An Interesting Approach to Signing A-Rod

[MFS62]

One of the callers to WFAN the other day said something I feel is worth considering for any team. (I paraphrase)
He noted that the current (reported ) salary demands of Agent Orange - $30 million-per-yer and above may move A-Rod out of consideration for most teams.
But he suggested that an interested team might offer a more reasonable salary (maybe $20+ mil?) and then offer a piece of the club when he retires. The caller noted that this would address Boras' contention that signing A-Rod would result in the financial growth of the franchise. So, he continued, why not allow the player to reap those benefits he provided to that team?

*****************************************
My thoughts are that even with joint partnership with one majority owner, the team might offer non-voting shares (the votes associated with shares given to the player remain with the owners giving up those shares). But the profits of those shares would go to the player.

It seems like this is something worth considering. I'm not sure if the Union would agree, since he would be signing at a lower annual salary. And I'm not sure this is allowed within the baseball bylaws. BUT...

Thoughts?

Later

[metirish]

There would seem to be too many conflicts involved with a player having a piece of the team.

[nymr83]

there is a rule against a player having a piece of the team.

[metirish]

That then would be the major conflict.

[MFS62]

Nymr83 wrote: there is a rule against a player having a piece of the team.

This plan calls for the player to receive the shares when they are finished playing, so it doesn't violate any current league regulations.

Anyone care to comment now?

Later

[Guest sharpie]

There is such a rule: that contracts cannot have provisions whereby players have a piece of the team afterward.

[Guest attgig]

mario with the penguins?

[Guest sharpie]

An MLB rule, not a rule rule.

[MFS62]

Thanks for the update.

Later

[TransMonk]

From what I remember, the rule is vague and could probably be skirted around depending on the situation.

I've read this before, but don't remember exactly where they talk about the dos and donts of compensation (and don't have time to read it again right now).

http://mlbplayers.mlb.com/pa/pdf/cba_english.pdf

[nymr83]

MFS62 wrote: ="Nymr83"]there is a rule against a player having a piece of the team. This plan calls for the player to receive the shares when they are finished playing, so it doesn't violate any current league regulations. Anyone care to comment now? Later

the rule includes that, know what you're talking about before you try to correct me.

[Guest Edgy DC]

I don't like the rule. An architect or a lawyer becomes a big enough asset for his firm that they can't affortd to lose him, he makes partner.

[Centerfield]

What we should do is bring back Jose Lima and his wife. Promise Alex a few romps with her and that should get the deal done.

In fact, we should make this policy for all top tier free agents.