Comments on: Is Cost Certainty Better Than Roster Flexibility?

By: tempman89

tempman89 — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 04:13:06 +0000

Very good article
Watching bedard on ROOT right now. Shame he didn’t give us enough last year, needed him to be a veteran rotation arm

By: Sean Matthews

Sean Matthews — Mon, 28 Jan 2013 23:00:31 +0000

Carlos Santana, Indians catcher, signed a 5/21 deal before last season. I think he was in a similar situation as Neal. Hopefully Neal will be willing to leave some money on the table for more impact players. Is Santana getting ripped off?

By: battlingbucs

battlingbucs — Mon, 28 Jan 2013 22:01:09 +0000

I’m all for signing Walker but I don’t think 5/32 does it (I think Walker would need just a little more). He asked for 3.6 so assuming that is 20% of what he perceives his market value at that makes his value 18 million a year. The Pirates would have to pay him .2, .4, .6, .8 and 1 year of that or 54 million dollars.

On the Pirates side of 3 million that is still 15 million. So that is 5/45.

Those numbers seem a little high to me as well. So if we split the difference between Walker and the Pirates and say it represent 30% of his value and make it a 30/50/70/90 scale that means a 5 year deal should get Walker 3.4 years of his value and his yearly value would be 11 mil. So that makes it 37.4 million. Take a little offer since the Pirates are assuming the risk and I think 34-35 is the correct neighborhood.

By: Sandoz

Sandoz — Mon, 28 Jan 2013 19:05:48 +0000

Very good article. It is essential to approach each player from a contextual perspective. As you say, position, past injuries and future projections should all play into the decision of giving a long term contract to a player.

The most important advantage in signing a player long term is the potential value added to that player with a team friendly contract. You are able to maximize his trade value in this way and get more in return than he is worth. While if you sign a long term contract to a player that he doesn’t live up to, his value would be low anyways and not greatly affected by the poor contract. All you lose is money at that point.