By Jeff Todd | December 7, 2015 at 4:08pm CST
A pair of outstanding rookie third basemen, Kris Bryant of the Cubs and Maikel Franco of the Phillis, have filed grievances claiming that their service time was manipulated in an effort to delay their future entry onto the free agent market, Jeff Passan of Yahoo Sports reports.
No shortage of attention will be paid to these cases. Bryant, of course, won the National League’s Rookie of the Year award, while Franco might have staked his own claim to that title had he not been injured late in the year. And most importantly, the issue has heightened relevance with collective bargaining talks set to begin in earnest.
..........this really pizzes me off. First, I see nothing in the rules that prohibits a team from deciding on it's on when to promote a player. And yes, I agree that the timing of promotions can be influenced by when to start a player's service clock, but so what? Baseball is a business and team's should be allowed to manage their own business. With the rapidly escalating salaries, including those awarded in arbitration and not to overlook super two status, the pendulum is already way into the player's favor.
If a player is truly talented enough to deserve the big bucks, delaying free agency for a season isn't going to matter much in the grand scheme of things....especially when said player is "forced" to accept the mere sum of a half million dollars for his initial season in the bigs....keeping in mind that many of these same players are already millionaires due to their signing bonuses. Just imagine being made a millionaire prior to throwing your first ML pitch or getting your first base knock. Truly effing amazing that they still find time to whine.
If the rules are to be changed in this area for the future, I hope the teams can counterbalance this with stopping a player's clock while he on the DL (especially the 60 day) sucking up a paycheck. I love Profar, but two years of his service time to the Rangers has already gone down the drain. That seems grossly unfair to me considering how much money a team has to invest in a player just to get them to rookie status. I'd also like to see a modification to the mindset that just because one player has more service time than another, he should get paid more. What ever happened to the concept that your paycheck should reflect your value....and not your tenure? With the outrageous escalation of salaries(imagine being paid a million dollars per start), teams are sooner or later going to have to load their rosters with more and more minimum salaried players to balance their budgets and by doing so, possibly creating fewer jobs for veteran non-stars that are probably still better players than the minimum salaried guys that take their place but in order to pay the super stars the big bucks, there just isn't the additional funds to pay guys $5-10mm per year just because they've racked up time in the game. Since the player's union argument is largely going to be based on the premise that the quality of the game is being compromised because these talented youngsters spend a few additional weeks in the minors, what about the number of veterans who stand to lose their jobs to cut costs...despite possibly contributing more to the standard of play on the field in those same few weeks?