Cubs Fire Renteria, Hire Maddon

[UMFan83]

Theo and Co seem pretty confident that there was no tampering

 

"We welcome the MLB investigation," Epstein said Monday night at the general managers meetings. "As we said last week there’s no tampering whatsoever, and I’d rather they investigate so we can clear our names and get this over and move on from this quickly. We’re giving our full cooperation and welcome it."

[minnesotacubsfan]

So, what will we lose out of this if they prove tampering?

[Banedon]

So, what will we lose out of this if they prove tampering?

 

Nobody can say, cuz it's a pretty uncommon circumstance. Ultimately, Maddon had every right to opt out without Tampa receiving any compensation. So my best guess is that it'd be a fine.

 

It's pretty unlikely that tampering is proven, imo.

[UMFan83]

So, what will we lose out of this if they prove tampering?

 

Nobody can say, cuz it's a pretty uncommon circumstance. Ultimately, Maddon had every right to opt out without Tampa receiving any compensation. So my best guess is that it'd be a fine.

 

It's pretty unlikely that tampering is proven, imo.

 

Well yeah but it would be a bit more punitive if they can prove Maddon opted out because he knew the Cubs were offering him their job. When Maddon opted out, the Twins were the only team with an open managerial spot, so it immediately seems fishy that Maddon would opt out of his job when there was only 1 team that was definitely looking for a manager. Especially because like a week before he stated how he was dedicated to staying with Tampa Bay long term and abruptly changed course.

 

I don't think the Cubs tampered at all (based on Theo's extremely confident remarks and the promise of full cooperation), I'm just saying why the Rays might get more compensation than a fine if the Cubs were caught tampering.

 

Also, considering their willingness to give the MLB investigators full cooperation, if they maintained their innocence to the investigators and were later found to have tampered, the MLB could suspend Theo and Jed and/or take away draft picks/draft and IFA pool money.

[Cubfanintheknow]

So, what will we lose out of this if they prove tampering?

 

Nobody can say, cuz it's a pretty uncommon circumstance. Ultimately, Maddon had every right to opt out without Tampa receiving any compensation. So my best guess is that it'd be a fine.

 

It's pretty unlikely that tampering is proven, imo.

 

Well yeah but it would be a bit more punitive if they can prove Maddon opted out because he knew the Cubs were offering him their job. When Maddon opted out, the Twins were the only team with an open managerial spot, so it immediately seems fishy that Maddon would opt out of his job when there was only 1 team that was definitely looking for a manager. Especially because like a week before he stated how he was dedicated to staying with Tampa Bay long term and abruptly changed course.

 

I don't think the Cubs tampered at all (based on Theo's extremely confident remarks and the promise of full cooperation), I'm just saying why the Rays might get more compensation than a fine if the Cubs were caught tampering.

 

Also, considering their willingness to give the MLB investigators full cooperation, if they maintained their innocence to the investigators and were later found to have tampered, the MLB could suspend Theo and Jed and/or take away draft picks/draft and IFA pool money.

 

It's been reported that Joe Maddon made an offer to re-up his contract in Tampa and Rays management declined. http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/writer/jon-heyman/24782084/before-taking-big-cubs-deal-maddon-made-olive-branch-offer-to-rays

 

Even if Theo had a conversation to the effect of, "If you're ever available, we'd love to talk to you about managing the Cubs," it wouldn't matter. Maddon legally opted out. The only reason the opt-out kicked in is because Friedman left. If they had kept Friedman, none of this would have happened.

 

It's going to be impossible to find any tampering charges given all the dominoes that needed to fall for all this to happen.

[Guest]

So, what will we lose out of this if they prove tampering?

 

Nobody can say, cuz it's a pretty uncommon circumstance. Ultimately, Maddon had every right to opt out without Tampa receiving any compensation. So my best guess is that it'd be a fine.

 

It's pretty unlikely that tampering is proven, imo.

 

Well yeah but it would be a bit more punitive if they can prove Maddon opted out because he knew the Cubs were offering him their job. When Maddon opted out, the Twins were the only team with an open managerial spot, so it immediately seems fishy that Maddon would opt out of his job when there was only 1 team that was definitely looking for a manager. Especially because like a week before he stated how he was dedicated to staying with Tampa Bay long term and abruptly changed course.

 

I don't think the Cubs tampered at all (based on Theo's extremely confident remarks and the promise of full cooperation), I'm just saying why the Rays might get more compensation than a fine if the Cubs were caught tampering.

 

Also, considering their willingness to give the MLB investigators full cooperation, if they maintained their innocence to the investigators and were later found to have tampered, the MLB could suspend Theo and Jed and/or take away draft picks/draft and IFA pool money.

 

It's been reported that Joe Maddon made an offer to re-up his contract in Tampa and Rays management declined. http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/writer/jon-heyman/24782084/before-taking-big-cubs-deal-maddon-made-olive-branch-offer-to-rays

 

Even if Theo had a conversation to the effect of, "If you're ever available, we'd love to talk to you about managing the Cubs," it wouldn't matter. Maddon legally opted out. The only reason the opt-out kicked in is because Friedman left. If they had kept Friedman, none of this would have happened.

 

It's going to be impossible to find any tampering charges given all the dominoes that needed to fall for all this to happen.

 

I'm not sure that that's true, even though I don't think anything comes of this whole situation.

[jersey cubs fan]

Even if Theo had a conversation to the effect of, "If you're ever available, we'd love to talk to you about managing the Cubs," it wouldn't matter.

 

That is the very definition of tampering.

[treebird]

So, what will we lose out of this if they prove tampering?

 

Nobody can say, cuz it's a pretty uncommon circumstance. Ultimately, Maddon had every right to opt out without Tampa receiving any compensation. So my best guess is that it'd be a fine.

 

It's pretty unlikely that tampering is proven, imo.

 

Well yeah but it would be a bit more punitive if they can prove Maddon opted out because he knew the Cubs were offering him their job. When Maddon opted out, the Twins were the only team with an open managerial spot, so it immediately seems fishy that Maddon would opt out of his job when there was only 1 team that was definitely looking for a manager. Especially because like a week before he stated how he was dedicated to staying with Tampa Bay long term and abruptly changed course.

 

I don't think the Cubs tampered at all (based on Theo's extremely confident remarks and the promise of full cooperation), I'm just saying why the Rays might get more compensation than a fine if the Cubs were caught tampering.

 

Also, considering their willingness to give the MLB investigators full cooperation, if they maintained their innocence to the investigators and were later found to have tampered, the MLB could suspend Theo and Jed and/or take away draft picks/draft and IFA pool money.

 

It's been reported that Joe Maddon made an offer to re-up his contract in Tampa and Rays management declined. http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/writer/jon-heyman/24782084/before-taking-big-cubs-deal-maddon-made-olive-branch-offer-to-rays

 

yeah, this is really the cubs' best argument. the stuff with the lack of openings looks somewhat shady, but it's really easy to say that maddon opted out because he wanted to make more money and thought he'd get it from the rays if he were a free agent. they refused to pay him what he wanted so then he went and found somebody who would.

[Cubfanintheknow]

Even if Theo had a conversation to the effect of, "If you're ever available, we'd love to talk to you about managing the Cubs," it wouldn't matter.

 

That is the very definition of tampering.

 

Except that it kinda isn't. http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/tampering.html

[minnesotacubsfan]

Even if Theo had a conversation to the effect of, "If you're ever available, we'd love to talk to you about managing the Cubs," it wouldn't matter.

 

That is the very definition of tampering.

 

Except that it kinda isn't. http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/tampering.html

 

Yea, it could easily be said in a way that is entirely harmless to the Rays.

[minnesotacubsfan]

I mean, for it to be tampering, Theo would have to say:

 

"Yo, big guy, ask for a huge raise and when they say no, quit and we will sign you!!!!"

 

 

Not:

 

"Dude, I love your managerial style. If the Rays ever let you go, look me up"

 

Which I dont believe the latter qualifies

[jersey cubs fan]

Even if Theo had a conversation to the effect of, "If you're ever available, we'd love to talk to you about managing the Cubs," it wouldn't matter.

 

That is the very definition of tampering.

 

Except that it kinda isn't. http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/tampering.html

You aren't familiar with sports are you?

[Cubfanintheknow]

Even if Theo had a conversation to the effect of, "If you're ever available, we'd love to talk to you about managing the Cubs," it wouldn't matter.

 

That is the very definition of tampering.

 

Except that it kinda isn't. http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/tampering.html

You aren't familiar with sports are you?

 

You aren't familiar with reading, are you?

[jersey cubs fan]

Even if Theo had a conversation to the effect of, "If you're ever available, we'd love to talk to you about managing the Cubs," it wouldn't matter.

 

That is the very definition of tampering.

 

Except that it kinda isn't. http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/tampering.html

You aren't familiar with sports are you?

 

You aren't familiar with reading, are you?

 

So you think sports league offices are concerned with whether or not opposing teams are altering each others documents when they investigate tampering?

 

 

When team execs have contact with a player/coach under contract and express interest in retaining their services if/when they are out of that contract, that is treated as tampering.

[SouthSideRyan]

Even if Theo had a conversation to the effect of, "If you're ever available, we'd love to talk to you about managing the Cubs," it wouldn't matter.

 

That is the very definition of tampering.

 

Except that it kinda isn't. http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/tampering.html

You aren't familiar with sports are you?

 

You aren't familiar with reading, are you?

 

Yes, the Cubs didn't strong-arm a witness, alter a document, or put out false results to make their testing look better. This is all quite relevant.

[SouthSideRyan]

MLB's tampering rules say "there shall be no negotiations or dealings respecting employment, either present or prospective, between any player, coach or manager and any club other than the club with which [the player] is under contract or acceptance of terms,"

[SouthSideRyan]

Huh. On my googling, apparently Matt Bruback(3rd piece in the Aramis trade), not a big fan of the Cubs organization.

 

http://mlb-tampering.blogspot.com/

[Guest]

Even if Theo had a conversation to the effect of, "If you're ever available, we'd love to talk to you about managing the Cubs," it wouldn't matter.

 

That is the very definition of tampering.

 

Except that it kinda isn't. http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/tampering.html

You aren't familiar with sports are you?

 

You aren't familiar with reading, are you?

Come on, if you are under contract and I find out you are considering your options and I contact you that is tampering.

[Cubfanintheknow]

 

So you think sports league offices are concerned with whether or not opposing teams are altering each others documents when they investigate tampering?

 

 

When team execs have contact with a player/coach under contract and express interest in retaining their services if/when they are out of that contract, that is treated as tampering.

 

Look, I spelled out a hypothetical conversation. One in which no deals were made, no dollar figures tossed around, no terms, nothing. The kind of conversation that happens all the time in the sports world. Players who are under contract are always talking about teams they'd like to play for before they hit the open market. They openly admit it to the media. Shouldn't that be tampering? Agents have been working the phones before a player's contract is up, defining a market for their representatives and perhaps lining up potential suitors in the process. If your agent isn't doing that, then he sucks. Should't that be tampering, too? You honestly don't think managers do the same thing? Really? If you truly want to go by your definition of tampering, that's fine. But then I think you'd see these types of charges being leveled all the time.

[Cubfanintheknow]

Yes, the Cubs didn't strong-arm a witness, alter a document, or put out false results to make their testing look better. This is all quite relevant.

 

Hey, I didn't make up the definition.

[jersey cubs fan]

Yes, the Cubs didn't strong-arm a witness, alter a document, or put out false results to make their testing look better. This is all quite relevant.

 

Hey, I didn't make up the definition.

No, you just made up the source you chose to take it from.

[jersey cubs fan]

 

So you think sports league offices are concerned with whether or not opposing teams are altering each others documents when they investigate tampering?

 

 

When team execs have contact with a player/coach under contract and express interest in retaining their services if/when they are out of that contract, that is treated as tampering.

 

Look, I spelled out a hypothetical conversation. One in which no deals were made, no dollar figures tossed around, no terms, nothing. The kind of conversation that happens all the time in the sports world. Players who are under contract are always talking about teams they'd like to play for before they hit the open market. They openly admit it to the media. Shouldn't that be tampering? Agents have been working the phones before a player's contract is up, defining a market for their representatives and perhaps lining up potential suitors in the process. If your agent isn't doing that, then he sucks. Should't that be tampering, too? You honestly don't think managers do the same thing? Really? If you truly want to go by your definition of tampering, that's fine. But then I think you'd see these types of charges being leveled all the time.

This type of thing happens every year when NFL free agency comes around. Lots of teams circumvent the rules. The point is, there is tampering, and if somebody actually goes through the effort of not turning a blind eye and lobbing an accusation, it can and does get discovered and punished in the sports world. If your hypothetical occurred and can be proven, it would be considered tampering.

[Cubfanintheknow]

 

So you think sports league offices are concerned with whether or not opposing teams are altering each others documents when they investigate tampering?

 

 

When team execs have contact with a player/coach under contract and express interest in retaining their services if/when they are out of that contract, that is treated as tampering.

 

Look, I spelled out a hypothetical conversation. One in which no deals were made, no dollar figures tossed around, no terms, nothing. The kind of conversation that happens all the time in the sports world. Players who are under contract are always talking about teams they'd like to play for before they hit the open market. They openly admit it to the media. Shouldn't that be tampering? Agents have been working the phones before a player's contract is up, defining a market for their representatives and perhaps lining up potential suitors in the process. If your agent isn't doing that, then he sucks. Should't that be tampering, too? You honestly don't think managers do the same thing? Really? If you truly want to go by your definition of tampering, that's fine. But then I think you'd see these types of charges being leveled all the time.

This type of thing happens every year when NFL free agency comes around. Lots of teams circumvent the rules. The point is, there is tampering, and if somebody actually goes through the effort of not turning a blind eye and lobbing an accusation, it can and does get discovered and punished in the sports world. If your hypothetical occurred and can be proven, it would be considered tampering.

 

MLB's tampering rules say "there shall be no negotiations or dealings respecting employment, either present or prospective, between any player, coach or manager and any club other than the club with which [the player] is under contract or acceptance of terms,"

 

So is my hypothetical conversation a "negotiation" or a "dealing." Please help me.

[Cubfanintheknow]

Yes, the Cubs didn't strong-arm a witness, alter a document, or put out false results to make their testing look better. This is all quite relevant.

 

Hey, I didn't make up the definition.

No, you just made up the source you chose to take it from.

 

Yup. I hastily threw together a website with business definitions in order to confound you. You got me.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Yes, the Cubs didn't strong-arm a witness, alter a document, or put out false results to make their testing look better. This is all quite relevant.

 

Hey, I didn't make up the definition.

No, you just made up the source you chose to take it from.

 

Words aren't allowed to have different definitions in different contexts. That would be chaos.