Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Trent Richardson Interviews Fellow Brown Brandon Weeden

Read the article.

I really like the idea of locking up Pineda early. His ceiling is high enough to counter the chance of him getting injured. Don't know how PIneda would feel, though the thought of being teamed with Felix should be enticing to him.

6 months ago Dscn1856_tiny JLProck 26 comments 0 recs  | 

Story-email Email Printer Print

More from Lookout Landing

The Ugly Side Of Rooting

Mar 2012 by Jeff Sullivan - 133 comments

The Brett Lawrie Rumor

Jan 2012 by Jeff Sullivan - 192 comments

A Little Trade Background

Jan 2012 by Jeff Sullivan - 136 comments

Trade's Official

Jan 2012 by Jeff Sullivan - 65 comments

Comments

Display:

My first instinct was "increased trade value"

That’s a bingo! Is that the way you say it?

by Kermit. on Dec 11, 2011 5:40 PM PST reply actions   2 recs

I think they should do shit like this all the time and I'm surprised they don't.

I understand the risks involved, but every time they do something like this they allow for the opportunity of a low cost franchise player, especially because of the team options which ensure that a great player doesn’t get to try to run away from the M’s to get bigger money and more years of free agency. Really, even if this stuff screws a team over, it seems like a great PR move also.

...and now I'm here

by CapSea on Dec 11, 2011 7:45 PM PST reply actions  

That would only work for so long before the Union got involved. While they likely couldn’t get anything done for one time, if it was a pattern of blackmail, they likely could.

Secondly, how is that at all a good way of convincing a young player to sign a team-friendly contract? They have agents who know what teams are doing, y’know.

by Crpls1983 on Dec 11, 2011 10:00 PM PST up reply actions  

It may not seem like it, but these players do walk away winners in this scenario.

By signing these contracts they’re guaranteed set for life at a point in their careers when there are no guarantees. Pineda seems like a great pitcher, but he makes pennies until his 4th year of team control – only making 400,000 for his first 3 years. If he gets injured, his career is over, and he walks away with some money, but not hugely wealthy.

Instead, he can take a contract that guarantees him, say, $25,000,000. He becomes a rich man tomorrow. If he stays healthy and pitches extremely well, he’s shorted quite a bit of money, but he’s still set for life. If you had the option of making 25,000,000 right now guaranteed or given 800,000 with a 10% chance of 50,000,000, you take the 25,000,000 now. The agents probably feel this way too.

...and now I'm here

by CapSea on Dec 11, 2011 10:14 PM PST up reply actions  

Oh, I’m not disagreeing with the idea that it’s generally good for the player. Moore’s arm could fall off tomorrow and he’s still set for life if he handles his money right.

And there are plenty of players (and agents) who have avoid this route, despite the ability to be set for life. Though my guess is a lot of those players may the ones who got a good bonus.

But my point is just that punishing them if they don’t do it could easily be counter-productive.

by Crpls1983 on Dec 11, 2011 11:52 PM PST up reply actions  

Keep in mind though that the players usually don't become rich RIGHT NOW

Longoria and Moore’s contracts both pay them very little through their pre-arb years – it’s just that the money during the arb years is guaranteed and pushes the injury risk for those seasons to the club. The players see a very marginal increase for their first three years in the majors

by seattlebruin on Dec 12, 2011 9:26 AM PST up reply actions  

Right, but the guarantee makes them rich in essence. Unless they die, they get the money.

Without the contract there is no guarantee, and they’re not set for life unless they reach the last of those arbitration years healthy and successfully.

...and now I'm here

by CapSea on Dec 12, 2011 1:25 PM PST up reply actions  

I'd love to quantify the "set for life" notion

I don’t know if everyone values this money the same. You’d think Albert Pujols was set for life too, but he held out for a stupid huge contract. Perhaps some people keep their same standard of living when they get that much money; others might take care of extended family; still others start living up to a certain lifestyle.

by Chris_FB on Dec 12, 2011 1:38 PM PST up reply actions  

Minor league players make next to nothing.

Major league players make a great salary, at 400,000, but if there careers end after one year, most of them have no marketable skills and all they walk away with is 400,000. If they sign a contract that guarantees them 25,000,000, it’s safe to say that they’ll be financially well off if there career ends.

I highly, highly doubt that most minor leaguers has started “living up a certain lifestyle” with a minor league salary that’s close to what I make.

...and now I'm here

by CapSea on Dec 12, 2011 2:32 PM PST up reply actions  

I'm confused if you're disagreeing with me.

But yes, most players should want to guarantee their income at this stage in their careers. We talk about how good this is to the team, but it would also be foolish for most young players – especially pitchers – to not take advantage of at least some type of guaranteed contract when they have only played such a short while. This is a win/win for both the players and the team, and it only looks like a loss in the end if the player ends up staying healthy and reaches free agency, which is never anywhere close to a guarantee.

...and now I'm here

by CapSea on Dec 12, 2011 2:45 PM PST up reply actions  

Well reasoned all around.

I didn’t know whether I was agreeing with you or not, actually. To me it was a variable what the kid (and most of them are just that, kids) would do with that amount of money all at once. But yeah, this makes sense.

by Chris_FB on Dec 12, 2011 3:45 PM PST up reply actions  

It's probably less beneficial for top draft picks though.

Strasburg already has 15 million dollars, so having that guaranteed money is worth less, since he’s already set for life and can make much, much more by going to free agency as soon as possible.

by joof on Dec 13, 2011 12:07 PM PST up reply actions  

Totally agree, although I'm sure there are ways around that by offering a bit more for the contract or what have you.

That’s why I didn’t mention it for Ackley. I would offer it, at least, but who knows if he would take it.

...and now I'm here

by CapSea on Dec 13, 2011 12:50 PM PST up reply actions  

Right, but doesn't it make a huge difference if you get the money right away?

Especially for a young player who doesn’t necessarily have much in the bank yet? Like I would way rather have $13M guaranteed over five years and get $2M the first year than have $14M guaranteed and get $450k the first year

by seattlebruin on Dec 12, 2011 3:02 PM PST up reply actions  

Sure. That could probably be a good selling point for trying to get them on contract too.

“Hey Pineda, how would you like 3 million tomorrow? The only thing is, you need to sign this very long and lucrative but team friendly contract right now.”

...and now I'm here

by CapSea on Dec 12, 2011 4:08 PM PST up reply actions  

Sounds pretty good to me, kind of a stick and carrot

He’s had a taste of the good life in the pros, he does have a limited pitching repertoire so it’s not completely unreasonable. The team is basically paying him a premium to lock him up through his arbitration years and he gets a guarantee to be on the 25 man. The way I see it, the premium is just front loading the contract with some of what he’s likely to make when he hits arbitration. Money that he might not see if he gets injured. There’s risk for everyone.

by Kermit. on Dec 11, 2011 10:18 PM PST up reply actions  

I would love this!

I would much rather invest 12-16 million dollars (or more) on a long-term Pineda lockup then say 2 years of Willingham.

by SgtSasquatch on Dec 12, 2011 7:49 AM PST reply actions  

Investing in quality pitching is a nice counter to Pujols

I’d like to think that if Hultzen, Walker and/or Paxton settle in well, that some of them plus Felix and Pineda can lead to several years of “Albert who?”.

Reducing hundreds of millions of dollars to a series of strikeouts and groundouts, with the occasional unfortunate dinger, would be rather enjoyable.

It doesn’t have to be an arms race with the Los Angeles Pujols of Anaheim or the Texas Team That Doesn’t Suck. We can see the M’s counter with premium starting pitching and (one hopes, eventually) some league-average offense.

by Chris_FB on Dec 12, 2011 12:39 PM PST reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

By reading a game thread of your own volition you agree to accept all liability for any and all damage done to your delicate sensibilities.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Small
Starlin Castro's fit with Seattle
Kawasaki80_small
Lists! So many lists!
M_s_hat_copy_small
OT -- May 22nd In Memoriam
Ichiro_small
Why do managers and media members hate walks?
Wbc_029_small
Friday Morning Music Thread
Small
Dustin Ackley BP swing vs game swing
Beastquakerwallpaper_small
More on the Struggles of Smoak
Randy2_for_sbn_small
Albert Pujols 2012: Three Retrospectives
Small
On Batting Orders
Niehaus_small
More on Dustin Ackley and the strikezone

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Yahoo_full_count

Sexy People

Wbc_029_small Jeff Sullivan

Small Matthew

Claw_small JY