Would the Yankees have preferred that Chapman be suspended 60, not 30 days?

Aroldis Chapman is suspended 30 days starting opening day. He has yet to pitch for the Yankees in a regular season game. Chapman was acquired cheap from the Reds after it became public that he had been investigated for domestic violence, including firing a gun at a wall in his Florida garage. No charges were filed against Chapman by the police.

A deal was struck between the Major Baseball League (MBL) and the players union with concurrence from Chapman through his attorney not to appeal to an independent arbitrator. The Yankees had no standing.

Had Chapman been suspended about 45 days he would have lost a year in terms of becoming a free agent. The 30 day suspension will let Chapman become a free agent after the 2016 season. A 60 day suspension would have delayed that until after the 2017 season.

Chapman made the calculated decision to lose about $1.8 million early this season in exchange for assuring that he can make that up and more by negotiating with all teams after this season. Chapman's full 2016 salary would have been $11,325,000.

The Yankees would have preferred no suspension but were resigned to losing Chapman for part of the season. The Yankees just did not know how long. A 60 day suspension would have provided the Yankees with an extra year of control. That would have been huge and probably well worth the absence of Chapman for 60, not 30 days.

What do you think?