Author Topic: Top priority: catcher  (Read 4170 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 19680
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #50: October 17, 2017, 11:38:38 AM »
That Strasburg deal for instance... Steven gets to decide after 2019, and again after 2020, if he wants out. So basically if he keeps ptiching like this, he goes somewhere else for huge money. If he gets injured again... guaranteed pay for four more years beyond 2020.

I think players saw the control first NBA players and then Stanton got over their own careers. I wouldn't be surprised to see player options become the norm for the highest tier super stars- they have the leverage to demand it and there is almost no downside for the player.

Offline GburgNatsFan

  • Posts: 19304
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #51: October 17, 2017, 11:41:39 AM »
I think players saw the control first NBA players and then Stanton got over their own careers. I wouldn't be surprised to see player options become the norm for the highest tier super stars- they have the leverage to demand it and there is almost no downside for the player.

I'm just surprised that Rizzo agreed to this for a guy that's already had TJ.

Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 19680
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #52: October 17, 2017, 11:45:57 AM »
I'm just surprised that Rizzo agreed to this for a guy that's already had TJ.

It may have been a case of agree to it or look for a new pitcher when the arb years are up

Offline GburgNatsFan

  • Posts: 19304
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #53: October 17, 2017, 11:56:51 AM »
It may have been a case of agree to it or look for a new pitcher when the arb years are up

I guess that's the calculation.

Offline dcpatti

  • Posts: 3051
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #54: October 17, 2017, 12:09:20 PM »
I wouldn't mind if they had a relationship with Boras that was a little more like other teams. One thing that's guaranteed: the relationship does zero for the Nats.  It's only about money, whatever the Lerners or Rizzo may think.

That Strasburg deal for instance... Steven gets to decide after 2019, and again after 2020, if he wants out. So basically if he keeps ptiching like this, he goes somewhere else for huge money. If he gets injured again... guaranteed pay for four more years beyond 2020.

Strasburg wants to stay here. He likes the way the team makes his health a priority. He said as much in one of the pressers after he signed his extension.  Plus, he and his wife like living in Alexandria (I think they're in the Bel Haven area?) and Mrs Stras wants to have a house full of Strasbabies without having to move every 2-3 years.  The opt-out clauses help make it seem like Boras drove a hard bargain but it was Stras' idea to get the extension done in the first place. 

Offline Elvir Ovcina

  • Posts: 2464
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #55: October 17, 2017, 12:19:15 PM »
I think players saw the control first NBA players and then Stanton got over their own careers. I wouldn't be surprised to see player options become the norm for the highest tier super stars- they have the leverage to demand it and there is almost no downside for the player.

Aren't they already pretty much the new norm for contracts signed in the past 2-3 years? When people like Wei-Yin Chen are getting them, it seems very hard to push back against an actual star who wants one.

Offline GburgNatsFan

  • Posts: 19304
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #56: October 17, 2017, 12:44:16 PM »
Aren't they already pretty much the new norm for contracts signed in the past 2-3 years? When people like Wei-Yin Chen are getting them, it seems very hard to push back against an actual star who wants one.

Player-only options? It sounded like it was pretty unique when Boras did it with Strasburg.

Offline GburgNatsFan

  • Posts: 19304
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #57: October 17, 2017, 12:45:04 PM »
Sure hope that's the case. It's nice having Max and Stras at the top of the rotation.

Strasburg wants to stay here. He likes the way the team makes his health a priority. He said as much in one of the pressers after he signed his extension.  Plus, he and his wife like living in Alexandria (I think they're in the Bel Haven area?) and Mrs Stras wants to have a house full of Strasbabies without having to move every 2-3 years.  The opt-out clauses help make it seem like Boras drove a hard bargain but it was Stras' idea to get the extension done in the first place.

Offline CoryTheFormerExposFan

  • Posts: 1091
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #58: October 17, 2017, 02:18:54 PM »
So many were convinced Stras would never sign an extension here and now they are convinced he just opts out and signs elsewhere.  Did it ever occur to some of you he might just like where he's at?  He could have signed in free agency with somebody else and got the same opt-out clauses in his deal.  Why would he only want to stay in DC another few years then leave?  What would have changed?  He's started a family, so they only are going to have deeper roots here by that time. 

Offline GburgNatsFan

  • Posts: 19304
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #59: October 17, 2017, 02:25:03 PM »
I'm convinced that Boras is an excellent agent and will be able to cash in for Stras. If that's what he wants. If they could cash in and make a move back to Cali, they wouldn't want that?

You must have Patti on ignore. ;)


So many were convinced Stras would never sign an extension here and now they are convinced he just opts out and signs elsewhere.  Did it ever occur to some of you he might just like where he's at?  He could have signed in free agency with somebody else and got the same opt-out clauses in his deal.  Why would he only want to stay in DC another few years then leave?  What would have changed?  He's started a family, so they only are going to have deeper roots here by that time.

Offline Ray D

  • Posts: 10073
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #60: October 17, 2017, 02:28:16 PM »
So many were convinced Stras would never sign an extension here and now they are convinced he just opts out and signs elsewhere.  Did it ever occur to some of you he might just like where he's at?  He could have signed in free agency with somebody else and got the same opt-out clauses in his deal.  Why would he only want to stay in DC another few years then leave?  What would have changed?  He's started a family, so they only are going to have deeper roots here by that time. 

It isn't a matter of leaving.  It's that his opt-out is tantamount to free-agency (actually better - he has a guaranteed contract if he opts-in and free agency if he opts-out).  So at that point he is free to negotiate a new contract, if he feels that the current contract doesn't live up to his market value. So rather than "why would he leave" the question would be: why wouldn't he try to negotiate a better contract?  He may well end up here, the point is, the contract really isn't the home discount it was advertised to be.

Offline Count Walewski

  • Posts: 1948
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #61: October 17, 2017, 02:30:41 PM »
I'd hardly consider catcher to be the "top" priority. There's a decent chance we have an acceptable in-house replacement for Weiters. Another top of the rotation starter, filling in the bullpen holes, and completely rebuilding the bench are all higher priorities.

Offline CoryTheFormerExposFan

  • Posts: 1091
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #62: October 17, 2017, 02:39:32 PM »
It isn't a matter of leaving.  It's that his opt-out is tantamount to free-agency (actually better - he has a guaranteed contract if he opts-in and free agency if he opts-out).  So at that point he is free to negotiate a new contract, if he feels that the current contract doesn't live up to his market value. So rather than "why would he leave" the question would be: why wouldn't he try to negotiate a better contract?  He may well end up here, the point is, the contract really isn't the home discount it was advertised to be.

Absolutely it's tailored to his advantage.  That is how you'll see any big-ticket player's contract work.  They always get more years than the team would want.  I doubt the Angles wanted to be paying Pujols these dollars up in his 40s, but they had to in order to sign him for those last good years he was expected to have.  They get opt-outs so that if their value increases they get even more by opting out, and if they are hurt and their value diminishes they still have the original deal.  Somebody else will give them the deal if your team doesn't.

Offline Ray D

  • Posts: 10073
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #63: October 17, 2017, 02:41:49 PM »
I'd hardly consider catcher to be the "top" priority. There's a decent chance we have an acceptable in-house replacement for Weiters.

Who'd you have in mind?

Offline Elvir Ovcina

  • Posts: 2464
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #64: October 17, 2017, 02:47:37 PM »
Player-only options? It sounded like it was pretty unique when Boras did it with Strasburg.

Nah.  Just among pitchers: Cueto has an opt out, so does Tanaka, Wei-Yin Chen, Ian Kennedy as well, and that's just opt outs that can be exercised after this season.  Kershaw has one that he can use after next season (as does David Price), Greinke had and used one to get out of LA, Sabathia had one back in 2011 that he used to get better term out of NYY, James Shields had one that he didn't use. 

Offline CoryTheFormerExposFan

  • Posts: 1091
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #65: October 17, 2017, 03:06:01 PM »
Nah.  Just among pitchers: Cueto has an opt out, so does Tanaka, Wei-Yin Chen, Ian Kennedy as well, and that's just opt outs that can be exercised after this season.  Kershaw has one that he can use after next season (as does David Price), Greinke had and used one to get out of LA, Sabathia had one back in 2011 that he used to get better term out of NYY, James Shields had one that he didn't use.

First major one I recall was A-Rod in NY.

Offline awbb

  • Posts: 639
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #66: October 17, 2017, 03:09:04 PM »
Who'd you have in mind?

Anyone who hits more than .225 and throws a decent percentage of runners trying to steal bases out?

Or, Matt Wieters getting paid league minimum, or about 1/20th of what he ‘earned’ this year (and will get next season too)..

He started the season with really well but appeared to forget how to play baseball after the walkoff against the Blos. It must have been a dagger to do that to his (old) team.

Offline GburgNatsFan

  • Posts: 19304
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #67: October 17, 2017, 03:18:53 PM »
Huh. Maybe I'll have to find that feature on Scott Boras and read it again, see why he was so smug and thought this was so unique an arrangement.

Nah.  Just among pitchers: Cueto has an opt out, so does Tanaka, Wei-Yin Chen, Ian Kennedy as well, and that's just opt outs that can be exercised after this season.  Kershaw has one that he can use after next season (as does David Price), Greinke had and used one to get out of LA, Sabathia had one back in 2011 that he used to get better term out of NYY, James Shields had one that he didn't use.

Offline Elvir Ovcina

  • Posts: 2464
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #68: October 17, 2017, 03:30:19 PM »
First major one I recall was A-Rod in NY.

Same, but I was limiting it to pitchers.  I think the catastrophic injury risk makes the market for pitchers a fundamentally different valuation/negotiation exercise than for hitters.

Offline dcpatti

  • Posts: 3051
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #69: October 17, 2017, 03:46:32 PM »
It isn't a matter of leaving.  It's that his opt-out is tantamount to free-agency (actually better - he has a guaranteed contract if he opts-in and free agency if he opts-out).  So at that point he is free to negotiate a new contract, if he feels that the current contract doesn't live up to his market value. So rather than "why would he leave" the question would be: why wouldn't he try to negotiate a better contract?  He may well end up here, the point is, the contract really isn't the home discount it was advertised to be.


To be fair, if he decides to opt out and use the quasi free agency  as leverage to get more money or more favorable terms, the team can always say Bye and let him walk, which makes it risky for a player who actually does want to stay here.

Offline CoryTheFormerExposFan

  • Posts: 1091
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #70: October 17, 2017, 03:46:58 PM »
Same, but I was limiting it to pitchers.  I think the catastrophic injury risk makes the market for pitchers a fundamentally different valuation/negotiation exercise than for hitters.

Agreed.

Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 19680
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #71: October 17, 2017, 03:51:35 PM »
Same, but I was limiting it to pitchers.  I think the catastrophic injury risk makes the market for pitchers a fundamentally different valuation/negotiation exercise than for hitters.

maybe, but I'm guessing a lot of the teams that have signed hitters to enormous deals wished that they had taken opt outs, then again a lot of them go sour before the player would ever have the chance to exercise the option

Online Slateman

  • Posts: 45811
  • Tom's Narcan Hero
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #72: October 17, 2017, 09:39:17 PM »
I wouldn't mind if they had a relationship with Boras that was a little more like other teams. One thing that's guaranteed: the relationship does zero for the Nats.  It's only about money, whatever the Lerners or Rizzo may think.

That Strasburg deal for instance... Steven gets to decide after 2019, and again after 2020, if he wants out. So basically if he keeps ptiching like this, he goes somewhere else for huge money. If he gets injured again... guaranteed pay for four more years beyond 2020.

The relationship might get a return call for the Nats to match. Some contract construction.

Offline whytev

  • Posts: 8768
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #73: October 17, 2017, 09:53:48 PM »
Is there any evidence that any of this is anyone other than the gm?

There were whole newspaper articles devoted to it.  By reputable reporters.

Offline whytev

  • Posts: 8768
Re: Top priority: catcher
« Reply #74: October 17, 2017, 09:55:07 PM »
First major one I recall was A-Rod in NY.

You mean Texas.