Well, you're going to be waiting awhile then.

Posted by deanod on 10/21/2011 11:52:00 AM (view original):

Posted by jiml60 on 10/21/2011 11:32:00 AM (view original):

Posted by deanod on 10/21/2011 11:20:00 AM (view original):

Posted by jiml60 on 10/21/2011 10:55:00 AM (view original):

Posted by deanod on 10/21/2011 9:50:00 AM (view original):

i don't see how the sox can come out of this without mcnutt, he's such reasonable compensation.

What is the precedent for  a team giving up a top ten prospect for hiring a guy getting a promotion from his former job?

mcnutt's a fringe top 50 prospect, not top 10.

top 10 on the Cubs.

oh, well who cares about being top 10 on the cubs.

Obviously Henry and Luccino, they're the one holding this up.

Posted by jiml60 on 10/21/2011 12:30:00 PM (view original):
Well, you're going to be waiting awhile then.

I know.  Because I got it right the first time. 

If that's what you want to believe, who am I to say no.

Well, you could explain what you meant but, because you'd just be saying "You're right", I guess it's not necessary.

Henry granted the Cubs permission to talk with Theo; doesn't mean a contract is voided or that compensation is required - it's just talking.  Henry should realize there is a possibility Theo would take Ricketts offer.

Ricketts and Theo agreed to a contract; Henry asked for the $3.5M termination clause be paid by the Cubs - Ricketts said OK.

Henry also said he would not stand in the way of any employee leaving for a promotion over a current position.  So Henry could see the possibility of Theo leaving.

Seems to me if Henry didn't want Theo to leave all he had to tell the Cubs was no.

I don't think he cares if Theo leaves.    I think he wants something in return.    Nothing he did prior to that would negate his right to demand something in return.

That was my point.   Saying "no" negates the possibility of Cubs/Theo agreeing to anything thus negating the possibility of getting something in return.   And NO employer will ever say "Yeah, it's a better opportunity for him there but we're going to make him stay here."   Even the Bengals backed away from that when they were able to get compensation for Palmer.

yeah negotiating for compensation def doesn't qualify as standing in the way

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/21/2011 1:21:00 PM (view original):
I don't think he cares if Theo leaves.    I think he wants something in return.    Nothing he did prior to that would negate his right to demand something in return.

That was my point.   Saying "no" negates the possibility of Cubs/Theo agreeing to anything thus negating the possibility of getting something in return.   And NO employer will ever say "Yeah, it's a better opportunity for him there but we're going to make him stay here."   Even the Bengals backed away from that when they were able to get compensation for Palmer.

I think he is trying to save face with the Boston fan base.  There really isn't much precedent for player compensation on promotions, lateral moves a little bit moreso.  The Boston FO trying to hold out for top Cub prospects is the problem here.  They don't have any leverage, they've already burned their bridges by naming Cherington GM.  They can't afford to let Ricketts walk away and go in another direction. Hence the stonewalling on Boston's part.

Nick Cafardo. Stereotype: Boston Red Sox Shill. This morning:

Posted by jiml60 on 10/21/2011 1:39:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/21/2011 1:21:00 PM (view original):
I don't think he cares if Theo leaves.    I think he wants something in return.    Nothing he did prior to that would negate his right to demand something in return.

That was my point.   Saying "no" negates the possibility of Cubs/Theo agreeing to anything thus negating the possibility of getting something in return.   And NO employer will ever say "Yeah, it's a better opportunity for him there but we're going to make him stay here."   Even the Bengals backed away from that when they were able to get compensation for Palmer.

I think he is trying to save face with the Boston fan base.  There really isn't much precedent for player compensation on promotions, lateral moves a little bit moreso.  The Boston FO trying to hold out for top Cub prospects is the problem here.  They don't have any leverage, they've already burned their bridges by naming Cherington GM.  They can't afford to let Ricketts walk away and go in another direction. Hence the stonewalling on Boston's part.

The Red Sox hold all the cards.   Theo is under contract.   They can have him do filing if that's what they want.     They can ask his opinion on baseball moves and ignore him.  They can send him home and tell him "Be ready". 

The Cubs have no negotiating power in this.   The fan base is all "Yay, Theo!!!"   If Ricketts fails to get him this year, over some 2nd level prospect, they'll say "Just like the Cubs" but still fill Wrigley Stadium every week. 

To me, both take a PR hit if this doesn't happen but Boston doesn't lose anything as they're prepared to go it without Theo.  I'm not sure the Cubs are.

When you can walk away, you still have negotiating power.  The Cubs can simply walk away, hire a GM (which they apparently have in Jed Hoyer) and wait for Theo to finish his contract with the Red Sox.  The Red Sox have to pay Theo's salary, his end of contract bonus and lose out on any prospects the Cubs may throw in.

Ricketts waited  almost two full seasons to fire Hendry, I think he can wait another year for Epstein.  Of course the meathead Cub fans will holler and still go to the games.  The fan base is all "Yay, Theo", not only because what he has done for the Red Sox (regardless of edso's opinion) but the fact that finally ownership has a clear plan for the future instead of trying to catch lightning in a bottle.

I really doubt they can have him do filing, I would think there are specifically drawn-out duties in his contract; they may not have to approve his transactions or plans but having him fill out some menial role is not going to fly.

Don't worry, Bud's gonna get involved!

YAY!!!

Well, the filing part was a bit of an exaggeration but they can effectively de-ball him while paying out his salary. 

But I still think both take a hit, publicly, if this doesn't happen.   I just think the Cubs stand to lose more in the fan's eyes.   Red Sux fans are blaming everyone for their failures this year.   Cubs fans are still looking for a scapegoat for next year's failures.

Speaking as a Cub fan, every Cub fan I've talked, chatted, emailed about this does not feel Ricketts is to blame if the deal falls through.  In fact, that Ricketts went out and actually did what he said when he bought the team - build through the draft and IFA, put more emphasis on statistical analysis, in effect change the culture - has been a positive.  I think a lot of your more baseball-savvy Cub fans have faith in Ricketts now.  Of course there will always be the meathead and casual fan contingent that will spin this into "the same old Cubs" and get more attention from the media for their idiocy.