Witt Extension; Adley Comparison

[ThisIsBirdland]

1 minute ago, Sports Guy said:

If he is performing well, he will opt out immediately. 

He would still be looking at a potential of 7/229 but he likely will be able to get more than that on the open market.

Yeah makes sense. So it will almost certainly either be:

• 7/$141m
• 11/$281m

That puts a tremendous burden on the team if he underachieves or gets hurt. Not sure why they decided to tack on those three team options, tbh.

[CaptainRedbeard]

First impression is that this seems like a pretty bad deal for the Royals. They bought out 3 free agent years, but at $30-$35M each and the price was guaranteeing $140M in 4 consecutive opt out seasons for the player at $35M a year. That guaranteed money with 4 opt outs is massive value to the player.

If I understand the contract correctly all those team options at the end are worthless because either he’ll opt out in one of the 4 years before that or he won’t be a good enough player at that time for the team to ever want to use them.

Witt is a very good player but it’s not like his profile is without flaws. I don’t think I’d sign Gunnar to this deal. 

[Malike]

I'd like to see Gunnar get an extension but I keep reminding myself that Boras has never had a client sign an extension with less than 2 years of service time. Not once.

[Moose Milligan]

50 minutes ago, interloper said:

Yeah Witt would have to really go nuts to outperform this deal. I'm not sure he's that kind of player. 

He came into his own a lot last year, he was at 4.4 bWAR for the year.  30 homers and 49 steals, that doesn't grow on trees.  

I do believe he'll take another leap forward this year and show that he's worth it.  But the Royals are trying to make a statement here, trying to identify a young guy to build around and let fans know that they're serious.  IMO, that's what this deal is about as much as it is paying BWJR.  

Like SG said, it's 7/141, it's what we should be offering Gunnar to lock him up.  But Boras, blah, blah, blah.

It is my hope that Rubenstein, after years of being tempered by the business world, finds Scott Boras to be a pussycat and has no fear in regards of dealing with him.  

[Sports Guy]

5 minutes ago, ThisIsBirdland said:

Yeah makes sense. So it will almost certainly either be:

• 7/$141m
• 11/$281m

That puts a tremendous burden on the team if he underachieves or gets hurt. Not sure why they decided to tack on those three team options, tbh.

Well, it could work out. I’m a fan of the opt out and I like the year to year ones too.

My thought is let someone else pay for those declining years. It gives the player the power but it may save the team big time. I’m ok with that trade off.

[Frobby]

Back to Adley, last year I suggested 10/$200 mm would be fair.  A year of control at low cost has gone by, so now I’d say 9/$200, which wouid take him through 11 years (if including those already played) at age  34.  As a reminder, Mauer made $218 mm over 15 years through age 35, Molina made $174 mm over 19 seasons through age 39, Posey made $171 mm over 12 years through age 34, Perez will have made $152 mm over 15 years through age 36, Realmuto will have made $135 mm over 12 years through age 34.  Those are the five highest paid catchers of all time in career earnings.  

[Sports Guy]

The players don’t work for Boras. You put these deals on the table and you make them say no. If they do, so be it but I tend to doubt they turn them down.

[Moose Milligan]

5 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

The players don’t work for Boras. You put these deals on the table and you make them say no. If they do, so be it but I tend to doubt they turn them down.

You're absolutely correct that they don't work for Boras. 

But, Boras is in their ear telling them that they can get more in free agency.  And he's telling them how many times he's gotten players more in free agency.  

So you're right, the player has to say no.  But Boras is in their ear all the time saying they'll deserve more, he can get them more, etc.  

[Frobby]

Just now, Moose Milligan said:

You're absolutely correct that they don't work for Boras. 

But, Boras is in their ear telling them that they can get more in free agency.  And he's telling them how many times he's gotten players more in free agency.  

So you're right, the player has to say no.  But Boras is in their ear all the time saying they'll deserve more, he can get them more, etc.  

And, they chose Boras knowing that’s his general stance.

[Moose Milligan]

2 minutes ago, Frobby said:

And, they chose Boras knowing that’s his general stance.

That's right.  I'm sure he covers his philosophy on free agency very explicitly when courting new clients.

 

[Going Underground]

14 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

He came into his own a lot last year, he was at 4.4 bWAR for the year.  30 homers and 49 steals, that doesn't grow on trees.  

I do believe he'll take another leap forward this year and show that he's worth it.  But the Royals are trying to make a statement here, trying to identify a young guy to build around and let fans know that they're serious.  IMO, that's what this deal is about as much as it is paying BWJR.  

Like SG said, it's 7/141, it's what we should be offering Gunnar to lock him up.  But Boras, blah, blah, blah.

It is my hope that Rubenstein, after years of being tempered by the business world, finds Scott Boras to be a pussycat and has no fear in regards of dealing with him.  

Yes,the Royals want funding for a new stadium downtown.  

[wildbillhiccup]

1 hour ago, Bahama O's Fan said:

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2024/02/royals-bobby-witt-jr-agree-to-11-year-extension.html

Do you sign Adley to something similar? Is it too long?

I know others have already pointed out that it's not exactly an apples to apples comparision because of the age and position difference between Witt and Adley, but in the broad sense, no I'm not giving Adley an 11 year contract. Mostly because I think he's likely to age out of the catcher position for a good chunk of that time and I don't think his bat can be valued the same when he's permanently playing DH and/or 1B. I think one of the best modern day comps for Adley might be Joe Mauer. He shifted to 1B permantently after basically 7 1/2 full seasons in MLB and while he still posted a great OBP I'd argue that having a 1B who barely cracked 10 HRs each season was not exactly ideal for the Twins. Then again, maybe I'm splitting hairs since we're talking about a HOFer! 

On the flip side, I'd sign Gunnar to that contract in a heartbeat. 

[ThisIsBirdland]

1 minute ago, Moose Milligan said:

That's right.  I'm sure he covers his philosophy on free agency very explicitly when courting new clients.

 

This Witt structure may very well be the only way to get Boras clients to agree to the long-term deals.

Buy 3 additional years of control (7 total) by offering an additional 4 years of player opt outs at the current market rate as security for the player.

Not sure it's the right long-term strategy for the team or not. As a fan I'd like to see it (hey, it's not my money) but I can't say I'd blame the team if they didn't think that trade-off was necessarily worth it. It might just be better to negotiate a more conventional extension once these guys hit FA.

[TopGunnar]

It’s a great deal if he becomes a star face of the franchise. $30 mill a year in 7 years is going to be a steal

[TheWall]

4 minutes ago, ThisIsBirdland said:

This Witt structure may very well be the only way to get Boras clients to agree to the long-term deals.

Buy 3 additional years of control (7 total) by offering an additional 4 years of player opt outs at the current market rate as security for the player.

Not sure it's the right long-term strategy for the team or not. As a fan I'd like to see it (hey, it's not my money) but I can't say I'd blame the team if they didn't think that trade-off was necessarily worth it. It might just be better to negotiate a more conventional extension once these guys hit FA.

A conventional extension would be dramatically more expensive if Witt continues on his current trajectory. 

 

31 minutes ago, ThisIsBirdland said:

Yeah makes sense. So it will almost certainly either be:

• 7/$141m
• 11/$281m

That puts a tremendous burden on the team if he underachieves or gets hurt. Not sure why they decided to tack on those three team options, tbh.

I think the 3 team options helps them hedge the risk a little bit and there is no downside. Witt is only extending the deal to 11/$281M if he's not playing up to expectations. If rebounds during those last 4 years the team might want to lock him down for additional years at these $ amounts negotiated in '24 when the average contract amount will likely be dramatically higher 11 years from now.