Jump to content

why are people so eager to overpay manny machado?


cacavolante

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 101
  • Created
  • Last Reply
But you are compensating him for the four years you are getting 100M worth of production for 30 M. That's an incentive to give you the extra 2 years.

Thats nice and all.... but I doubt a player would be willing to give back tons and tons of money if he didn't play up to his contract. Why should we be giving a player far more money then we would have been paying him? The rules are in place for a reason, you shouldn't be expected to get a salary raise until you hit arbitration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't recall ever saying anything about letting him walk and taking the pick. But if the only other option is 6 $80 and he has not shown massive improvement as a hitter by this time next year (which is when you said you'd offer this deal), I would definitely consider it.
Massive, over what? His second half numbers? That's a safe bet. Over is first half. That's unrealistic. If he puts up .280 .330 .450 with 18 HR and 80 RBI, I'll be happy to pay him 6/80 M.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He is coming off major knee surgery

He has a condition (can't remember the medical name) let's call it knocked knee that puts his right knee at risk, and even his left knee is at a higher risk of reinjury.

If you read some of the early post surgery medical reports, part of his rehab was to basically teach him to run correctly to reduce the stress that his normal (for him) but very un-natural (for most athletes) stride puts on his knees.

His risk of knee problems and his .647 post all star game OPS would make me want to wait at least another year to even consider an extension.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

His risk of knee problems and his .647 post all star game OPS would make me want to wait at least another year to even consider an extension.

That is brutal OPS for a third baseman. People love the guys with potential on here but don't like the guys who already proven. He has a weakness for the slider. He will keep getting thrown it until he hits it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a fair position to take, I just believe the price will increase significantly at that point.

Look guys, this is pretty simple. The earlier he is signed long term, the cheaper it will be, if Machado performs about as expected. At the same time, the earlier he is signed, the more risk the team takes on, that (1) he won't perform as expected, or (2) he will get hurt and the result will be catastrophic. It's a risk/reward tradeoff and it all depends on how Machado does down the road which is the better approach.

If I could sign Machado for 10/$100 mm right now, I'd do it. If you assume that in the arb years a player gets 40%, 60% and 80% of his FMV, then Machado would need to be worth about 2.5 WAR per season over the next 10 years to be worth that contract:

2014 - $.5 mm

2015 - $.5 mm

2016 - $6 mm

2017 - $9 mm

2018 - $12 mm

2019 - $15 mm

2020 - $15 mm

2021 - $15 mm

2022 - $15 mm

2023 - $15 mm

So it's pretty simple -- do you think Machado will be worth significantly more than 25 WAR over the next 10 years?

Let's assume, for sake of argument, that Machado averages 3.5 WAR during that period, and instead of extending now, we wait. How much will that cost us? If I had to guess, I'd say waiting two more years, until he is arb eligible, probably costs us $40 mm over the remaining 8 years in that scenario. We only come out ahead waiting two years if Machado has a career threatening injury in the interim, or proves to be worse than a 2.5 WAR per year player. I'll take those risks and save the $40 mm (more if he is better than 3.5 WAR per year).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd have no problem doing a 10 year/100 million dollar deal. That would make his free agency contract essentially be 5 years, 70 million... that would be a bargain. The problem is that its TOO team friendly that Manny would never sign it. More likely he'd only go up to 6-7 years and we'd only be able to get a couple years of free agency at a hiked up price, and I'd pass on doing that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a rule of thumb. Applicable to most. But if you want to apply Brooks' career as your rule of thumb that's up to you.

You're right of course, but doesn't it make sense to nudge Manny closer to Brooks than the average ballplayer? He's absurdly good and hasn't really even learned the position yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd have no problem doing a 10 year/100 million dollar deal. That would make his free agency contract essentially be 5 years, 70 million... that would be a bargain. The problem is that its TOO team friendly that Manny would never sign it. More likely he'd only go up to 6-7 years and we'd only be able to get a couple years of free agency at a hiked up price, and I'd pass on doing that.

Somewhere there is a 20 page thread from last year or before about what contract we should offer Manny.

Longoria deal plus inflation to push if forward a couple of years is where I'd start.

One healthy month and I wouldn't even blink.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is brutal OPS for a third baseman. People love the guys with potential on here but don't like the guys who already proven. He has a weakness for the slider. He will keep getting thrown it until he hits it.

It's a spectacular OPS for a 20-year-old anything. I'd hazard a guess that most eventual Hall of Famers weren't even in the major leagues at the point where you were terribly disappointed with his performance.

At the age of 20 Brooks Robinson OPS'd .645. At 20 Cal OPS'd .278. In all of modern Oriole history only four players have even gotten 100 PAs at 20. Heck, through age 22 Brooks had a .645 OPS.

I truly don't think most folks realize that just being a major league regular at 19 and 20 is rare and wonderful, and almost a guarantee of future success.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Somewhere there is a 20 page thread from last year or before about what contract we should offer Manny.

Longoria deal plus inflation to push if forward a couple of years is where I'd start.

One healthy month and I wouldn't even blink.

Longoria deal was team viewed as very team friendly even then and Manny has over a full season more service time then Longoria did when he signed it.

I still say the Simmons deal is the best starting off point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're right of course, but doesn't it make sense to nudge Manny closer to Brooks than the average ballplayer? He's absurdly good and hasn't really even learned the position yet.

Anything can happen, but I'd never use one player's career as a plan for anyone else's. If I had to guess I'd say Manny's best defensive season will have been 2013. Just because Brooks never even had ratings like that. Either Manny declines a bit, or he becomes the greatest third baseman who ever lived.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anything can happen, but I'd never use one player's career as a plan for anyone else's. If I had to guess I'd say Manny's best defensive season will have been 2013. Just because Brooks never even had ratings like that. Either Manny declines a bit, or he becomes the greatest third baseman who ever lived.

Or both really. He could decline a bit and if he can maintain that level over a decade or so still be the greatest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd have no problem doing a 10 year/100 million dollar deal. That would make his free agency contract essentially be 5 years, 70 million... that would be a bargain. The problem is that its TOO team friendly that Manny would never sign it. More likely he'd only go up to 6-7 years and we'd only be able to get a couple years of free agency at a hiked up price, and I'd pass on doing that.

You'd have to get creative, including expensive team options with sizable buyouts after six years, I'd think. Agree 10/100 won't work, but you could maybe work out something reasonable like 7/55 guaranteed with a team option for two additional years at like $25 MM per, or a $5MM team opt out. So Manny ends up with 7/60 as a baseline to ensure against injury and basically gives the team the option to sign him to a 2/50 deal if they so desire. I think that would give Machado the largest AAV for a 1+ year player and he doesn't give up much in the way of free agent money. If things go well, and this is the backdrop, it also allows Baltimore to talk longer extension once year four or so rolls around. Second thought, the buyout might need to be a bit higher -- maybe 7 or 8 million?

I don't think Baltimore needs to make a decision right now, but it should start determining what sort of stomach it has for big money extensions. If you can foresee a willingness to pay Machado big to keep him around, you can start laying that groundwork. If you just don't want anything to do with those larger contracts, keep talking extension and ride out his time with the club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...