Master Index of Archived Threads


The Jarred Kelenic Situation

MFS62 Feb 26 2021 06:27 AM

Jarred Kelenic went public saying he is being unfairly kept in the minors because of a contract dispute with the Mariners. “It was communicated to Jarred that had he signed that contract, he would have debuted last year,'' said Brodie Scoffield, who represents Kelenic. The article also mentions the similar situation Pete Alonso and others have had - whether to delay a call-up to extend the club's control over the player. https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/mlb/columnist/bob-nightengale/2021/02/24/jarred-kelenic-mariners-prospect-service-time-manipulation/4568463001/ There are a lot of pros/cons for a team doing this in the article, and this case, the team seems to have a good case. “I'm not sure how you construe a service-time manipulation with a 21-year old player who has played (21) games above A-ball,'' Dipoto said on a Zoom call, “and has not yet achieved 800 plate appearances as a professional player. That would be an unprecedented run to the big leagues that hasn't happened in three decades (since Alex Rodriguez in 1994). How do you feel about this? Later

Fman99 Feb 26 2021 06:31 AM Re: The Jarred Kelenic Situation

Hard for the Seattle execs to make a good case in their favor, trying to also talk through all the egg on their faces. That's what happens when someone says the quiet part loud.

Johnny Lunchbucket Feb 26 2021 06:53 AM Re: The Jarred Kelenic Situation

Yeah those dumb comments gave Kelenic more than enough to go on believing they're screwing him whether they are or they're not. That's really the problem with the structure they've agreed to, you're always going to want to take best advantage of the rules and it'll make you look bad at times. I think this also gives us a not-so-great look into the kinda guy Kelenic might be, and I wonder if he's not more than a little douchey irl. I recall getting a real jocky vibe from the start and have always wondered the extent to which perception of his personality might have played a role in the Mets giving him up. I think it's possible for example, he made a bad impression on Fred negotiating his signing deal or something.

ashie62 Feb 26 2021 07:02 AM Re: The Jarred Kelenic Situation

The Mariners had given a "lesser' prospect Evan White a forward looking deal and on signing White played the entire year in Seattle.

Edgy MD Feb 26 2021 07:18 AM Re: The Jarred Kelenic Situation

DiPoto should be doing everything he can to not litigate this in the press.

batmagadanleadoff Feb 26 2021 09:31 AM Re: The Jarred Kelenic Situation

My two cents: Teams that hold back minor leaguers for a short while to gain an extra whole year of pre-free agency eligibility from that player all make a calculated business decision: is the team better off by promoting the minor leaguer a few weeks earlier at the start of the season in question and losing that extra year of pre-free agency eligibility or is the team better off by delaying for a short while, the promotion of that minor leaguer to gain an extra season of pre-free agency eligibility? It's a fair decision, permissible as the rules are written, and if the players don't like it -- and why should they? -- it's a win-win for management and a lose-lose for labor, the union can renegotiate when the current CBA expires. Players will cry foul and that the owners are acting in bad faith when players are held back but it's pretty easy to justify a team's decision to hold back a player for just a short while and a team can give various plausible reasons for doing so. Kelenic's camp uses Pete Alonso as an example of a player who had star potential and yet was promoted at the start of the season in question. So what, I say? Apples and oranges and it's impossible to compare one team's situation to that of another team, given the literally infinite number of variables at play. And while BVW has received lotsa credit for having the foresight to promote Alonso at the start of the 2019 season, I'm not buying it and I'm not giving BVW a speck of credit for that decision. BVW got the Mets GM job for many reasons, the two main reasons, I believe, are 1) that no established GM wanted to work for the meddling, overbearing and incompetent Wilpons, and 2) BVW was selling the Wilpons the precise bill of goods that Fred wanted to hear --- that the Mets could win the WS immediately with the right moves. Wilpon wanted to go for it all and immediately, because he knew that his days as Mets owner were numbered. The rift between his family and the Katz's over the sale of the team hadn't been made public at the time of the Kelenic/Cano trade but with hindsight, was already brewing and Fred knew about it. So he signed onto BVW's hare-brained plan to go for it all, sacrificing Kelenic and a year of Alonso's service time. Kelenic was traded because the Wilpons didn't give a flying fuck about the state of the Mets four or five or six years down the line because they knew that they'd no longer be here as Mets owners. Same with Alonso's extra year of service time. Otherwise, Alonso would've been held back to gain that extra year of service time. The Alonso decision worked out well for the Mets and their fans. Alonso had a historic rookie season and as it turned out, would need every single day of the 2019 season to set the all-time rookie HR record. And with Cohen as the Mets new owner, money will, presumably, not be an issue or a stumbling block when the time comes to extend Alonso. But the Wilpons, acting out of self-interest, traded some of the Mets future hoping for a short term or immediate gain, and as part of that plan, permitted BVW to promote Alonso at the start of the 2019 season.

MFS62 Feb 26 2021 10:42 AM Re: The Jarred Kelenic Situation

Teams that hold back minor leaguers for a short while to gain an extra whole year of pre-free agency eligibility from that player all make a calculated business decision: is the team better off by promoting the minor leaguer a few weeks earlier at the start of the season in question and losing that extra year of pre-free agency eligibility or is the team better off by delaying for a short while, the promotion of that minor leaguer to gain an extra season of pre-free agency eligibility? It's a fair decision, permissible as the rules are written, and if the players don't like it -- and why should they? -- it's a win-win for management and a lose-lose for labor, the union can renegotiate when the current CBA expires. Players will cry foul and that the owners are acting in bad faith when players are held back but it's pretty easy to justify a team's decision to hold back a player for just a short while and a team can give various plausible reasons for doing so. I agree. I don't think it is covered under the current CBA, nor do I think it should be. It is a team by team, player by player decision when a team thinks a player "is ready" for the majors. And they must weigh whether that player's lost productivity until that moment they bring him up will hurt their chances that year against when they want to pay him for his productivity in the future. Later

batmagadanleadoff Feb 26 2021 11:03 AM Re: The Jarred Kelenic Situation

Teams that hold back minor leaguers for a short while to gain an extra whole year of pre-free agency eligibility from that player all make a calculated business decision: is the team better off by promoting the minor leaguer a few weeks earlier at the start of the season in question and losing that extra year of pre-free agency eligibility or is the team better off by delaying for a short while, the promotion of that minor leaguer to gain an extra season of pre-free agency eligibility? It's a fair decision, permissible as the rules are written, and if the players don't like it -- and why should they? -- it's a win-win for management and a lose-lose for labor, the union can renegotiate when the current CBA expires. Players will cry foul and that the owners are acting in bad faith when players are held back but it's pretty easy to justify a team's decision to hold back a player for just a short while and a team can give various plausible reasons for doing so. I agree. I don't think it is covered under the current CBA, nor do I think it should be. It is a team by team, player by player decision when a team thinks a player "is ready" for the majors. And they must weigh whether that player's lost productivity until that moment they bring him up will hurt their chances that year against when they want to pay him for his productivity in the future. Of course the CBA doesn't compel a team to promote or not promote a player at a given time. But the CBA determines how service time is calculated and when a player is eligible for free agency.

Johnny Lunchbucket Feb 26 2021 11:06 AM Re: The Jarred Kelenic Situation

And no matter what those rules are both sides will do they can to brush up against their permissible limits.

Frayed Knot Feb 26 2021 01:06 PM Re: The Jarred Kelenic Situation

The thing the Mariners did wrong here was to basically telegraph their move and their reason for it. I mean, it's legal and there's nothing Kelenic can do about it -- at least while still under this CBA which doesn't have long to live anyway so this may become a moot point (or, as it was often called on the MoFo, a 'Mute' point but that was also the forum which brought you the 'Pre-Madonna' ballplayer) -- but it's not going to build any good will with their player going forward. Maybe that matters, maybe it never does. Like I said, there's a good chance that the rules are different by this time next year. In all, it hasn't been a good week for Seattle execs speaking out. When the Cubs did this with Kris Bryant they brought him up the day after he was assured of belonging to the Cubs for a 7th season. iow, they didn't say they were doing so ahead of time, but then they probed that that was exactly what they were doing. Bryant later filed a grievance against them (two years ago?) but lost seeing as how he was arguing against a work condition that his union agreed to. 2021 is now the extra year that the Cubs got out of him and they're (maybe) actively trying to trade him so yaneverknow.

metsmarathon Feb 26 2021 01:41 PM Re: The Jarred Kelenic Situation

the real problem with the rule is that it kicks in so early in the season, that the club gets nearly a full season out of a player, and the player gets nearly a full season of incredibly below-market salary. if the cutoff were later in the season i think you'd see it affect fewer players. or maybe more. it's sometimes pretty hard to tell how the unintended consequences play out.

Benjamin Grimm Feb 26 2021 02:07 PM Re: The Jarred Kelenic Situation

I agree. Teams only have to wait a few weeks into April. If it was June 1 they'd be less likely to make these kinds of delays.

Frayed Knot Feb 26 2021 03:33 PM Re: The Jarred Kelenic Situation

A similar thing happened with Salary Arbitration a bunch of years back. Originally, salary arb was after just two years. The owners cried poverty and, in a rare example of an MLBPA give-back in those days, they agreed to move it to three years. The owners then did what they were used to doing if given an inch, they took a mile by doing the "late" call-up thing and effectively turned arbitration into a four-year deal. That got fixed in the next round of negotiations and what they settled on was a cut-off with no specific date but rather one that involved all players with 3+ years of service plus approx 1/6 of those with between two and three years. So the deadline became around the end of May but it was impossible to know exactly what date was "safe" to call up a player because it depended on other players on other teams over which you had no control. If there were 60 players with more than two but less than three seasons of service, the ten who had to most time under their belts would qualify for arbitration while the other 50 did not. Clubs could still try to manipulate but it was harder and the stakes less stark than a Freedom/no-freedom situation. One would think a future FA threshold would resemble something like that as well, although there's been talk of a sliding scale based on the age of first call-up. Older players would be tied to a team for a shorter period so wouldn't have to wait until their early 30's for their first crack at FA-gency while clubs would Not get extra years of control by delaying a player's call-up.

smg58 Feb 28 2021 09:42 AM Re: The Jarred Kelenic Situation

The controversy comes from whether the owners are acting against the team's interest in holding back a player back and getting an extra year of control when he's already better than their other options. The players and owners are never going to be objective about this -- it costs the players money, and the owners are saving money in a way the rules clearly don't prevent. From the fans' perspective -- and the commissioner of baseball, regardless of who employs him, should put the fans' interests first -- they want to know that their team is playing their best players and giving themselves the best chance to win right out of the gate, when every team starts tied and every fan has some hope. You don't endear yourself to your fans when you wait until your team is out of contention to give a potential star (and a potential ticket-seller) the call. (Circumstances were at least a little bit different back then, but I remember how frustrating it was in 1983 to wait to see Darryl Strawberry.) I think the players union needs to demand the service time to be 5 1/2 years instead of six. That eliminates the issue at the start of the season, and if a non-contending team waits until August instead of June to call somebody up, it's less controversial (and the player still starts the next season with the team).

Edgy MD Feb 28 2021 10:04 AM Re: The Jarred Kelenic Situation

The Jarred Kelenic Situation were terrific when they stuck to short, fun, funny, high-energy floor-fillers. What possessed them to get all high-art concept-album focused is beyond me. [fimg=650]https://pauldankers.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/random_band_photo.jpg[/fimg]

batmagadanleadoff Feb 28 2021 10:12 AM Re: The Jarred Kelenic Situation

The controversy comes from whether the owners are acting against the team's interest in holding back a player back and getting an extra year of control when he's already better than their other options. The players and owners are never going to be objective about this -- it costs the players money, and the owners are saving money in a way the rules clearly don't prevent. From the fans' perspective -- and the commissioner of baseball, regardless of who employs him, should put the fans' interests first -- they want to know that their team is playing their best players and giving themselves the best chance to win right out of the gate, when every team starts tied and every fan has some hope. You don't endear yourself to your fans when you wait until your team is out of contention to give a potential star (and a potential ticket-seller) the call. (Circumstances were at least a little bit different back then, but I remember how frustrating it was in 1983 to wait to see Darryl Strawberry.) I think the players union needs to demand the service time to be 5 1/2 years instead of six. That eliminates the issue at the start of the season, and if a non-contending team waits until August instead of June to call somebody up, it's less controversial (and the player still starts the next season with the team). and the commissioner of baseball, regardless of who employs him, should put the fans' interests first.... Pretty hard for the commissioner of baseball to ignore or forget who employs him. Because if the commisioner had the power to make unilateral changes to the way service time is calculated to thwart the way the owners can delay a player's free agency by a whole year by simply manipulating less than one month's worth of service time, that commissioner would be fired the moment those thoughts entered his head. The unspoken words are that a baseball commissioner isn't hired to be neutral and impartial in matters between the union and the owners. The controversy comes from whether the owners are acting against the team's interest Owners always act in their own self-interests instead of in the interests of their teams and fans. So would you and I if we owned teams. And when it appears that owners are acting in the interests of their teams and fans, it's only because in that case, those interests happen to intersect with the owners' own interests. Otherwise, as just one example, Fred Wilpon would have sold the Mets ten years ago instead of putting the the Mets and their fans through hell all these years by desperately clinging to ownership until he no longer could. I like your idea of reducing service time to five and a half years for free agency eligibility. It's straight-forward, easy to implement, and the fairest proposal I've come across. MLB, union have to solve prospect issue: Sherman By Joel Sherman February 27, 2021 | 9:59am | Updated Excerpt: The math is basically that a major league season is 187 days, but a player is counted as having earned a full year of service with 172 days on the roster or injured list. Thus, if a team holds a player down for 16 days or more and, therefore, limits him to 171 days or less, that player does not gain a full year of service. And it takes six full years to gain free agency, not five years and 171 days. That allows the team to keep the player for seven seasons before free agency. [***] During the [Cubs Kris] Bryant furor a few years ago, then-Cardinals pitcher Carlos Villanueva, who was a member of the union's executive board, said: “I'm a union guy. We signed that contract. That language in the contract — the team has the liberty to do what they want when it comes to that. We don't have to like it. And if we don't like it, next time we sit at the bargaining table, we have to do something about it.” In the past week. Cubs union rep Ian Happ criticized the manipulation of service and added, “I hope that both sides can work together to improve that because the system allows for it.” https://nypost.com/2021/02/27/mlb-must-stop-punishing-top-prospects-sherman/

smg58 Feb 28 2021 10:22 AM Re: The Jarred Kelenic Situation

Pretty hard for the commissioner of baseball to ignore or forget who employs him. Because if the commisioner had the power to make unilateral changes to the way service time is calculated to thwart the way the owners can delay a player's free agency by a whole year by simply manipulating less than one month's worth of service time, that commissioner would be fired the moment those thoughts entered his head. The unspoken words are that a baseball commissioner isn't hired to be neutral and impartial in matters between the union and the owners. This is true, unfortunately, but a savvy commissioner could advocate for the fans at the next CBA in a way that doesn't alienate the owners. He could say something like "The game will benefit if you give a little on this, and I'll get the players to give on something else."

batmagadanleadoff Feb 28 2021 10:26 AM Re: The Jarred Kelenic Situation

Pretty hard for the commissioner of baseball to ignore or forget who employs him. Because if the commisioner had the power to make unilateral changes to the way service time is calculated to thwart the way the owners can delay a player's free agency by a whole year by simply manipulating less than one month's worth of service time, that commissioner would be fired the moment those thoughts entered his head. The unspoken words are that a baseball commissioner isn't hired to be neutral and impartial in matters between the union and the owners. This is true, unfortunately, but a savvy commissioner could advocate for the fans at the next CBA in a way that doesn't alienate the owners. He could say something like "The game will benefit if you give a little on this, and I'll get the players to give on something else." Sure, but if the commissioner did say that, and truly meant and believed what he said, instead of trying to thread a needle to secretly advance the union's interests, then he'd be advocating for the owners as well. That's his job. If he was trying to "trick" the owners, he'd probably fail because the owners, collectively, are sophisticated for the most part, and with enormous, practically limitless resources to inform them. We're far from the days when Marvin Miller practically picked the owners' pockets.

Fman99 Feb 28 2021 11:01 AM Re: The Jarred Kelenic Situation

Edgy MD wrote: The Jarred Kelenic Situation were terrific when they stuck to short, fun, funny, high-energy floor-fillers. What possessed them to get all high-art concept-album focused is beyond me. [fimg=650]https://pauldankers.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/random_band_photo.jpg[/fimg] Just another ripoff of the Endy Chavez Experience, if you ask me.

batmagadanleadoff Feb 28 2021 11:23 AM Re: The Jarred Kelenic Situation

Edgy MD wrote: The Jarred Kelenic Situation were terrific when they stuck to short, fun, funny, high-energy floor-fillers. What possessed them to get all high-art concept-album focused is beyond me. [fimg=650]https://pauldankers.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/random_band_photo.jpg[/fimg] Just another ripoff of the Endy Chavez Experience, if you ask me. The Endy Chavez Experience is a rip-off of The Tommy Davis Experience. Check out this TDE concert poster below from 1967. Name the supporting acts and the venue and win a prize! [FIMG=555]https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50989897506_a346e9e3cf_o.png[/FIMG]

Johnny Lunchbucket Feb 28 2021 11:33 AM Re: The Jarred Kelenic Situation

The Duke of Moock and Auntie Grzenda and The Shaw Thangs

batmagadanleadoff Feb 28 2021 11:38 AM Re: The Jarred Kelenic Situation

It's The Shaw Thang, not Thangs, but we'll accept your answer. We need the venue, now.

Johnny Lunchbucket Feb 28 2021 11:38 AM Re: The Jarred Kelenic Situation

The Ballroom Shea

Johnny Lunchbucket Feb 28 2021 11:41 AM Re: The Jarred Kelenic Situation

I prefer the Larry Davis Experience myself

batmagadanleadoff Feb 28 2021 11:43 AM Re: The Jarred Kelenic Situation

Johnny Lunchbucket wrote: The Ballroom Shea The Ballroom Shea was the swingingest rock and roll venue during the psychedelic sixties! You win this video, inspiration for one of the supporting acts. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DJs9Q0bc2C0

batmagadanleadoff Feb 28 2021 11:56 AM Re: The Jarred Kelenic Situation

From the halcyon days of the Ballroom Shea. The headliner, touted as the next Elvis Presley, wouldn't even turn out to be a one-hit wonder. But the unknown band debuting and relegated to the bottom of the bill went on to great things and an eventual induction into the R&R HOF. Accompanying psychedelic light show by Lindsey, Bob and Ralph (uncredited). [FIMG=555]https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50990142417_4772894ed6_o.png[/FIMG]

Frayed Knot Feb 28 2021 01:27 PM Re: The Jarred Kelenic Situation

Back to Kelenic for a second (the ballplayer, not the band). The Mariners actually have a good case for not promoting him. Between his age [not 22 until July] and his (lack of) experience [663 total ABs as a pro, just 83 of them above A-Ball] to promote him off that could be considered the definition of rushing him. Covid, of course, has a lot to do with that but neither side is to blame there. For comparison, Wright, also a HS draftee, had ~1,500 ABs with 337 at AA or AAA when he got called up; Reyes, who started younger and may have been somewhat rushed, had 1,262 / 435; Dom had racked up 2,300 / 1,000+ and at this time last year many Met fans were hoping he'd be a throw-in on a trade package Again, the M's biggest problem was essentially admitting that delaying his service time was their reason for holding off on his promotion and seemed to only fall back on the lack of games and ABs after catching flack for it.

Edgy MD Feb 28 2021 01:39 PM Re: The Jarred Kelenic Situation

The reality is that this arrangement is a vestige of the reserve system and whatever adjustments they make to it will still be used to the best advantage of management and labor as necessary at times and not necessarily to the best advantage of a team's current competitive advantage. And that system can't come crashing down soon enough.

Johnny Lunchbucket Feb 28 2021 01:47 PM Re: The Jarred Kelenic Situation Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Feb 28 2021 02:06 PM

I was a big fan of The System Can't Come Crashing Down Fast Enough. Then they went and signed that million-$$ deal with Sony and they lost all their credibility.

Edgy MD Feb 28 2021 01:59 PM Re: The Jarred Kelenic Situation

I always confused them with System of Rick Down.

Lefty Specialist Feb 28 2021 02:40 PM Re: The Jarred Kelenic Situation

Kelenic's a troublemaker. Glad we're rid of him. . . . . . . . . . (OK, just kidding.)