Theo Compensation

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from hill55. Show hill55's posts

    Re: Theo Compensation

    In Response to Re: Theo Compensation:
    [QUOTE]Maybe if John Henry and Larry Lucchino SUE Theo Epstein for breach of contract and file TAMPERING charges against the Cubbies, they'll force Bud Selig to intervene quickly and decesively and end up with better compensation than they DESERVE. Not Matt Garza or anything, but maybe a Trey McNutt or a Dave Sappelt. Ideally, they'd simply ask for and get the Cubbies 1st round pick, but MLB doesn't allow trading of draft picks unless awarded as compensation for bending the rules.
    Posted by BostonGlory[/QUOTE]
    The Red Sox owners reportedly granted the Cubs permission to talk with Theo Epstein and later agreed to release Epstein from the final year of his contract.

    The Red Sox owners apparently have no grounds for a suit or a complaint.

    The parties will work out the compensation.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from tcal2-. Show tcal2-'s posts

    Re: Theo Compensation

    I don't know what people here expect.....He was a GM.  We should be happy with 2 aaccountant's and a low level lawyer in return.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from kimsaysthis. Show kimsaysthis's posts

    Re: Theo Compensation

    In Response to Re: Theo Compensation:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Theo Compensation : pro·mo·tion      [ pr uh - moh -sh uh n ]     Show IPA noun 1. advancement   in   rank   or   position. In addition to Zak being right about semantics, you might just be regular wrong as well.  I don't know that you need to be in the same company to qualify as 'promoted'.
    Posted by Joebreidey[/QUOTE]

    Yes, if it weren't for Zac, who would be right about semantics?
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from rkarp. Show rkarp's posts

    Re: Theo Compensation

    In response to "Re: Theo Compensation": [QUOTE]While the expectation of Garza was in fact ludicrous, you are mistaken to say no compensation is owed. It makes no difference whether the move is lateral or involves a promotion to a highger position, the compensation is for breaking an existing contract. In fact, the Red Sox should have been asked for permission to even speak with Theo about any position with the Cubbies, before any discussions took place. Anyone here think for one minute Theo would leave his position with the Red Sox BEFORE being assured he had the Cubs job? If ya do, I'd love to talk to you about some swampland I have for sale...  In Response to Re: Theo Compensation : Posted by Teakus[/QUOTE] The RS were asked and permission was granted. Henry specifically stated he would never hold anyone back, and he also felt change was good. Please state any instance, in all of baseball, where an executive chAnged organizations to a higher job position, and compensation was granted. Wasn't Lunhow of the Cards under contract and just took the Astros job? In that instance, zero compensation was even discussed. Hoyer moved from the Padres to the Cubs in a lateral position, and no compensation was awarded. Theo moved from GM of the RS to a greater position with the Cubs. Permission was granted. In this case Zero compensation is "owed". Perhaps compensation was discussed in order for the Sox to grant permission. To think that compensation would be an asset such as Garza, as I mentioned earlier is ridiculous.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Beantowne. Show Beantowne's posts

    Re: Theo Compensation

    In Response to Re: Theo Compensation:
    [QUOTE]In response to "Re: Theo Compensation": The RS were asked and permission was granted. Henry specifically stated he would never hold anyone back, and he also felt change was good. Please state any instance, in all of baseball, where an executive chAnged organizations to a higher job position, and compensation was granted. Wasn't Lunhow of the Cards under contract and just took the Astros job? In that instance, zero compensation was even discussed. Hoyer moved from the Padres to the Cubs in a lateral position, and no compensation was awarded. Theo moved from GM of the RS to a greater position with the Cubs. Permission was granted. In this case Zero compensation is "owed". Perhaps compensation was discussed in order for the Sox to grant permission. To think that compensation would be an asset such as Garza, as I mentioned earlier is ridiculous.
    Posted by rkarp[/QUOTE]

    rkarp,
    The rules and regualtion regarding managers, coaches or front office personell leaving to assume jobs with other teams differ from team to team and industry to industry. In my job, previuos to hiring. I signed a non-compete aggreement that prohibits me from accepting a like positon with a competitor during my employ or for 18 months after terminating my employment.

    Recently the Blue Jays changed thier policy. That once allowed field managers or front office personall to void thier contracts and take a like position with another organization. To protect themselves from losing Farrel, they amended that policy, when Frnacona resigned. In the case of Hoyer, the Padres had Brynes at the ready to take over and thus allowed Hoyer (who was under contract) to leave without asking for compensation.

    In the case of Epstein, after learning that Luccino had agreed to stay on in his present role. Henry then met with Epstein to gauge his interest in staying on as the GM and signing an extension. After learning that Epstein was not ameanable to continuing long term in his current role. He allowed him to seek a position in another organination that was not seen as a lateral move while under his current contract. He also made clear that if he were to allow Epstein to void the final year of his deal that the Red Sox as a condition of his leaving, would expect the new organization to compensate the Red Sox in the form of a player(s) and not financially....Otherwise, he'd be expected to honor the last year of his deal. The Cub's it appears by offering Epstein a contract for emplyement, agreed to the compensation clause. Now it's a matter of working through the details to arrive at what is fair and equitable...

    From all I've read, it doesn't appear that either side is all that concerned about the timing of when the transaction will be completed. Cherington has stated publically that both parties have already agreed to the framework, it's the details that need to be put to paper and then submitted to MLB for approval....
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from rkarp. Show rkarp's posts

    Re: Theo Compensation

    In response to "Re: Theo Compensation": [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Theo Compensation : rkarp, The rules and regualtion regarding managers, coaches or front office personell leaving to assume jobs with other teams differ from team to team and industry to industry. In my job, previuos to hiring. I signed a non-compete aggreement that prohibits me from accepting a like positon with a competitor during my employ or for 18 months after terminating my employment. Recently the Blue Jays changed thier policy. That once allowed field managers or front office personall to void thier contracts and take a like position with another organization. To protect themselves from losing Farrel, they amended that policy, when Frnacona resigned. In the case of Hoyer, the Padres had Brynes at the ready to take over and thus allowed Hoyer (who was under contract) to leave without asking for compensation. In the case of Epstein, after learning that Luccino had agreed to stay on in his present role. Henry then met with Epstein to gauge his interest in staying on as the GM and signing an extension. After learning that Epstein was not ameanable to continuing long term in his current role. He allowed him to seek a position in another organination that was not seen as a lateral move while under his current contract. He also made clear that if he were to allow Epstein to void the final year of his deal that the Red Sox as a condition of his leaving, would expect the new organization to compensate the Red Sox in the form of a player(s) and not financially....Otherwise, he'd be expected to honor the last year of his deal. The Cub's it appears by offering Epstein a contract for emplyement, agreed to the compensation clause. Now it's a matter of working through the details to arrive at what is fair and equitable... From all I've read, it doesn't appear that either side is all that concerned about the timing of when the transaction will be completed. Cherington has stated publically that both parties have already agreed to the framework, it's the details that need to be put to paper and then submitted to MLB for approval.... Posted by Beantowne[/QUOTE] We said the same thing Jays would have allowed Farrell to leave f or high compensation Please state an instance of any previous compensation in any other move?
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Beantowne. Show Beantowne's posts

    Re: Theo Compensation

    In Response to Re: Theo Compensation:
    [QUOTE]In response to "Re: Theo Compensation": We said the same thing Jays would have allowed Farrell to leave f or high compensation Please state an instance of any previous compensation in any other move?
    Posted by rkarp[/QUOTE]

    Marlins traded a couple of prospects just last winter for Ozzie Guillen and there are others, I recall where players were sent as compensation for managers. Below is an article on the Lou Pinella deal between the Mariners and the Rays...both would fall under compensation for "management under contract " where the team recieved prospects as a condidtion for allowing the manager to void the last year of his deal.

    http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20110927&content_id=25281286&vkey=news_mlb&c_id=mlb
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from garyhow. Show garyhow's posts

    Re: Theo Compensation

    Disagree w/ most here. Think RS will be compensated. If Marlins gave up what they did for Ozzie, then what is a GM who won 2 WS titles in  8 years worth? This could set a bad president if no real compenstaion involved. Imagine what Yanks will do to others organizations top executives if say a Cashmen were let go or retired, imagine where the salaries of these guys will go. Andrew Friedman and what he is done in Tampa w/ limited resources might get a bigger deal than some top FA players. The only thing keeping bigger market teams from raiding smaller market teams staffs is the compensation involved. These were special circumstances, the RS collapse, baseball wanting the Cubs to be winner [would make for great story], did RS really want Theo anyway? But no compensation would be bad for baseball. What also complicates is Theo actually took a higher position i.e. Team Presidet while Jed Hoyer is the GM filling Theo's spot, usually if promotion no compensation involved, but we all know Theo/ Jed will be doing same jobs they did in Boston just different titles. Plus doesn't resolve fact that Theo still had year left on contract. May be Cubs way of lessening compensation demands?It may not be what RS fans would like but they will receive something. Even a trade which favors RS would be nice Garza for some prospects not named Middlebrooks/Renaudo/Boegarts
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from rkarp. Show rkarp's posts

    Re: Theo Compensation

    In response to "Re: Theo Compensation": [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Theo Compensation : Marlins traded a couple of prospects just last winter for Ozzie Guillen and there are others, I recall where players were sent as compensation for managers. Below is an article on the Lou Pinella deal between the Mariners and the Rays...both would fall under compensation for "management under contract " where the team recieved prospects as a condidtion for allowing the manager to void the last year of his deal. http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20110927&content_id=25281286&vkey=news_mlb&c_id=mlb Posted by Beantowne[/QUOTE] Ozzie and Pinella were lateral moves, therefore compensation was granted. Theo's move was upward.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Beantowne. Show Beantowne's posts

    Re: Theo Compensation

    In Response to Re: Theo Compensation:
    [QUOTE]In response to "Re: Theo Compensation": Ozzie and Pinella were lateral moves, therefore compensation was granted. Theo's move was upward.
    Posted by rkarp[/QUOTE]

    Not sure what you're argument is? The Red sox made clear from the begining that if they were to let Theo out of the last year of his deal. That they would expect compensation...the Cub's agreed and all that is left is deciding what that means in terms of value...
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from sportsbozo1. Show sportsbozo1's posts

    Re: Theo Compensation

    In the meantime Theo has traded 6 of the players that the Sox liked.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from rkarp. Show rkarp's posts

    Re: Theo Compensation

    In response to "Re: Theo Compensation": [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Theo Compensation : Not sure what you're argument is? The Red sox made clear from the begining that if they were to let Theo out of the last year of his deal. That they would expect compensation...the Cub's agreed and all that is left is deciding what that means in terms of value... Posted by Beantowne[/QUOTE] You are the only person reporting this was made clear by the RS
     

Share