APIAD wrote:

I highly doubt arods appeal will help him but i suppose he has to take that step to save face as to his innocence.  Really it is a break for the yankees.  Saves them 25million dollars.  I am sure they are dissappointed it wasnt a life time ban.  I know the union would never allow the idea but a ped violation should void contracts.  It is a lie and a fraud to the employer.

I know MLB teams can't follow their players around 24/7/365, but the Yankees should bear some brunt of the burden for signing this guy. Maybe have his annual salary count toward the luxury tax total or something. I can't remember whether they signed him to that extension before or after he first admitted to using steroids, but if the teams were more decisive about not throwing money at admitted users, then the sport would be able to clean itself up a lot quicker, if that's the goal.
 

artie_fufkin wrote:

APIAD wrote:

I highly doubt arods appeal will help him but i suppose he has to take that step to save face as to his innocence.  Really it is a break for the yankees.  Saves them 25million dollars.  I am sure they are dissappointed it wasnt a life time ban.  I know the union would never allow the idea but a ped violation should void contracts.  It is a lie and a fraud to the employer.

I know MLB teams can't follow their players around 24/7/365, but the Yankees should bear some brunt of the burden for signing this guy. Maybe have his annual salary count toward the luxury tax total or something. I can't remember whether they signed him to that extension before or after he first admitted to using steroids, but if the teams were more decisive about not throwing money at admitted users, then the sport would be able to clean itself up a lot quicker, if that's the goal.
 

Idk who should bare the brunt of the storm.  In the yankees case they knew what they were getting.  Especially after it came out he tested positive.  I believe the extension came after that.  However, say a player test positive in the middle of a large contract.  Why should the team have to continue paying him?  If they decide they dont want a cheater or that the players skills were enhanced when they signed them by ped they shoukd be able to opted out.
 

The latest contract was signed before A-Rod's admission.

forsberg_us wrote:

The latest contract was signed before A-Rod's admission.

Then imo the yankees cant be blamed.  They might have been okay signing an egotistical asshole but if he hadnt violated the drug policy at that time.  At least not more then rumors.  Maybe they should have known better in the case of arod.  I dont think you can apply hindsight to every case tho.  I think the majority of the blame lands on the players.  And i think their contracts should have the option of being voided.  Tell me losing 100 million dollar contracts wouldnt be motivation to stay clean.  The only issue i could see with that is say the yankees tainted something of arods so he would test dirty and to get out of a bad contract.  I know that didnt happen but i could see player being worried of that when millions of dollars are on the line. 
 

I think though, as you do. Anything that means you lose a full season to suspension or more... Should come with a team option to drop the contract. Course, they may look for a way to add that to the CBA, but it would be something that probably only applied to new contracts, if the MLBPA allowed it at all. The owners would have to give up something in trade for it, I'm certain.

And now we go to court...

Arbitor says, (Paraphrasing) Clear evidence he used three substances, and tried to derail the drug investigation multiple times. He doesn't mention how long the use was, but found it unruly enough to agree with baseball that it should be for a full season, although not 212 games or whatever that was...

Apparently A-Rod was in danger of losing 40 million in salary, had it knocked down to about 25 million, and immediately threw that 15 million back on the table with attorneys... No prayer in hell this is even close to resolved by opening day... Just a question of whether or not he was unjustly suspended and should be paid... I'd expect him to lose that (just my two cents) and then end up paying in a countersuit for the court costs invested by the other party.... Which will probably bring that 15 million in waste to about 45 million after he's paid off MLB for the privledge of getting spanked in court....

I don't know if he'll lose, but if he does.... He's going to lose a LOT of money doing it...

That article grew quite a bit from when I read it. Didn't really say he was trying to have the suspension tossed.... So he blasts the now deceased former head of the MLBPA, and complains that the MLBPA didn't protect him, and the MLB is guilty of "ethically challenged behavior".

Jesus even if he wins this case.... Talk about a seriously hostile work environment....

I agree Fors.... Would you want him playing for the Cardinals??? Even for free?

I'll pass, thanks though.

The amounts left on his contract are:

2015, 21mill
2016, 20mill
2017, 20mill


It is a bad contract no matter how you slice it.  It was clear it was a bad contract from the day it was signed.  Worst contract in history likely.  Well it is yet to be seen how bad the Pujols contract will turn out to be.  Anyway, the yankees are screwed.  They have 61million dollars tied up in this joker.  I am sure they would like to see a return on that money in some form.  I wonder what kind of numbers arod will put up over those three years and if from a business stant point it maybe smarted to purge him.  I wouldnt expect it anytime soon tho.  There is no advantage to cut him. 

This is from cotts.  Sounds like he was awarded an advance on his 2014 salary?

"after Rodriguez filed a grievance challenging the penalty, the suspension was reduced to 162 games in arbitration 1/11/14, with Rodriguez to receive 21/183 of 2014 salary"

"There is no advantage to cut him."

Financial there's no benefit.  But to avoid the negative publicity and the distraction to the other players it isn't out of the question.  Keep in mind, it's the Yankees.  The money is practically irrelevant.

APIAD wrote:

forsberg_us wrote:

"There is no advantage to cut him."

Financial there's no benefit.  But to avoid the negative publicity and the distraction to the other players it isn't out of the question.  Keep in mind, it's the Yankees.  The money is practically irrelevant.

I dont think he will be much a distraction while serving his suspension.  He might be in the headlines but i doubt he effects the clubhouse. 
 

I meant when he comes back in 2015. But A-Rod already announced his intention of coming to Spring Training. It's all about him. No regard whatsoever for his teammates.

I'd welcome him .... to our AA affiliate.... for the entire remainder of his contract, and threaten him with A if he doesn't toe the line.

Edit: By this I mean "The Yankees"... I don't even want him at AA on the Cardinals clubs..

Last edited by alz (1/15/2014 1:00 pm)

"Would you want him playing for the Cardinals??? Even for free?"

Interesting question. He'll be 39 when, appeal notwithstanding, he's eligible to play again, not having seen a pitch in anger in a year, with a surgically-repaired hip, no steriods, an OPS that has steadily declined from 1.067 to .771 since 2007, and he'll probably create the biggest media distraction since Barry Bonds broke the all-time home run record.
I can't see anyone wanting to take that on, unless like Fors says Jeffrey Loria thinks people will come to the ballpark to see whichever actress or disco lip syncher he's dating that particular month because she's in the crowd.