Thoughts about opt-out clauses?

[JLee2027]

Also heaven forbid Duquette have to plan. Because as far as risk go, the only risk for a team for opt outs is that a player exercises it. So you have to have contingency plans. Most of these opt outs are after 3 years or so. So if you're signing a 30 year old, opt outs are actually beneficial to a team.

Would a player ever agree to a contract where, if he had a bad year or is injured, the team can "opt out" of the remaining guarantees? No of course not.

Slices both ways you know.

[Can_of_corn]

Would a player ever agree to a contract where, if he had a bad year or is injured, the team can "opt out" of the remaining guarantees? No of course not.

Slices both ways you know.

Go check out Longoria's first extension. It had multiple team options. If he had bombed or been severely injured the team would not have been badly hurt.

[gtown]

An opt-out makes more sense, though, for a guy like Machado (from the player's perspective).

Of course, I should have been more clear that for players under team control, opt-outs make very little sense from the team's perspective.

[Can_of_corn]

Machado has 3 years of service time left. He could be offered an 8-10 year contract with an opt out after year 5 or 6. That's the type of contract it will take to keep him. The Orioles, no doubt, refuse to do so and get a pick when he leaves.

If the team collapses hard enough he might get traded instead.

[Frobby]

I

Machado has 3 years of service time left. He could be offered an 8-10 year contract with an opt out after year 5 or 6. That's the type of contract it will take to keep him. The Orioles, no doubt, refuse to do so and get a pick when he leaves.

A deal that might balance the risk somewhat would be one that contains options for both parties at different prices down the road. Example:

Deal is locked in for six years.

In year 7, O's can exercise an option at $32 mm. If they don't, Manny can exercise an option at $25 mm.

In year 8, O's can exercise an option at $35 mm. If they don't, Manny can exercise an option at $28 mm.

Obviously, you could make those numbers higher or lower, and make the spread between the team option and the player option bigger or smaller. But the point is, the team still has the ability to lock the player in at a fairly high price for a couple of extra years and the player can't say no, but they are not obligated to do it, but the player also has downside protection if things aren't going so well or he is hurt.

[Frobby]

Y

Manny has the hammer. Boras will want the right to opt out after year 5 or 6 and be able to sign another long term contract. Your contract is fair. It's just not realistic in the current atmosphere, IMO.

Ate age 30, in 6 years, Manny might command a 8-10 year contract at 35M a year.

Boras isn't Manny's agent -- but I expect you know that and just misspoke. I still think the structure might work, but maybe I set the team option price too low.

[Can_of_corn]

Agreed. However if the team goes around .500 the next few years and thinks it has a chance to "contend" I could see them holding onto him and getting nothing but a pick.

I concur.

[El Gordo]

Also consider the climate of the 2018 FA market:

Infielders

Manny Machado

Josh Donaldson

Dee Gordon

Jose Iglesias

Outfielders

Heyward *

Bryce Harper

Andrew McCutchen

A.J. Pollock

Michael Brantley

Adam Jones

Starting pitchers

Price *

Clayton Kershaw *

Jose Fernandez

Matt Harvey

Dallas Keuchel

Shelby Miller

Garrett Richards

Jose Quintana

Closers

Craig Kimbrel

Trevor Rosenthal

Andrew Miller

Lots of opt. out potential there. http://m.mlb.com/news/article/159474948/mlb-could-see-even-bigger-deals-in-2018

[weams]

The Orioles, no doubt, refuse to do so and will trade him next off-season or at the deadline in 2017.

That's more what I expect. Hey, Dan got within an hour of signing him before. If the fans just show him how much he is loved in Baltimore, maybe he will take less to stay in his hometown!

[weams]

Y

Boras isn't Manny's agent -- but I expect you know that and just misspoke. I still think the structure might work, but maybe I set the team option price too low.

http://deadspin.com/5861982/dan-lozano-albert-pujolss-superagent-king-of-sleaze-mountain

[Frobby]

http://deadspin.com/5861982/dan-lozano-albert-pujolss-superagent-king-of-sleaze-mountain

See, I read that and wonder why people obsess about Scott Boras. This guy is far more frightening.

[weams]

See, I read that and wonder why people obsess about Scott Boras. This guy is far more frightening.

I agree.

[weams]

You mean the Orioles are going to trade Machado, like they did with Wieters, Markakis, Davis, Chen, and O'Day? Oh, so you're expecting the Orioles not to be contenders over the next 2 years? Because, their history shows that as long as they think they have a "chance" they aren't dealing anyone.

Well certainly, if all the reports of the team absolutely stinking going forward are correct. We were contending during that previous period. And If Matt had not needed Tommy John? Who knows!

[Frobby]

We do know. Wieters would not have been traded if he had remained healthy. To think otherwise is to ignore all of the evidence. So I think we are in agreement. If the Orioles stink over the next 2 years the odds of trading Machado go way up, but if the Orioles have another 81 win season next year and are not out of the wildcard in 2017, he likely stays.

Seems pretty likely to me. Can you think of examples of a .500ish team that has traded away a young superstar? I'm not saying it shouldn't happen in that scenario, but I don't think the O's would be unusual in eschewing such a trade.

[weams]

Off the top of my head, Cespedes, Upton, and Heyward. I will think on it. Many are locked up before free agency.

Cespedes wrecked the best team in baseball's season. Upton and Heyward played for teams that were not competing.