269 replies to this topic

[dude]

I have a number of comments but wanted to wait a little to add them.

 

I don't think I change any of my thoughts. 

 

Just thoughts here, but I'd guess you need to be in the 7/140M range to make something interesting.  I've suggested something similar, but I'd put something like 7/175 behind that.  That's out to age 39 (2037) and in the 300M neighborhood.  That's 90% of "max value", you get Legacy and it costs you a (team risk option) at age 33.  Still 140M locked in (250% MW).  I've written out some new details (versus ones laid out before), but who cares.

 

Haven't changed any of my perspectives (they do get updated each step of the way).  If you wanted to sign the next 4 years, it's probably (1/9/15/20... a little conservative, but guaranteed) 4/45 (agree with the ESR article there).  Doesn't really make sense for either side to do that, but that would be the number you'd use to build some larger deal.

 

The only thing I'd change in what I've suggested is I'd make the execution of the 7/175 team option a contractual decision after year 4 of the 7/145 deal.  That assesses the risk over the next 4 years and you are essentially getting to sign him to a 10 year deal (the 3 + new 7) and put his career in the 310-320 range.

[dude]

Won't bother me at all if the O's trade him with a year or two left in his team control. 

 

So while I agree (and have said this specifically) that you don't tie winning to Adley, because with or without him, you need to have a plan for winning....but I have no idea why anyone wouldn't want him longer term.

 

Trading him "with 2 years of control remaining" means you only have him for this season and the next 2 (2024 and 2025)...that would seem like a real waste of opportunity.

 

He not getting 35-40M per in a guaranteed deal today until he's 40.  That's not the way it works and if you look at most of the FA deals signed, guys were adding years FA years in the 25-28M range but adding years to get the total value up. 

 

Create the deal where you pay him 25M per until he's 39 and manage some risk and the Orioles are never hurt.

[dude]

I'm willing to give him a 10 year, $300 million deal right now. 

 

Well, he'd sign that because the first 4 years are 4/50 so the last 6 are 6/250....so if you want to give him 40M per, ok, but I don't think you have to go anywhere near that to get something done.  You'd need to do that with a Boras client, but I think there is more reasonable space to accomplish something. 

 

If you were willing to guarantee him 300M right now, you'd do something like 14/300 and eat the risk and be done.

[BSLChrisStoner]

So while I agree (and have said this specifically) that you don't tie winning to Adley, because with or without him, you need to have a plan for winning....but I have no idea why anyone wouldn't want him longer term.

Trading him "with 2 years of control remaining" means you only have him for this season and the next 2 (2024 and 2025)...that would seem like a real waste of opportunity.

He not getting 35-40M per in a guaranteed deal today until he's 40. That's not the way it works and if you look at most of the FA deals signed, guys were adding years FA years in the 25-28M range but adding years to get the total value up.

Create the deal where you pay him 25M per until he's 39 and manage some risk and the Orioles are never hurt.

Have no real desire for him in an Os uniform in his 30s. Definitely not his mid to late 30s.

[bmore_ken]

I would be highly surprised if the O's sign him to anything like you guys are talking. They don't roll that way. Is John going to have some sort of Come To Jesus moment? 

[dude]

If I'm Mullins, before I listen to the O's buyout offers, they first must extend Adley. 

 

I understand Mackus comment and Chris's like of it, but I think there is space to consider the thought.

 

I think any player wants some perspective on their opportunity.  Guys will always say the right things publicly about wanting to win, etc, but they often just follow the money.  

 

If Adley wants to be serious about winning, I think there are layers to the team building that you want to know/understand.  Since Performance (ie Winning) is more than just Talent, creating that Attitude/Chemistry can be important.  Adley actually has the right (correct, imo) on Chemistry.  So the [WHO] can matter.

 

Somebody has to go first.  I'm a Bengals fan and my brother and I have this conversation about JoeB.  He can set the tone for the longevity of the Organization by accepting a deal that while huge in magnitude, could widely be considered a discount.  Be creative.  If Burrows does it....does Chase have to follow suit....those are your top 2 guys....if anyone wants to walk, let them.  If you want to be part of [THIS] then we need to figure out how to get everyone in.  The Patriots were wildly successful (maybe more than any Pro franchise) in selling the Championship culture/system.

 

I have no idea what Adley wants....but Mullins and Hays are best friends.  If they want to play together HERE and be part of something special and that's what Adley wants too...then start getting things done.  It's not the only path and if Gunnar and Jackson want to go chase a dollar in NY or LA, great, when the time comes, good luck, the guys here are the guys that want to be here.  I don't need the next prospect at AAA to produce results (like any/every year) I need guys that want to be here, pull the rope in the same direction and show up every day for the Team.  Everyone isn't getting 10 year deals, you do what you do and there's transition years for everyone...but that's actually the GM job.  That's the first job.  All the other stuff is important but secondary.

[dude]

Have no real desire for him in an Os uniform in his 30s. Definitely not his mid to late 30s.

 

Fair enough.  I have a real desire for him to wear an Orioles hat in Cooperstown. 

[dude]

I would be highly surprised if the O's sign him to anything like you guys are talking. They don't roll that way. Is John going to have sort of Come To Jesus moment? 

 

John is only doing what he's doing out of planned necessity.  If they ever get beyond that Gate, he wants to be the hero.

 

The short term costs, which is all that really matters, is what he cares about.  Short term value is largely the same no matter what you do.   

 

I'll say this and I've alluded to "being wrong about a couple things" back in January.  If the first thing had happened (it didn't) then I figured JA would have to extend Adley to appease the masses.  Since 1 didn't happen, 2 didn't either. 

[bmore_ken]

John is only doing what he's doing out of planned necessity. If they ever get beyond that Gate, he wants to be the hero.

The short term costs, which is all that really matters, is what he cares about. Short term value is largely the same no matter what you do.

I'll say this and I've alluded to "being wrong about a couple things" back in January. If the first thing had happened (it didn't) then I figured JA would have to extend Adley to appease the masses. Since 1 didn't happen, 2 didn't either.

I still wouldn't bet my money on it regardless. Hopefully I'm wrong and would be glad to be.

[CantonJester]

I understand Mackus comment and Chris's like of it, but I think there is space to consider the thought.

 

I think any player wants some perspective on their opportunity.  Guys will always say the right things publicly about wanting to win, etc, but they often just follow the money.  

 

If Adley wants to be serious about winning, I think there are layers to the team building that you want to know/understand.  Since Performance (ie Winning) is more than just Talent, creating that Attitude/Chemistry can be important.  Adley actually has the right (correct, imo) on Chemistry.  So the [WHO] can matter.

 

Somebody has to go first.  I'm a Bengals fan and my brother and I have this conversation about JoeB.  He can set the tone for the longevity of the Organization by accepting a deal that while huge in magnitude, could widely be considered a discount.  Be creative.  If Burrows does it....does Chase have to follow suit....those are your top 2 guys....if anyone wants to walk, let them.  If you want to be part of [THIS] then we need to figure out how to get everyone in.  The Patriots were wildly successful (maybe more than any Pro franchise) in selling the Championship culture/system.

 

I have no idea what Adley wants....but Mullins and Hays are best friends.  If they want to play together HERE and be part of something special and that's what Adley wants too...then start getting things done.  It's not the only path and if Gunnar and Jackson want to go chase a dollar in NY or LA, great, when the time comes, good luck, the guys here are the guys that want to be here.  I don't need the next prospect at AAA to produce results (like any/every year) I need guys that want to be here, pull the rope in the same direction and show up every day for the Team.  Everyone isn't getting 10 year deals, you do what you do and there's transition years for everyone...but that's actually the GM job.  That's the first job.  All the other stuff is important but secondary.

 

 

You got where I was coming from. 

[dude]

https://eutawstreetr...hman-extension/

Some interesting ideas in this article for and against his extension from his and the team's point of view. I'm in the "extend him now" camp and accept that he might be only a (very good) DH late in that contract.

 

So I agree with Rob in there on the first 4/45....but I'm not sure 8/180 works...getting a year deeper into FA opportunity for a catcher is big risk.  That's 4/135 for the last half, but it also put him deeper into his 30s and a year in your 30s as a catcher is a lot.  If you wind up going year-to-year, that can certainly work out ok, but is a lot of pressure wrt injury and performance in given year.

 

There has to be some balance between years and total guarantee.  If you do what fishteacher suggests and just pay him 10/300.  Hey, easy.  Worry bout age 35+ then.   Nobody is doing undervalued years to 31 or 32.  New CBA really helped out AR's negotiating position because this all makes a lot more sense (team/fans) without a full year in 2022.

 

So the risk balance is somewhere in the 6/120, 7/145, (ok, let's go with Rob's) 8/180 ranges.  Guarantee versus opportunity beyond current.  That's the game. That's why I think you break into pieces and be creative about the execution.

 

It's still incredible that we don't point out the obvious Wieters parallel in these type articles.  MW followed Boras' advice and it cost him at least half what could have been his career earnings.  All sides carry risk.  Few guys, if any, lament signing guaranteed deals.

[CantonJester]

I don't get the Rutschman skepticism. Like, at all. Sign him to a ten year deal (if he's willing) and move him out from behind the dish in 6 or 7 years. He'll be a power hitting first baseman. The horrors. 

[dude]

I don't get the Rutschman skepticism. Like, at all. Sign him to a ten year deal (if he's willing) and move him out from behind the dish in 6 or 7 years. He'll be a power hitting first baseman. The horrors. 

 

...and ultimately, it's his value behind the plate in the Playoffs that makes the ultimate difference.  He can be 38 and still catch most of the Playoffs.  You minimize his wear nad tear in current seasons to keep him fresh for current Playoffs and future Playoffs.  

 

He's the most unique profile.  He's a freaking Unicorn.  If you have a Unicorn, keep him.

[BSLSteveBirrer]

I don't get the Rutschman skepticism. Like, at all. Sign him to a ten year deal (if he's willing) and move him out from behind the dish in 6 or 7 years. He'll be a power hitting first baseman. The horrors. 

If I read the current status correctly the O's have him for 5 more seasons (through his year 30 season). For peanuts. At which time its fairly likely he's not going to catch too many more years after that. 

 

But its hard for me to think of him as a "power hitting first baseman" You bet I want him in the lineup everyday but the premium he's worth goes way downhill in another half dozen years. So why overpay a ton upfront when those out years could probably be replaced for less money? 

 

Now I have no problem giving him a 10 year contract tomorrow. But if its over about $225 to 240M then its overpaying too much IMO.

[CantonJester]

If I read the current status correctly the O's have him for 5 more seasons (through his year 30 season). For peanuts. At which time its fairly likely he's not going to catch too many more years after that. 

 

But its hard for me to think of him as a "power hitting first baseman" You bet I want him in the lineup everyday but the premium he's worth goes way downhill in another half dozen years. So why overpay a ton upfront when those out years could probably be replaced for less money? 

 

Now I have no problem giving him a 10 year contract tomorrow. But if its over about $225 to 240M then its overpaying too much IMO.

 

He's a switching hitter with a 60 hit and 60 power grades. You know who else was a switch hitting 1B with a 60 hit and 60 power grade?

 

Mark Teixeira. 

[BSLChrisStoner]

I don't get the Rutschman skepticism. Like, at all. Sign him to a ten year deal (if he's willing) and move him out from behind the dish in 6 or 7 years. He'll be a power hitting first baseman. The horrors.

What skepticism?

He might be the best catcher in the game already.

No thx on a 10 year deal.

[CantonJester]

What skepticism?

He might be the best catcher in the game already.

No thx on a 10 year deal.

 

 

And why's that? You're skeptical he'll be worth the money on the back end of a ten year contract. That's the school of thought for 27-30 year old players, not 25 year olds. 

[BSLChrisStoner]

And why's that? You're skeptical he'll be worth the money on the back end of a ten year contract. That's the school of thought for 27-30 year old players, not 25 year olds.

You already have him for his prime.
I see no reason to lock him up for what figures to be declining years just because he's likable and the current face.

I'm not skeptical of what he is.
I can also believe he can be productive when he has to move off catching, but he's as valuable as he is because he is a catcher.

He can be productive off of catcher, but he wont be as valuable, he will be past his prime, and declining. Yeah, I'm good without doing that extension.

[TwentyThirtyFive]

I don't get the Rutschman skepticism. Like, at all. Sign him to a ten year deal (if he's willing) and move him out from behind the dish in 6 or 7 years. He'll be a power hitting first baseman. The horrors.

100%. Hes a team leader for one. Two, the batting eye aint going away. If hes Jason Varitek at 34, 35 making a bunch of money at the back end of a deal thats fine with me

[BobPhelan]

I never want him to wear another jersey.