[新聞] Alvarez holding out, on restricted list
08/28/2008 12:38 AM ET
Alvarez holding out, on restricted list
Pirates' No. 2 overall pick wants to rework signing bonus
By Jenifer Langosch / MLB.com
==
PITTSBURGH -- Answers as to why Pedro Alvarez, the No. 2 overall pick in this
year's First-Year Player Draft, had not reported to Pittsburgh yet came to
light on Wednesday. However, those answers bring anything but a resolution to
the situation.
Early on Wednesday afternoon, the Pirates released a statement saying that
Alvarez's advisor, Scott Boras, had informed the club that his client will
not sign what was believed a binding contract in which the Pirates would have
paid Alvarez a $6 million signing bonus, spread over a two-year period.
The reason, as stated by the Pirates, for Alvarez's holdout is that the
former Vanderbilt third baseman and Boras want the agreement to be reworked
in order for Alvarez to receive a larger signing bonus. According to the
Pirates, Boras is now contending that the agreement reached on Aug. 15 was
done so after the deadline, therefore not making his client bound to it.
The Pirates emphatically deny that claim.
"This claim was not raised on the evening of the 15th when we informed Mr.
Boras that Major League Baseball had confirmed that the contract was
submitted in a timely fashion," Pirates president Frank Coonelly said in a
statement. "Mr. Boras asserted this claim several days later, after all of
the draft signings had become publicized."
"The Office of the Commissioner has assured us that we have a valid contract
with Pedro and that it will vigorously defend any claim to the contrary,"
Coonelly added.
Boras, in speaking with MLB.com, responded to Coonelly's statement.
"The Pirates should come clean to the Pittsburgh fans as to their dealings
with Pedro Alvarez," Boras said.
However, this issue has quickly become more than just a war of words between
the Pirates and Boras.
Hours after Coonelly released his statement, the Major League Baseball
Players Association filed a grievance against the Commissioner's Office,
stating that it granted extensions -- past the Aug. 15 midnight ET deadline
to sign drafted players -- to clubs and then approved signings of players
without consulting the MLBPA.
"Within hours after this year's Aug. 15 midnight deadline passed, the Players
Association learned from several sources that the Commissioner's Office had
extended the deadline for negotiating and reporting signings with drafted
players," Major League Baseball Players Association general counsel Michael
Weiner said in a statement. "This was done without notice to or consultation
with the Players Association, despite a firm deadline having been established
through collective bargaining.
"The Players Association, after discussions with the Commissioner's Office,
players, agents and other parties, viewed it necessary to file a Grievance
challenging this plainly unlawful unilateral act by the Commissioner's
Office. The grievance was not filed on behalf of any particular player. It is
the union's obligation, on behalf of all players, to defend the integrity of
its collectively bargained agreements and to ensure that those agreements are
respected and honored by the Clubs.
"Moreover, based on information gathered to date by the Association, Frank's
statement is inaccurate in a number of respects. While the Association will
not respond specifically through the press, we are confident that, at
hearing, the Panel will agree that the Commissioner's Office acted improperly
when it unilaterally changed the terms of the deal it struck with the
Association in 2006."
The Commissioner's Office responded to the grievance with this statement:
"We believe the grievance is entirely without merit," said Rob Manfred,
Executive Vice President, Labor Relations & Human Resources. "The deadline
was extended to accept Minor League contracts voluntarily entered into by the
clubs and the players with the help of their agents. It is settled law that
the arbitration panel has no authority to disturb such Minor League
contracts."
As a result of all this, Alvarez has been put on the restricted list for not
signing his contract.
Under Major League Baseball rules, any player who refuses to sign an
agreed-upon contract and report to an organization can be put on the
restricted list. While a player is on the restricted list, he may not sign a
contract with or play for another organization.
The MLBPA and Commissioner's Office have agreed to expedite this grievance
process. The next case set to go before a MLB arbitrator is scheduled to take
place on Sept. 10, and this grievance is expected to also be heard at the
same time.
While the grievance filed against the Commissioner's Office does not
specifically cite the Pirates, it clearly addresses the issue at stake in the
dispute between the Pirates and Boras.
Under the Collective Bargaining Agreement reached in 2006, MLB agreed to
change certain Draft rules. Among those was changing the signing deadline for
all drafted players who still had collegiate eligibility remaining. An Aug.
15 midnight signing deadline was set and agreed to.
In the CBA, there was no specification made as to how that agreement would be
made binding. As a result, the Commissioner's Office later administered a
bulletin that said that teams would be required to e-mail or fax the terms of
an agreement with a Draft pick to the Commissioner's Office in order for the
Commissioner's Office to approve that an agreement was made prior to the
deadline.
As a result, there should be tangible proof -- time stamped -- of when the
Commissioner's Office is notified of an agreement.
This written agreement would come after an oral binding agreement had been
made between a drafted player and/or his agent and the team. It is common
practice, then, that a fully executed contract is not written up until well
past the midnight deadline once details are finalized. According to the CBA,
a drafted player is considered signed once he orally agrees.
Coonelly, in his statement, said that all these necessary processes on the
night of Aug. 15 were completed.
"The Pirates are confident that the contract reached with Pedro Alvarez was
agreed to and submitted to Major League Baseball in a timely fashion and
properly accepted by Major League Baseball," he said.
On Wednesday, Coonelly did not specify the exact time with which the deal was
made. Back on Aug. 16, Pirates management talked about the deal going through
in the final minutes before midnight.
Neither Alvarez nor Boras is disputing the fact that an oral agreement was
made. The issue now is that the MLBPA is contesting the time in which the
Alvarez deal was consummated.
MLB.com also attempted to get in touch with Alvarez, but was unsuccessful.
Boras said that his client won't speak until after all litigation. Alvarez
could be called upon to testify in front of an arbiter.
While the ruling now lies in the hand of an arbiter, the Pirates maintain
that the grievance process was set in motion by Boras in order to get his
client more money.
Multiple sources with knowledge of the dissension claimed that Boras was
asking for an increase in Alvarez's bonus. While not directly citing a
specific amount, these sources pointed to Giants Draft pick Buster Posey's
$6.2 million bonus as being the amount Boras wished to match or exceed.
Doing so would ensure that Alvarez equaled Buster as the highest-paid player
in the Draft.
The Pirates, a source said, balked at this demand. It was at this time that
Boras informed the Pirates that Alvarez would not be reporting to Pittsburgh
for the required physical.
Boras denied those claims.
The Giants and Posey, the No. 5 overall selection, agreed to a $6.2 million
bonus just moments before the midnight signing deadline. That signing bonus
was the highest among the 2008 Draft class, just slightly higher than the
$6.15 million top pick Tim Beckham received from Tampa Bay.
Interestingly enough, there seem to be cases in the past where Draft picks
and clubs have agreed to deals after the midnight deadline.
Though no proof has been made public, the Pirates claim that Eric Hosmer, the
No. 3 overall pick who was selected by the Royals and also represented by
Boras, had his contract submitted to the Commissioner's Office after the
Pirates sent in Alvarez's. As a result, if the Pirates were in fact past the
deadline, so was Hosmer, Connelly stated.
Regardless, Hosmer signed his contract without any details of the timing of
the negotiation being contested.
"Mr. Boras is apparently satisfied with the $6 million bonus that he secured
for Mr. Hosmer and has not challenged the validity of that contract,"
Coonelly said. "Mr. Boras has been informed that if he pursues a claim that
our contract with Pedro was not timely, he puts Eric Hosmer's contract with
Kansas City in jeopardy."
Royals general manager Dayton Moore had this to say in response to the
validity of Hosmer's $6 million agreement: "We had an agreement by the
deadline and the terms were submitted in a timely manner, so I'm not
uncomfortable with the situation."
Weiner, referencing the grievance, addressed both Alvarez and Hosmer in his
public statement as well.
"I have read the statement issued by Frank Coonelly, President of the
Pittsburgh Pirates, regarding Pedro Alvarez," Weiner said. "Frank's statement
also refers to the contract between Eric Hosmer and the Kansas City Royals.
The Association, after further investigation and the processing of the
Grievance, will determine what relief it will seek from the Arbitration
Panel, including whether it will seek relief related to agreements accepted
by the Commissioner's Office after the collectively bargained signing
deadline."
Coonelly's release also revealed that the Pirates' were willing to offer as
much as a $6 million signing bonus. However, Coonelly said that efforts to
sign Alvarez immediately were impeded by Boras' presence.
"The Pirates made several attempts to commence negotiations immediately
following the draft and were willing and ready to agree to pay Pedro a $6
million signing bonus from the very outset," Coonelly said. "Predictably,
however, Mr. Boras refused to engage in any negotiations at all until shortly
before the August 15 deadline, and even then an agreement was reached only
after Pedro took control of the negotiations.
"Regrettably, we are not surprised that Mr. Boras would attempt to raise a
meritless legal claim in an effort to compel us to renegotiate Pedro's
contract to one more to his liking," he added. "We are, however, disappointed
that Pedro would allow his agent to pursue this claim on his behalf. Pedro
showed tremendous fortitude and independent thinking when he agreed to his
contract on August 15."
While the Pirates have said they will not renegotiate the contract, the
organization is still hopeful of having Alvarez in its system once all these
legal issues are untangled.
"Despite our disappointment, we continue to believe in Pedro Alvarez the
person and the baseball player and remain excited to add Pedro to our
system," Coonelly said. "We will sit down with Pedro and his family as soon
as Mr. Boras' claim is rejected to chart a new and much more productive start
to Pedro's career with the Pittsburgh Pirates."
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 61.227.184.69
Pirates 近期熱門文章
PTT體育區 即時熱門文章
