SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Sox talking long-term extension with Pedroia
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jul 20, 2013 8:05:26 GMT -5
This is a good time to talk about comparing other players contracts. It's a dumb reason to give a certain dollar to a player. It's been brought up but why give a bad contract just because someone else will? Why do it 2 years before you have to unless you are getting something big in return?
Cano isn't getting 250M... These the sae reporters who spoke like it was fact that Bourne was getting $100? And BJ Upton.. Or countless others. Big contracts are trending downwards and will continue to as Crawford, Arod, Werth, Hamilton, Tex, AGon and Pujols continue to be a disaster.
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Jul 20, 2013 8:16:36 GMT -5
Pedroia is almost priceless to the organization. He's the leader and it shows when guys like Iggy cone up and talk about how much he's helped them. Can't really put a value on intangibles but I'm not letting a few million more a year prevent this from getting done before Cano signs. I'd try to front load a 5-6 year $100-115 deal. Tear up the current options and pay him $23-25 mill the first few years when we have cheap players like JBJ, Xander, Iggy, WMBs, Workman, Britton, Rubby, Webster knocking on the door and another wave in Salem and Portland. Front load the first three years a few million and maybe put in a 6th option year based on DL time the last two years of the deal.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jul 20, 2013 8:26:21 GMT -5
Pedroia is almost priceless to the organization. He's the leader and it shows when guys like Iggy cone up and talk about how much he's helped them. Can't really put a value on intangibles but I'm not letting a few million more a year prevent this from getting done before Cano signs. I'd try to front load a 5-6 year $100-115 deal. Tear up the current options and pay him $23-25 mill the first few years when we have cheap players like JBJ, Xander, Iggy, WMBs, Workman, Britton, Rubby, Webster knocking on the door and another wave in Salem and Portland. Front load the first three years a few million and maybe put in a 6th option year based on DL time the last two years of the deal. Henry wouldn't front load a deal. Makes no sense financially for a team like the Red Sox. AAV is what counts towards the tax.
|
|
|
Post by GyIantosca on Jul 20, 2013 8:38:09 GMT -5
You know when I heard this I said to myself oh this is a 8 or 9 year deal for 100 million. Then I reread the rumors that he is getting 20 million a year. Wow it still hasn't hit me these guys get that kind of money. Cano should rape the MFY's.
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Jul 20, 2013 10:30:09 GMT -5
Baseball is like any other business and though it may not make any sense, you take care of your own. The Yankees have gone over board with the notion in regards to Jeter's contract. But Pedroia is a good guy to pay alot of money too, you want to make sure he is a Red Sox for life and is taken care of. The gamble is paying upfront for good PR and recruiting down the road. Ok, lets take Jeter's contract. Well to be fair his 30 - 34 year old contract where we know Pedroia fits. With ok defense and a solid bat Jeter hit. .313 .382 .453 .835 119 for those years. Seems to me Pedroia fits right in to that level with the fan appeal in Boston and the Yanks marketing of Jeter is about the same too. Jeter got 18.6M 19.6M 20.6M 21.6M 21.6M so why shouldn't the front office consider Pedroia at a level such as that with NO inflation (after all everyone agrees that Jeter's defense was not top of the line on his stats) and supposed Pedroia defensive decline. When you take that into consideration it seems a No brainer to me. Give him the money now and save before the Cano deal gets done.
|
|
|
Post by dfwsox on Jul 20, 2013 10:47:31 GMT -5
Love this guy, like everyone does. Have no problem paying him 20 mil AAV. He's a plus defender, plus bat, and his power has been zapped a bit with the thumb problems but I'm sure you will see that come back. Plus he's what they want the club to stand from (playing hard, the games important to him).
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jul 20, 2013 12:17:28 GMT -5
Just looking at some greats (and less greats as we work our way down the list) at second base in recent history here...
• Biggio dropped off after age 33. • Ditto Roberto Alomar. • Lou Whitaker had a weird career where he was never great but managed to be very good for almost two decades. • Sandberg was basically done at 32. • Jeff Kent held up well into his late 30s. • Chase Utley had an insane peak from ages 25-30 where he was neck-and-neck with Pujols for the Best Player In The Game title (not that anyone noticed), and has been a shell of his former self since then. • Willie Randolph peaked in his early 20s, fell off, and had somewhat of resurgence in his early 30s but was really at his best at ages 21-25. • Chuck Knoblauch was an .850 OPS guy from ages 25-30 and managed to play himself out of the league by 33, which is an impressive feat in a way. • Placedo Polanco doesn't really have a identifiable peak, but only has a couple good seasons after age 30. • Alfonso Soriano... debatable how good of a player he's been in his 30s (not very, IMO), but he moved off second so not a great example anyway. • Ray Durham was decent in his early 30s, but again the bulk of his value was before 30. • Bobby Grich was a good player for the duration of his career, which continued until he was 37. • Dan Uggla has basically been a disaster after age 30, a terrible signing by the Braves. I know he gets decent WAR scores but that's a function of defensive numbers which are suspect at best. • Mark Grudzielanek was actually at his best in his late 30s, although he wasn't ever very good. • Brett Boone was never very good except for a weird age 32-34 peak in Seattle, which is a very odd sentence to write given what's been going on with that team in recent years. • Orlando Hudson fell off after age 30. • Mark Loretta had a bit of a late peak, but didn't do much after age 32. • Giles was an outstanding hitter in his mid-20s, and didn't even play in the majors after age 29. • Rickie Weeks, peaked ages 24-28, is 30 now and hasn't really been good the last two years. • Jose Vidro was a fantastic player in his age 24-29, fell off at 30 and washed out by 33.
Are we seeing the pattern yet? With a few notable exceptions (Whitaker, Kent, Grich), it's nearly impossible to find a second baseman (and I suspect this would hold true for shortstops as well but someone else can do the BR legwork on that one) who didn't accumulate 75% of their career value BEFORE the age of 30. Even with the guys like Ray Durham who had some good years in the 30-35 range, they still had like seven good seasons before that. Are we really going to bet on Pedroia to buck this trend? The tiny guy who gets hurt every year? The guy who likes headfirst slides into first base and diving for balls three feet out of his reach? He's been an amazing player up to this point, one of my favorite ever. But he's a terrible investment.
|
|
|
Post by taftreign on Jul 20, 2013 12:25:58 GMT -5
Just looking at some greats (and less greats as we work our way down the list) at second base in recent history here... • Biggio dropped off after age 33. • Ditto Roberto Alomar. • Lou Whitaker had a weird career where he was never great but managed to be very good for almost two decades. • Sandberg was basically done at 32. • Jeff Kent held up well into his late 30s. • Chase Utley had an insane peak from ages 25-30 where he was neck-and-neck with Pujols for the Best Player In The Game title (not that anyone noticed), and has been a shell of his former self since then. • Willie Randolph peaked in his early 20s, fell off, and had somewhat of resurgence in his early 30s but was really at his best at ages 21-25. • Chuck Knoblauch was an .850 OPS guy from ages 25-30 and managed to play himself out of the league by 33, which is an impressive feat in a way. • Placedo Polanco doesn't really have a identifiable peak, but only has a couple good seasons after age 30. • Alfonso Soriano... debatable how good of a player he's been in his 30s (not very, IMO), but he moved off second so not a great example anyway. • Ray Durham was decent in his early 30s, but again the bulk of his value was before 30. • Bobby Grich was a good player for the duration of his career, which continued until he was 37. • Dan Uggla has basically been a disaster after age 30, a terrible signing by the Braves. I know he gets decent WAR scores but that's a function of defensive numbers which are suspect at best. • Mark Grudzielanek was actually at his best in his late 30s, although he wasn't ever very good. • Brett Boone was never very good except for a weird age 32-34 peak in Seattle, which is a very odd sentence to write given what's been going on with that team in recent years. • Orlando Hudson fell off after age 30. • Mark Loretta had a bit of a late peak, but didn't do much after age 32. • Giles was an outstanding hitter in his mid-20s, and didn't even play in the majors after age 29. • Rickie Weeks, peaked ages 24-28, is 30 now and hasn't really been good the last two years. • Jose Vidro was a fantastic player in his age 24-29, fell off at 30 and washed out by 33. Are we seeing the pattern yet? With a few notable exceptions (Whitaker, Kent, Grich), it's nearly impossible to find a second baseman (and I suspect this would hold true for shortstops as well but someone else can do the BR legwork on that one) who didn't accumulate 75% of their career value BEFORE the age of 30. Even with the guys like Ray Durham who had some good years in the 30-35 range, they still had like seven good seasons before that. Are we really going to bet on Pedroia to buck this trend? The tiny guy who gets hurt every year? The guy who likes headfirst slides into first base and diving for balls three feet out of his reach? He's been an amazing player up to this point, one of my favorite ever. But he's a terrible investment. Breaking News!!!! MLB players peaks are in their mid to late 20's and players are not as productive in their 30's. Someone should tell MLB front offices about this.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jul 20, 2013 12:45:08 GMT -5
It's not players, it's middle infielders specifically, because defense peaks much earlier than hitting does, and those guys usually can't be productive players if they move down the defensive spectrum. It's even worse for second baseman, because there's greater injury risk at the position and they're typically not as athletic as shortstops.
Oh, and on top of all that, Pedroia is a righty hitter, and those guys tend to decline faster as well, since a loss of bat speed hurts a player more when he doesn't have the platoon advantage.
Yes, we all know players in general tend to be less valuable after age 30 than before. But there's more specific factors that indicate how well a player is likely to hold up, and Pedroia has nearly every red flag for a fast decline phase that you can imagine. He's basically the prototype of a player who's going to be done at 32.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 20, 2013 13:10:17 GMT -5
Who cares if his contract is way overpriced? Who else are they going to spend money on up to the luxury tax limit? The Sox will be able to afford an albatross contract if they continue to build the team from within while adding reasonable short term guys to fill in holes. That will be the new model for successful teams.
If Pedroia's contract prevents them from signing a Pujols or Hamilton, well good!
The MFY were so successful by keeping their core group of 4-5 leadership guys in tact for so long. Pedroia IS that guy. He is the one who teaches the kids how to be a Red Sox.
The Sox have the money to spend up to the tax threshold every year. If they continue to build the team the way they have, they aren't going to come close to reaching it in a couple years.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jul 20, 2013 13:18:27 GMT -5
Well is the contract 5 more years or 7 more years? It matters a great deal.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 20, 2013 13:47:17 GMT -5
Who cares if his contract is way overpriced? Who else are they going to spend money on up to the luxury tax limit? The Sox will be able to afford an albatross contract if they continue to build the team from within while adding reasonable short term guys to fill in holes. That will be the new model for successful teams. If Pedroia's contract prevents them from signing a Pujols or Hamilton, well good! The MFY were so successful by keeping their core group of 4-5 leadership guys in tact for so long. Pedroia IS that guy. He is the one who teaches the kids how to be a Red Sox. The Sox have the money to spend up to the tax threshold every year. If they continue to build the team the way they have, they aren't going to come close to reaching it in a couple years. This is a bad way of thinking about it, for a few reasons. (1) Circular reasoning: "we don't want the front office to spend on an albatross contract, so let's sign Pedroia to one!" (2) It's this exact logic that led to the Beckett extension that, in retrospect, looks terrible. Player performance is always at risk of diminishing significantly when a player enters his 30s, and this extension would basically be signing Pedroia at his peak value. Deals like that rarely work out well. (3) The Yankees should not be a role model team. They literally did not have a budget limit in the late 90s through the late-00s, which meant they could afford semi-albatross extensions but also keep spending on the free agent market for mid-tier stars. Under the new CBA, however, that strategy has hamstrung them significantly-- the increased luxury tax penalties (especially for repeaters) does represent a real hard cap, and they're really struggling to field a competitive team this season. (4) There are plenty of ways to better spend that salary. Signing mid-tier veterans can eat up cash pretty quickly, especially since the FO is willing to overpay in AAV terms to keep the length of deals short. The prospect "core" is going to need to be locked up sooner than you think. (5) Paying for "leadership" is rarely a good idea. Yeah, it was great when Adrian Gonzalez taught Papi how to hit again or whatever, but his power eroded pretty quickly and now that contract looks more and more like an albatross every day.
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Jul 20, 2013 14:09:15 GMT -5
(5) Paying for "leadership" is rarely a good idea. Yeah, it was great when Adrian Gonzalez taught Papi how to hit again or whatever, but his power eroded pretty quickly and now that contract looks more and more like an albatross every day. Or is it? His HR total this season even playing in LA Stadium is already 14 plus his doubles are at 20, rbi's (don't mean to much but) could again be at 100 plus and his overall stats show a good improvement at: .299 .349 .480 .829 132+ Seems like we just have last year to complain about really. www.baseball-reference.com/players/g/gonzaad01.shtml
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 20, 2013 14:15:16 GMT -5
Who cares if his contract is way overpriced? Who else are they going to spend money on up to the luxury tax limit? The Sox will be able to afford an albatross contract if they continue to build the team from within while adding reasonable short term guys to fill in holes. That will be the new model for successful teams. If Pedroia's contract prevents them from signing a Pujols or Hamilton, well good! The MFY were so successful by keeping their core group of 4-5 leadership guys in tact for so long. Pedroia IS that guy. He is the one who teaches the kids how to be a Red Sox. The Sox have the money to spend up to the tax threshold every year. If they continue to build the team the way they have, they aren't going to come close to reaching it in a couple years. This is a bad way of thinking about it, for a few reasons. (1) Circular reasoning: "we don't want the front office to spend on an albatross contract, so let's sign Pedroia to one!" (2) It's this exact logic that led to the Beckett extension that, in retrospect, looks terrible. Player performance is always at risk of diminishing significantly when a player enters his 30s, and this extension would basically be signing Pedroia at his peak value. Deals like that rarely work out well. (3) The Yankees should not be a role model team. They literally did not have a budget limit in the late 90s through the late-00s, which meant they could afford semi-albatross extensions but also keep spending on the free agent market for mid-tier stars. Under the new CBA, however, that strategy has hamstrung them significantly-- the increased luxury tax penalties (especially for repeaters) does represent a real hard cap, and they're really struggling to field a competitive team this season. (4) There are plenty of ways to better spend that salary. Signing mid-tier veterans can eat up cash pretty quickly, especially since the FO is willing to overpay in AAV terms to keep the length of deals short. The prospect "core" is going to need to be locked up sooner than you think. (5) Paying for "leadership" is rarely a good idea. Yeah, it was great when Adrian Gonzalez taught Papi how to hit again or whatever, but his power eroded pretty quickly and now that contract looks more and more like an albatross every day. If we let Pedey walk and not sign anyone to unreasonable contracts, listen to Sox fans bitch about having a $120 million payroll. That is the direction we're heading. If there is anyone to sign to an unreasonable contract, it's Pedey. He's not an asshole like Beckett and he's not a wet mop like Agon. The Yankees are not the role model. But they were able to buy championships because of their leadership core and why other teams who tried to do it failed when they didn't have that in place. We should pay to keep our core in place and build from within to add to it. The time has come where teams are very limited in being able to add talent with money. So you spend it on your own guys or you don't spend it. The Sox only have $120 million committed next year and few holes to fill. It'll go down from there.
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Jul 20, 2013 14:44:07 GMT -5
This is a bad way of thinking about it, for a few reasons. (1) Circular reasoning: "we don't want the front office to spend on an albatross contract, so let's sign Pedroia to one!" (2) It's this exact logic that led to the Beckett extension that, in retrospect, looks terrible. Player performance is always at risk of diminishing significantly when a player enters his 30s, and this extension would basically be signing Pedroia at his peak value. Deals like that rarely work out well. (3) The Yankees should not be a role model team. They literally did not have a budget limit in the late 90s through the late-00s, which meant they could afford semi-albatross extensions but also keep spending on the free agent market for mid-tier stars. Under the new CBA, however, that strategy has hamstrung them significantly-- the increased luxury tax penalties (especially for repeaters) does represent a real hard cap, and they're really struggling to field a competitive team this season. (4) There are plenty of ways to better spend that salary. Signing mid-tier veterans can eat up cash pretty quickly, especially since the FO is willing to overpay in AAV terms to keep the length of deals short. The prospect "core" is going to need to be locked up sooner than you think. (5) Paying for "leadership" is rarely a good idea. Yeah, it was great when Adrian Gonzalez taught Papi how to hit again or whatever, but his power eroded pretty quickly and now that contract looks more and more like an albatross every day. If we let Pedey walk and not sign anyone to unreasonable contracts, listen to Sox fans bitch about having a $120 million payroll. That is the direction we're heading. If there is anyone to sign to an unreasonable contract, it's Pedey. He's not an asshole like Beckett and he's not a wet mop like Agon. The Yankees are not the role model. But they were able to buy championships because of their leadership core and why other teams who tried to do it failed when they didn't have that in place. We should pay to keep our core in place and build from within to add to it. The time has come where teams are very limited in being able to add talent with money. So you spend it on your own guys or you don't spend it. The Sox only have $120 million committed next year and few holes to fill. It'll go down from there. I agree. Develop the farm system, and then spend the money to keep the guys your organization developed. Aside from the baseball element of it, theres the human element that Pedroia has worked his rear end off for this organization and 2nd basemen are very, very hard to come by. Remember the revolving door we had at 2nd before we got Pedroia? Pedoia is arguably the hardest working member of the team if you've ever heard about his off-season regimen. It definitely helps the Red Sox' reputation as well to reward that type of commitment. Finally, Pedroia is pretty easily the most popular player on the team and probably puts some fans in the stands. Pedroia is an excellent player to build around.
|
|
|
Post by ray88h66 on Jul 20, 2013 15:32:27 GMT -5
I don't like the idea of long term deals for middle infielders over 30. Doubt it ends well. But It's nothing I'll get worked up about with this player. Sounds like the offer has been made. Maybe Laser show thinks he'll get more by waiting for Cano to sign and turns it down.
|
|
|
Post by theaveragefan88 on Jul 20, 2013 15:36:20 GMT -5
With the way the Sox are operating these days, being more conservative financially and rebuilding the farm system, I don't see how anyone can be too upset if they overpay a guy like Pedroia to be their building block for the next few years while these young guys come up and get their shots around him on the roster. Lock him up!
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jul 20, 2013 16:23:16 GMT -5
If there is anyone to sign to an unreasonable contract, it's Pedey. He's not an asshole like Beckett and he's not a wet mop like Agon. Josh Beckett was the Leader Of The Rotation before he started to suck, and Gonzalez was the Model Teammate who taught Ortiz how to hit lefties before he stopped hitting. Pedroia will go from Team Leader to Arrogant Jerk the second his production falls off.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 20, 2013 16:24:41 GMT -5
If there is anyone to sign to an unreasonable contract, it's Pedey. He's not an asshole like Beckett and he's not a wet mop like Agon. Josh Beckett was the Leader Of The Rotation before he started to suck, and Gonzalez was the Model Teammate who taught Ortiz how to hit lefties before he stopped hitting. Pedroia will go from Team Leader to Arrogant Jerk the second his production falls off. And then we learned that they were two of the biggest problems in the clubhouse.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jul 20, 2013 16:29:54 GMT -5
Josh Beckett was the Leader Of The Rotation before he started to suck, and Gonzalez was the Model Teammate who taught Ortiz how to hit lefties before he stopped hitting. Pedroia will go from Team Leader to Arrogant Jerk the second his production falls off. And then we learned that they were two of the biggest problems in the clubhouse. Do you seriously not get the correlation here?
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 20, 2013 16:32:44 GMT -5
And then we learned that they were two of the biggest problems in the clubhouse. Do you seriously not get the correlation here? Oh come on. Not every player who's production drops turns into a clubhouse cancer. Beckett and Agon were NEVER Pedey.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jul 20, 2013 17:01:41 GMT -5
Oh come on. Not every player who's production drops turns into a clubhouse cancer. Beckett and Agon were NEVER Pedey. It's not a matter of turning into a clubhouse cancer. It's a matter of perception. Players who do well are seen as leaders and players who do poorly are seen as problematic. It's like how the gold gloves always go to players who hit really well. I have no idea what any of these players are actually like in the clubhouse. Whatever we hear is in large part driven by their performance in other areas.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 20, 2013 17:04:47 GMT -5
Oh come on. Not every player who's production drops turns into a clubhouse cancer. Beckett and Agon were NEVER Pedey. It's not a matter of turning into a clubhouse cancer. It's a matter of perception. Players who do well are seen as leaders and players who do poorly are seen as problematic. It's like how the gold gloves always go to players who hit really well. I have no idea what any of these players are actually like in the clubhouse. Whatever we hear is in large part driven by their performance in other areas. He has many years to get to that point. Jeter hasn't produced anywhere near his contract for a long time and he's still the leader of the Yankees.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jul 20, 2013 17:07:12 GMT -5
My biggest question is why give a top market deal 2.5 years before you have to? How is that ever logical? Because another contract may bump yours up a bit? Doesn't the 2.5 years of potential injury and decline for a 29 year old who plays with reckless abandon out weight that?
If you still want to give him that money 2.5 years from now, you can.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jul 20, 2013 17:08:36 GMT -5
It's not a matter of turning into a clubhouse cancer. It's a matter of perception. Players who do well are seen as leaders and players who do poorly are seen as problematic. It's like how the gold gloves always go to players who hit really well. I have no idea what any of these players are actually like in the clubhouse. Whatever we hear is in large part driven by their performance in other areas. He has many years to get to that point. Jeter hasn't produced anywhere near his contract for a long time and he's still the leader of the Yankees. Stop comparing Jeter and Pedey. They aren't comparable. Jeter is an icon.
|
|
|