201 replies to this topic

[mweb08]

I agree the only way he extends is if he gets some big time stability on the back end, rather than sign for a year or two and then try to cash in big time as a ~32ish year old catcher.

I also think that I would sign him to that type of deal if he's open to it. It's certainly a big risk, but if he hits like we hope he will, he'll be worth several times what he'll be paid for the early part of the deal and still useful even if he's not worth every penny as a 1B or DH if he has to move off of catcher for the last couple years.

If he struggles and ends up not being worth anywhere near the contract, well then we were probably going to be bad anyways, so we're not really any worse off overall. Also, unless we extend Jones or sign a big FA, we aren't going to have (m)any guys making big time money in the middle and later years of an 8-year contract for Wieters. Nobody else on the team still in the service time area really seems like we'll need to lock them up to big time contracts. Maybe one or two of the young starters...maybe, and they still don't project as #1 type big time money makers.

I mostly agree with what you're saying, but I don't care for the line of thinking in bold. Yes, he will be worth much more than his pay in the first 3 years, but that's not really an added benefit since he's already controlled for those years anyway at a likely reasonable cost. To me, the part of the contract that needs to be thoroughly examined is the 5/75 part. If you (general you) don't think he'll be worth more than 75M over those 5 years, then you shouldn't be for that contract.

So 75M for 5 years (age 30-34 seasons). That's a tough call for me. If he doesn't have any awful injuries, he should still be at least a near AS C for the first 2-3 years. The last 2-3 years is largely dependent on how well he will age and if he becomes good enough with the bat to be worth a fair amount while playing less at C. I think if reasonably healthy, he should be good enough and age well enough to be worth that contract, but it's such a big risk to give a catcher going into his age 27 season a 8 year contract.

[Mackus]

I mostly agree with what you're saying, but I don't care for the line of thinking in bold. Yes, he will be worth much more than his pay in the first 3 years, but that's not really an added benefit since he's already controlled for those years anyway at a likely reasonable cost. To me, the part of the contract that needs to be thoroughly examined is the 5/75 part. If you (general you) don't think he'll be worth more than 75M over those 5 years, then you shouldn't be for that contract.

So 75M for 5 years (age 30-34 seasons). That's a tough call for me. If he doesn't have any awful injuries, he should still be at least a near AS C for the first 2-3 years. The last 2-3 years is largely dependent on how well he will age and if he becomes good enough with the bat to be worth a fair amount while playing less at C. I think if reasonably healthy, he should be good enough and age well enough to be worth that contract, but it's such a big risk to give a catcher going into his age 27 season a 8 year contract.

The tricky part is definitely if you believe (which I think we both do) that he would only extend if he gets that type of a 5/$75M extension after his club-controlled years are done.

There isn't a realistic middle-ground here. We either have him for 3 years (or less if we trade him prior to letting him walk, which I would in that situation barring a miraculous development where we're actually competitive) and then he's gone or extend him for what is almost certainly going to be an overpaid contract. At some point, we'll have to stop rebuilding and always looking for bargain contracts if the team is going to be good. I'd rather take that gamble with Wieters who still has some legit star upside moreso than anyone else in our organization at this point, recognizing the risks inherent with signing a catcher for those aged seasons.

[mweb08]

The tricky part is definitely if you believe (which I think we both do) that he would only extend if he gets that type of a 5/$75M extension after his club-controlled years are done.

There isn't a realistic middle-ground here. We either have him for 3 years (or less if we trade him prior to letting him walk, which I would in that situation barring a miraculous development where we're actually competitive) and then he's gone or extend him for what is almost certainly going to be an overpaid contract. At some point, we'll have to stop rebuilding and always looking for bargain contracts if the team is going to be good. I'd rather take that gamble with Wieters who still has some legit star upside moreso than anyone else in our organization at this point, recognizing the risks inherent with signing a catcher for those aged seasons.

I don't think it's a foregone conclusion that he almost definitely would be overpaid if he got 5/75 after his arb years. I'm not sure how inflation will effect things, but he'd likely only need to be worth 15-17 WAR over that span to meet the standard that FanGraphs puts forward.

As far as your comments regarding bargain contracts, I don't think the team always needs to be looking for bargain contracts, but I don't think planning on overpaying someone is a good strategy either. If it's a matter where you're just worried about the last year or maybe two, I can understand that, but if you don't think he'll easily exceed 45M in value for the first 3 post arb years, then I can't get behind that.

Due to the finances of the Yanks and Sox along with the high intelligence of the Rays and Jays, this team is not in a position to pay more than the market rate in free agency for a win. They need to be as efficient as possible. And long-term deals to lock up guys at Wieters stage in his career are supposed to favor the club in terms of expected dollars per win, but favor the player in terms of risk and security. So that's a long way of saying that'd only sign him if I expected him to be worth at least as much as he's being paid.

Now maybe if the O's have a great 2014 and Wieters is a key cog, I'd be willing to overpay Phillies style in order to continue with the positive momentum on and off the field.

[Mackus]

I think, like you mention, that inflation is going to make contemporary contracts look relatively team-friendly over the next several seasons, which is part of why I'm more willing to take on a big risk to guarantee we get to keep Wieters. If the Dodgers are worth $2B, then team values in general are going to go up, and that's going to trickle down to payrolls going up and average salaries increasing.

I don't disagree with any of your points. Even if the payrolls overall go up, for us to compete with the Yankees and Red Sox we're going to have to be smarter than them, which is difficult. That said, at some point the team is going to have to really commit to taking that big risk which might put them over the top. We've always considered that to be a big free agent splash, but paying a ton to keep a guy you've already got, when he would just leave and sign elsewhere if you don't pay absolutely top dollar, is sort of in the same ballpark.

Ideally, Wieters would be willing to sign an extension which buys out 2-3 free agency years, but like you said before, that really isn't in his best interest if his goal is to maximize his earnings over the course of his career. We're really going to have to blow him away to get him to sign off on a deal that prevents him from hitting free agency anywhere near the peak of his career and earning potential. I still think the most likely outcome is he is not receptive to any sort of big extension and will test the FA waters, and in that case I likely look to trade him. However, now that MacPhail is not the man making the trades, signing him to a likely crazy contract is looking a bit more attractive of an option to me than seeing what Duquette gets in return for him. That's probably unfair to Duquette, but I haven't been really thrilled with the trades he's made and the guys he was asking for in return (reportedly) for some of the guys he didn't trade (Jones, specifically).

[mweb08]

Yeah, I agree that big risks may need to be taken. I just didn't agree with the notion that they should basically knowingly overpay someone if they want to contend.

I'm not at that point with Duq yet; although, I get where you're coming from.

[Slappy]

... plays a position that carries a lot of injury and decline risk.

Just asking, is there some research on this? It's my impression that catchers can last at least as long as anyone else. I mean, Ivan Rodriguez played through 39, Fisk was 45, Berra until he was 40, Gary Carter was 38, Johnny Bench 35, Piazza was 38, Posada 39, etc. Most of those guys caught up until their last or next-to-last season. It may very well be true but I'm curious as to whether that has been verified anywhere.

[mweb08]

Just asking, is there some research on this? It's my impression that catchers can last at least as long as anyone else. I mean, Ivan Rodriguez played through 39, Fisk was 45, Berra until he was 40, Gary Carter was 38, Johnny Bench 35, Piazza was 38, Posada 39, etc. Most of those guys caught up until their last or next-to-last season. It may very well be true but I'm curious as to whether that has been verified anywhere.

Yes, there is research on it, but I'm not going to look it up now. While certain catchers have lasted until their late 30's, on average, catchers decline quicker than usual due to the wear and tear on their bodies that comes with the position. Catchers are kind of like the running backs of MLB.

[SportsGuy]

I wouldn't give Wieters more than 6 guaranteed years. I would go 6 with a vesting games played option for year 7 though.

[Oriole85]

If I am the Orioles, Wieters is either signed or traded by next ST.

I just don't like the idea of playing out the string of his arb years and just seeing what happens unless some miracle happens and we look like we are going to be contenders next year.

Just too much risk there. If he isn't willing to sign here long term and he has a big year this year, he will be worth a ton in the offseason or maybe even at the deadline.

I don't think were the quite yet. I'm after all one of those people who says no one is untouchable outside of Machado and Dylan Bundy. That's not to say if some team gave us a good offer, I wouldn't think about it. Finding solid catchers, who can both hit and field is so rare, you can't just give them up. They'll have multiple opportunties to trade Wieters after next ST. 3 years is long time, even if it doesn't seem like it.

[Oriole85]

I wouldn't give Wieters more than 6 guaranteed years. I would go 6 with a vesting games played option for year 7 though.

Six years is pushing it, look at Joe Mauer's contract

[You Play to Win the Game]

Six years is pushing it, look at Joe Mauer's contract

Mauer is an interesting case study. He makes $23MM annually between 2011-2018, which are his age 28-35 seasons. He had a down year in 2011 having played just 82 games and being worth just $7MM according to Fangraphs, but already this year he's been worth $1.4MM. He's put up seasons where he has earned or exceeded that salary ($23.7MM in '06; $27.3MM in '08; $35.7MM in '09; $22.2MM in '10).

That said, it's pretty much a sure thing that he won't be worth $23MM in the later years of this contract. Mauer is Mr. Twin right now, and was a huge part of the buzz that helped Target Field get built, so there is more at play here that can't be quantified on Fangraphs, but in strictly baseball terms it was a bit much for my taste. The prospects of him moving to 1B at some point even further exclaims that point.

As important as it is for us to retain Wieters, a Mauer'esque contract would be a poor idea, IMHO. Of course I realize this is a pointless statement as no one is suggesting a Mauer'esque contract - But I have a feeling that's right around where Boras would probably start.

Fangraphs - Mauer - http://www.fangraphs... ... on=C#value

Mauer contract details - http://www.huffingto... ... 07629.html

[Oriole85]

Mauer is an interesting case study. He makes $23MM annually between 2011-2018, which are his age 28-35 seasons. He had a down year in 2011 having played just 82 games and being worth just $7MM according to Fangraphs, but already this year he's been worth $1.4MM. He's put up seasons where he has earned or exceeded that salary ($23.7MM in '06; $27.3MM in '08; $35.7MM in '09; $22.2MM in '10).

That said, it's pretty much a sure thing that he won't be worth $23MM in the later years of this contract. Mauer is Mr. Twin right now, and was a huge part of the buzz that helped Target Field get built, so there is more at play here that can't be quantified on Fangraphs, but in strictly baseball terms it was a bit much for my taste. The prospects of him moving to 1B at some point even further exclaims that point.

As important as it is for us to retain Wieters, a Mauer'esque contract would be a poor idea, IMHO. Of course I realize this is a pointless statement as no one is suggesting a Mauer'esque contract - But I have a feeling that's right around where Boras would probably start.

Fangraphs - Mauer - http://www.fangraphs... ... on=C#value

Mauer contract details - http://www.huffingto... ... 07629.html

Good to see him off to a good start, although he seems like a huge injury liability. Really sad, especially for Twins fans when Pohlads despite being one of the wealthiest owners in the game finally decided to spend and shed their small market status, the team has gone downward. Maybe it was just a one year hiccup although the opening series at OPACY was bad for them.

[SportsGuy]

Six years is pushing it, look at Joe Mauer's contract

Mauer was also a little older at the start of the deal and has more innings under his belt.

I would prefer 5 years though.

[Oriole85]

Mauer was also a little older at the start of the deal and has more innings under his belt.

I would prefer 5 years though.

Yep, a five year deal seems like a win for Wieters as well as he would get two FA years but could still get another substantial contract at 31 if he stayed healthy like I.Rod or Fisk (the Pudges).

What I was getting at more than anything is how unproductive Mauer was in the first two years of his contract. I know he's older, but I don't think anyone saw him breaking down at the age of 27-28, you expected that mroe towards the end of his contract.

[Mackus]

Yep, a five year deal seems like a win for Wieters as well as he would get two FA years but could still get another substantial contract at 31 if he stayed healthy like I.Rod or Fisk (the Pudges).

I've mentioned this before, but I just don't see Wieters agreeing to a deal that buys out exactly 2 years of FA. My expectation, is that he'll either want to hit FA as early as possible or if he extends, for that deal to essentially be similar to what type of contract he could've signed as a FA after 2015 with only slight discount.

A 29 y/o, All-Star level catcher will be able to command a much bigger contract than a 31 y/o All-Star level catcher with identical recent history. Those two years are huge, as they are pretty much the tail end of the prime for most catchers. Not many catchers remain highly productive into their mid-30s.

At 29, a team can justify a big, 6-7 year contract by expecting to get 3-4 really good years out of him, 1-2 solid years, and then only 1-2 bad or mediocre years. The immediate and short term performance return justifies the big contract and sunk costs at it's end. At 31, you're really only expecting 1-2 really good years, then your 1-2 solid years and 1-2 more bad or mediocre years. It's probably not worth paying for those mediocre years if you've only got 1-2 really great years at the beginning of the contract to get value from, so it's harder to justify anything over about 4 years.

I would sign him to just about any deal he'd be willing to sign with us, but unfortunately I think it's more likely that we don't get that opportunity. I'd love to be wrong about this, though, and whatever Wieter's mindset is regarding an extension, the team should definitely be talking to him already, trying to convince him to extend here.

[Oriole85]

I've mentioned this before, but I just don't see Wieters agreeing to a deal that buys out exactly 2 years of FA. My expectation, is that he'll either want to hit FA as early as possible or if he extends, for that deal to essentially be similar to what type of contract he could've signed as a FA after 2015 with only slight discount.

A 29 y/o, All-Star level catcher will be able to command a much bigger contract than a 31 y/o All-Star level catcher with identical recent history. Those two years are huge, as they are pretty much the tail end of the prime for most catchers. Not many catchers remain highly productive into their mid-30s.

At 29, a team can justify a big, 6-7 year contract by expecting to get 3-4 really good years out of him, 1-2 solid years, and then only 1-2 bad or mediocre years. The immediate and short term performance return justifies the big contract and sunk costs at it's end. At 31, you're really only expecting 1-2 really good years, then your 1-2 solid years and 1-2 more bad or mediocre years. It's probably not worth paying for those mediocre years if you've only got 1-2 really great years at the beginning of the contract to get value from, so it's harder to justify anything over about 4 years.

I would sign him to just about any deal he'd be willing to sign with us, but unfortunately I think it's more likely that we don't get that opportunity. I'd love to be wrong about this, though, and whatever Wieter's mindset is regarding an extension, the team should definitely be talking to him already, trying to convince him to extend here.

Being a Boras client I tend to agree with what you wrote, I'm just not sure how much worth it is to sign him to a Mauer-esque contract like you are suggesting? Even if this team was competitive, it wouldn't be the greatest idea, but I could justify it. If they are going to continue to be a 65-70 win team, it's very hard to justify it. He could be the best catcher in the history of baseball, but do you really want that much money tied up to one player on a chronically losing team? If they could show they are capable of competing in the next 3-5 years, I'd be more inclined to sign him as well. I just don't see it though. Even if Machado/D. Bundy live up to the hype, there's just so many holes. Wouldn't it be better to spread the wealth?

Even if Wieters won't sign my proposed 5 year extension. I'll point this out - it's a two way street. If Mauer had waited another year even, I'm not sure he gets that large contract. Wieters could really strike it rich or does he want gamble that he won't be injured and/or ineffective in 2-3 years?

[Mackus]

Being a Boras client I tend to agree with what you wrote, I'm just not sure how much worth it is to sign him to a Mauer-esque contract like you are suggesting? Even if this team was competitive, it wouldn't be the greatest idea, but I could justify it. If they are going to continue to be a 65-70 win team, it's very hard to justify it. He could be the best catcher in the history of baseball, but do you really want that much money tied up to one player on a chronically losing team? If they could show they are capable of competing in the next 3-5 years, I'd be more inclined to sign him as well. I just don't see it though. Even if Machado/D. Bundy live up to the hype, there's just so many holes. Wouldn't it be better to spread the wealth?

Even if Wieters won't sign my proposed 5 year extension. I'll point this out - it's a two way street. If Mauer had waited another year even, I'm not sure he gets that large contract. Wieters could really strike it rich or does he want gamble that he won't be injured and/or ineffective in 2-3 years?

I'm not exactly proposing a Mauer-esque contract. I wouldn't be saying anything near the $180M he got. Mauer's deal was a straight extension, it didn't buy out any arb years, each year of his deal was a potential FA year and he was a pending FA when he signed it, so there wasn't any discount due for him being further away from FA. Wieters would be buying out 3 arb years and then an extension past that. When you're 3 years away from FA, you take less to extend over those years than you would as a pending-FA.

Also, Mauer was a bonafide superstar when he signed his deal. He was the reigning MVP and had won the batting title in 3 of the previous 3 years. Wieters has a career .754 OPS and still has yet to have a season above a .780 OPS, Mauer had never had a full year below that and was at .892 for his career.

Assuming Wieters continues to have an All-Star caliber season, lets say mid to upper 800s OPS, I would be prepared to offer him something in the 6/$80M to 8/$120M range. Over the next three years of arbitration, he'll likely make something like $4M, $8M, and then $12M (more or less depending on just how good he is, those are my rough estimates based on him being pretty damn good). Then you'd have to extend him at least 3-4 years to make the entire contract worth his time, rather than just have him play out the string and hit FA after 2015 entering his age 30 season. I'd say something like $16M, $17M, $18M, $20M might do the trick. That would be 7/$95M, or really a 4/$71M extension following his arbitration years.

It's certainly a big commitment, but I'd rather do that than see him walk after 2015 for nothing. If we're good, I'd rather do that than trade him away for prospects. If we're still crappy, then trading him is the better option. But you won't know if we're good or crappy during those years until we get there.

[Oriole85]

I'm not exactly proposing a Mauer-esque contract. I wouldn't be saying anything near the $180M he got. Mauer's deal was a straight extension, it didn't buy out any arb years, each year of his deal was a potential FA year and he was a pending FA when he signed it, so there wasn't any discount due for him being further away from FA. Wieters would be buying out 3 arb years and then an extension past that. When you're 3 years away from FA, you take less to extend over those years than you would as a pending-FA.

Also, Mauer was a bonafide superstar when he signed his deal. He was the reigning MVP and had won the batting title in 3 of the previous 3 years. Wieters has a career .754 OPS and still has yet to have a season above a .780 OPS, Mauer had never had a full year below that and was at .892 for his career.

Assuming Wieters continues to have an All-Star caliber season, lets say mid to upper 800s OPS, I would be prepared to offer him something in the 6/$80M to 8/$120M range. Over the next three years of arbitration, he'll likely make something like $4M, $8M, and then $12M (more or less depending on just how good he is, those are my rough estimates based on him being pretty damn good). Then you'd have to extend him at least 3-4 years to make the entire contract worth his time, rather than just have him play out the string and hit FA after 2015 entering his age 30 season. I'd say something like $16M, $17M, $18M, $20M might do the trick. That would be 7/$95M, or really a 4/$71M extension following his arbitration years.

It's certainly a big commitment, but I'd rather do that than see him walk after 2015 for nothing. If we're good, I'd rather do that than trade him away for prospects. If we're still crappy, then trading him is the better option. But you won't know if we're good or crappy during those years until we get there.

Valid points, the Mauer-esque comment might have been a bit extreme on my end.

True you don't know where you'll be. But I think were atleast 3 years away from really competing if not more and that's if everything goes right- Markakis, Jones are solid; rotation steps up; make some decent trades; Bundy/Machado pan out. So you are really betting that in most likely 5 years not only is Wieters still good, but the O's are competitive as well. As I said it's only worthwhile to commit so much money to one player if the team is competitive. No team needs a close to nine figure contract when they are in last place.

[BSLChrisStoner]

Bumping this thread based on the extension suggested by Scott Miller, CBS Sports.

[mweb08]

Bumping this thread based on the extension suggested by Scott Miller, CBS Sports.

Which I believe would be laughed at by Boras.

It's 5/25 for anyone who hasn't seen it.