OrangeWhoopass.com Forums

General Discussion => Talk Zone => Topic started by: pravata on January 25, 2008, 02:39:34 pm

Title: "Line in the sand"?
Post by: pravata on January 25, 2008, 02:39:34 pm
Why?

"Our goal was to get negotiated settlements," Wade said. "It's in the best interest of everybody involved, but in this process, there are differences of opinion, and that's why the process (arbitration) is in place."
Link (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/bb/5480826.html)

Chip Bailey of the Chronicle's Fan Blog met Assistant GM Dave Gottfried at the Caravan stop in Baton Rouge and gets this information regarding the hearings,

(he)...said the decision to draw a line in the arbitration sand actually pre-dates GM Ed Wade.

"Tal and Tim had talked about it previously," Gottfried said  "Tal revisted it again this year and we all kicked it around. I would be in favor of doing it again."

"You get to a point where you've said all you can say. They've made a strong case with us and we with them. We're at a stalemate." He said continued negotiation wouldn't have "changed anything".
Link (http://blogs.chron.com/fanblogastros/archives/2008/01/post_136.html)

Where they looking for a fight?
Title: Re: "Line in the sand"?
Post by: MusicMan on January 25, 2008, 02:44:19 pm
Penny wise, pound foolish.
Title: Re: "Line in the sand"?
Post by: pravata on January 25, 2008, 02:58:13 pm
Penny wise, pound foolish.

I almost get that, they're determined to hold down costs.  These two players might not be the place to do it but maybe that's where they saw an opportunity.  But to have talked about wanting (?) arbitration hearings last year, and creating a deadline 9 days before the hearing?  Did they have a strategy to encourage a hearing?
Title: Re: "Line in the sand"?
Post by: S.P. Rodriguez on January 25, 2008, 03:21:48 pm
I don't know, Valverde makes sense as he's asking for a near 200% increase.  Loretta doesn't make much sense to me.  Then again, the Astros may not have expected for him to earn the bonus money that pushed him up to 3.7 (approx.). 

Either way, Valverde and Loretta better acquaint themselves with Tal Smith's background/history because he will be prepared.
Title: Re: "Line in the sand"?
Post by: OldBlevins on January 25, 2008, 03:24:06 pm
I don't see how the Astros can win the Loretta hearing, if it actually goes to hearing.
Title: Re: "Line in the sand"?
Post by: pravata on January 25, 2008, 03:32:57 pm
I don't see how the Astros can win the Loretta hearing, if it actually goes to hearing.

Asked if he would continue to negotiate with the players agents in the days leading up to the hearing dates, Wade gave an emphatic "no."
http://www.orangewhoopass.com/forums/index.php?topic=104809.0
Title: Re: "Line in the sand"?
Post by: The Spleen on January 25, 2008, 04:50:02 pm
The real fun starts when Mullah McClane resumes the Slot Jihad this June...
Title: Re: "Line in the sand"?
Post by: OldBlevins on January 25, 2008, 08:57:02 pm
Asked if he would continue to negotiate with the players agents in the days leading up to the hearing dates, Wade gave an emphatic "no."
http://www.orangewhoopass.com/forums/index.php?topic=104809.0

I see the point of sticking to your word, but the whole approach seems kinda screwed up to me.
Title: Re: "Line in the sand"?
Post by: astrox on January 25, 2008, 11:06:53 pm
Color me dumb, but why wasn't Valverde's deal done when he was signed?
Title: Re: "Line in the sand"?
Post by: strosrays on January 26, 2008, 05:36:40 am
Color me dumb, but why wasn't Valverde's deal done when he was signed?


Just guessing the main reason he was available at all was the Adders didn't have a deal with him done, and didn't want to pay what they figured he would get in arbitration.

It does seem a little odd to trade for a guy and then go hard line on him, though.
Title: Re: "Line in the sand"?
Post by: mihoba on January 26, 2008, 11:36:56 am
I don't see how the Astros can win the Loretta hearing, if it actually goes to hearing.

Loretta is asking to double his base salary from last year. His overall worth is not reflected very well in statistics, so Tal has a good case IMO. I'm guessing the Astros expected he would decline arb, so when he accepted the Astros made an offer that was a slight increase in base salary.

If the starting lineup stays healthy, he won't have near the playing time this year.
Title: Re: "Line in the sand"?
Post by: Snake on January 26, 2008, 10:37:30 pm
Is it true that if Valverde's case goes to arbitration he can become a free agent after this season? I heard that on the radio, and I'm hesitant to trust it.
Title: Re: "Line in the sand"?
Post by: GreatBagwellsBeard on January 28, 2008, 08:52:03 am
The real fun starts when Mullah McClane resumes the Slot Jihad this June...

I just threw up in my mouth a little bit.
Title: Re: "Line in the sand"?
Post by: MusicMan on January 28, 2008, 08:53:40 am
Is it true that if Valverde's case goes to arbitration he can become a free agent after this season? I heard that on the radio, and I'm hesitant to trust it.

He cannot be a FA until after 2009.

Edit: unless the Astros decline to offer him arbitration after this season, i.e., only if he blows out his arm at the end of the year and is out for 2009.