Just for fun... 29 days service on B-Ref too. 172 days equals 1 full service season. So we could have him up for 142 days next season if we want to keep him under that threshold at the end of the year. Season ends Oct. 1, 2017, so we could call him up May 13th to delay his free agency by one year. Probably not a big deal for a pitcher. "Super 2" arbitration status would be even less of a concern.
Takes two teams to trade, though. And it's harder to keep things too quiet at something like the winter meetings, which is when Dave's source basically said the deal was done.
That "movie" was in fact ordered by Twins ownership: http://img.bleacherreport.net/img/slides/photos/003/706/998/61bc3e03d4706e63beb50fd05c83e246_crop_north.jpg?w=630&h=420&q=75
I assumed they'd pay for their own transportation home (or hitch-hike). But any extra hotel fees would go back on the original card used to book the room. On that note -- maybe the Dodgers executives raided the Twins minibar for snacks during the negotiations, and they have to fully settle that bill before the trade can proceed.
For a major trade, involving a major media market (LA), I'd say that is pretty rare. This isn't like Hicks-for-Murphy flying under the radar. I'm not picking on you, though, I appreciate the thread and the discussion!
I know when the meetings are scheduled to end. Perhaps I should have said, why are the Twins flying home? If two top prospects are already on the table, and you're serious about trading him, that's when you sit down and hammer out a final agreement. Just don't tell the Pohlads you got charged extra for not checking out of the hotel in time.
Thanks Jack. Any insight on how that 3-team deal went down? How did we know that Haley would still be available at #10? I understand it when it's a spot or two, like a direct flip with the Padres would have been. But 10 spots down seems sort of unusual. Unless you absolutely know how teams 2 through 9 are going to pick, seems like a risk if you actually like Haley (and I imagine the cash benefit is probably pretty minimal with Rule 5 trades).
Maybe it helps to discourage some agreements to sign prospects early. Maybe taking away part of a bonus pool could be used as punishment if a team is found to have made a prohibited pre-signing day deal with a prospect. That would be harder to undo if teams had already made trades involving bonus slots. Also, it's a further penalty on teams like the Padres who overspend their bonus pool -- they can't simply trade their future bonus pools as early/easily.
I'd expect that Haley is ticketed for the pen. (Haven't seen many Rule 5 starter pitchers actually starting right away) I'd like to see May start, but Santana-Gibson-Santiago-Hughes-Berrios have to be considered near locks as long as they don't get traded and show up healthy. Any word from the new regime about their plans for Trevor May? (Sorry, way off topic, I know)