Rosenthal: Jays players ready to alter deals to get Santana

Randle McMurphy · Post #41 » by **Randle McMurphy** » Fri Apr 4, 2014 8:56 pm

Back2back2back wrote:
Randle McMurphy wrote:
Santoki wrote:We really shouldn't be shocked. This ownership group did the same thing a few years earlier. Fool me twice...

Shouldn't be surprising to anybody that's actually paid attention to the last 13+ years of ownership. Reinforces how important the failure of last season was, though.

Another fire sale should be coming our way soon.

Can we include AA, Beeston, and Gibbons with that fire sale as well?

Meh/I hope so/I hope not.

Homer Jay · Post #42 » by **Homer Jay** » Fri Apr 4, 2014 10:27 pm

Yeah no pay cuts, but you can defer. Not sure if it had ever been done on this scale thou. Bobby Bonilla famously took that 1 mil a year for 20 years from the Mets, and Mario Lemiuex used deferred money to gain an ownership stake in a team.

It's plain stupid thou, because it's Rogers we are talking about here, and they have the money. It's not some small town owner who's biggest asset is by far the team and he needs to keep it in the black because team credit is already extended too far, and there is literally no money available.

dagger · Post #43 » by **dagger** » Sat Apr 5, 2014 3:45 am

It was just DR guys that were ready to defer salary for Santana

Dickey and Buerhle, too

http://sports.nationalpost.com/2014/04/ ... urces-say/

There There · Post #44 » by **There There** » Sat Apr 5, 2014 4:36 am

dagger wrote:It was just DR guys that were ready to defer salary for Santana

Dickey and Buerhle, too

http://sports.nationalpost.com/2014/04/ ... urces-say/

Nothing to do with nationality, it's just the five highest paid guys.

What a clown organization... there's really no other way to describe it. As much criticism as I've had towards Rogers in the past, this still manages to blow my mind.

You have to believe something like this could be the final straw for this fan base and if this season goes belly up, there are likely some dark days ahead for this franchise; Skydome could be a ghost town for the foreseeable future.

Randle McMurphy · Post #45 » by **Randle McMurphy** » Sat Apr 5, 2014 4:41 am

Can the five band together again and get us the money for Stephen Drew? :lol:

Santoki · Post #46 » by **Santoki** » Sat Apr 5, 2014 10:25 am

dagger wrote:It was just DR guys that were ready to defer salary for Santana

Dickey and Buerhle, too

http://sports.nationalpost.com/2014/04/ ... urces-say/

Wow, I didn't buy this story at all when it was first published, but there you have it. What an absolute embarrassment.

Does anyone at Rogers understand the concept of how this will hurt the brand, the team, and its future potential revenues? I mean, if that's all they care about, speak in their language.

BlueJayReyes · Post #47 » by **BlueJayReyes** » Sat Apr 5, 2014 1:41 pm

Randle McMurphy wrote:Can the five band together again and get us the money for Stephen Drew?

but we have Goins lol

Sent from my Nexus 4 using RealGM Forums mobile app

Back2back2back · Post #48 » by **Back2back2back** » Sun Apr 6, 2014 12:45 pm

Schadenfreude wrote:
dagger wrote:So far, the Jays' performance is precisely tracking the performances of its starting pitchers. If only Rogers...

If we're going to do the small-sample thing, Ervin Santana got rocked in his debut. In AAA.

torontoaces04 · Post #49 » by **torontoaces04** » Sun Apr 6, 2014 4:20 pm

The fact that the club had to do this, after what Rogers dished out for hockey ($5.2 billion), is pathetic. They couldn't give two **** about this baseball club, just sell already.

I can't be the only one who thinks we deserve better than Rogers/AA/Beeston.

Randle McMurphy · Post #50 » by **Randle McMurphy** » Sun Apr 6, 2014 6:36 pm

torontoaces04 wrote:The fact that the club had to do this, after what Rogers dished out for hockey ($5.2 billion), is pathetic. They couldn't give two **** about this baseball club, just sell already.

I can't be the only one who thinks we deserve better than Rogers/AA/Beeston.

Don't think Beeston or AA had anything to do with this. In fact, they seemed more than happy to let the media know about it.

Post #51 » by **Schad** » Sun Apr 6, 2014 11:32 pm

Homer Jay wrote:Yeah no pay cuts, but you can defer. Not sure if it had ever been done on this scale thou. Bobby Bonilla famously took that 1 mil a year for 20 years from the Mets, and Mario Lemiuex used deferred money to gain an ownership stake in a team.

It's doubtful that the players would have been allowed to pull this off by the union, unless they were getting a Bonilla-esque return on investment. Still doesn't reflect well at all on ownership that the players felt they had to pass the hat to increase payroll, though.

dagger · Post #52 » by **dagger** » Mon Apr 7, 2014 8:13 pm

Schadenfreude wrote:
Homer Jay wrote:Yeah no pay cuts, but you can defer. Not sure if it had ever been done on this scale thou. Bobby Bonilla famously took that 1 mil a year for 20 years from the Mets, and Mario Lemiuex used deferred money to gain an ownership stake in a team.

It's doubtful that the players would have been allowed to pull this off by the union, unless they were getting a Bonilla-esque return on investment. Still doesn't reflect well at all on ownership that the players felt they had to pass the hat to increase payroll, though.

Except that the union did sign off.

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/ken- ... one-040714

How advanced were the conversations among several Toronto Blue Jays players about deferring money to clear payroll for free-agent right-hander Ervin Santana?

Far more advanced than I previously reported.

The players' association had approved the deferrals in exchange for the players receiving additional money later in their contracts, according to major-league sources.

"Everyone had signed off," one source said of the deferrals. "It was already done."

Santoki · Post #53 » by **Santoki** » Mon Apr 7, 2014 8:37 pm

Now that we have proof of the source of that $14 million (and know that Rogers shut down any payroll increase in 2014 which means that AA/Beeston's entire offseason spiel about signing pitchers was pure BS), what I'd really like to know is what happened between the Friday at 5pm of the "decision" and the Sunday afternoon where word gets out that Medlen is injured and the Braves will be in play for Santana. How was he not flown out, had his physical done and signed the deal within 36 hours?

Michael Bradley · Post #54 » by **Michael Bradley** » Mon Apr 7, 2014 8:45 pm

No MLB signings (other than Navarro), no significant MLB trades, no payroll increase except to accommodate existing talent, and players having to defer money to sign a middling free agent. Unbelievable.

There is no doubt in my mind now that, barring a major run this season, a firesale is coming. Follows the exact pattern this organization has seemed to incorporate since Rogers took over. Spend huge, fails after a year or two, cut bait.

Back2back2back · Post #55 » by **Back2back2back** » Mon Apr 7, 2014 8:53 pm

"REPORT: BLUE JAYS' DEFERRAL PLAN SIGNED OFF ON BY MLBPA"

http://www.tsn.ca/mlb/story/?id=448624

WHO CARES??? Why is this still a story?

Someone is doing some serious damage control in this organization.

AA and the Blue Jays organization failed to sign a quality starting pitcher in the off-season. End of story. Lets move on.

Santoki · Post #56 » by **Santoki** » Mon Apr 7, 2014 9:07 pm

Back2back2back wrote:"REPORT: BLUE JAYS' DEFERRAL PLAN SIGNED OFF ON BY MLBPA"

http://www.tsn.ca/mlb/story/?id=448624

WHO CARES??? Why is this still a story?

Someone is doing some serious damage control in this organization.

AA and the Blue Jays organization failed to sign a quality starting pitcher in the off-season. End of story. Lets move on.

This doesn't make the Jays look good in any way, shape or form so they're certainly not using this story as damage control. It makes both ownership and management look foolish. However, it does help AA/Beeston in case things start to go south. They can try spinning the narrative of this offseason as one where their hands were completely tied and they didn't know the gravy train would dry up after one failed season.

They (and mostly AA) have career moves to keep in mind and know they are the first ones on the chopping block (after they fire Gibby). I am surprised they let it leak this early in the season though.

guvernator · Post #57 » by **guvernator** » Mon Apr 7, 2014 11:36 pm

In a proper setup AA would be counted among the top half dozen GMs in MLB. I have no problem if he leaked the story. And I hope, if Beeston is fired (he'd probably retire if it comes to that), he lays the operating MO of Rogers out in the open. Needs to make the GM position of jays a no go to everyone but rookies. F Rogers. And I won't be surprised to find out that AA's hand was forced to make big moves last year?

Post #58 » by **Nolan** » Mon Apr 7, 2014 11:55 pm

Crazy that the MLBPA signed off on it and its even crazier that all this is being made public. Someone wanted to smear Rogers and they've done a good job of it so far.

Santoki · Post #59 » by **Santoki** » Tue Apr 8, 2014 1:10 am

And now this state of the franchise documentary looks like a perfectly timed response from Rogers.

makaveli191 · Post #60 » by **makaveli191** » Wed Apr 9, 2014 2:48 am

The story here isn't about Irving Santana and him wanting to be a Blue Jay or not, Its about a billion dollar company penny pinching. There is no doubt in my AA has strict "payroll parameters" and the only way i see them spending any money is if they are in playoff contention where Rogers would probably get a pretty good return on investment.