Compensation thought

[GoIrish]

I was thinking about this today when I was looking at the bids on some of the FA's. I think the way we do compensation is good but looking at the work behind it, it seems like it is time consuming for the people that put those numbers together to figure it out.

I had a thought to simplify the process of compensation. My thought was to have the market dictate the level of compensation. Something along the lines of 20M + a season or 70M overall value in a contract would dictate a Part A comp and maybe 10M + a season or 35M overall value in a contract would be a Part B comp.

You can ignore running the numbers then and just go off of the signing of the contract and the market will than detirimine if that player is truely a Part A or Part B compensation. You would not have to worry about players being offered fall back arb offers because that fallback offer in retrospect would be a non-factor as the FA contract offer would dwarf the fall back offer.

This would also allow players to bid up to certain level on players and then back out once it gets to the level of a 1st round or 2nd round pick that they would not want to part with.

Again, I am not pointing fault at our current system, I am just trying to add some thought and think outside the box.

Sean

[mike]

Not a bad idea but how would be decide how much money he is worth. Also I don't like the idea of a team potentially not getting their comp

[GoIrish]

We would just need to set the parameters of how much money per season or overall contract vaule is worthy of compensation. Once we have that established, the market would dictate if there is compensation and how much compensation is required.

[dejota]

I think you may be on to something, but you'd have to do it in the opposite order. After the market has settled, top 5% of contracts are type A next 10% are type B otherwise GMs would manipulate the system now. However, you wouldn't know if you were bidding on a compensated player until after the fact, but I'd imagine the surprises would be limited to the final 1 or 2 per cent of Type B's.

[GoIrish]

The only thing with that DJ is some years there might be no players worthy of compensation.If we did that route, it would say there will be compensation regardless if there is a player worthy or not. You also have the other issue that some people would not want to bid on a player if they knew compensation was involved and compensation in that system is in established in the rear. With a stated value, the inviduals know, once the bidding gets over a set amount, that now compensation is a factor.

When I originally had this thought this morning was to set a value of per season as the factor. Then I thought, someone will circumvent that by instead of offering a 5 year 20M deal, they will offer a 10 year 10M deal and still pay the same money but not have to pay Part A compensation. Then I thought, ok, do a "or" you could have it be either "x" amount of value per season or "Y" amount of overall contract.

Lets take my numbers and look at this class of FA. I am also not stating that these are the numbers we should use, they can be changed, just showing how it applies.

Part A compensation (20M per season or 70M in total contract)
Clay Bucholtz

Part B Compensation (10M per season or 35M in total contract)
Dai Sima
Adam Dunn

then you have 2 players on the cusp of part B in Liriano and Reyes both at contracts of 30M in total.

If you wanted you could even add a part C compensation (3rd round pick) for players from 7M per season or 20+ in total contract.

[ezpkns34]

I think the way we do compensation is good but looking at the work behind it, it seems like it is time consuming for the people that put those numbers together to figure it out

It's not