Before the mlb will rule on A decision .The Mets basically have to agree to sign Bourn.
So,after the Mets sign him,the mlb can still basically say nope and scr#w the Mets out of the pick. What A crock.

Their new CBA rules are flawed and it sounds like they just dont want to own it.

Sandy has stated all off season he dont want lose this pick.

supposedly if we draft a deal w/ bourn that is contingent on the pick being protected, they will rule and we dont have to sign him fi they rule against us

its such a stupid rule change to begin w/

Why should MLB go through the effort and create a precedent for something that most probably will not happen as I don't believe that the Mets will pony up for Bourn. They will open up pandora's box to benefit Scott Boras not just in this case but also in the future. Boras is looking for a BJ Upton deal and is attempting this ploy to entice the Mets to help him bid up Bourn's price for either the Mariners or Rangers.

ok,so get it done.aslong as we keep the pick . i dont care

"supposedly if we draft a deal w/ bourn that is contingent on the pick being protected, they will rule and we dont have to sign him fi they rule against us"

I'm fine with that if that's the case.

so if they pony up and sign him,under the provision that their pick is protected.would you be ok with that?

then its on the Mets now.aslong as theres an out if the mlb rules against them.so be it.im fine with it.

its something that should have never been changed to begin w/, thats what people seem not to be getting

this isnt an old rule that had applied when it was 15 teams, it is something that they changed in the new CBA when it went to ten....every single draft up to this point, the worst 10 (or 15 before last year) teams in baseball had their picks protected regardless of comp picks that pushed them out of the top 15...for some reason, under the new cba, they changed this...

it should have been fought at the time, sandy should have fought it the moment we found out we lost that protection, and we should be fighting it now...

personally i am of the opinion that draft picks should not carry over to the next years draft...sign them or lose them

Personally I don't like Bourn enough to justify a BJ Upton contract. He is a lifetime .272 LH whose entire game is based on his speed.
At age 30 he will lose his speed and then you will get zilch.

I had him on my fantasy team in 2011 just to get stolen bases. His value increased to me when he was traded to the Braves from the lowly Astros so I got run scoring production from him.

He had an awful 2nd half in 2012 post ASG .225 Avg 13 CS Ok maybe some bad umpiring as usual

The Braves got this one right IMO. Scott Boras has him overpriced.

if you can get him on a 3-4 year deal worth no more than 15 mil per season AND we dont lose a pick, its not a bad contract

one difference bt bourn and reyes that makes the bourn signing a bit less of a risk (besides the fact that itd be at about half the money) is that bourn has never had any leg injuries that suggest a rapid decline in speed based skills

Too bad the Met FO didn't take up my suggestion & sign Jason Bourgeois who replaced Bourn in CF for Houston after Bourn was traded.
Bourgeois went on to steal 31 bases with a .294 Avg. for them in 2011.

He could have been signed to a minor league deal at the time when the Mets were making those signings.

Oops savvy Tampa Bay signed him after that.

Maybe the Mets could have traded for the 2 CF that the Twins gave up in Denard Span to the Nats or Ben Revere to the Phillys.

Maybe MLB can move the Wilpons and their org. somewhere and relocate the Tampa team to Citi Field.

They can work out a deal conditioned on the pick being protected.

..and that's the real story here....MLB will only do this if they have an army of lawyers tell them the Mets would sue and win if they didn't.

The MLB will not make a decision unless they are forced too.
So unless the Mets agree to sign Bourne the Mets can not petition the league for the decision.
I don't think Bourne is the player to risk losing the number 11 pick on. Especially a division foe with a better younger team and farm system will be getting that extra pick.

If the Mets seriously want to sign Bourn, they will have to make an agreement with his agent, Scott Boras. After they have agreed to a deal, then they can go to MLB to protest losing the 11th pick in the 2013 draft and forfeit a 2nd round pick instead. MLB will then have to agree to this rule change or they may not.

If the MLB approves the rule change for the Mets beforehand, Boras can just use the Mets to bid up the price for the Mariners or Rangers. The a priori rule change will probably increase Bourn's contract value and hence Boras' compensation therefrom.

~~~ Before the mlb will rule on A decision .The Mets basically have to agree to sign Bourn.
So,after the Mets sign him,the mlb can still basically say nope and scr#w the Mets out of the pick. What A crock. ~~~

I can't understand why the MLB Union doesn't get involved. If it's true that only the Mets and the Mariners are interested in Bourn, then he'll be missing out on a bidding war for him if the Mets are out of the running because of the loophole. If that happens, the Mariners can name their price.

They can't get involved until the Mets are in agreement with Bourne. The league will never decide on this problem without a reason too. This opens up to big a can of worms for the MLB. Unless they are forced to make a decision they will just point at the CBA and say it says what it says and means what it says.

If MLB allows Mets to protect their draft pick & sign Bourn I beleive it will not effect any other team.

MLB can justify letting Mets protect #11 pick because they would've/ should've had #10 pick if Pittsburgh signed their 1st rd draft pick (and therefore would've been protected w/ #10 pick). The teams picking AFTER Mets would NOT have been protected. So they won't be allowed to forgo having to give up a draft pick to sign Bourn. Just as if Mets had been #10 pick like they should've been.

So NO DIFFERENCE for any team other than Mets if MLB allows this exemption.

It's so comical that all this is over Michael Bourn for crying out loud.

No if you ahve an agreement in place it is an agreement Borass can not then go back to other teams and try to get better offers, Once an agreement is in place it is for all intents a deal pending a physical or whatever.

~~~ If MLB allows Mets to protect their draft pick & sign Bourn I beleive it will not effect any other team. ~~~

I think the Braves will sue. They'll lose a 1st round draft pick.