Yes, but not in addition to three pre-arb years. Six years of "club control" before free agency. Usually, it's 3+3. Sometimes it's 2+4. It's never 3+4.
The former is true, the latter in not. You cannot write a contract that circumvents the CBA. What would be circumventing? Older IFAs usually have a clause that says they get released automatically when their contract is up, that's why you can have a Fukudome four-year deal. And certainly you can have a contract that goes past the six-year line. If Soler broke camp with the big club this year and never went back down, he could opt out after 2016 to enter the arbitration process and then would be a free agent after 2019. If the contract said that he was still under club control for 2020 (ostensibly eligible for arbitration for a fourth time), that would be a violation of the CBA and they couldn't do that.
Wesley Wright is one of the relatively rare Rule 5 draft success stories. At one time, Wesley Wright was the longest tenured member of the Houston Astros.
One of the things he'll be asked to do is to scout the Cubs just like our advance scouts scout upcoming opponents. The stated purpose of this is to identify things the team is doing poorly with an eye toward taking corrective action.
Outside of Zimmer/Ventura... who would be considered as "high end pitching prospects" in the Royals system? I imagine Almonte could be considered as one? Maybe Selman, but I wouldn't consider him as high end. So lets go with this... Shark/Barney/Scheirholtz for Cain/Herrera/Ventura/Zimmer What do you guys think? Too lopsided in our favor. It probably won't be Zimmer. Replace him with Almonte and it seems more equitable.
Hopefully they can just install Kelly Pickler as the full-time seventh inning stretch singer. Make sure she's still got the implants and I'd get behind that So to speak.
Craig, I was at Fitch all week last week and the place is loaded with minor leaguers who have arrived early. I think it's extremely common for a pretty good fraction of the organization's minor leaguers to report before February.
I'm not as well read on prospects as I should be, so I will often use Google...and I can't figure out who you're talking about. The dude we took in the Rule 5, so we don't have to keep him on the main roster all year. That could not happen. Maybe not in the "just hold onto that guy as part of the deal" sense, but I'm not aware of any restrictions that the Cubs can't mostly agree on a deal that involves Rondon, then just return him to the Indians as a formality before they trade him to us outright. Every other team after the Cubs in the Rule 5 draft order would have a chance to take Rondon and keep him subject to the Rule 5 stipulations. The Cubs and Indians could not work out a trade that would effectively rob Rondon of his Rule 5 rights. If no other team took him under Rule 5, then a trade could be agreed to (see Chiasson-Hinske).
I'm not as well read on prospects as I should be, so I will often use Google...and I can't figure out who you're talking about. The dude we took in the Rule 5, so we don't have to keep him on the main roster all year. That could not happen.