Yeah, Pressly is a different example, bc he was already under contract. The taking effect immediately I have been referring to only really applies to players under team control on rookie scale salary or arbitration. In Pressly's case, his extension went into effect following the duration of his previous contract. Earlier we were talking about Tucker, who is not currently under contract but will be following arbitration this year. He's effectively on a year-to-year deal now until he hits FA.
As someone else pointed out, the salary for the upcoming season had already been agreed upon - in essence the 1 year deal played out before the extension kicked in. If a player is under team control, but hasn't agreed to a contract for the upcoming season, either rookie scale or arbitration, and an extension is signed, then it would go into effect immediately. Of course the team and player can negotiate the 1st season salary of that extension however they want.
This is going to be a damn good baseball team again. Hunter Brown about to light the world on fire and yankees, dodgers, and all other fair weather fans gonna be losing their minds.
Players under team control without a contract typically get year to year contracts. Arbitration is for a one year contract. Two things confuse some people. There is often a contract tendered for arbitration years which extend through three seasons. An extension can mean either extending an actual contract (technically correct), Or a new contract which can include replacing the remaining existing contract or simply start upon completion of the current contract. Cash for signing bonuses can be part of the new contract while playing under an existing contract, but is included with the extension for CBT purposes. Altuve and Alvarez I believe extended without replacing their current contract at the time they signed. But I don't feel like a research project this morning, so check for accuracy.
This would be an interesting research project. Can a player sign a future contract for FA years and still go through the arbitration process or a negotiated contract for their arbitration year or years? It's not normally done as the team wants to use the Arbitration years to reduce the AAV for the CBT. But it may be allowed. For example, Tucker decides locking in $40M/yr is a good idea and thinks the Arbitration values are too low. Can he sign to cover ages 29-35 (2026-2032) years at $40M/yr (7 year $280M) and take his chances for ages 26-28 (2023-2025) years? And before you tell me that's not going to happen, this is simply a theoretical exercise. Can it be done, not will it be done nor should it be done. If it can't be done, the other questions are moot.
I'm no lawyer but the answer is 'no'. It would likely violate the CBA to have an unfixed baseline player salary. It's one thing to have incentive bonuses. It's an entirely different can of worms to have a contract extension where the base salary/compensation is not guaranteed (short of minor league considerations). The players association would never let that happen.
Stanton can’t stay healthy a full season (He turns 33 this year?) and soon Judge (Turns 32?) won’t be able to either. Judge played 157 games last year with no rest. That’s an old team. They also got swept WITH Cole because they cannot hit in the playoffs.
Also, Montas is garbage, and Cortes will regress. Severino can’t pitch more than 10-15 games before an injury. That team is not a concern.
The Yankees will need to worry more about Toronto and Tampa (with an outside chance at needing to worry about Baltimore) far more than they should be worried about Houston.
The bottom line is that in both Bregman and Pressly's caes they gad an agreement in place for the upcoming season prior to agreeing to the extension and did not include that season into the contract, as they could have but were not required to. If there was no contract then the extension would have to start immediately
Astros leap frogged past 2 teams this year (as well as 2 other teams they were tied with) in no hitters by franchise. 26 Dodgers 20 White Sox 18 Red Sox 17 Giants 17 Reds 17 Cubs 15 Astros 3rd place is firmly in sight. By years of existence, the Astros are easily first.
The one no hitter I could do without is the Mike Fiers one… that scum bag did so much to tarnish the Astros, that I can’t ever rewatch his no-hitter.
There is no need for a baseline. The contract for future years is not dependent on a baseline. The only question is whether the future contract will be used to set the Arbitration awards. I agree it probably won't be done, but I'd like to know where it is prohibited. I can say, without knowledge, It CAN be done and you can say, without knowledge, It CAN'T be done and were just two ignorant people arguing. But speculating is fine.
MLB contracts are guaranteed outside incentives which are limited to things like awards and playing time. Contracts can't be performance-based outside awards and PT. I can say with knowledge, it CAN'T be done.
