Author Topic: Orioles....part 2?  (Read 330784 times)

shemptiness

  • Member
  • Posts: 3288
Re: Orioles....part 2?
« Reply #900 on: February 25, 2016, 08:05:11 pm »
He had a one year deal on the table - a $15.8M qualifying offer.  If Boras is correct that industry revenues are split 57/43 in favor of the owners, then maybe this is a way for the players to flex some muscle.  But why would you let a guy walk after one year after giving up the 14th pick in the draft to get him?

And of course Fowler's agent rips the O's.
« Last Edit: February 25, 2016, 08:07:52 pm by Nuke LaLush »

shemptiness

  • Member
  • Posts: 3288
Re: Orioles....part 2?
« Reply #901 on: February 25, 2016, 09:12:22 pm »
Pretty predictable and a tired joke at this point, but...




vansmack

  • Member
  • Posts: 19716
Re: Orioles....part 2?
« Reply #902 on: February 25, 2016, 09:23:26 pm »
He had a one year deal on the table - a $15.8M qualifying offer.  If Boras is correct that industry revenues are split 57/43 in favor of the owners, then maybe this is a way for the players to flex some muscle.  But why would you let a guy walk after one year after giving up the 14th pick in the draft to get him?

And of course Fowler's agent rips the O's.

I don't blame the O's at all for not giving in on the opt-out clause, but I'm really starting to worry about the bad advice the agents are giving their players around not accepting QO's and not taking financial security by asking for an opt out clause instead - and truthfully, the Fowler deal is not an opt out as it's a mutual option (with a $5m buyout).  He left $2m+ on the table and he'll be a free agent for sure next season. 

I know at least one team he won't be playing for in 2017....
« Last Edit: February 25, 2016, 09:29:52 pm by vansmack »
27>34

shemptiness

  • Member
  • Posts: 3288
Re: Orioles....part 2?
« Reply #903 on: February 25, 2016, 11:10:59 pm »
So, in effect, it's a mutual opt-out.  Doesn't change the fact that when he wants to leave after one year he will.  While leaving $2.8M on the table.

K8teebug

  • Member
  • Posts: 4119
Re: Orioles....part 2?
« Reply #904 on: February 26, 2016, 10:35:51 am »
If he leaves after one year, the Orioles lose their draft pick and they're screwed. Good for them for telling him to go someplace else.

Having said that, I'm really sad he's not on the team.

vansmack

  • Member
  • Posts: 19716
Re: Orioles....part 2?
« Reply #905 on: February 26, 2016, 12:59:32 pm »
So, in effect, it's a mutual opt-out.  Doesn't change the fact that when he wants to leave after one year he will.  While leaving $2.8M on the table.

It's mutual in that both sides have to agree to keep him.  If he chooses to leave, he gets nothing.  If the Cubs tell him to leave they pay him $5m.  If he stays, he makes $9m in 2017 (up from $8m in 2016).

All this when he had a one year $15m deal on the table and 3 year $32m deal on the table.  It's pretty obvious he won't make more than either of these offers when it's all said and done.


« Last Edit: February 26, 2016, 01:12:58 pm by vansmack »
27>34

hutch

  • Guest
Re: Orioles....part 2?
« Reply #906 on: February 26, 2016, 01:01:06 pm »
so if the Orioles weren't stealing the Nats money would they be viable or permanent cellar dwellers?

What does that say about Baltimore if it can't field a competitive team?

shemptiness

  • Member
  • Posts: 3288
Re: Orioles....part 2?
« Reply #907 on: February 26, 2016, 01:07:08 pm »
so if the Orioles weren't stealing the Nats money would they be viable or permanent cellar dwellers?

What does that say about Baltimore if it can't field a competitive team?

Are you referring to the non-competitive team that made the playoffs 2 out of the last 4 years?

Julian, Forum COGNOSCENTI

  • Member
  • Posts: 28464
  • 11x MVP, 1st Posts, HoF, Certified Weblebrity
Re: Orioles....part 2?
« Reply #908 on: February 26, 2016, 01:08:22 pm »
I don't even like the Orioles and I thought that was ridiculous.
LVMH

K8teebug

  • Member
  • Posts: 4119
Re: Orioles....part 2?
« Reply #909 on: February 26, 2016, 03:26:39 pm »
so if the Orioles weren't stealing the Nats money would they be viable or permanent cellar dwellers?

What does that say about Baltimore if it can't field a competitive team?

Are you referring to the non-competitive team that made the playoffs 2 out of the last 4 years?

We were here first.

http://www.camdenchat.com/2016/2/5/10917292/orioles-nationals-masn-money-court-case


vansmack

  • Member
  • Posts: 19716
Re: Orioles....part 2?
« Reply #910 on: February 26, 2016, 03:28:08 pm »
27>34

K8teebug

  • Member
  • Posts: 4119
Re: Orioles....part 2?
« Reply #911 on: February 26, 2016, 03:35:39 pm »
We were here first.

http://www.camdenchat.com/2016/2/5/10917292/orioles-nationals-masn-money-court-case

At least you chose an unbiased opinion on the matter....

I had the worst visiting fan experience of my life at Nats Park. And I've been to Fenway in Orioles gear.

vansmack

  • Member
  • Posts: 19716
Re: Orioles....part 2?
« Reply #912 on: February 26, 2016, 06:19:44 pm »
I had the worst visiting fan experience of my life at Nats Park. And I've been to Fenway in Orioles gear.

Well, I'm sure that author took your fan experience into consideration when drafting that article.  Whatever you do, make sure you base all of your opinions about the team on that one experience because that makes perfect sense.

This is a legal battle, pure and simple.  Bud Selig made promises he couldn't keep (to both the Nat's and the A's) and the courts are left to figure it out.  The Nats are going to throw everything they can and the O's are going to defend their turf.  But this about the almighty dollar, not the fans.

I've been to almost every ball park, including Walgreen's Stadium a few times and had a good experience.  Even dressed like this:

 
27>34

shemptiness

  • Member
  • Posts: 3288
Re: Orioles....part 2?
« Reply #913 on: February 26, 2016, 06:45:13 pm »
I don't think this crap will be settled as long as Angelos is still alive. 

vansmack

  • Member
  • Posts: 19716
Re: Orioles....part 2?
« Reply #914 on: February 26, 2016, 07:03:53 pm »
I don't think this crap will be settled as long as Angelos is still alive. 


Agreed.  And I think the A's leave Oakland but not for San Jose.
27>34