Page 1 of 1

Paxton

Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2011 6:19 pm
by Cardinals
Leave it to Bren.

Bren's challenging the fact that Brennan signed Paxton - given the fact that Paxton signed after January 1, but was drafted last year. He had the extended window to sign.

I don't really see how this is an issue. Paxton was drafted in '10. I was under the impression we were using Jan 1 as the cutoff for international signees, not amateur draftees as well.

Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2011 6:49 pm
by Rangers
Yep, our Jan 1 deadline has nothing to do with draftees.

Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2011 8:15 pm
by Astros
allow it

Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2011 8:21 pm
by Reds
looks like a legal signing to me.

Re: Paxton

Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2011 8:26 pm
by Padres
Pirates wrote:Leave it to Bren.

Bren's challenging the fact that Brennan signed Paxton - given the fact that Paxton signed after January 1, but was drafted last year. He had the extended window to sign.

I don't really see how this is an issue. Paxton was drafted in '10. I was under the impression we were using Jan 1 as the cutoff for international signees, not amateur draftees as well.
This is laugable - and given the source, oh so predictable.

Posted: Sun Mar 27, 2011 2:18 pm
by Dodgers
Referring to both viewtopic.php?t=2517 and viewtopic.php?t=2771 (and big surprise that Bren was the one complaining about this issue there as well) it seems like a valid signing.