The Player to be Named Later
Such Transactions Compromise the Game's Integrity
If a player thinks he will be sent to a contender at the trading deadline, will his play against that team be affected before the trade?
Leonard Koppett was the first writer to be elected to both the baseball and basketball Hall of Fame. He was a reporter for The New York Herald Tribune, The New York Post and The New York Times, covering the Yankees, Dodgers, Giants and Mets and the Knicks, at different times, of course. Koppett was concerned about the integrity of the game. In 1967, he expressed his concerns about teams trading a player for "a player or players to be named later."
Waiver Transactions
In 1967, June 15 was the trading deadline. After that date, only waiver deals could be made. In a waiver trade, each team is given the chance, based on reverse order of won-lost record, to buy a player's contract. The major purpose of the procedure was to prevent wealthy teams vying for the pennant from raiding teams that were out of contention. If the second place Red Sox wanted Elston Howard from the ninth place Yankees, all the teams with worse records than the Red Sox would have the chance of obtaining Howard's services.
A Disgraceful Procedure
On August 3, 1967, the Yankees sent Elston Howard to the Red Sox for two players to be named later. Leonard Koppett called trades for "a player or players to be named later" as "disgraceful" and "dishonest." He explained that such transactions undermine the belief that baseball is structured in a way that prevents a player from playing against his future employer and KNOWING IT.
Will a Player Do His Best Against His Future Employer?
Late in 1964, the Yankees obtained the services of Pedro Ramos, without whom they would not have won the pennant. In return for Ramos, the Yankees would send the Indians a player to be named later. The player turned out to be Ralph Terry, who was on the 1964 Yankees' pitching staff. Terry didn't know that he was the player who would be named later, but if he did know that he was going to be an Indian, would that have affected him when he faced the Indians? Koppett asks, "What if a player, knowing he'll be with Cleveland next year, has to play against them for the Yankees this year while Cleveland is fighting for a pennant? Will he do his best to damage his next employer? He should---but sooner or later someone might not."
Bo Belinsky Trade Nullified
Some light is shed on the problem by the Bo Belinsky situation. Belinsky was a flaky left handed pitcher who toiled for the Angels. When Bo discovered that he was the player to be named later in a trade, commissioner Ford Frick nullified the trade because Belinsky spoke about it.
Last Year of a Contract
The current trading deadline is July 31, not June 15, and there is no ban against inter-league transactions. Two thirds of the season have been played by July 31, and many teams are out of contention. Teams in contention that are willing to spend money or give up promising minor leaguers pluck players they need from teams that are out of the races. "Frugal" teams are often anxious to unload players who are in the final year of their contract. The Twins trade of Johan Santana in the last year of his contract is an excellent illustration. The rich Mets get baseball's top lefty while Twins' management tells gullible fans they are building for future greatness that will never occur.
Players Read Newspapers and Watch Television
Koppett's concerns have become greatly magnified. The Yankees, Red Sox, Mets, and Dodgers are among baseball's big spenders. Take a player on Kansas City or Pittsburgh or any other team that refuses to spend money. The better players on those teams read the newspapers and watch television. They are aware of the chances that they will be pitching for a particular contender after July 31. Will all of those players, as Koppett wrote, "...do his best to damage his next employer? He should---but sooner or later someone might not."
The Integrity of the Game is Compromised
If a player thinks he is going to be sent to a contender in advance, when he plays against that contender, the integrity of the game is compromised. The potential for improprieties cannot be allowed to exist. Leonard Koppett addressed the issue forty years ago. It has become even more of an issue today.
References:
Koppett, Leonard. "Wheeling and dealing." New York Times, 4 August 1967, p.S20.
