Reese Kaplan -- Avoiding Baseball's First-Ever Dirty Dozen

It's the day after Christmas and all of your friends and relatives to the best of their abilities put their minds to work coming up with what they thought was the perfect gift to honor you and enhance the richness of your life, only for you to realize that maybe that effort was more about good intentions than a realization of the giver's mindset.

The same is pretty much true of baseball transactions made by your favorite team. There are times when the thinking that went into the moves seemed to make perfect sense, while other times there was a lot of head scratching when the deal in question was announced.

Right now the issue at hand is the same one that faced the San Francisco Giants when it came to securing the services of former Astro and Twin Carlos

 Correa. If you believe the reports that leaked out (and then appear to be confirmed) there was a great question about how Correa's leg and not back could impact his ability to play at an elite level over the duration of a lengthy contract. 

 First the Giants chose the somewhat abrupt and embarrassing move of postponing the press conference to commemorate the transaction, and then Steve Cohen reached a meeting of the minds with Steve Boras on Correa's behalf in the middle of the night thus clutching the wanted-but-not-landed free agent out of San Francisco's unsure hands.

Of course, as is customary with any sports contract there is a due diligence period during which a physical exam is a mandatory part of the evaluation and decision making process. It turns out that the very same medical concerns raised by the Giants has now become a decision point for the New York Mets as well. They need to determine whether they want to take the risk of a long-term deal which could go sour in the mold of a David Wright, or do they try to paint themselves as astute business people who use the medical issue as a way of renegotiating what was originally agreed upon between both sides.

If you think about it, that would be the best of both worlds for both Correa and the Mets. If Correa was returned to the open market after wooing and agreeing to terms with not one but two baseball teams, it would mean his price would be forcibly reduced not only on an annual basis but also regarding the number of years to which a prospective employer would commit.

On the Mets side, no one is disputing the capabilities that Correa brings to the table. The fact he was willing to move off his preferred playing position in the field suggests how much Correa was willing to make a concession to ensure he would be on top of the world when it came to spending on luxury goods for the rest of his life.

So if I am a hardcore negotiator, the cards are very much in the Mets hand when it comes to strategizing on what to do now. Obviously Steve Cohen is a big boy and could shrug off the ill-fated and somewhat hasty contract offer as doing the right thing for the business. There would be a lot of disappointed fans but not more than there would be if he played on average 80 games per season at a good but not great level while earning a top-of-the-list paycheck for a half effort.

The other way to play this game is to pencil in some provisions into the contract that would enable Correa to put up or shut up regarding his health and how it does not affect his ability to play. Lawyers would have a field day wordsmithing the language of games played, statistical metrics met or time lost due to injury. It may never have been done before but there's a first time for everything. 

 If all goes well for Correa health-wise, then he would not have a major objection to putting in some language regarding his ability to play over the duration of the contract. If he's not, then there is some real concern there and it would underscore the reason Cohen might want to withstand the barbs that would come from fans and the media for teasing them about bringing in a great player and then backing out.

Not having any legal training myself, I cannot speak to what is and is not possible for contractual provisions for termination of pay or reduction of rate due to known injuries. However, if I'm in the front office's shoes then I would certainly hire the best of the best in contract law to play some real hardball about getting protections so that the money paid is well spent year in and year out for the next dozen years lest they become known in baseball legacy as the "Dirty Dozen."