Qualifying Offer Value Set At $17.2MM

[DrungoHazewood]

I disagree. I think they can QO Matt, still have the 16 million to spend AND the draft pick. You believe Scott Boras will let him sign a 1 year deal where he might even split time at catcher and are so trying to avoid this that you would have Matt walk and get no compensation at all. We shall see who is correct.

Extending the QO to Wieters is very, very low risk. There's is absolutely no way he takes a 1/16 deal when Boras is supremely confident he'll get someone to bite on at least a 4/40 deal. I see the QO as a free draft pick.

[wildcard]

If Wieters only gets 10m/year the O's may resign him 3/30. When healthy he will get 22 HR, 80 RBI, 743 OPS which isn't bad for a catcher. We are talking ages 30-32. If that is the way it plays out the O's may be in on him.

[24fps]

Extending the QO to Wieters is very, very low risk. There's is absolutely no way he takes a 1/16 deal when Boras is supremely confident he'll get someone to bite on at least a 4/40 deal. I see the QO as a free draft pick.

I didn't respond to your earlier post directed to me because I thought I addressed everything elsewhere, but I will say that I think 4/40 isn't enough to preclude consideration of a qualifying offer by Wieters/Boras. After all, the goal is the most money by the end of a career, not how much can be made by the end of 2016. Wieters spending 2016 improving his prospects for one more large, multi-year contract in excess of 4/40 is certainly a gamble on his part but not completely unreasonable. It would be all the more palatable with an extra $16 million in his pocket to cushion the blow if he miscalculated. A disappointing 3/30 from 2017-2019 would still be a net gain in that scenario.

FWIW I consider the likelihood of Wieters accepting a QO a considerable higher than the 10% you suggested in your earlier post although no more than 50% and probably less. To me the choice hinges on how far he believes he is from completely healthy and how large a payday he was psychologically invested in before he was injured. I don't think any of us has any true understanding of the reality of his current thinking.

[DrungoHazewood]

I didn't respond to your earlier post directed to me because I thought I addressed everything elsewhere, but I will say that I think 4/40 isn't enough to preclude consideration of a qualifying offer by Wieters/Boras. After all, the goal is the most money by the end of a career, not how much can be made by the end of 2016. Wieters spending 2016 improving his prospects for one more large, multi-year contract in excess of 4/40 is certainly a gamble on his part but not completely unreasonable. It would be all the more palatable with an extra $16 million in his pocket to cushion the blow if he miscalculated. A disappointing 3/30 from 2017-2019 would still be a net gain in that scenario.

FWIW I consider the likelihood of Wieters accepting a QO a considerable higher than the 10% you suggested in your earlier post although no more than 50% and probably less. To me the choice hinges on how far he believes he is from completely healthy and how large a payday he was psychologically invested in before he was injured. I don't think any of us has any true understanding of the reality of his current thinking.

I think that Boras' ego and confidence in his negotiation skills makes 10% chance of accepting a QO very reasonable. If not over-conservative. My gut says the odds of him accepting are almost negligible. 30+ year old catchers are high risk trying to resume build with a one-year deal. Catchers often have years where they're beat up and don't produce, meaning he'd be worth less going into 2017 than 2016.

[24fps]

I disagree. I think they can QO Matt, still have the 16 million to spend AND the draft pick. You believe Scott Boras will let him sign a 1 year deal where he might even split time at catcher and are so trying to avoid this that you would have Matt walk and get no compensation at all. We shall see who is correct.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I don't look at it as compensation gained or lost, I look at it as insurance bought or declined.

[AlbionHero]

If we were just going to let Matt walk for nothing, I really wish we could have traded him at the deadline. Someone would have given us a solid prospect for an experienced catcher.

[mdbdotcom]

If we were just going to let Matt walk for nothing, I really wish we could have traded him at the deadline. Someone would have given us a solid prospect for an experienced catcher.

Why would anyone have given us a solid prospect for a catcher recovering from injury who was incapable of playing every day?

[DrungoHazewood]

Why would anyone have given us a solid prospect for a catcher recovering from injury who was incapable of playing every day?

We wouldn't have told them he couldn't play everyday. They could have dressed Joseph up in Wieters' uniform every other day and insisted he never remove his mask. Totally would have netted us a top 50 and a lower-level prospect.

[mdbdotcom]

We wouldn't have told them he couldn't play everyday. They could have dressed Joseph up in Wieters' uniform every other day and insisted he never remove his mask. Totally would have netted us a top 50 and a lower-level prospect.

You're right. Guess I didn't think it all the way through.

[osfan83]

I didn't respond to your earlier post directed to me because I thought I addressed everything elsewhere, but I will say that I think 4/40 isn't enough to preclude consideration of a qualifying offer by Wieters/Boras. After all, the goal is the most money by the end of a career, not how much can be made by the end of 2016. Wieters spending 2016 improving his prospects for one more large, multi-year contract in excess of 4/40 is certainly a gamble on his part but not completely unreasonable. It would be all the more palatable with an extra $16 million in his pocket to cushion the blow if he miscalculated. A disappointing 3/30 from 2017-2019 would still be a net gain in that scenario.

FWIW I consider the likelihood of Wieters accepting a QO a considerable higher than the 10% you suggested in your earlier post although no more than 50% and probably less. To me the choice hinges on how far he believes he is from completely healthy and how large a payday he was psychologically invested in before he was injured. I don't think any of us has any true understanding of the reality of his current thinking.

The last thing Boras/Wieters wants is to rebuild value on a team that already has a legit stating catcher. If Wieters takes the QO and starts slow in April, He will get less and less AB's to build value....someone offers him a decent 4 year deal, he is taking it.

[24fps]

The last thing Boras/Wieters wants is to rebuild value on a team that already has a legit stating catcher. If Wieters takes the QO and starts slow in April, He will get less and less AB's to build value....someone offers him a decent 4 year deal, he is taking it.

It's a gamble isn't it? It's also a situation different than any other I've seen in the short history of qualifying offers. The prospect of leaving money on the table is unthinkable to just about everyone including those who already have more than a normal person would spend in a lifetime. So is Wieters disciplined enough to take a good long-term offer this offseason, or in his mind is he still the can't-miss prospect who's going to raise the bar for professional catchers and whose ego and that of his agent still requires him to be compensated accordingly?

I tend to avoid making predictions based on other people's psychology, but it certainly makes this situation interesting.

[Yardball85]

From MLBTR

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2015/10/qualifying-offer-value-set-at-15-8mm.html

Offer to Davis, Chen, and Wieters. At worst, you get Wieters for just one year hopefully motivated to cash in in 2016.

[tntoriole]

It's a gamble isn't it? It's also a situation different than any other I've seen in the short history of qualifying offers. The prospect of leaving money on the table is unthinkable to just about everyone including those who already have more than a normal person would spend in a lifetime. So is Wieters disciplined enough to take a good long-term offer this offseason, or in his mind is he still the can't-miss prospect who's going to raise the bar for professional catchers and whose ego and that of his agent still requires him to be compensated accordingly?

I tend to avoid making predictions based on other people's psychology, but it certainly makes this situation interesting.

It will depend on Scott Boras' skill as to whether the deal is a no brainer. But the track record is that he doesn't just get the routine deal of the parameters discussed on boards, but gets deals that make everyone scratch their head and say " How on earth did that deal make any sense?" I think Boras will find Matt a deal that will be 4 years and in the 50-60 million range. And I hope we get the pick.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[ReclaimTheCrown]

My apologies if this was shared in another thread, but I didn't see it so posting here. Not great news on either front, according to Jon Heyman:

The Orioles don't seem to want to give the $15.8 million qualifying offer to Matt Wieters and probably only will if they are convinced Wieters won't take it. That way they get the draft pick, which is what they want ... Chris Davis has put himself in great position for a big deal after 47 home runs, but while the Orioles would love to retain him, the sides were miles apart in talks.

I'll be frustrated if we don't QO Matt, especially since I think we could have and did not with Nick last year. There is some (I would argue minimal) risk involved that he does take it, but even if it does, you've got a presumably highly motivated switch hitter that could play some DH and 1B in addition to catch. A 2016 team that spends 16 mill on Wieters is not a terrible thing. Not how I'd most like to spend the money, but I think Matt would have a nice year.

If we fail to QO Wieters and then aren't able to resign Davis (which Heyman seems to be alluding is unlikely), I will be displeased to say the least...

http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/writer/jon-heyman/25341627/inside-baseball-mattingly-deserves-to-stay-in-la-but-will-he-plus-notes

[Can_of_corn]

My apologies if this was shared in another thread, but I didn't see it so posting here. Not great news on either front, according to Jon Heyman:

I'll be frustrated if we don't QO Matt, especially since I think we could have and did not with Nick last year. There is some (I would argue minimal) risk involved that he does take it, but even if it does, you've got a presumably highly motivated switch hitter that could play some DH and 1B in addition to catch. A 2016 team that spends 16 mill on Wieters is not a terrible thing. Not how I'd most like to spend the money, but I think Matt would have a nice year.

If we fail to QO Wieters and then aren't able to resign Davis (which Heyman seems to be alluding is unlikely), I will be displeased to say the least...

http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/writer/jon-heyman/25341627/inside-baseball-mattingly-deserves-to-stay-in-la-but-will-he-plus-notes

I will be very irritated if they give away a pick by not hitting Matt with a QO.

This farm system is not in a state where refusing talent is an option.

Of course this is Heyman we are talking about and sometimes I think he is literally on Boras' payroll.

And by sometimes I mean all the time.