Addison Russell

[jersey cubs fan]

in a system that artificially deflates salary prior to free agency, it would be crazy to think Boras and Russell would have a good case against the Cubs granting him free agency.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

When it comes down to robotically trying to defend as some kind of unavoidable business decision, probably best to just punch out.

 

I'll stop here because again, I don't want Russell back, and I don't care if they get anything for him or not. Even so, I had zero doubt that they would tender him so I'm surprised that so many appear to be shocked/angered by that outcome. I think there's a reasonable argument to be made they need to tender him regardless of their intentions, but even if not it's more than fair to think it doesn't matter because they wouldn't have non-tendered him even in a zero-risk situation. More broadly, similar to Badger this is a frustrating situation because there isn't a great and just outcome. If banishing Russell to be a full-time Pokemon trainer would help with future DV in his life or others, then it'd be easy. But it doesn't so I'm caught between feeling like the only outcome is an unproductive exacting of a pound of flesh, and also being okay with never seeing him again because no fans need to have a conflict of cheering him on knowing his past actions.

[SouthSideRyan]

And what happened with Bryant's grievance?

 

Boras would have no case. He's going to argue against free agency?

 

Being similar in how a grievance would be allowed is not the same as the likelihood of success. Russell is still subject to arbitration in future years with his new team, and the negative signal of being cut by a team that would have kept him without the DV is pretty straight forward.

 

Bryant being held back 11 days cost him a year of free agency. This would be giving Russell that ability to negotiate with 29 other teams early. It doesn't matter that he's subject to arbitration in the following years, his baseline is either going to be higher or the other 29 teams agreed that he wasn't worth the contract he'd get by being tendered a contract. If he wants to plead collusion at that point, whatever, I still don't see how that goes anywhere.

[Bluescale]

And what happened with Bryant's grievance?

 

Boras would have no case. He's going to argue against free agency?

 

Being similar in how a grievance would be allowed is not the same as the likelihood of success. Russell is still subject to arbitration in future years with his new team, and the negative signal of being cut by a team that would have kept him without the DV is pretty straight forward.

 

Wait...if he were released, and became a free agent, he would still be subject to arbitration with his new team?

[Post Count Padder]

Not pleased he's being tendered but maybe it's temporary and we can find a taker at some point.

[Rob]

I keep coming back to the Milton Bradley situation. Even when it was clear they didn't want him back, I was livid at Hendry for putting the final nail in the coffin for his trade value by suspending him at the end of the season. I couldn't understand how he could overlook the obvious baseball implications.

 

I was very wrong about that. The more info we got about how bad it was, the worse and worse I've felt about defending Bradley. I'm not making the same mistake again.

 

Russell needs to go.

[Banedon]

When it comes down to robotically trying to defend as some kind of unavoidable business decision, probably best to just punch out.

 

I'll stop here because again, I don't want Russell back, and I don't care if they get anything for him or not. Even so, I had zero doubt that they would tender him so I'm surprised that so many appear to be shocked/angered by that outcome. I think there's a reasonable argument to be made they need to tender him regardless of their intentions, but even if not it's more than fair to think it doesn't matter because they wouldn't have non-tendered him even in a zero-risk situation. More broadly, similar to Badger this is a frustrating situation because there isn't a great and just outcome. If banishing Russell to be a full-time Pokemon trainer would help with future DV in his life or others, then it'd be easy. But it doesn't so I'm caught between feeling like the only outcome is an unproductive exacting of a pound of flesh, and also being okay with never seeing him again because no fans need to have a conflict of cheering him on knowing his past actions.

 

People aren't angry because they expected the Cubs to do the right thing and non-tender him. They're angry because they expected them to do the wrong thing and tender him, and they lived up to those unfortunate expectations.

 

Fans that are angry do not care about the business/team success ramifications. They want a message that DV is not ok...that the Cubs think DV is not ok. And yet every action they take sends the exact opposite message.

[Backtobanks]

Bottom line is that Russell has some value as a baseball player and Theo can include him as a throw-in in some deal to a team that is willing to take a chance on him.

[imb]

Cause STONE COLD said so

[JudasIscariotTheBird]

Bottom line is that Russell has some value as a baseball player and Theo can include him as a throw-in in some deal to a team that is willing to take a chance on him.

[Sammy Sofa]

Bottom line is that Russell has some value as a baseball player and Theo can include him as a throw-in in some deal to a team that is willing to take a chance on him.

 

This post is dog horsefeathers.

[Bertz]

Russell hit .250/.317/.340 last year and is in line to make ~6 million in arbitration. Even if a grievance would be filed (I've never heard of such a thing for a non-tender), it would not be tough to argue that it was merit based. Hell, he made 17 errors in 2/3's of a season, so they could play dumb and say that he sucks on defense too. And even if they lost the grievance, like the Yankees did with Arod, they have to pay $6m for a quality backup SS. That would suck for us fans, but that's not a bad outcome for some heartless FO type.

 

I don't think he actually plays for the team next year, but this is still the team deciding that whatever B- prospect he ends up netting us is worth the message this sends. It's super messed up.

[Bluescale]

I don't think he actually plays for the team next year, but this is still the team deciding that whatever B- prospect he ends up netting us is worth the message this sends. It's super messed up.

 

For a front office that's made a big deal about character being as important as skill, they sure are willing to look past character when it's convenient...

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I don't think he actually plays for the team next year, but this is still the team deciding that whatever B- prospect he ends up netting us is worth the message this sends. It's super messed up.

 

For a front office that's made a big deal about character being as important as skill, they sure are willing to look past character when it's convenient...

 

They mean "be obsessive about being good at your sport" character, not "don't beat up women" character.

[CoolHandLuke]

Chiefs > Cubs

[Rex Buckingham]

Chiefs > Cubs

 

As far as releasing the scum bag, sure. But pretty sure they had knowledge of the incident way before today.

[soccer10k]

Chiefs > Cubs

 

As far as releasing the scum bag, sure. But pretty sure they had knowledge of the incident way before today.

 

And they still employ Tyreek Hill.

[UK]

Chiefs > Cubs

 

As far as releasing the scum bag, sure. But pretty sure they had knowledge of the incident way before today.

 

They knew about in August as did the NFL, which is something they should be held accountable for.

 

Of course, I would have a difficult time believing that the Cubs found out via her blog post.

 

The Chiefs ultimate conclusion was a greater damnation than the Cubs, despite their efforts to conceal it.

[Splendid Splinter]

Chiefs > Cubs

 

As far as releasing the scum bag, sure. But pretty sure they had knowledge of the incident way before today.

 

They knew about in August as did the NFL, which is something they should be held accountable for.

 

Of course, I would have a difficult time believing that the Cubs found out via her blog post.

 

The Chiefs ultimate conclusion was a greater damnation than the Cubs, despite their efforts to conceal it.

 

Chiefs/NFL knew about Hunt since February when it happened. NFL have been saying that they tried multiple times to get the video, but hotel policy only give those to law enforcement and Cleveland PD wouldn't give NFL a copy of it. Since they didn't have video proof, Hunt wasn't suspended/fine/etc.

 

Yet, TMZ can get a copy of the video? Yyyeeeeaaaahhhh ok Roger...

[Bear Cub]

Rehab does sometimes work.

[Sammy Sofa]

Sure; some of us would have just preferred for him to try and tackle that away from the Cubs.

 

I think it's faulty to act like people like him NEED to be given a second chance....and when I say "people like him," I mean millionaire celebrities. People talk like they need to be given another chance, or it should be given that he get another shot to play pro baseball...but why? Why treat exceptional people like they're everyone else? This isn't Addison Russell: plumber; he's Addison Russell: millionaire baseball player (and watch me have real sympathy that he's "only" made $4.6 million in the last 4 years).

[CyHawk_Cub]

[tweet]

[/tweet]

[Clem Fandango]

Should have added "Is not old enough to rent a car" under the three babies one just to accentuate the awfulness of that.

 

Addison Russell is panhandle trash.

[Sammy Sofa]

But gotta be sure to write fluff pieces about how he's a manchild who has to travel around during the season with his binders full of horsefeathering Pokemon cards.

[r_mack]

Russell hit .250/.317/.340 last year and is in line to make ~6 million in arbitration. Even if a grievance would be filed (I've never heard of such a thing for a non-tender), it would not be tough to argue that it was merit based. Hell, he made 17 errors in 2/3's of a season, so they could play dumb and say that he sucks on defense too. And even if they lost the grievance, like the Yankees did with Arod, they have to pay $6m for a quality backup SS. That would suck for us fans, but that's not a bad outcome for some heartless FO type.

 

I don't think he actually plays for the team next year, but this is still the team deciding that whatever B- prospect he ends up netting us is worth the message this sends. It's super messed up.

He's one of the best defensive SS's in baseball and he's still only 24. It's pretty clear he's been affected by the off the field stuff (by his own doing) but when he's good, he has value. Letting Russell go for what is still an accusation (as far as we know) hurts this baseball team going forward whether people like it or not.

 

and FYI, I trust the front office in doing the right thing here. There's stuff that has gone on behind the scenes that people are completely oblivious to.