Either cut Britton or give him a small extension

[FanSince88]

We should offer Britton a short extension.  Maybe 2/18 or something to that effect.  If he comes back in June and pitches well, there's no reason we can't trade him and with the extra year of team control he'd be an even more attractive trade piece.  If he's remains injured the entire year this season, at least he will have next offseason to recover and next year to build some value and maybe then he's good trade bait at the '19 deadline.  

If he refuses such an offer, we should cut him.  Whether or not we decide to "go for it" in 2018, we could use his salary that we recover to sign a SP who can at least eat innings.  Even losing teams need an innings-eater, otherwise they end up blowing their entire roster's arms and/or rushing guys who aren't ready.  

This way, we can plausibly say that we tried to be loyal to one of "our guys" and bent over backwards to give him a cushion as he tries to rehab.  If he refuses the offer, that's on him and is a risk he is taking, not a cold, crass move on our end.  I think it's fair for us to insist that Britton commit to another year of team control if we're going to pay him not to pitch at least half the 2018 season.  And I think most other players would understand and it wouldn't make us look bad.  

[InsideCoroner]

A) He’s already been tendered his 2018 deal as of December 1st. A 2/18 deal would be an extension through the end of 2020.

B) Scott Boras all but ensures that a cheap, team-friendly extension in a walk year ain’t about to happen, damaged goods or not.

C) What if he’s hot garbage from this point onward? You want another $18M on the books for that in addition to Davis and/or Trumbo? Our starting pitching is already going to make us look like the Washington Generals of the AL East.

[FanSince88]

Just now, InsideCoroner said:

A) He’s already been tendered his 2018 deal as of December 1st. A 2/18 deal would be an extension through the end of 2020.

B) Scott Boras all but ensures that a cheap, team-friendly extension in a walk year ain’t about to happen, damaged goods or not.

C) What if he’s hot garbage from this point onward? You want another $18M on the books for that in addition to Davis and/or Trumbo? Our starting pitching is already going to make us look like the Washington Generals of the AL East.

I agree with you on B.  But at least make the offer, so when Boras refuses and we cut Britton, it is he who looks reckless instead of us who look heartless.  

[POR]

9 minutes ago, InsideCoroner said:

A) He’s already been tendered his 2018 deal as of December 1st. A 2/18 deal would be an extension through the end of 2020.

B) Scott Boras all but ensures that a cheap, team-friendly extension in a walk year ain’t about to happen, damaged goods or not.

C) What if he’s hot garbage from this point onward? You want another $18M on the books for that in addition to Davis and/or Trumbo? Our starting pitching is already going to make us look like the Washington Generals of the AL East.

A.  Incorrect.  A two year contact  would be for 18 and 19. A player that is tendered can sign a multi year contract. 

B.  If Boras thinks a two year deal make sense for Britton he will recommend that Britton sign it.  Obviously he is not going to recommend something is that is much less than what he thinks Britton can get on the open market.

C.  Any contract  has the potential not to work out.  Another scenario is that Britton come back strong and could be traded for prospects at the trade deadline.

[backwardsk]

I was under the impression that we could not cut Britton because of injury.  We could cut Gonzalez and pay a fraction of his salary because of "non-performance."  Did that ever get clarified from the long Britton thread last week?

[weams]

5 minutes ago, backwardsk said:

I was under the impression that we could not cut Britton because of injury.  We could cut Gonzalez and pay a fraction of his salary because of "non-performance."  Did that ever get clarified from the long Britton thread last week?

It was clarified.  You are correct. 

[Tx Oriole]

29 minutes ago, FanSince88 said:

I agree with you on B.  But at least make the offer, so when Boras refuses and we cut Britton, it is he who looks reckless instead of us who look heartless.  

Why do you care if the FO looks like heartless people? They can cut Britton for all I care. 

[Mondo Trasho]

I like Britton. I think he's a great closer. If he gets back to 100% he'll be a great closer possibly for a while to come.

But, with limited resources a team should not be paying relievers a great deal of money. You'd be better off going with whatever you could find for cheap and investing the money in positions that factor more into the team's everyday success.

[FanSince88]

40 minutes ago, weams said:

It was clarified.  You are correct. 

Yup, you're right, it appears that we are stuck with Britton's $11.4 million and can't cut him since he was injured during baseball activities.  

http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/orioles/blog/bs-sp-orioles-britton-release-21071221-story.html

Darn it.  That would take away a lot of leverage for a team-friendly extension.  So I guess my OP is moot.  

[InsideCoroner]

1 hour ago, POR said:

A.  Incorrect.  A two year contact  would be for 18 and 19. A player that is tendered can sign a multi year contract. 

B.  If Boras thinks a two year deal make sense for Britton he will recommend that Britton sign it.  Obviously he is not going to recommend something is that is much less than what he thinks Britton can get on the open market.

C.  Any contract  has the potential not to work out.  Another scenario is that Britton come back strong and could be traded for prospects at the trade deadline.

Thanks, I stand corrected on the first part.

I still don’t think an extension is really in the cards, though. I think if he’s healthy and effective (two large “if’s”) Boras will hold out for a bigger payday. If he’s not healthy the Orioles won’t want to keep him around. I just wish we had traded him after ‘16 along with Manny for the maximum haul.

[maybenxtyr]

There really isn't an incentive for Britton to sign anything. Take the $11+ million this year and come back late enough where a QO is out of the question. If he pitches well be will be in line for a healthy contract somewhere else, without a pick attached. 

I'm also skeptical that he will entertain the idea of going back to starting. Like it or not, the system in MLB favors the players.

[sportsfan8703]

2 hours ago, maybenxtyr said:

There really isn't an incentive for Britton to sign anything. Take the $11+ million this year and come back late enough where a QO is out of the question. If he pitches well be will be in line for a healthy contract somewhere else, without a pick attached. 

I'm also skeptical that he will entertain the idea of going back to starting. Like it or not, the system in MLB favors the players.

I wonder if PA had some type of insurance policy for him to cover his salary if he’s out all year?

[Aristotelian]

 

7 hours ago, FanSince88 said:

Yup, you're right, it appears that we are stuck with Britton's $11.4 million and can't cut him since he was injured during baseball activities.  

http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/orioles/blog/bs-sp-l-britton-release-21071221-story.html

Darn it.  That would take away a lot of leverage for a team-friendly extension.  So I guess my OP is moot.  

Doh. That directly contradicts what had been posted on mlbtraderumors. So I guess there is no downside to keeping him and hoping that he can prove himself healthy enough to have some trade value. I am a little surprised because Britton had said publicly that he expected to get cut and was bummed his time with the Orioles had to end that way. 

[Frobby]

48 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

 

Doh. That directly contradicts what had been posted on mlbtraderumors. So I guess there is no downside to keeping him and hoping that he can prove himself healthy enough to have some trade value. I am a little surprised because Britton had said publicly that he expected to get cut and was bummed his time with the Orioles had to end that way. 

The language of the CBA is not crystal clear and Britton was probably just going with his offhand impression without having gotten advice on the subject. 

[weams]

8 hours ago, Frobby said:

The language of the CBA is not crystal clear and Britton was probably just going with his offhand impression without having gotten advice on the subject. 

He may have been recovering with pain meds when he got confused.