Ellsbury DFA'd

[Stradling]

4 minutes ago, eligrba said:

Yes, they will.

Why?

[eligrba]

23 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Why?

I can see the Yankees being held harmless because of the potential litigation timeline. They just need to delay the effects of a luxury tax for one year. The cost of lawyers will be a fraction of what they would pay in a luxury tax. 

[Stradling]

1 minute ago, eligrba said:

I can see the Yankees being held harmless because of the potential litigation timeline. They just need to delay the effects of a luxury tax for one year. The cost of lawyers will be a fraction of what they would pay in a luxury tax. 

They’ll retroactive it. 

[eligrba]

Just now, Stradling said:

They’ll retroactive it. 

The Yankees could finally agree to pay the remaining salary before it goes to trial or to an arbitrator after the 2020 season. MLB would be unable to implement a luxury tax because the payment would occur after the 2020 season unless the Yankees are over the cap for the 2021 season.

MLB should force the Yankees to escrow the disputed salary during the 2020 season until the issue is resolved. If the Yankees win, they get all of their money back. If the Yankees lose, the money is released to Ellsbury and the Yankees are held responsible for any possible salary cap taxes.

[Tank]

18 minutes ago, Vladdylonglegs said:

Didn’t the Yankees try to cancel Arods contract as well? 

I think that was connected to arod breaking the rules and using peds, which violated MLB rules and could have voided his contract. I think that’s what Arte tried with Hamilton. Neither one got away with it.

[Claude]

8 minutes ago, Tank said:

I think that was connected to arod breaking the rules and using peds, which violated MLB rules and could have voided his contract. I think that’s what Arte tried with Hamilton. Neither one got away with it.

The Yankees called A-Rod in,  wrote him an early bye-bye check, (paid in full) set up a press conference and sent him packing because he could no longer perform at a high level. It was a smart move because it immediately opened up a roster spot. 

[Stradling]

9 minutes ago, Calzone 2 said:

The Yankees called A-Rod in,  wrote him an early bye-bye check, (paid in full) set up a press conference and sent him packing because he could no longer perform at a high level. It was a smart move because it immediately opened up a roster spot. 

No, that isn’t what happened. 

[Claude]

25 minutes ago, Stradling said:

No, that isn’t what happened. 

A-Rod had already announced that he would be retiring after his 2017 season. The Yankees expedited the process and forced him to retire early. They amicably agreed that he would get an advisory position with the team.

https://www.nj.com/yankees/2016/08/yankees_alex_rodriguez_was_forced_out.html

Edited November 23, 2019 by Calzone 2

[Duren, Duren]

Ellsbury will collect some portion of his contracted  millions at some point. Too contentious and too many ramifications for it to be an all or nothing result. Too much at stake for the player's association to be shut out and set another losing precedent. 

Considering Ellsbury has been collecting millions for no work during multiple years he should have a little more dignity and fade away with a modest settlement if negotiated.  But a contract is a contract, and a team accepts catastrophic risks as part of the deal. 

The Yankees are shrewd, think outside the box and have to live up to fan and media expectations. Coming up short in the playoffs may have ignited this unorthodox runaround to clear up money for Cole. 

MLB and the Player's Association will generate many billable hours for many lawyers. 

[Claude]

1 hour ago, Vladdylonglegs said:

Didn’t the Yankees try to cancel Arods contract as well? 

They bought him out early and got him off the roster. It's a smart move that opens a roster spot. Sacking Ellsbury will also open up a roster spot.

[Lou]

Ellsbury will get every dollar 

[Claude]

3 minutes ago, Lou said:

Ellsbury will get every dollar 

Yep and that's why it's a smart move. They're going to have to pay him anyway so why not get his ass off the roster early. 

[Claude]

7 hours ago, RBM said:

Maybe Pujols sought the same “outside treatment” as Ellsbury...

How dare you. 

Remember when they tried to tell us that Hamilton was rehabbing his shoulder at his buddy's house in Houston the same way he would be doing at spring training. Failed cover up.

Edited November 23, 2019 by Calzone 2

[tdawg87]

45 minutes ago, Calzone 2 said:

How dare you. 

Remember when they tried to tell us that Hamilton was rehabbing his shoulder at his buddy's house in Houston the same way he would be doing at spring at training. Failed cover up.

I'm glad you took your mouth off the Yankees wiener long enough to take a jab at the Angels. 

I love you.

[Second Base]

3 hours ago, Stradling said:

They’ll retroactive it. 

Yes they will, but by that time, the damage will be done. By not paying Ellsbury, they're clearing up 26? million upfront, and can sign a top starting pitcher consequence free.

Once they lose in court and are ordered to pay Ellsbury, they'll ether owe the retroactive tax, by which time they'll have more money coming off the books and can better afford the retroactive pay.

It's basically deferring pay in order to afford more in the present and putting off paying now until a future time at which they'll be financially prepared.

Again, it's sketchy. But it'll probably work. And it will set a precedent that MLB doesn't want repeating so they'll make rules against it. But the Yankees will get away with it.

[Lou]

it'll never get to court 

[Claude]

6 hours ago, Second Base said:

Yes they will, but by that time, the damage will be done. By not paying Ellsbury, they're clearing up 26? million upfront, and can sign a top starting pitcher consequence free.

Once they lose in court and are ordered to pay Ellsbury, they'll ether owe the retroactive tax, by which time they'll have more money coming off the books and can better afford the retroactive pay.

It's basically deferring pay in order to afford more in the present and putting off paying now until a future time at which they'll be financially prepared.

Again, it's sketchy. But it'll probably work. And it will set a precedent that MLB doesn't want repeating so they'll make rules against it. But the Yankees will get away with it.

The Yankees are not in on Cole. They will however make a trade this winter to get a starting pitcher.  

[Second Base]

3 hours ago, Calzone 2 said:

The Yankees are not in on Cole. They will however make a trade this winter to get a starting pitcher.  

That was accurate, before they managed to cut well over 20 million from their payroll temporarily.

[Second Base]

9 hours ago, Lou said:

it'll never get to court 

I sincerely hope you're right.

[eligrba]

10 hours ago, Lou said:

it'll never get to court 

Even if it does, the appeals process can certainly be utilized to benefit the Yankees.  There is no "down-side" with the Yankees taking this approach.

[Lou]

Doctor in Ellsbury-Yankees contract battle disputes team's account

 

Viktor Bouquette, an outside doctor involved in the contract dispute between Jacoby Ellsbury and the New York Yankees, says he never treated the outfielder for a work-related injury, according to Ken Rosenthal of The Athletic.

The Yankees believe he did, which is reportedly the basis of their plan to withhold the $26 million still owed to Ellsbury, who was released by the team last week.

The club believes Ellsbury used Bouquette's Progressive Medical Center in Atlanta to rehab from multiple injuries that forced him to miss the 2017 and '18 campaigns. The Yankees also believe the treatment Ellsbury received at the facility may have prevented him from properly rehabbing his injuries.

To withhold the money, New York must prove Ellsbury visited the facility without permission, and that he received treatment for a work-related injury, according to Rosenthal.

However, Bouquette said Sunday that his clinic focuses on reducing inflammation; not on rehabbing injuries.

The physician added that the Yankees knew Ellsbury was going to the clinic because they asked him for a signed statement regarding banned substances in May 2019.

"To my knowledge, (the Yankees) had no objection at all," Bouquette said. "The only (request) I got from them was asking if I was familiar with the banned-substance list, and then saying I needed to put that in writing, which I did. That was the only contact we had with them (to that point)."

In another wrinkle, the Yankees reportedly didn't insure Ellsbury's contract for the 2020 season. They were previously reimbursed for 75% of the $42 million the outfielder earned over the last two years while sitting out with injuries.

Meanwhile, MLB isn't actively investigating Bouquette for giving Ellsbury or any other players PEDs, sources told Rosenthal. That contradicts a report from Bill Madden of the New York Daily News, which said the league was looking into the matter.

[T.G.]

Viktor Bouquette?  

[Docwaukee]

per the CBA, all of this stuff ends up in an arbitration process.  

why anyone is assuming that just because the yankees said they aren't going to pay Ellsbury that the league would agree his salary doesn't count toward the CBT threshold and allow them to delay it's allocation from 2020 to next year?  Both league and mlbpa would be aligned against the Yankees on this.  

sounds like the Yankees are pissed about the level of effort Ellsbury put forth to get back on the field.  Tough shit.  

Besides, the final number for the CBT isn't calculated till the end of the season.  There no way this doesn't get resolved by then.