Correa (Update, signs with Twins)

[Sports Guy]

3 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

Interesting. That is the opposite of how contracts are usually structured. It actually makes way more sense to frontload it since the player is still guaranteed the money.

We have seen some recent contracts more front loaded.

I know the value of money says not to do it that way but I think it’s a good way to do it looking at from a “this is when they will be worth the money” standpoint.

[btdart20]

We're like a bunch of piranhas smelling blood and hope!  To even be at the table says a lot to me.  I

SS is something of a question mark in the minors.  We have a few potentials, but none are likely to be a top tier all-around talent.  SS could be the only non-pitching position to make a splash with.

I'm not a fan of a 10-year deal, but I'm not opposed in this case (agree that an opt out has value here for both sides).  He's 27 now.  He's great defensively.  His power numbers are inflated by Houston's LF Crawford Boxes (315 down the line).  The opposite effect will be in play at OPACY going forward.  But he's not a dead pull hitter either.  Takes a walk and hits it where the ball is pitched.  

2023 has Trea Turner (30), Swanson (29), and probably Bogaerts (30) as FA (the rest of team options or not worth it).  It's a long-term risk any way you slice it.  Swanson has limited upside.  Correa is younger and better than Bogaerts.  I personally like Trea.  But Trea is 3 years older, built like a sprite and swings like Paul Bunyan!  My non-professional prognostication is that he's going to blow his back out at some point.  Correa is probably the best risk/reward FA target in the group.

Agree that the next contending team will not be made up completely of guys we drafted/developed.  The quick/expensive way is FA signings.  The cost-effective model is being really good at timing trades and knowing our talent.  Given that teams just aren't willing to trade Curt Schilling/Steve Finley/Pete Harnish for a Glenn Davis type talent in today's market (sorry to go there, but we need a reality check).

As we transition out of the rebuild, we can't get so fixated on 'our guys' that we lose sight of the reason we had to rebuild in the first place.  We have to be willing to trade away controllable up-and-coming talent to continually restock to minors.  That's the only way small/mid-market teams can maintain a 'competitive window' (without a hard salary cap, haha).  We simply can't cover our gaps with more salary (and that's my biggest concern with a significant % of payroll invested in one player).  

The O's will need to (among other things) a) know our talent to know who to keep, b) read the market to trade high, c) pick/choose who to give contracts to wisely, and d) have a great pulse on targets to trade for.  

[Aristotelian]

8 minutes ago, oriole said:

What’s more surprising, Lyles getting a guaranteed $7 million or the Orioles being mentioned whatsoever with one of the top free agents? It’s been a strange off season for sure

That would suck tremendously if we find that Correa was offered $350M by the O's but goes to the Yanks for $355M.

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

That would suck tremendously if we find that Correa was offered $350M by the O's but goes to the Yanks for $320M.

Fixed it.

[MarCakes21]

1 hour ago, Sports Guy said:

So, everyone sharing their concerns with Correa are right.  There are red flags to be worried about.

That being said, go look at the next several FA lists.  Tell me who you want?  Tell me who makes sense?

And if your answer is, no one..that’s fine too.  But there is essentially a zero percent chance that the next contending Os team will be comprised of only home grown talent.  We absolutely must acquire outside the organization talent.  
 

Not sure about you guys but I would rather sign one Correa(and I hate the idea of a 10/350 deal btw) than 3 Ubaldo type deals.

Story...cheaper, 7 years, history of defense.  Red flag is that he played at Coors and his splits aren't as good.

[Pickles]

I doubt we sign him as I believe he'll be able to get the same money in a "better" situation for him.

That said, he was the FA I said made the most sense in the beginning of the offseason, and I advocated for a front loaded contract to take advantage of our non-existent payroll for the next few seasons.

Signing middling FAs to middling contracts isn't going to move the needle for this team.  Those kind of deals make sense for a team with a solid competitive foundation.  Obviously, that is not our situtation.

[Yardball85]

1 hour ago, Sports Guy said:

 

As a baseball fan who wants to have fun summers watching the Orioles, I love it.  Get it done.  But as a realist, I know there are risks involved.  But with so little money committed over the next several years, I say why not?

[oriole]

18 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

That would suck tremendously if we find that Correa was offered $350M by the O's but goes to the Yanks for $355M.

It would highlight why tanking is so prevalent in the game right now. 

[Sports Guy]

1 hour ago, DrinkinWithFermi said:

Because, like I said, I think his bat keeps his value floor higher over the long haul. If Correa has to move off SS at some point, which is entirely possible (if not probable) once he gets into the back half of his 10 year deal that runs into his late 30s, his value will likely be much more negatively affected than Seager's.

Seager has a career 368 wOBA.  Correa is at 356.

Seager’s career slash line is 297/367/504

Correa is at 277/356/481

Its a difference but it’s not a big difference and the defensive difference is pretty big.  
 

I wouldn’t count on either being that productive after year 7 of the deal but I would count on Correa being worth more between now and year 7.

[Just Regular]

1 hour ago, Sports Guy said:

If that’s true, they offered him 10/320.

Or 3/117 or 4/146 with an opt-out after 3-4 years.   The contract structure report if correct is I suppose maybe some of the first work output of the new hire specializing in economics.

[Just Regular]

1 hour ago, Moose Milligan said:

Anyone who thinks Correa is coming here is still waiting for the Orioles to make their WOW offer to Mark Teixeira after a Ravens game.  

 

 

He and Lamar are going to have a joint press conference!

[Moose Milligan]

56 minutes ago, btdart20 said:

We're like a bunch of piranhas smelling blood and hope!  To even be at the table says a lot to me.  I

Or desperate kids on prom night.  

Man, it takes one tweet to send this board into a tizzy.  I hope it happens, I'd love to get him too.  But I don't know why a winner like Correa would come to a place like this.  We'd have to significantly spend more than anyone else in the running and I don't see that happening.

[Frobby]

I put zero credence in this rumor.  It’s not consistent with what Elias has said this offseason.   And, teams really can’t discuss their FA plans right now.   I think it’s fabricated.  

[DrinkinWithFermi]

4 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Seager has a career 368 wOBA.  Correa is at 356.

Seager’s career slash line is 297/367/504

Correa is at 277/356/481

Its a difference but it’s not a big difference and the defensive difference is pretty big.  
 

I wouldn’t count on either being that productive after year 7 of the deal but I would count on Correa being worth more between now and year 7.

Seager has been more consistent than Correa offensively (Correa has 2 sub-100 OPS+ seasons while Seager's 2 career lows are 103 and 112) and he clearly has the higher offensive ceiling of the two when you account for what actually led to Correa's monster 2017, and I think Seager would fare better at OPACY going forward as a LHB than Correa would as a RHB given the changes to LF. 

I wouldn't do either deal if I was Elias btw, I'm just saying that my preference would have been Seager if I had to sign one of them, both for the reasons I have already cited ITT and the fact that Seager will likely be cheaper by at least $15-25 million over the life of the deal,  maybe even a bit more if a post-lockout bidding war breaks out between some of the usual big spenders like the Yankees and Red Sox.

[eddie83]

1 hour ago, Sports Guy said:

We have seen some recent contracts more front loaded.

I know the value of money says not to do it that way but I think it’s a good way to do it looking at from a “this is when they will be worth the money” standpoint.

I think it makes sense from where they are right now. Payroll is nothing. As players graduate like Rutschman and go thru arb that will change.