Qualifying Offers Will Be Worth $13MM-Plus

[paul253]

Teams will only lose their 1st rd pick if they sign a player who declined a QO from their 2012 team. The Angels can offer him a QO, but no team, regardless of who signs him at the end of the season, will be losing a draft pick because he was not on the opening day roster.

So am I misinterpreting the new CBA? If a player turns down a QO from a team but has not been on said team for the entire year, the team that signs him does not lose a pick? But if the same player turns down a QO from a team he HAS been on all year the team that signs him DOES lose a pick? In other words if the Brewers didn't trade Greinke and instead offered him a QO which he promptly turned down and then signed with the Yankees, the Yankees would lose their first round pick? But if the Angels offer him a QO and he promptly turns it down and signs with the Yankees, the Yankees would not lose their first round pick? How does that make sense?

 

I was under the impression that it did not matter if the player who turns down the QO was on the opening day roster with that team. I was under the impression that as long as a player, any player, turns down a QO and signs with another team, the team that signs him loses a pick.

[torts]

Teams will only lose their 1st rd pick if they sign a player who declined a QO from their 2012 team. The Angels can offer him a QO, but no team, regardless of who signs him at the end of the season, will be losing a draft pick because he was not on the opening day roster.

So am I misinterpreting the new CBA? If a player turns down a QO from a team but has not been on said team for the entire year, the team that signs him does not lose a pick? But if the same player turns down a QO from a team he HAS been on all year the team that signs him DOES lose a pick? In other words if the Brewers didn't trade Greinke and instead offered him a QO which he promptly turned down and then signed with the Yankees, the Yankees would lose their first round pick? But if the Angels offer him a QO and he promptly turns it down and signs with the Yankees, the Yankees would not lose their first round pick? How does that make sense?

 

I was under the impression that it did not matter if the player who turns down the QO was on the opening day roster with that team. I was under the impression that as long as a player, any player, turns down a QO and signs with another team, the team that signs him loses a pick.

 

© Signing Club.

i. A Club that signs one Qualified Free Agent who is subject

to compensation shall forfeit its highest available selection in the

next Rule 4 Draft. A Club that signs more than one Qualified Free

Agent subject to compensation shall forfeit its highest remaining

selection in the next Rule 4 Draft for each additional Qualified

Free Agent it signs. Notwithstanding the above, a Club shall not

be required to forfeit a selection in the top ten of the first round

of the Rule 4 Draft, and its highest available selection shall be

deemed its first selection following the tenth selection of the first

round.

 

 

so by that section of the MLB CBA, it states that the Yankees would only lose their 1st rd draft pick if they signed Zack Greinke if the Brewers would have kept him, offered him a QO and had him pass on it.

 

That paragraph also can be read to say that if the Yankees sign ZG after the Angels try to keep him, they will not lose their 1st rd pick because ZG does not qualify as a Qualified Free Agent.

[RockCoCougars]

You have to let Marcum walk at this point. I will be irate if they offer him $13 million. My money says that he lands in Kansas City on a make good deal next season. He's not going to get a multi-year deal... at least not at anywhere near the salary he is shooting for.

[Roderick]

You have to let Marcum walk at this point. I will be irate if they offer him $13 million. My money says that he lands in Kansas City on a make good deal next season. He's not going to get a multi-year deal... at least not at anywhere near the salary he is shooting for.

 

I would definitely try to sign Marcum to a one year make-good deal (but not $13M) as I would hope that would be the perfect bridge to the young guys in the minors and he could very well end up as trade bait or comp pick.

[torts]

I think it would depend. marcum has made it known he doesnt think he'll be back in Milwaukee, and this QO can only be offered in a 5 day window following the completion of the World Series, and once the offer is made, Marcum has 7 days to accept/decline it. No team can offer Marcum a contract, or talk to him about contracts until after the QO period is over. So if MIL wants to take the gamble that Marcum is looking for a long term deal instead of just another one-and-done contract, they could still offer it to him. I doubt they'll do it, but it theres a chance it could happen.

 

now, MIL and Marcum cannot plan this out so the brewers get a pick, if it is found that there was discussions about Marcum declining the offer so MIL gets a comp pick, the brewers are fined and would lose future draft picks.

 

and just so its clearer, the pick is a comp rd pick, not a 1st rd pick. the team who signs marcum (or any QO player) loses their 1st rd pick (as long as its not a top 10 pick), and that lost pick is just removed from the board. So it essentially shortens the 1st rd, adds to the comp rd between the 1st and 2nd, and if you're one of the top10 pick teams, then you lose your 2nd rd pick.

[monty57]

marcum has made it known he doesnt think he'll be back in Milwaukee

 

I'm not sure where you're getting that. This is from an article on the Brewers' website today:

 

"If I had the opportunity [to re-sign with Milwaukee] I'd love to," Marcum said. "That's definitely a possibility. It's a great organization. Most of the guys are going to be back next year. It's a good group. They still have a chance to do some things in Milwaukee. It's pretty special."

 

A month or so ago, I believe it was Hardricourt who Tweeted that Marcum may be open to signing a one-year deal with the Brewers to rebuild his value. I would guess that if this is true it would be for less than $13.5MM. If Marcum is healthy, I think he's certainly worth offering a one-year $8-10MM deal. He bridges the gap to the prospects and he could be flipped at the deadline next season for prospects.

[torts]

marcum has made it known he doesnt think he'll be back in Milwaukee

 

I'm not sure where you're getting that. This is from an article on the Brewers' website today:

 

"If I had the opportunity [to re-sign with Milwaukee] I'd love to," Marcum said. "That's definitely a possibility. It's a great organization. Most of the guys are going to be back next year. It's a good group. They still have a chance to do some things in Milwaukee. It's pretty special."

 

A month or so ago, I believe it was Hardricourt who Tweeted that Marcum may be open to signing a one-year deal with the Brewers to rebuild his value. I would guess that if this is true it would be for less than $13.5MM. If Marcum is healthy, I think he's certainly worth offering a one-year $8-10MM deal. He bridges the gap to the prospects and he could be flipped at the deadline next season for prospects.

 

I didnt see that article prior to posting that, so thats good news to hear!

 

my comment was from my recollection of something he said prior to the trade deadline

[TooLiveBrew]

The Post-Crescent ran a story not too long ago around the time of Marcum's first rehab start. Naturally, Mass Haas included it in the Link Report. The headline was "Marcum doubts he will be a Brewer past this season", but it never included a quote with him saying that. The closest you get is:

 

“The experience has been great,” Marcum said of his time with the Brewers. “Last year is what you play for, a chance to get to the World Series. I’d love to return but I don’t write the checks and I don’t make the offers, so it’s going to be up to them.

 

The emergence of several pitching prospects, coupled with his arm issues, which began in mid-June, may prevent that from happening.

 

“Everything has been quiet on their end,” Marcum said of a possible extension with the club. “That’s just part of it. They have a lot of young pitchers there and in Triple A. We’ve seen some of them this year with (Mike) Fiers and (Tyler) Thornburg that have good arms and have a chance to do some pretty good things here.””

If you're going to run with that headline, presumably not attributing a quote to Marcum that he didn't say, I'd assume Marcum said he doubted he'd be a Brewer on the record... so why not include the quote? I understand that it's fairly likely that he's not back for 2013, but nothing in that article is more than just Marcum talking about the situation as it stands... not overtly stating he's unlikely to be back.

[monty57]

I've probably gotten my hopes up too high on the aforementioned Tweet, and the seemingly perfect situation of getting Marcum back for a reasonable price for one year. If he doesn't come back (or we can't get someone on a one-year deal), I hope we don't sign a multi-year deal with a B-level veteran. We have too many good arms coming up to block them with a high-priced vet.

 

To topic, as long as the Brewers were 100% certain that Marcum's arm is healthy, I wouldn't be mad if they made a qualifying offer. When healthy, Marcum is worth $13.5MM in free agency, and the one-year deal fits our time-frame with our prospects. They'd better make sure he's healthy before doing it.

[Nottso]

Can a qualifying offer be made with caveats/stipulations? Say a lower price, with the $13.5M kicking in at X innings pitched or something like that. I'm thinking it would have to be a relatively low number of innings, so that teams couldn't screw the pitcher, but high enough so that a serious injury prevents the higher number from becoming a reality.

 

I know deals like that can normally be made, but if the higher number were great enough, could it then be considered a qualifying offer?

[Raw Biz]

Can a qualifying offer be made with caveats/stipulations? Say a lower price, with the $13.5M kicking in at X innings pitched or something like that. I'm thinking it would have to be a relatively low number of innings, so that teams couldn't screw the pitcher, but high enough so that a serious injury prevents the higher number from becoming a reality.

 

I know deals like that can normally be made, but if the higher number were great enough, could it then be considered a qualifying offer?

 

No. Wouldn't a "qualifying offer with stipulations" just be a normal contract offer? Sure they could offer him something like that but they wouldn't get any compensation if he turned it down. The QO is the 13.5 (or whatever number it will be), take it or leave it. There is no negotiating or anything that goes with it.

[monty57]

Yeah, the "qualifying offer" was negotiated into the new CBA, so it has to meet the requirements of the CBA.

 

I'm not sure which way things will go with Marcum. If he's saying that the team hasn't approached him, then I don't know how likely it would be that they will offer him a one-year deal. His statement of "If I had the opportunity [to re-sign with Milwaukee] I'd love to," may mean "If the Brewers offer me a multi-year, market value deal, I'd love to take it."

 

While I'd love to get him back on a one-year deal, I think Melvin will try to guage the market, and if he thinks someone is going to offer Marcum a multi-year deal, he'll offer him the "qualifying offer." If he doesn't think someone will offer him a multi-year deal, he'll try to sign him to a one-year deal for less than the "qualifying offer."

[torts]

Can a qualifying offer be made with caveats/stipulations? Say a lower price, with the $13.5M kicking in at X innings pitched or something like that. I'm thinking it would have to be a relatively low number of innings, so that teams couldn't screw the pitcher, but high enough so that a serious injury prevents the higher number from becoming a reality.

 

I know deals like that can normally be made, but if the higher number were great enough, could it then be considered a qualifying offer?

 

no, a QO must be the average salary of the top 125 contracts on the year. it is a pre-determined amount, aimed to speed up that entire section of pre-free agency, and cannot be modified.