How to handle Matt Wieters Qualifying Offer

[DrungoHazewood]

Yes because putting the best team on the field necessarily has to take second place to punishing Matt Wieters for taking $15.8 million from the Baltimore Orioles after it was offered.

Does anyone honestly think that the even the greenest agent couldn't generate interest in Matt Wieters as a catcher in 2017 as long as he's healthy?

Does anyone honestly think that even the greenest agent couldn't get Matt Wieters more money than $15.8M this offseason? If Wieters takes a QO and subsequently reinjures his arm during the year even Scott Boras couldn't generate interest in Matt Wieters until he's almost certainly spiraling in towards a retirement crater.

[nadecir]

Does anyone honestly think that even the greenest agent couldn't get Matt Wieters more money than $15.8M this offseason? If Wieters takes a QO and subsequently reinjures his arm during the year even Scott Boras couldn't generate interest in Matt Wieters until he's almost certainly spiraling in towards a retirement crater.

That's what insurance is designed to protect against, a career ending injury causing loss of income. Boras has purchased this kind of insurance for several players, most recently with Matt Harvey. https://www.newsday.com/sports/baseball/mets/matt-harvey-s-agent-scott-boras-takes-out-insurance-policy-on-pitcher-reports-say-1.10988562

I imagine Boras would purchase insurance for Wieters if he played for the Orioles under a QO.

[24fps]

Does anyone honestly think that even the greenest agent couldn't get Matt Wieters more money than $15.8M this offseason? If Wieters takes a QO and subsequently reinjures his arm during the year even Scott Boras couldn't generate interest in Matt Wieters until he's almost certainly spiraling in towards a retirement crater.

Just about anybody with a pulse could get more than $15.8 million for Matt Wieters this offseason if we're talking about a multi-year contract. That's hardly the point. The point is how to get the most money for Wieters over the remainder of his career unless both Wieters and Boras are incredibly shortsighted, which I highly doubt.

Taking the best multi-year contract available this offseason is a reasonable approach, but there's the perception that Wieters is damaged goods and money might get left on the table by being too eager. Another approach is a one year contract to prove health. That might lead to a 2017 multi-year contract that means a greater AAV over the course of his entire career. That's also reasonable. There's risk to both approaches. Of course there is.

I can't say I really care about Wieters' future as a player because I think that the Orioles should put their resources elsewhere in 2016. I begin to care a great deal should Wieters and Boras decide on option 2 and the QO is significantly higher than what they can get elsewhere, something I think is likely for a single year. That's money that's better put to use in the OF or on the mound.

[DrungoHazewood]

Just about anybody with a pulse could get more than $15.8 million for Matt Wieters this offseason if we're talking about a multi-year contract. That's hardly the point. The point is how to get the most money for Wieters over the remainder of his career unless both Wieters and Boras are incredibly shortsighted, which I highly doubt.

And given the fact that catchers often have steep declines in their early 30s any kind of value-building year on an unprecedented acceptance of a QO would be very risky. In his career Wieters has been worth 2.7 fWAR per 130 games played. His peak year was 2011, his last full year in '13 was 2.6 wins. In 2015 he was worth one win in 75 games, which is about 1.7 wins in 130 games. Odds are good that, if healthy, Wieters will be about a 2-win player in '16. But a 2-win player a year older than he is today. To me it's a long shot that he's going in 2017 much more valuable than today. It may well be that the time to try to maximize his career earnings is this offseason.

[24fps]

And given the fact that catchers often have steep declines in their early 30s any kind of value-building year on an unprecedented acceptance of a QO would be very risky. In his career Wieters has been worth 2.7 fWAR per 130 games played. His peak year was 2011, his last full year in '13 was 2.6 wins. In 2015 he was worth one win in 75 games, which is about 1.7 wins in 130 games. Odds are good that, if healthy, Wieters will be about a 2-win player in '16. But a 2-win player a year older than he is today. To me it's a long shot that he's going in 2017 much more valuable than today. It may well be that the time to try to maximize his career earnings is this offseason.

I think this is a pretty solid analysis and I would certainly find it persuasive if I were Matt Wieters. I'm not and I don't know what, if any, residual expectations he might still have from the days when he was one of the top prospects in baseball - days that were beginning to be in the past even before the TJ surgery. I also don't know the current industry sentiment as to his future prospects post surgery. These are important variables - especially the latter. I would want to have a clearer understanding of both before I would be comfortable concluding that offering Wieters a QO was a "no brainer". Perhaps Duquette does from where he sits, but I don't.

[weams]

I think we know how this went down. Even though one person Roch spoke to was against it.

[UpstateNYfan]

That's what insurance is designed to protect against, a career ending injury causing loss of income. Boras has purchased this kind of insurance for several players, most recently with Matt Harvey. https://www.newsday.com/sports/baseball/mets/matt-harvey-s-agent-scott-boras-takes-out-insurance-policy-on-pitcher-reports-say-1.10988562

I imagine Boras would purchase insurance for Wieters if he played for the Orioles under a QO.

I imagine they do have policies...but 15.8 million guaranteed contract? What are they predicting future earnings?? The team is the one that needs compensation for losing a player due to injury. If Boras is worried about injury, then have Wieters sign a 4/50 contract. Any player that can't survive on that is just stupid, greedy or both.

[mdbdotcom]

There was a "Where they'll sign" prediction in the NY Post that predicted Wieters will take the QO.

[waroriole]

There was a "Where they'll sign" prediction in the NY Post that predicted Wieters will take the QO.

If just one does, it will curtail all these QO. Will Boras make an example out of Wieters?

[Can_of_corn]

If just one does, it will curtail all these QO. Will Boras make an example out of Wieters?

If he accepts it will be Wieters, not Boras, making the call. I could see him leaving Boras over it.

[Ripken]

There was a "Where they'll sign" prediction in the NY Post that predicted Wieters will take the QO.

Please, God, no.

[OFFNY]

There was a "Where they'll sign" prediction in the NY Post that predicted Wieters will take the QO.

Please God' date=' no.[/quote']

The NY Post is slightly more credible than the National Enquirer ....... if that makes you feel any better.

[Roll Tide]

The NY Post is slightly more credible than the National Enquirer ....... if that makes you feel any better.

Wieters is not accepting the QO

[Aristotelian]

Braves re-sign Pierzynski. Any chance Wieters panics and takes the QO?

[Can_of_corn]

Braves re-sign Pierzynski. Any chance Wieters panics and takes the QO?

I don't think panic is going to be a deciding factor.