Please enter bids below:
$250K
HGH bid $350k
$450K
$650,000
auk
$1.0M
The ACLs bid $1.25 million on Nathan Eovaldi.
HGH bid $1.5M
I posted a bid on Eovaldi, but that bid is invalid since I can only spend $50 million on free agents this year, and this bid would put me over the limit on free agent spending (I'm under the overall salary cap, though). The high bid should still be $1.5 million from the Hammers posted at 10:01 AM ET.
1.75M
HGH bid $2M
$2.25 million
auk
HGH bid $2.5M
Jason, thank you for your honesty. That's one of the hardest things to track for the CO, so I know they appreciate your sportsmanship, as do I.
I am trying to remember the reason for this rule. It seems like one that rarely comes into play (although maybe having it there means teams having a long-run plan to keep their max amount in a season to $50 million or less), and when teams do have more than $50 million, it isn't a lot over $50 million (I think I started at around $52 million). What is the thought process behind this rule?
It's a legacy rule from when we only had 3 year contracts and no arbitration. It was designed around keeping teams honest and ensuring they participated in free agency. But it makes a lot less sense nowadays. Rod and I have already discussed adding it to the list for discussion (i.e. eliminating it for next year).
As I recall, it was to discourage tanking.
I can understand that a team might abuse free agency in those early days by lightly participating (aka, tanking) for a few years and then jumping in with a ton of salary cap space. I agree with arbitration; it goes a long way in keeping teams active (although I guess teams could always tank). With arbitration, it is easy for teams to build up a lot of salary cap space if they have a few superstars debut in the same year and start getting raises together. I think juggling the salary cap in the league nowadays is a lot more challenging than it was 15 years ago.
Agreed with all of that. Unless something changes, my suggestion in the off-season is that we scrap it.
I agree. At a minimum something to discuss.
I just don’t see the need for it anymore.
$2.75 million ( I think 2.5 was the last bid)
auk
HGH bid $3.0M
$3.25 million
auk
HGH bid $3.5M
$3.75 million
auk
HGH bid $4M
$4.5 million
Auk
HGH bid $4.75M
Eovaldi will officially be our first silent auction of the year!
Current high bid belongs to the Hammers at $4.75M, but the Auk are still in this. However, anyone is welcome to continue bidding until 9PM CST if they want to be included in the silent auction.
Edit - 9PM PST, not CST
Not pretty. You should have seen what Bruno did to the off-season weight/training/spa/massage facilities after he heard the Auk wasn't guaranteed in getting "his guy" Eovaldi. He let the general manager have it. "You wanted to bring #$%@&@# Peralta back and now are too $#@#$%#$@ cheap to get Eovaldi ?!?!? "
So with this silent auction I would need to go at least $250,000 over the current high bid ?
Correct.
Tonight I’ll email everyone involved to have them submit their final bid to me direct. High bid wins.
Note: if the current high bid is the only bidder he does not have to bid against himself. So in that scenario the bid would revert back to the existing bid, not his silent bid. So there is value in having the highest bid heading into silent.
Eovaldi is now a Hammer of the Garden variety. Auk is out. Bruno will need to cool his jets at the cigar / whiskey section of the training facility
Bidding is closed
Three years please