What would extensions for Bradish and Rodriguez look like?

[Frobby]

Kyle Bradish just finished a season ever he posted the best ERA by an Orioles pitcher in 30 years.   He has five years of team control remaining, and is certain to be a Super 2 after the 2024 season. Grayson Rodriguez, like Bradish last year, had a rough introduction to the majors but rebounded after a brief return to the minors, and posted a 2.58 ERA after he returned at the all star break.  I believe he accrued 134 days of service, and is likely to be a Super 2 after the 2025 season.   He is under team control for six more seasons.  

So, what might an extension for either of them look like?   Here are three recent pre-Arb extensions:

1. Spencer Strider signed a 6 year, $75 mm deal at the end of his rookie year.  The contract included a team option at $22 mm with a $5 mm buyout.

2.  Blake Snell signed a 5 year, $50 mm deal after winning the Cy Young Award in 2018.  He’d played in three seasons but had only 2.071 years of service time and would not have been a Super Two.

3.  Hunter Greene signed a 6 year, $53 mm deal after a rookie year in which he posted a 4.44 ERA in 24 starts.  His contract provides one option year at $21 mm with a $2 mm buyout.  He had 5 years of service remaining when he signed and would not have been a Super Two.

All three deals provide one mandatory extra year of team control, and the Strider and Greene contracts contain an option for one more year of control, at prices where the option probably eoukd only be exercised if the pitcher were performing like a no. 1-2 starter at the time.  

I think the Greene deal is a floor for anything Bradish or Rodriguez wouid consider.  They both had a better year than Greene had when he signed that deal.   In Bradish’s case, he’s under control the same 5 years that Greene would have been, but he’ll be a Super Two and get four years of arbitration.  So, he’s gotta get more than Greene.   I could even argue that he should get more than Strider, as he had a slightly better year than Strider did before his contract and has the Super Two thing going for him.  But, he’s a couple of years older than either Strider or Greene was, so maybe that knocks him down a peg.  

Rodriguez is under team control for one more year than Strider or Greene, and thus has less leverage.  But, he does have likely Super Two status.  I don’t think he’d get the Strider deal right now but I still think he’d do better than Greene.  

Putting aside what Elias or Angelos would do, would you consider an extension for either or both pitchers in this ballpark?

[kidrock]

What you have laid out here seems like very reasonable comps.  I just hate giving long contracts to pitching.  Seems like such a high likelihood they get hurt and don’t work out.  But Bradish and Grayson seem like great candidates for this all things considered.  I would like to see similar deals.

[ShoelesJoe]

1 hour ago, kidrock said:

I just hate giving long contracts to pitching.  Seems like such a high likelihood they get hurt and don’t work out.  

Teams appear to be adding stipulations to pitcher's contracts that if they get injured and miss most or all of a season during the contract period the team gets an extra year at little or no cost. We usually don't hear about those stipulations unless the player gets hurt, but they're probably included in contracts a lot more often than we realize. I wouldn't have a problem with extensions for Bradish and Rodriguez if the Orioles had such insurance built into the new contracts. 

[RZNJ]

2 hours ago, ShoelesJoe said:

Teams appear to be adding stipulations to pitcher's contracts that if they get injured and miss most or all of a season during the contract period the team gets an extra year at little or no cost. We usually don't hear about those stipulations unless the player gets hurt, but they're probably included in contracts a lot more often than we realize. I wouldn't have a problem with extensions for Bradish and Rodriguez if the Orioles had such insurance built into the new contracts. 

Pretty sure if stipulations based on health are in a contract that they are public knowledge.  For instance a 3rd year kicks in for Eovaldi if he pitches 300 innings combined over the first two years.   
 

The reason the pitchers would sign a contract is for some security.   If you start taking away that security by saying we won‘t pay you if you get hurt that’s going to make it tougher to get a deal done.   None of the contacts mentioned are the kind that are going to financially cripple a team.  Because of the age factor I’d be more interested in buying FA years from Rodriguez but I would entertain both.

[Roll Tide]

6 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

Pretty sure if stipulations based on health are in a contract that they are public knowledge.  For instance a 3rd year kicks in for Eovaldi if he pitches 300 innings combined over the first two years.   
 

The reason the pitchers would sign a contract is for some security.   If you start taking away that security by saying we won‘t pay you if you get hurt that’s going to make it tougher to get a deal done.   None of the contacts mentioned are the kind that are going to financially cripple a team.  Because of the age factor I’d be more interested in buying FA years from Rodriguez but I would entertain both.

The amounts of these contracts are reasonable AAVs. If they included a clause that extended the deal by 1 year at its AAV if the pitcher were to require a TJ or something that would wipe a season out. That would seem pretty fair for both sides.

[RZNJ]

6 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:

The amounts of these contracts are reasonable AAVs. If they included a clause that extended the deal by 1 year at its AAV if the pitcher were to require a TJ or something that would wipe a season out. That would seem pretty fair for both sides.

Do the contacts mentioned have clauses like that?   It sounds good but I do know what the precedent is.

[Can_of_corn]

24 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:

The amounts of these contracts are reasonable AAVs. If they included a clause that extended the deal by 1 year at its AAV if the pitcher were to require a TJ or something that would wipe a season out. That would seem pretty fair for both sides.

I don't see how that type of clause is fair for the player.  Sounds like it is only an advantage to the team.  

[wildcard]

So Bautista is pitching great.  One pitch and he is out of a year and there is no way to know if he will be as good again.   5 year or longer extensions for  pitchers sounds risky. 

 

Edited October 21, 2023 by wildcard

[Aristotelian]

I would give less to Grayson than Strider at this point. He still has a lot to prove. Would love to get a couple extra years of Bradish. 

[Can_of_corn]

30 minutes ago, wildcard said:

So Bautista is pitching great.  One pitch and he is out of a year and there is no way to know if he will be as good again.   5 year or longer extensions for  pitchers sounds risky. 

 

Sure they are.

Signing marginal guys to one year deals and hoping they work out is also risky.

Teams have to accept some level of risk.

[Roll Tide]

1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:

I don't see how that type of clause is fair for the player.  Sounds like it is only an advantage to the team.  

So the extension gives the player now money instead of making them wait out the control and them arb process. It gives them protection against something career ending. When they are injured and a season is lost they get paid for no work. Essentially, they would still get that money for rehabbing but the team we retain that year of production. It seems pretty fair to me. The Orioles rewarded Bautista with a 2 year deal while he recovers from TJ. I guess you could say they are paying him that money for the year after TJ but spreading out over 2. Didn’t they do something similar with Means. 

[Roll Tide]

1 hour ago, wildcard said:

So Bautista is pitching great.  One pitch and he is out of a year and there is no way to know if he will be as good again.   5 year or longer extensions for  pitchers sounds risky. 

 

Everything with contracts are risky, but you have to take chances somewhere. We haven’t had a TOR in so long I’m not even sure if fans know who the last one was ….Bedard? 
 

At some point when we have that guy you have to try to keep him. Bautista is an unfortunate case and not a great example IMO. If you go back and look at the tape he was clearly over throwing and trying to throw it through the back stop. So I guess you could look at mechanics and pitch arsenals and make an educated guess on injuries. But that still wouldn’t be fool proof.

[ChosenOne21]

1 hour ago, wildcard said:

So Bautista is pitching great.  One pitch and he is out of a year and there is no way to know if he will be as good again.   5 year or longer extensions for  pitchers sounds risky. 

 

When we have a pitching pipeline like the Marlins or Guardians, we can afford not to take risks extending pitching. Until we do, we need to secure the pitching we have.

[Can_of_corn]

44 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:

So the extension gives the player now money instead of making them wait out the control and them arb process. It gives them protection against something career ending. When they are injured and a season is lost they get paid for no work. Essentially, they would still get that money for rehabbing but the team we retain that year of production. It seems pretty fair to me. The Orioles rewarded Bautista with a 2 year deal while he recovers from TJ. I guess you could say they are paying him that money for the year after TJ but spreading out over 2. Didn’t they do something similar with Means. 

A deal with that proviso is less advantageous to the player than a deal without it.  That clause is solely about mitigating risk for the team.

[Jim'sKid26]

I looked everywhere I know to find out who represents Bradish. Does anyone know who his agent is?