Posted by burnsy483 on 10/1/2014 11:17:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/1/2014 11:13:00 AM (view original):

Posted by burnsy483 on 10/1/2014 11:11:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/1/2014 10:41:00 AM (view original):
If the Yankees cut him, the claiming team would get him for the major league minimum.   Not 6m.

They could pay him more than his contract, I think. If you "claim him" you're on the hook for the whole salary? Wait until he clears waivers and then offer a contract. I think that's how it works. I could be wrong.

If he's released, it's BL minimum.     Dan Uggla for the Braves.   Soriano for the Yanks.

Well, Soriano was traded. And the Yankees are paying more than league minimum.

It would be a rare situation where a player was released and multiple teams were interested in his services. But I'm pretty sure that while the team that released you is on the hook for the salary, that when you sign another contract with another team, since you're no longer owned by the previous team. It's just usually league minimum, otherwise why was he released in the first place?

Posted by tecwrg on 10/1/2014 11:07:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 10/1/2014 11:03:00 AM (view original):
We're talking about one of the best players ever. 40 year old "not Arod anymore" is probably still a league average hitter. League average hitters get more than $6m per year. He gets $12m easy without the baggage. $8-10m with it.

It's almost like you don't want him to play well.

"one of the best players ever".

You forgot to mention "pharmaceutically enhanced".

That last part may not be part of the equation any more.

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/1/2014 11:30:00 AM (view original):
I'll help you.   You do something for roughly 32 years.   Obviously you grow older.  You peak then you decline.   Then you take 18 months off, at 38-39,  doing something that requires very good hand/eye coordination.   Some people says it's the toughest task in sports. 

How does the math say "Oh, he'll turn back the clock 5 years"?

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/1/2014 11:31:00 AM (view original):

Posted by burnsy483 on 10/1/2014 11:17:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/1/2014 11:13:00 AM (view original):

Posted by burnsy483 on 10/1/2014 11:11:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/1/2014 10:41:00 AM (view original):
If the Yankees cut him, the claiming team would get him for the major league minimum.   Not 6m.

They could pay him more than his contract, I think. If you "claim him" you're on the hook for the whole salary? Wait until he clears waivers and then offer a contract. I think that's how it works. I could be wrong.

If he's released, it's BL minimum.     Dan Uggla for the Braves.   Soriano for the Yanks.

Well, Soriano was traded. And the Yankees are paying more than league minimum.

It would be a rare situation where a player was released and multiple teams were interested in his services. But I'm pretty sure that while the team that released you is on the hook for the salary, that when you sign another contract with another team, since you're no longer owned by the previous team. It's just usually league minimum, otherwise why was he released in the first place?

Why would you sign another contract?   You're being paid by the team that released you.   Unless, of course, you think some team would offer ARod more than 3/60 if the Yanks released him. 

Posted by tecwrg on 10/1/2014 11:34:00 AM (view original):
Then why do they take it?

Posted by burnsy483 on 10/1/2014 11:38:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/1/2014 11:30:00 AM (view original):
I'll help you.   You do something for roughly 32 years.   Obviously you grow older.  You peak then you decline.   Then you take 18 months off, at 38-39,  doing something that requires very good hand/eye coordination.   Some people says it's the toughest task in sports. 

How does the math say "Oh, he'll turn back the clock 5 years"?

You're 39 years old. Your job is to do something that's draining on your body from April-October. You're told that you must do your job at age 40, but can take off this year if you want. Your goal is to do the best you possibly can at age 40.

Do you do your job at age 39? Or rest up for age 40?

Having passed the age of 40, I think I would have been better at 39.   Much like I was better at 38.  And I'd expect to be worse at 41.

Would a couple of weeks off during May and August help?   I think so.   But I don't think my reflexes get better between the age of 39 and 40.   And I need those.

Posted by burnsy483 on 10/1/2014 11:40:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/1/2014 11:31:00 AM (view original):

Posted by burnsy483 on 10/1/2014 11:17:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/1/2014 11:13:00 AM (view original):

Posted by burnsy483 on 10/1/2014 11:11:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/1/2014 10:41:00 AM (view original):
If the Yankees cut him, the claiming team would get him for the major league minimum.   Not 6m.

They could pay him more than his contract, I think. If you "claim him" you're on the hook for the whole salary? Wait until he clears waivers and then offer a contract. I think that's how it works. I could be wrong.

If he's released, it's BL minimum.     Dan Uggla for the Braves.   Soriano for the Yanks.

Well, Soriano was traded. And the Yankees are paying more than league minimum.

It would be a rare situation where a player was released and multiple teams were interested in his services. But I'm pretty sure that while the team that released you is on the hook for the salary, that when you sign another contract with another team, since you're no longer owned by the previous team. It's just usually league minimum, otherwise why was he released in the first place?

Why would you sign another contract?   You're being paid by the team that released you.   Unless, of course, you think some team would offer ARod more than 3/60 if the Yanks released him. 

It's in addition to the prior contract.

For example, the Mariners paid Jason Bay $1M in 2013, despite the fact the Mets released him. Now, I don't know if because the Mets were clever in how they paid him (deferred some money that Bay agreed to), that it changes anything, but Bay was released by the Mets and made more than league minimum from the Mariners. I'm trying to think of another example...

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/1/2014 11:42:00 AM (view original):

Posted by burnsy483 on 10/1/2014 11:38:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/1/2014 11:30:00 AM (view original):
I'll help you.   You do something for roughly 32 years.   Obviously you grow older.  You peak then you decline.   Then you take 18 months off, at 38-39,  doing something that requires very good hand/eye coordination.   Some people says it's the toughest task in sports. 

How does the math say "Oh, he'll turn back the clock 5 years"?

You're 39 years old. Your job is to do something that's draining on your body from April-October. You're told that you must do your job at age 40, but can take off this year if you want. Your goal is to do the best you possibly can at age 40.

Do you do your job at age 39? Or rest up for age 40?

Having passed the age of 40, I think I would have been better at 39.   Much like I was better at 38.  And I'd expect to be worse at 41.

Would a couple of weeks off during May and August help?   I think so.   But I don't think my reflexes get better between the age of 39 and 40.   And I need those.

Posted by bad_luck on 10/1/2014 11:46:00 AM (view original):

Posted by burnsy483 on 10/1/2014 11:40:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/1/2014 11:31:00 AM (view original):

Posted by burnsy483 on 10/1/2014 11:17:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/1/2014 11:13:00 AM (view original):

Posted by burnsy483 on 10/1/2014 11:11:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/1/2014 10:41:00 AM (view original):
If the Yankees cut him, the claiming team would get him for the major league minimum.   Not 6m.

They could pay him more than his contract, I think. If you "claim him" you're on the hook for the whole salary? Wait until he clears waivers and then offer a contract. I think that's how it works. I could be wrong.

If he's released, it's BL minimum.     Dan Uggla for the Braves.   Soriano for the Yanks.

Well, Soriano was traded. And the Yankees are paying more than league minimum.

It would be a rare situation where a player was released and multiple teams were interested in his services. But I'm pretty sure that while the team that released you is on the hook for the salary, that when you sign another contract with another team, since you're no longer owned by the previous team. It's just usually league minimum, otherwise why was he released in the first place?

Why would you sign another contract?   You're being paid by the team that released you.   Unless, of course, you think some team would offer ARod more than 3/60 if the Yanks released him. 

It's in addition to the prior contract.

For example, the Mariners paid Jason Bay $1M in 2013, despite the fact the Mets released him. Now, I don't know if because the Mets were clever in how they paid him (deferred some money that Bay agreed to), that it changes anything, but Bay was released by the Mets and made more than league minimum from the Mariners. I'm trying to think of another example...

It goes like this:

John Doe has a 2015 contract with the Yankees for $10 million. They release him. He hits the waiver wire. Any team that claims him is on the hook for the remainder of the $10m. If no one claims him, he becomes a free agent with the Yankees still responsible for his salary. If only one team tries to sign him, he gets a ML minimum contract and the Yankees pay him $10 - ML minimum.

If more than one team wants to sign him, John Doe usually signs with the team that offers the most money.Then the Yankees are on the hook for $10m - highest offer.

Posted by bad_luck on 10/1/2014 11:46:00 AM (view original):

Posted by burnsy483 on 10/1/2014 11:40:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/1/2014 11:31:00 AM (view original):

Posted by burnsy483 on 10/1/2014 11:17:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/1/2014 11:13:00 AM (view original):

Posted by burnsy483 on 10/1/2014 11:11:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/1/2014 10:41:00 AM (view original):
If the Yankees cut him, the claiming team would get him for the major league minimum.   Not 6m.

They could pay him more than his contract, I think. If you "claim him" you're on the hook for the whole salary? Wait until he clears waivers and then offer a contract. I think that's how it works. I could be wrong.

If he's released, it's BL minimum.     Dan Uggla for the Braves.   Soriano for the Yanks.

Well, Soriano was traded. And the Yankees are paying more than league minimum.

It would be a rare situation where a player was released and multiple teams were interested in his services. But I'm pretty sure that while the team that released you is on the hook for the salary, that when you sign another contract with another team, since you're no longer owned by the previous team. It's just usually league minimum, otherwise why was he released in the first place?

Why would you sign another contract?   You're being paid by the team that released you.   Unless, of course, you think some team would offer ARod more than 3/60 if the Yanks released him. 

It's in addition to the prior contract.

For example, the Mariners paid Jason Bay $1M in 2013, despite the fact the Mets released him. Now, I don't know if because the Mets were clever in how they paid him (deferred some money that Bay agreed to), that it changes anything, but Bay was released by the Mets and made more than league minimum from the Mariners. I'm trying to think of another example...

It goes like this:

John Doe has a 2015 contract with the Yankees for $10 million. They release him. He hits the waiver wire. Any team that claims him is on the hook for the remainder of the $10m. If no one claims him, he becomes a free agent with the Yankees still responsible for his salary. If only one team tries to sign him, he gets a ML minimum contract and the Yankees pay him $10 - ML minimum.

If more than one team wants to sign him, John Doe usually signs with the team that offers the most money.Then the Yankees are on the hook for $10m - highest offer.

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/1/2014 11:42:00 AM (view original):

Posted by burnsy483 on 10/1/2014 11:38:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/1/2014 11:30:00 AM (view original):
I'll help you.   You do something for roughly 32 years.   Obviously you grow older.  You peak then you decline.   Then you take 18 months off, at 38-39,  doing something that requires very good hand/eye coordination.   Some people says it's the toughest task in sports. 

How does the math say "Oh, he'll turn back the clock 5 years"?

You're 39 years old. Your job is to do something that's draining on your body from April-October. You're told that you must do your job at age 40, but can take off this year if you want. Your goal is to do the best you possibly can at age 40.

Do you do your job at age 39? Or rest up for age 40?

Having passed the age of 40, I think I would have been better at 39.   Much like I was better at 38.  And I'd expect to be worse at 41.

Would a couple of weeks off during May and August help?   I think so.   But I don't think my reflexes get better between the age of 39 and 40.   And I need those.

Posted by burnsy483 on 10/1/2014 11:54:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/1/2014 11:42:00 AM (view original):

Posted by burnsy483 on 10/1/2014 11:38:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/1/2014 11:30:00 AM (view original):
I'll help you.   You do something for roughly 32 years.   Obviously you grow older.  You peak then you decline.   Then you take 18 months off, at 38-39,  doing something that requires very good hand/eye coordination.   Some people says it's the toughest task in sports. 

How does the math say "Oh, he'll turn back the clock 5 years"?

You're 39 years old. Your job is to do something that's draining on your body from April-October. You're told that you must do your job at age 40, but can take off this year if you want. Your goal is to do the best you possibly can at age 40.

Do you do your job at age 39? Or rest up for age 40?

Having passed the age of 40, I think I would have been better at 39.   Much like I was better at 38.  And I'd expect to be worse at 41.

Would a couple of weeks off during May and August help?   I think so.   But I don't think my reflexes get better between the age of 39 and 40.   And I need those.

Would an entire season of not doing your strenuous job at age 39 help you at age 40? Probably, right? Now, if you want to argue that the decline in your physical skills and reflexes are worse at 40 (things that aren't effected by wear and tear, just age), and that he'd be better at 39 than waiting that year and playing at 40, OK. But my point is not playing in 2014 is better for A-Rod in 2015, than playing in 2014. Do you disagree?