In the wake of yesterday's news that Pedro Alvarez and the Pittsburgh Pirates had re-agreed to a contract, word today is that an agreement has been reached in the grievence which allows Alvarez and Eric Hosmer to return to their teams.  Another key term of the agreement is that contract negotiation extensions of the Aug 15th deadline can only be approved by BOTH the commissioners office and the MLBPA. 

Dejan Kovacevic of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reports today that Scott Boras and Alvarez were in Pittsburgh this morning and that a contract was signed this evening.  Alvarez and Boras held a conference call for the media after the signing and Alvarez said that:

"Throughout this whole process, I, myself, wanted a fair trial, a fair negotiation. I wanted everything to play itself out. I thought for myself and made decisions for myself.  I just want the fans of Pittsburgh to judge me as the professional player that I am now, to judge me on the player that I am. I will work my hardest to be the best player I can be, to be a leader on and off the field in the community."

After weeks of speculation and debate technically between the MLBPA and the Commissioners office over the validity of contracts agreed to by Pedro Alvarez and Eric Hosmer that were allegedly consumated after teh 12:00am Aug 15th, 2008 deadline, Alvarez and the Pirates have finalized a deal that will end the grievence filed by the MLBPA and get Alvarez into a Pirates uniform.

Despite his early statements that he would not increase the value of the deal that was previously agreed to, Pirates President Frank Coonelly ultimately gave Alvarez a 335K increase on the guaranteed $6M deal that was originally accepted on August 15th. One change in the terms, however, is that the bonus will now be paid out over four years instead of two. The agreement is expected to force the MLBPA to withdraw its previously filed grievence.

Within his daily blog, espn.com's Buster Olney gives us some more insight into the Pedro Alvarez situation.  The arbitration case is scheduled for today (Wednesday).

• This case is not going to be settled by just one arbitration hearing.  Multiple hearings will be necessary dragging the case out likely over a month.
• With the main tenant of the case being when Alvarez verbally agreed to his contract (before or after the 12pm) deadline, most experts do not see how the result could be anything but a binding agreement or that Alvarez goes back to the 2009 draft.  Many suspect that Scott Boras is angling for free agency, but that seems unlikely.
• Alvarez stands to lose more than he can gain from this process.  He's already being viewed as greedy by fans, media, and even his professional peers.
• Jason Varitek, another Boras client, took basically the same route as Alvarez, going through multiple drafts before signing.  This delayed when he became an unrestricted free agent to when he was 31, instead of 29.  The estimated loss of earnings is anywhere from $20-$25M. 
• The compensation teams receive from not signing draft picks is stronger than ever, reducing the incentive for teams to cave to a young player's demands.  the Pirates will get the #3 pick in teh 2009 draft if Alvarez's agreement is voided and that type of compensation would only continue if whomever drafts Alvarez in 2009 decides to offer less than $6M.

Dejan Kovacevic of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reports that Pirates team officials are not expected to be at the hearing today because it is technically the player's association filing a grievence against the commissioner's office. 

Royals officials are also not expected to be at today's hearing either.  Their #1 pick, Eric Hosmer, has been wrapped up in the grievence because his contract was also allegedly signed after the 12am deadline on August 15th.  The major difference with Hosmer is that he's physically signed his contract already and begun playing for the Royals professionally.

Jon Heyman gives us some more insight into how the Pedro Alvarez arbitration hearing is expected to play out.

• MLB is expected to argue that there is precedent for Alvarez's after midnight verbal agreement.
• Scott Boras is expected to contend that Alvarez was only on the phone with general manager Neal Huntington because it was after midnight and Boras was no longer allowed to negotiate.
• The union is also expected to note that they never got a phone call requesting an extension from MLB officials.  MLB will likely counter that Alvarez's negoations were not the only ones expected to go beyond midnight (see Eric Hosmer) and there was little harm in an extension.  Considering Hosmer's contract was completed after the deadline and that has worked out fine for the Royals, it doesn't make Alvarez's situation look good. 

A lot happened with the Pedro Alvarez situation over the weekend, so check that out. 

Dejan Kovacevic reports today that Alvarez's adivsor, Scott Boras, defended himself against Pirates president Frank Coonelly's assertion that Boras is responsible for dragging Eric Hosmer into the Alvarez dispute.  Boras's stance all along has been that the grievence filed by the union had nothing specifically to do with him or Alvarez and that if other player's contracts are possibly void, such as Hosmer's, that has nothing to do with him. 

Pirates general manager, Neal Huntington, notes within this piece that, no matter what the outcome of the arbitration is, the Pirates will not renegotiate the deal. 

All week we have been tracking the bizarre developments in the grievence filed by the Players Assocaition claiming that some contracts completed by 1st round draft picks, such as Pedro Alvarez, were completed after the Aug 15th deadline. The Kansas City Royals have been concerned that their signed pick, Eric Hosmer, will be dragged into this mess. However, Dejan Kovacevic of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reports today that it doesn't seem as if Hosmer will be involved.

Jonathan Mayo of mlb.com, however, believes that the focus of the grievance will not be Alvarez alone based on the use of plurals in the grievence ("clubs" "agreements"). Whether this means Hosmer and/or players such as Buster Posey is hard to determine.

As the stand-off between Pedro Alvarez, Scott Boras and the Pirates continues, Dejan Kovacevic provides background on the clash between Boras and Pirates president Frank Coonelly.  Apparently Boras bristled at the Pirats 2007 assertion that then concensus #1 player Matt Wieters was not a top five talent and not someone on the Pirates radar with the #4 pick.  Combine this professional insult with Boras's well documented rivalry with Coonelly, who formerly worked for MLB, and the contentious relationship is easy to envision. 

Peter Gammons takes us through how the two sides will approach the arbitration hearing.  Gammons ultimately blames the Alvarez mess and the inequity of the draft over the past few years on Bud Selig and Donald Fehr's inability to successfully negotiate how the draft will work back in 2002.

Meanwhile, the Roylas are worried that the grievence filed by the player's union (which is not specifically about Alvarez, but is obviously motivated by the situation) will rope in the contract they agreed to with Eric Hosmer.

There were stunning developments in the bizarre Pedro Alvarez "did he sign, didn't he sign" back and forth between the Pirates organization and Scott Boras yesterday. While nothing has been resolved yet, Buster Olney of espn.com provides his thought on how the situation only make sense for Boras, not Alvarez and envisions the young sluggers career starting the way JD Drew and/or Scott Rolen's did.

Dejan Kovacevic from the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette notes that the grievence filled by the MLBPA was not jsut about Alvarez's allegedly invalid contract, but that of several players which were signed after MLB August 15th deadline. Alvarez's (and maybe others) case is likely to be heard by an arbitor before anything is resolved.

David Boyce of the Kansas City Star notes that because Eric Hosmer's contract was allegedly signed after Alvarez's, the Royals have found themselves in the middle of this spat.

11:10 PM: Rob Neyer of espn.com dives into the Pedro Alvarez situation.  Neyer points out that back in 1996, Boras fould a loop-hole in the amateur signing system that resulted in four of his clients becoming free agents and making more money than they would have if they stayed with their drafted club, so this may not be as obvious as it seems.  Neyer confirms that the final contract allegedly reached between Alvarez and the Pirates was done so without Boras and this fact could possibly hurt Boras's credibility with future amateurs if his presence as an advisor doesn't really garner a larger signing bonus.

7:49 PM: Jonthan Mayo of mlb.com did some digging today to try and get some more answeres on the Pedro Alvarez situation. Mayo reports that the deal was finalized by Pirates with Alvarez, directly, without Boras's involvement. Allegedly Eric Hosmer agreed to his deal after the deadline, but Mayo tells us that Hosmer has signed his contract already and is playing.

3:40 PM: Jennifer Langosch reports that Scott Boras is asking for an additional $200K to Pedro Alvarez's signing bonus so that it matches Buster Posey's. Boras is also claiming that the contract was agreed upon after the August 15th, 11:59pm deadline making it void.

2:07 PM: Yesterday, word from the Pirates was that #2 overall pick Pedro Alvarez had not yet arrived in Pittsburgh for an introductory press conference and/or physical. Dejan Kovacevic reports today that Alvarez's advisory, Scott Boras, is now saying that Alvarez will no longer agree to the deal they signed on August 15th.

In an effort to seperate legitemate rumors and facts from a reporter or writer's opinions on a matter, we'll be starting a new posting delinating when we're dealing solely with conjecture. Often these writers spend a lot of time with teams so their opinions have a lot of research behind them, but these thoughts are pure creations of the writers imaginations.

• The Kansas City Star thinks Eric Hosmer's negotiations were a good move. I agree, who knows what can happen with these guys, it could easily be the only contract they sign.
  
• More 2008 draft signing round up as Jim Callis gives us his best signings.
  
• Ken Rosenthal likes the Greg Maddux trade, but feels that the Dodgers would have been better off blocking the Adam Dunn waiver claim/trade by the Diamondbacks. Ben Bolch of the LA Times looks into some reasons why the Dodgers didn't block the move.
  
• Patrick Saunders disputes the "Helton has to go" talk.
• This article discusses Derek Jeter's future with the Yankees. Jeter can obviously still play, but as the article points out at $19M+ a season, that's a lot to play for a singles hitter with average defensive abilities.
• Joel Sherman of the New York Post discussed Carl Pavano's possible future and the implications his short 2008 stint could have.