Japanese contract was transferred along with him.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Due to differences in Players Associations, a contract can't simply be that easily transferred.

I also think that being able to transfer contracts among different teams is more indentured servitude than having to renegotiate a new one.

[rah]

To me a contract is a contract and it should be honored. If the transfer is that undesirable, that's what no-trade options are all about. Both parties agree initially, and it should be honored.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Well a contract is a contract between two parties. If one party deals the contract then you don't have the same two parties. For example, your boss can't transfer your employment contract to another firm. This is the reason that in soccer, the player gets to negotiate with the new team so they can have a legitimate contract - if it falls through than the transfer of the player falls through with it.

[rah]

As long as there is no restriction to it, I have no problem with a contract being traded. Talent contracts can be transferred if there are no restrictions against it.

And I laugh when people pull out the term 'indentured servitude' when talking about athletes making millions of dollars. (or anybody that has negotiated an employment contract)


And finally I'm not trying to argue which way is right, just what my opinion is on the matter. Arguing my point of view is just for fun.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Well, as long as there is no restriction to it, I have no problem with selling the rights of players .

And isn't that the argument against the posting system - that its like indentured servitude as you are selling players for money?

[rah]

But the posting system isn't actually selling the player. So that's not the issue I have.

[Imran Siddiqui]

To a certain extent it is. It does allow the player to negotiate a deal for himself, so is a bit better than American trades.

[OzzyKP]

This debate is way less interesting. Can we go back to talking about Zambrano?

[Imran Siddiqui]

I prefer this debate

[rah]

To a certain extent it is. It does allow the player to negotiate a deal for himself, so is a bit better than American trades.

That's where we will agree to disagree. If a player signs a contract, he should honor it. So I think it's a bit worse than American trades.