When the NBA introduced the amnesty clause in 2011, I thought it was genius. Each team gets one do-over, under certain circumstances. The player gets paid but it doesn't count against the official payroll. The player gets released and can sign elsewhere.
Of course, the Sandoval disaster immediately comes to mind as a Red Sox fan. However, the Diamondbacks just put Yasmany Tomas on waivers. He's owed $46M by Arizona.
Allow teams 1 amnesty. After it's used, there's a 5 year waiting period. You can't dump Pablo and Hanley at the same time. Put in some provisions that the player has to have been on the 40-man for at least two full seasons with the team under their current contract. No signing a player to an 8 year deal and dumping him after getting buyers remorse 3 months in. If Stanton turns into Brock Holt overnight, the Yankees can't amnesty him until after the 2019 season. An over-36 clause or the like would need to be instituted like the NBA did to avoid long term deals to players at the end of their careers. Teams can't reclaim a player they amnestied. Etc.
The players union will probably not go for it, but the players union wants teams to spend. The Red Sox likely would have signed another free agent if they could have amnestied Sandoval and cleared up some room around the luxury tax threshold. They still had the right to DFA his lazy ass and send him out of town. He's still getting paid, was able to sign on somewhere else. The only difference is that this way, Greg Holland, for example, closes out the game today instead of Joe Kelly.
Owners don't like paying millions of dollars for players to play for other teams, so it's not too likely to get out of hand. It didn't in the NBA. There are circumstances where The Sandoval Clause works for pretty much everyone involved and it's usually when a player is massively underperforming.
I'll hang up and listen.
Of course, the Sandoval disaster immediately comes to mind as a Red Sox fan. However, the Diamondbacks just put Yasmany Tomas on waivers. He's owed $46M by Arizona.
Allow teams 1 amnesty. After it's used, there's a 5 year waiting period. You can't dump Pablo and Hanley at the same time. Put in some provisions that the player has to have been on the 40-man for at least two full seasons with the team under their current contract. No signing a player to an 8 year deal and dumping him after getting buyers remorse 3 months in. If Stanton turns into Brock Holt overnight, the Yankees can't amnesty him until after the 2019 season. An over-36 clause or the like would need to be instituted like the NBA did to avoid long term deals to players at the end of their careers. Teams can't reclaim a player they amnestied. Etc.
The players union will probably not go for it, but the players union wants teams to spend. The Red Sox likely would have signed another free agent if they could have amnestied Sandoval and cleared up some room around the luxury tax threshold. They still had the right to DFA his lazy ass and send him out of town. He's still getting paid, was able to sign on somewhere else. The only difference is that this way, Greg Holland, for example, closes out the game today instead of Joe Kelly.
Owners don't like paying millions of dollars for players to play for other teams, so it's not too likely to get out of hand. It didn't in the NBA. There are circumstances where The Sandoval Clause works for pretty much everyone involved and it's usually when a player is massively underperforming.
I'll hang up and listen.
