Buck4Prez

3rd highest projected playoff percentage.

good god the Mets are stupid.

Fire Eric Chavez and all his assistants. Make the scoreboard 50% bigger. Everyone plays a random position they've never played before for 3 innings tomorrow, get them out of their rut, break the routine, destroy their preconceived notions, open their minds.

=batmagadanleadoff post_id=186774 time=1741411274 user_id=68] Of course it's a cap. Nobody's suggesting that a player can accumulate more than one year's worth of service time in a given season. The issue is whether a player can combine partial seasons of service time. Every internet source I've come across indicates that he can't.

Every single one of those sources said that one year of service time equals 172 days of active roster or IL time combined in one given season. But if a player may carry-over service time from one season to another season, then the phrase "in one given season" is superfluous and also confusing. it's a cap. i.e. if you never go to the minors you don't get 1.05 years of service time or whatever. The weird "cannot be combined" thing from Wiki/posts is confusing though, yes. I'm not sure what they're trying to clarify there. Maybe just that Acuña, for instance, can't take his 14 games from last year and play 158 this year, and add it up to 1. He gets his 0.016 from last year, and if he plays 158/187 this year he'll probably still fall just short of 1 full year of service time.

Nobody's really answered the original question, so here goes: I may be clinging to an outmoded notion of how teams treat their rookies, but I wonder if the Mets are committed to sending Acuna to Syracuse for a month or so to make up for the month or so that they called him up at the end of 2024, in order to give themselves an extra year of locking up his services, that is, delaying his potential free agency by a year if he lacks the service time at the MLB level. Is this still how the system operates? Yes, the Mets can delay Acuna's free agency eligibility by an entire season or calendar year by keeping him at AAA this season for a few weeks. If so, Acuna's Syracuse stint need not occur at the beginning of the 2025 season, but instead, can occur at any point in the season. Also, his late 2024 call-up (or cup of coffee) plays no part in this calculation. A player is eligible for free agency after accumulating six years of service time -- that is six years of service time either on the active 26 man roster or on the IL. A player is credited with one day of service time for each day that he is either on the active roster or on the IL. A player is credited with a year of service when he accumulates at least 172 days of service time in a given year or season. A season typically has about 190 days, or something close to that number. So keeping Acuna in Syracuse for about three weeks this year will prevent him from gaining one year of service time this season. This would have nothing to do with "making up" for Acuna's time on the active roster in 2024. The few weeks Acuna spent with the Mets in late September of that season was not enough to give Acuna a year of service time. And Acuna's 2024 service time does not carry over into the next year or any other year for purposes of calculating service time for free agency eligibility. A player who has half a year of service time in one season and half a year of service time in another season cannot combine those two half years to give himself one full year's worth of service time for the purposes of calculating free agency eligibility. In theory, a team can delay a player's free agency practically in perpetuity if it sends that player to AAA for a few weeks every single season (so long as that player has options). Not so sure how the union and the fans would react though, especially if that player was a star. Your last paragraph is the hint that your middle paragraph is wrong. The 172 is simply the max. Presumably there was some sort of agreement, with expanded rosters and minor leagues ending earlier, designed to keep teams eliminated 9/10 from just demoting a guy to game the system. You could also option the guy in the middle of the year for a few months, every year. But that's why there are option years, pretty soon you won't be able to do that, and if you want to send him down he becomes a free agent earlier. They would need to keep Luis down for roughly 30 days. ZiPS is highest on him, but even they only project 136 games. (no one projects him to be a good hitter btw) This is also his last option year. They can keep him down now, but next year they have to play him.

probably all but given really. They don't have a spot to give him regular playing time. He's got 0.016 years of service time, so they just really need to keep that under 0.9 or whatever for the bonus of an extra year. Who knows if he'll be good enough that they even have to worry about team control for 2032. You get him the playing time in Syracuse

why would you think that? He's not a journalist, he's a guy paid to have takes. Right or wrong, doesn't matter. People are gonna tune in Monday, pay attention Monday (well, if our dictator hasn't turned off radio signals) and give him even more attention.

[bLOCKQUOTE]Attachment 49, which the players and owners agreed upon in response to past acts of collusion by the clubs, is designed to prevent club officials from attempting to influence the market through their public comments. In theory, it also applies to agents.[/bLOCKQUOTE] Which is why everything usually comes in "leaks". Heavily manipulated ones, that should never be taken at face value. And why owner's have executives that are versed in that language and the workings of baseball to do this stuff for them. No owner should be speaking about this stuff beyond "Seems like a fine baseball player, I'll let my POBO decide what to do"

still just money. it's just some variation in pay structure. it's just a give-take on opt-outs, buy-outs, bonuses-deferrals. Just accounting. It's not "asymmetrical" whatever that's supposed to mean. Not like he's demanding to be paid in compound interest based on percentage payouts of an investment in off-shore wind farms or something. But then, we're talking about the guy who threw a hissy fit and quit twitter because people were "buying stock wrong" a few years back, so who knows.

Saw this on bluesky yesterday, someone posted the Cespedes deal. 3/75, 9 years ago. Pete's was a better hitter even last year than Cespedes was in his career to that point. With inflation that's probably more than the Mets are rumored to be offering Pete, or that Pete asked for. I can't keep track of which rumor is which. Longer this goes, the longer I think he returns. Unless somebody gets injured and opens up a season-long hole at first base somewhere else, something unlikely to happen in the offseason.

Nobody's demanding unanimous thought, but we've had a spat of bad-faith detractors over the last few decades that use that same argument to justify a lot of attention and time to batshit crazy things. We demand unanimous collective thought in plenty of places, deciding on where to do for dinner, juries, we should all drive between the lines and stop at stop lights, etc. But taken even the hall, they kept Piazza out for years because one batshit crazy blogger mouthed off about bacne and enough people gave that attention. Sometimes the .3% is the guy that decides the stop sign is optional, and we shouldn't applaud his not falling into groupthink or whatever. Also the BBWAA voted to make ballots public, it's the Hall itself that's the holdup.

Cohen made that much money in the time it took you to write this.

Can't blame the Alonso camp if they end up getting a better deal from some team other than the Mets. If you wanna blame, blame eff Wilpon for selling out the Mets future. Alonso shouldn't even be a free agent this off-season. It's been like 5 years. wtf cares about the Wilpons? It's 2025, if they don't want to 'overpay' Alonso, that's a decision, but it's not super useful to armchair GM the way you think things happened 6 years ago.