Home› Sports Talk

Will the no trade clause be a problem in future in basbeall CB agreements?

IseeyouIseeyou Posts: 77
in Sports Talk
What's everyone's opinion on this? I would consider the no trade clause to be a nuisance to owners in the future since more and more free agents are trying to get them and seems to be a major reason for a decision on a certain team, like Giami leaving the A's. I consider the no trade clause somewhat similar to I think what was called the clemency clause before free agency, where it was basically agreed that the team that got you owned your right's and you couldn't leave. You have teams like the Red Sox, trying to get around a trade clause like they did for Varitek, creating that rule specifically to keep him and not have to give a player like Manny Romirez since in his contract it states that if anyone on the sox gets a no trade clause he automatically gets one. The Varitek rule is now anyone on the sox for more than 8 years will get one. Since Manny's contract at the end won't have him there for 8 years, they don't have to worry about him. It might eventually become a problem where the owners might try to settle on no trade clauses with conditions.

Mike

Comments

  • Dallas88Dallas88 Posts: 746 ✭
    I'd say a bigger problem is the economic imbalances that exist in baseball.
  • Dallas88Dallas88 Posts: 746 ✭
    Oops - didn't answer your question!

    I think you hinted at it in your post. Not a problem, merely a nuisance for organizations.

    There are several other things that baseball needs to address before messing around with no-trade clauses.
Sign In or Register to comment.