The non-tender deadline is midnight tonight

3 Comments

You’ll hear all sorts of things about the non-tender deadline today. Here’s what it is:

By midnight tonight teams have to decide whether to tender contracts to arbitration-eligible players. If they do, the team retains control over the player, the team and the player can negotiate salary for 2014 and, if they can’t come to an agreement over that (i.e. an agreement avoiding arbitration) they will proceed to submit proposed salaries to one another and have a salary arbitration early in the spring.

If the team non-tenders a player, that player immediately becomes a free agent. Basically, the calculus is whether or not the team thinks the guy is worth the low end of what he might receive in arbitration. Or, put differently, if the guy isn’t worth what he made in 2013, he’s probably going to be non-tendered. Not that there are a lot of those guys, as most arbitration-eligible players are young and have just recently made the minimum or something close to it.

Tim Dierkes of MLB Trade Rumors compiled a list of possible non-tender candidates last month. Some of them have since either signed deals avoiding arbitration or are rumored to be in talks to do so. Some of the names are intriguing. Others less so. What you often see here are players with one tool — like a no-hit, good defense infielder or a power corner outfielder with holes in other parts of his game — who may or may not be worth a gamble.

We’ll update you with any notable non-tenders as the deadline approaches and passes.

The Angels are giving managerial candidates a two-hour written test

Getty Images
8 Comments

Jon Morosi of MLB.com reports that the Los Angeles Angels are administering a two-hour written test to managerial candidates. The test presents “questions spanning analytical, interpersonal and game-management aspects of the job,” according to Morosi.

I can’t find any reference to it, but I remember another team doing some form of written testing for managerial candidates within the past couple of years. Questions which presented tactical dilemmas, for example. I don’t recall it being so intense, however. And then, as now, I have a hard time seeing experienced candidates wanting to sit for a two-hour written exam when their track record as a manager, along with an interview to assess compatibility should cover most of it. Just seems like an extension of the current trend in which front offices are taking away authority and, with this, some measure of professional respect, from managers.