Jan
30

Open Thread: Today in weird contract clauses

By

I think that's Crawford's Obama pose. (AP Photo/Winslow Townson)

The Red Sox have apparently put a clause in Carl Crawford’s contract that prevents any team he’s traded to from turning around and trading him from the Yankees. I’m not sure how exactly this would be enforced; if the Sox eventually trade him to the Angels, and then the Angels want to deal him to the Yanks at some point in the future, what can Boston do? Take him back? I suppose they could bitch and moan to MLB and get Selig could step in, but if they’re so afraid of him playing for New York, why would they deal him if he’s healthy and productive? If they trade him because he stinks, you’d think they’d want him on the Yankees. Eh, whatever.

Anyways, here is the night’s open thread. The Pro Bowl is apparently still being played these days, and can be seen on FOX at 7pm ET. That means no Simpsons or Family Guy. Lame. The Knicks are also playing tonight, but that’s pretty much it. Go ahead and talk about anything your heart desires.

Categories : Open Thread

68 Comments»

  1. NHL All-Star Game >>>>> Pro Bowl

    • Bryan L says:

      This in its entirety.

    • Jimmy McNulty says:

      I like that it’s the week before the Super Bowl now so that players have something to play for the week before the Super Bow. However, I do think it shouldn’t be in Hawaii. It should be wherever the Super Bowl is, the weeks before the Super Bowl should be a celebration of the NFL much like the baseball ASG is a celebration of the greatest game ever.

      Speaking of the Super Bowl if he finds a way to sell out 110K seats at the prices that are being charged and he can sell out the parking lot watch parties at 200 bucks a pop he deserves to have the Super Bowl at his stadium every year. If he can make that much money off of one game, why even try to do better?

    • Poopy Pants says:

      Anything >>>>>>> Pro Bowl

  2. Jerkface says:

    *places hand on Red Sox bloated, slug like body*

    It’s afraid!

  3. Esteban says:

    Hey dalelama I think I found you commenting on thedailybeast.com article about Egypt.
    http://www.thedailybeast.com/b.....hood/full/

  4. Esteban says:

    Pro Bowl has to be the worst All-Star game out there right?

  5. Rich Stein says:

    i love these threads

  6. Kiersten says:

    Wow, what kind of petty bullshit is that?

    • Jimmy McNulty says:

      Furthermore, if the Red Sox stop wanting to pay him 20 million a year what the hell makes them think that the Yankees would want to spend that on him?

      • charley says:

        Well. If the sox trade him b/c he sucks, then he has a bounce back year and is traded to the Yankees, the sox would be pissed. Hence, this contract clause.

  7. nsalem says:

    Just in case anyone is still interested the Mel Hall walk-off was vs Boston on May 27, 1991 He hit two home runs that game. A solo shot in the seventh and the three run walk off in the ninth. Hall’s home run did not go into the loge or upper deck It was 3 or 4 rows back in the lower deck. Dave Eiland was the starter that game and was gone by the 5th inning. To the best of my knowledge Mel was not surprised by a pie or anything else in his face as he came home. I’m sure he is praying for the same outcome tonight.

  8. MikeD says:

    No way that can be enforced. It’s also a stupid clause, since it reduces the Sox’ ability to deal Crawford with his high salary. The receiving team would not want to restrict their future trading market.

    Not that I see Crawford being dealt. Once he begins his decline phase, no team will be interested in that $21-million-per contract, especially from a non-power-hitting corner OFer.

  9. Jimmy McNulty says:

    Isn’t is contract a no trade clause? I mean, Crawford’s a great player, but I don’t see people wanting to spend 20M a year on him should the Red Sox ever want to deal him.

  10. NZ Samuel says:

    Is there any history out there for that sort of clause before? Or are the Red Sox “pioneering” this one?
    Thanks

  11. Jimmy McNulty says:

    The guest authors can fuck themselves with an iron stick if they think I’m going to comment this on their individual articles, but I think they did a fantastic job all the way around this weekend. Every piece was a fun article to read, and I found all of them to be well written pieces. Mike, Ben, and Joe did a great job in picking three very talented writers that offer a different, yet still good, take on the Yankees from what we see Monday through Friday.

  12. Xstar7 says:

    I guess John Henry and Theo are as insecure as their team’s fans. I don’t even think the Yankees want Carl Crawford anymore at this point.

  13. Avi says:

    Interesting interview with Cashman about player development and Montero. Found the link today on TYU.
    http://minormatterstrenton.blogspot.com/

    • Jerome S. says:

      I really hope that’s true, but why wouldn’t Cashman say that Montero’s defense is solid? It would be senseless for him to come out and say that Montero is terrible (which he probably is).

  14. squishy jello person says:

    Jesus Montero led the 2010 SWB yankees in: runs, doubles, home runs, RBIs, walks (!), BA (min 200 pas), OPS and total bases. You’re welcome.

  15. Esteban says:

    X Games super pipe starting now if y’all are interested.

  16. Kiersten says:

    “Orioles & Nationals Are Finalists For Duchscherer”
    http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/.....herer.html

    I’m not jumping into the “omgz Cashman sux” camp, but seriously, WTF?

  17. cano is the bro says:

    I’m thinking about buying a yankee poster for my room. Anyone have any suggestions?

  18. Avi says:

    Orioles Signed Duchsherer dam it

  19. 28 this year says:

    How does that clause even work? How can the Red Sox even enforce it?

    I just think if that clause is true, it just shows how petty the Red Sox are. They are like, we just bought a shiny new toy that we expect to trade adn then we expect the team to try and unload it on the Yankees. Like wtf??

  20. Ross says:

    Four full posts in one day. Yeesh. My mouth tastes like… blog.

  21. Turk Turkleton says:

    if I ever saw Bob Lorenz on
    The city streets, I would totally give him a bear hug,

  22. Dr Van Nostrand says:

    Random story that you all might find interesting.

    I was in the lobby of my building in Los Angeles a week or so ago with my girlfriend and we were decked out in Yankee gear for no particular reason. The security guard stopped us to ask if we were from NYC like he was. Once he heard that we were and were big Yankee fans, he said he had just experienced a pretty bizarre coincidence not 15 minutes before we arrived in the lobby.

    They were doing some shooting for some shitty film or something in my building, as they do frequently in my area of downtown LA, and some schmuck was walking around the lobby with a dirty red sox cap. The security guard decided to give this guy a hard time and tell him to take off his Red Sox hat because they suck etc etc. Turns out it was John Henry in town because he was financing this shitty movie and was just chatting with a few of the producers about logistics etc.

    If only I could have come 15 minutes earlier to ask him how the curse of Mark Teixeira’s been workin out for him…

  23. deadrody says:

    Totally not enforceable, AND stupid to boot. What is it worth to Carl Crawford besides nothing. So he gets trade to, say, Anaheim. And they re-negotiate, take that clause out and add $5 to his deal. Done. You’re telling me that preventing Crawford from going to NY where there are more ad dollars to be had than anywhere else in baseball is actually worth ANYTHING to him, let alone more than $5 ?

    Not.

  24. deadrody says:

    Furthermore, it is quite amusing to see just how far up the chain the Red Sox obsession with the Yankees go. By all measures they improved their team immensely this offseason, likely surpassing the Yankees along the way. And yet they STILL define themselves through the prism of the evil empire.

    Hysterical.

  25. Mr. Sparkle says:

    Sounds like a case of paranoia/buyer’s remorse. The only reason a clause like this would need to exist is if, for some reason, Crawford struggles in Boston right away. Let’s say a bad first year extends into a bad start in year two. The knee-jerk fans in Boston, mirrored by the knee-jerk Boston media and eventually the knee-jerk Boston front office decide the contract is a disaster and they have to move him quickly while he still has some value. The fact they think this even remotely could happen would define the “buyer’s remorse.” There must be some doubt in the Boston front office about something.

    Then, in kicks the paranoia. They make the decision to ship him out of town and get a taker. He plays a little better there, hinting that maybe Boston was the problem (or maybe just a general change of venue.) He finishes out the season there, and that team decides that rather than continuing to pay him they would rather dump the salary and get some young player(s) in return, or fill a hole. In come the Yankees who wrest him away because it’s primarily a money dump deal, the only kind they can ever seem to pull off. His legs and bat are refreshed in New York and he returns to the form he showed in Tampa Bay, helping the Yankees to a division, AL and World Series title.

    That’s one crazy scenario…one that can only come from a paranoid organization. It also goes to prove what I’ve been saying since the 2004 ALCS debacle. The Red Sox thought they changed everything, but it wouldn’t be long before they proved that a deeply ingrained mindset over 80+ years was not going to change overnight. This isn’t the first instance…just another in a long list of examples. This is clearly pre-2004 thinking at work. Or, using a more accurate description, business as usual in Boston.

  26. Dave Mancuso says:

    I guarantee….I absolutely 100% guarantee, that any such clause is completely unenforceable.

    The Red Sox cannot (no matter how much they wish it) restrain a player’s right to join another team. Nor can they restrain another organization from dealing with a third organization.

    That said, I wouldn’t believe such a scenario would arise anyways. I mean, for argument’s sake, let’s say the Sox do trade him. It obviously wouldn’t be this year. Or next year. Not even likely the year after that. Let’s say they trade him when he’s 34 or 35 though.

    Do you think the Sox would really care if the Royals (for example) flipped him back to the Yankees? If they actually bothered to trade him away, I’d doubt they’d even care where he went after that.

    Even so, Any clause in any contract restraining trade or ability of a player to join another team would be unenforceable. Red Sox can claim all the “power” they want to their fans in that respect. But, in the end, it’s all spin and mental retardation.

Leave a Reply

You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> in your comment.

If this is your first time commenting on River Ave. Blues, please review the RAB Commenter Guidelines. Login for commenting features. Register for RAB.