Yep, because if so, I don't understand the current regime's decision. Ostensibly, the failure to sign Aiken was partially our own decision: by failing to sign him (and Nix/Marshall), we received a GIANT bonus pool next year with the #2 pick and our own pick. Signing Aiken alone, without Nix and Marshall? It's an admission of failure. That's why this is surprising. If Aiken, elbow and all, was really so valuable that giving up on Nix/Marshall or future draft $$$ was worth it, then why didn't we just sign him for $6.5m in the first place? You're smart, so grace us with your edifying mind.
your question made zero sense. the astros received the 2015 1.2 because they failed to sign Aiken. now... if the astros SIGNED aiken... are you starting to see the light? please let me know if I need to spell it out in greater detail for ya.
ah, i see. thanks. if the astros have a chance at losing the Nix grievance, couldn't they just settle out of court?
Technically it isn't a court case but arbitration. The article above is pretty much saying that t people close to the situation feel like there is the possibility that the 2 sides will come to a deal and both Aiken and Nix will be signed. I have no idea at what amounts, but I would guess Nix gets his agreed upon deal for $1.5M and Aiken gets a deal somewhere between what he originally agreed to and what the Astros offered post MRI. Again, that is speculation on my part.
Actually the only thing that makes it far worse is losing the future first round picks if MLB sides with Nix. The Astros are OK with the #2 pick next year as compensation for everything falling through. Of course, if they can come to a deal that avoids a harsher future penalty, they'll take it.
He's saying it was a stupid question. Of course they would not get the #2 pick next year if they ended up with Aiken.
All of baseball will be laughing at the Astros if they lose the #2 pick next yeaR after failing to sign Aiken. There was a envy anger issue with the Astros fielding minor league team to select the top draft pick by 3 years in a row..... But i dread the possibility the Astros only end up with Nix after last years disaster. Losing 2 first round picks would be harsh...... And a huge set back.
I hope you are right. But if the arbitrator says a verbal contract was in place, what happens next? Does The new commish give the Astros a break?
I don't know how it works legally, but I would think that even the commish couldn't change what an arbitrator rules. Now, the commish could let them do what is being speculated and go ahead and sign both of them, but once an arbitrator rules I would think that is final. Just my opinion on how it works, i'm not an expert on arbitration As for those saying there is nothing to worry about because the Astros were in contact with Selig during the process. Not sure how people know how much the Astros were in contact with Selig unless they have inside info . . .but, if there is no chance of Nix winning, none at all.....the grievance wouldn't be filed
If the arbitrator rules, then all parties must agree. But the issue here centers around the fact that the Nix signing over the slot amount was always contingent on Aiken signing his deal. If not, Nix would have expected to sign upon agreeing to the contract. But nope, he waited for Aiken to sign his deal. It was always implied by the Astros that, and everyone in baseball knew the situation. Heck, up until the last minute Nix himself could have decided he wanted more money and left the Astros hanging. However, if the Arbitrator, whose opinion is binding has a bias, then anything could happen! So, if the arbitrator sided with the player in this case, would the Astros get penalized the 2 first round picks, if they did not physically sign the player with the situation! Or would the Astros get punked, because everyone knew they were trying to play with the allocated slot amounts to sign additional players with the savings?
I am guessing that the worst case scenario for the Astros is that the Astros accidentally gave a binding agreement and that the arbitrator forces the Astros to give Nix the $1.5 million. How that would affect next year's draft would be up to the MLB who has some discretion. I could see the MLB doing one of the following making the Astros pay the $1.5 million as a penalty, making Nix a free agent and having the Astros keep their 2015 picks making the Astros pay the $1.5 million, letting Nix play for the Astros and penalizing the Astros in the 2015 draft making the Astros pay the $1.5 million, letting Nix play for the Astros, letting the Astros sign Aiken and maybe Marshall and penalizing the Astros in the 2015 draft if they go over paying Nix itself (since the League told the Astros that the Astros's actions were legit) and making Nix a free agent and having the Astros keep their 2015 picks etc. I just don't think there is only one way for this to play out, if Nix wins arbitration. My bet is that Close is using the arbitration as ploy to get his clients back to the table with the Astros and the MLB, to see if all of the parties can salvage this mess. Close will try to cut a deal prior to arbitration, since I suspect his arbitration case is extremely thin. A best case scenario for all parties if Nix wins his arbitration and with Aiken looking to follow suit would be Nix signs a $1.5 million contract with the Astros Aiken signs a $5.5 million contract with the Astros Marshall signs a $1.5 million contract with the Astros Astros lose the 1.2 pick when they sign Aiken MLB penalizes the Astros for going over by dropping their 1.5 pick to 1.10 (or some such) to match the overage
Scott Feldman's stock is at an all time high right now, Im thinking he gets moved. Its time to give Wojo NiTro or White a chance, all three have been pitching great and have proven themselves at AAA.
