JDM is signed-5 years, 110 mil

Status
Not open for further replies.

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,048
I hope that means they were able to find a white “RED SOX” jersey and hat for him to don at his press conference.


I heard somewhere that player opt-outs in a contract actually benefit the team, as well as players.

Maybe we could discuss that?
Don’t make me bring The Fez Man back in here.
 

Max Power

thai good. you like shirt?
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
7,879
Boston, MA
They were concerned about his health, so they decided to give him yet another player option? It would make more sense to have those as mutual options in case of a specific injury so either side can terminate the contract after the second, third, or fourth season.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
8,105
They were concerned about his health, so they decided to give him yet another player option? It would make more sense to have those as mutual options in case of a specific injury so either side can terminate the contract after the second, third, or fourth season.
That does seem odd. Maybe there’s more details to come?
 

Byrdbrain

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
8,588
JD was just on EEI and he said Price never told him the fans would boo him in Boston directly contradicting quotes from Price last week.
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
4,662
JD was just on EEI and he said Price never told him the fans would boo him in Boston directly contradicting quotes from Price last week.
He's right. Whether or not Price told JD this, it's a distinction of the fanbase and media culture here and players shouldn't be expected to pretend that it's not.
 

BigPapiMPD34

New Member
Apr 9, 2006
98
Boston, MA
I got some pretty good confirmation on how the AAV will work for the JDM contract. The AAV does not reset in the event of a player opt-out. The difference simply gets picked up in the following season. Thus, the AAV will be 22M each year and then a small amount would be picked up in the year after an opt-out (if used). Please ignore the fact that the salary only adds up to 119.95M - the reporters somehow mis-reported this, but its close enough I suppose.

The biggest takeaway here is that the Sox budget for 2018 will be based on a 22M AAV for JDM (and a 4M AAV for Nunez). By my calculation, they are still pretty close to 137M, but probably have enough room left for mid-season call-ups and trades. Definitely manageable enough where they can stay under 137M and avoid the additional penalties.

JDM Actual Salary:
2018: 23.75M
2019: 23.75M
2020: 23.75M (or 2.5M buyout)
2021: 19.35M
2022: 19.35M

JDM AAV:
If he opts out after 2 years (50M): 22M, 22M, 6M
If he opts out after 3 years (71.25M): 22M, 22M, 22M, 5.25M
If he opts out after 4 years (90.6M): 22M, 22M, 22M, 22M, 2.6M
If he plays all 5 years (110M): 22M per year
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,048
I got some pretty good confirmation on how the AAV will work for the JDM contract. The AAV does not reset in the event of a player opt-out. The difference simply gets picked up in the following season. Thus, the AAV will be 22M each year and then a small amount would be picked up in the year after an opt-out (if used). Please ignore the fact that the salary only adds up to 119.95M - the reporters somehow mis-reported this, but its close enough I suppose.

The biggest takeaway here is that the Sox budget for 2018 will be based on a 22M AAV for JDM (and a 4M AAV for Nunez). By my calculation, they are still pretty close to 137M, but probably have enough room left for mid-season call-ups and trades. Definitely manageable enough where they can stay under 137M and avoid the additional penalties.

JDM Actual Salary:
2018: 23.75M
2019: 23.75M
2020: 23.75M (or 2.5M buyout)
2021: 19.35M
2022: 19.35M

JDM AAV:
If he opts out after 2 years (50M): 22M, 22M, 6M
If he opts out after 3 years (71.25M): 22M, 22M, 22M, 5.25M
If he opts out after 4 years (90.6M): 22M, 22M, 22M, 22M, 2.6M
If he plays all 5 years (110M): 22M per year
Loophole?

Teams can potentially borrow from the future?

That would be a wonderful monkey wrench in assessing the value of options... maybe we should have a thread on that?
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
31,213
Seems pretty clear the Sox asked for protection and Boras wanted something of value for JD in exchange for that protection, which is where the additional opt-out came from.

Sophisticated parties regularly negotiate clauses like each of these where all, or most, of the benefit inures to one party and includes them in an agreement which, overall, benefits both.
 

BigPapiMPD34

New Member
Apr 9, 2006
98
Boston, MA
Loophole?

Teams can potentially borrow from the future?

That would be a wonderful monkey wrench in assessing the value of options... maybe we should have a thread on that?
It could simply be the fact that we rarely see contracts with opt-outs and/or the CBA language changed. I suppose it does make sense to simply adjust it in the following year, because going back and recalculating AAV would cause issues. It would be awful to operate under the assumption that the club was under the LT threshold, only to find out a few years later that you are now considered over the threshold due to an opt-out.
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,048
It could simply be the fact that we rarely see contracts with opt-outs and/or the CBA language changed. I suppose it does make sense to simply adjust it in the following year, because going back and recalculating AAV would cause issues. It would be awful to operate under the assumption that the club was under the LT threshold, only to find out a few years later that you are now considered over the threshold due to an opt-out.
Sure.

I’m wondering if, once realized, this could be an exploitable loophole,
 

JimBoSox9

will you be my friend?
SoSH Member
Nov 1, 2005
16,667
Mid-surburbia
Once MLB is done fixing pace of play, they really ought to take a look at fixes to pace of press conferences. The GM never knows whether to help put the jersey on or just hand it to the player, and the player always looks like they're buttoning up a shirt for the first time in their lives. Slow, awkward mess every time.
 

shaggydog2000

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 5, 2007
11,483
Once MLB is done fixing pace of play, they really ought to take a look at fixes to pace of press conferences. The GM never knows whether to help put the jersey on or just hand it to the player, and the player always looks like they're buttoning up a shirt for the first time in their lives. Slow, awkward mess every time.
They should just photoshop the jersey on. We have the tech for that now.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
13,622
Lisfranc injuries often lead to mid foot arthritis, he probably had an MRI that showed some early cartilage loss or bone changes. Apparently not enough to be symptomatic but enough to concern docs that it could be down the road. Impossible to project accurately especially if he truly has no symptoms, could be problematic in 3 years or 30.

Fortunately no one is counting on him to be a world class baserunner or defender so hopefully it’s a minor/non issue for him as far as everyone here is concerned.
 

BigPapiMPD34

New Member
Apr 9, 2006
98
Boston, MA
Sure.

I’m wondering if, once realized, this could be an exploitable loophole,
I definitely see a loophole available for teams to lower the AAV, but it certainly comes back to bite you in the final year. Maybe MLB keeps a close eye on the contracts to ensure no team is creating opt-outs for AAV purposes? Or maybe the lowest a salary can get in one season must hit a certain percentage of the AAV? For example, the JDM lowest salary hit is 19.35M, which is 88% of the 22M AAV. Below is an example of a loophole if a team wanted to screw with the system:

5/110M: AAV of 22M for 4 years, then 16M in final year that was opted out
26M
26M
26M
26M
6M (player opt out)

2/20M: AAV of 10M for 1 year, then 7M for final year that was opted out
17M
3M (player opt out)
 

FredCDobbs

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 5, 2004
563
Austin
Taking a deeper look at the contract, J.D. can opt out after this year if there is any recorded evidence (applies to home games only) that someone has yelled out that he "sucks."
 

Sam Ray Not

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
8,849
NYC
I mean, how can anyone not be totally stoked at the idea of JDM in the middle of a lineup featuring one-year older-and-stronger Betts, Beni and Devers; improved launch-angle Bogaerts; Raking Blake Swihart; JBJ, Hanley/Mitchy, and Nunez/Pedey?

Just the thought warms up my grey February morning. YMMV.
 
Last edited:

uncannymanny

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 12, 2007
9,081
Once MLB is done fixing pace of play, they really ought to take a look at fixes to pace of press conferences. The GM never knows whether to help put the jersey on or just hand it to the player, and the player always looks like they're buttoning up a shirt for the first time in their lives. Slow, awkward mess every time.
Should've included a press conference opt out.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,505
I got some pretty good confirmation on how the AAV will work for the JDM contract. The AAV does not reset in the event of a player opt-out. The difference simply gets picked up in the following season. Thus, the AAV will be 22M each year and then a small amount would be picked up in the year after an opt-out (if used). Please ignore the fact that the salary only adds up to 119.95M - the reporters somehow misreported this, but its close enough I suppose.
Finally looked at the CBA. You are substantially correct but the CBA words it differently. In short, the CBA considers each year with a qualifying player option to be a full contract year and if the option is not exercised, then the difference is credited to the year in which the option is exercised.

So the contract is structured as 2/$50MM with protection to JDM in case of non-performance but has a lower luxury tax calculation because of the option years.

The operative language is Article XXIII ("CBT"), Section (E)(5)(a)(ii), which says: "A Player Option Year shall be considered a “Guaranteed Year” if, pursuant to the Player’s right to elect or subject to his right to nullify, the terms of that year are guaranteed within the definition in Section A(8); provided, however, that a Player Option Year shall not be considered a Guaranteed Year if the payment the Player is to receive if he declines to exercise his option or nullifies the championship season is more than 50% of the Base Salary payable for that championship season." (This applies to multiple years as well.)

Section (A)(8) reads: “'Guaranteed Year' shall mean any championship season included in a Uniform Player’s Contract for which more than 50% of the Player’s Base Salary is guaranteed by the Contract in the event of termination."

Section (E)(5)(d)(i) then states: "If a Player fails to exercise or chooses to nullify a Player Option Year that is deemed a Guaranteed Year pursuant to Section E(5)(a)(ii) above, the difference between the amount paid to the Player under his Contract (including any Option Buyout payment) and the amount that has been attributed to Actual Club Payroll of a Club under that Contract shall be added to (or subtracted from) Actual Club Payroll in the Contract Year in which the Player Option Year falls."

Note that Section (E)(5)(b)(i) states that "If a Uniform Player’s Contract contains a Club Option
Year or a Player Option Year that is not deemed a Guaranteed Year pursuant to subparagraph (a)(ii) above and the Player is to receive consideration upon the non-exercise of that option
or the nullification of a championship season (“Option Buy- out”), then such Option Buyout shall be deemed a Signing Bonus."
 

OCD SS

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I definitely see a loophole available for teams to lower the AAV, but it certainly comes back to bite you in the final year. Maybe MLB keeps a close eye on the contracts to ensure no team is creating opt-outs for AAV purposes? Or maybe the lowest a salary can get in one season must hit a certain percentage of the AAV? For example, the JDM lowest salary hit is 19.35M, which is 88% of the 22M AAV. Below is an example of a loophole if a team wanted to screw with the system:

5/110M: AAV of 22M for 4 years, then 16M in final year that was opted out
26M
26M
26M
26M
6M (player opt out)

2/20M: AAV of 10M for 1 year, then 7M for final year that was opted out
17M
3M (player opt out)
I thought this sort of loophole got closed after the way Sox structured Beltre's player option. Is it different because it's called an opt out rather than a player option?

This is obviously being done to manipulate the contract AAV. It completely clears up my biggest concern, which was retaining as much flexibility this year (and into next year) without compromising the team's draft status as a CBT penalty. It also makes sense that the option would be structured this way as it saves MLB from having to assess non-financial penalties retroactively.

Can we get a "FINALLY" added to the thread title?
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,850
Context? To me, this sounds like he’s talking about the Red Sox offense “stepping on the neck” of opposing teams...
I think that's what it sounds like to everyone. The poster was using sarcasm to lead into it.
 

DanoooME

above replacement level
SoSH Member
Mar 16, 2008
19,831
Henderson, NV
Lisfranc injuries often lead to mid foot arthritis, he probably had an MRI that showed some early cartilage loss or bone changes. Apparently not enough to be symptomatic but enough to concern docs that it could be down the road. Impossible to project accurately especially if he truly has no symptoms, could be problematic in 3 years or 30.

Fortunately no one is counting on him to be a world class baserunner or defender so hopefully it’s a minor/non issue for him as far as everyone here is concerned.
You must be new to this board. NOTHING is a minor/non-issue on this board. [/sarcasm]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.