Cespedes Re-signs with the Mets

[southsider2k5]

Yes, that is true. However, maybe there is a "method to their madness". By giving the guy more money up front, and less money later, they are providing the player with a tremendous extra motivation to produce. He has a chance to make more money, if he can demonstrate his value. That is one of the things about which I was thinking, when I raised this issue. Think of it this way: One of the biggest concerns about giving a player a big long term contract is that you disincentivise his productivity.

Hey, he's got his long term guarantee, it's just human nature to become a little complacent. By continuing to hold out a potentially bigger reward for excellence, you keep him highly motivated. Then, as he approaches the years, in which you are really not that thrilled to be obligated, he opts out, and signs his bigger deal. Now he is both slowing down, because of age, and he is far less motivated, because he has obtained the final big payday.

 

To me, this kind of contract can be an effective way to both keep a player motivated, and possibly avoid the undesirable long term obligation to a player in his declining years. Maybe the Cubs had that precise strategy in mind, when they offered that contract to Hayward. Why not front load a big contract to Cespedes, and give him an opt out, in 3 years? Pay him and motivate him, for the anticipated prime years, and then, let him go, as he approaches his mid 30's, and wish him all the best. Moreover, if he should decide to stay, at least you are paying him less, for what is likely to be a lower level of performance. It also makes it easier to trade him, if the contract is more manageable.

 

Sure. Motivated to leave.

[Jerksticks]

Sure. Motivated to leave.

Which is good. One word: Engel

[caulfield12]

It's a bit scary if Engel's our best outfield solution for the future (it's also indicative of how far Courtney Hawkins' stock has fallen).

 

I realize he had a great AFL season, but let's wait until he puts up an 800+ OPS in Birmingham first.

[BlackSox13]

Ya, let's see how Engel handles moving up to AA before we get too excited. Engel is definitely a player to take the wait and see approach with.

[Jerksticks]

Ya, let's see how Engel handles moving up to AA before we get too excited. Engel is definitely a player to take the wait and see approach with.

Mos def. God I hope he tears up AA and Anderson tears up AAA...AND Saladino cements himself as our SS for the next 5-8 years. Would love to be able to use Anderson to get our catcher of the future.

[BlackSox13]

Mos def. God I hope he tears up AA and Anderson tears up AAA...AND Saladino cements himself as our SS for the next 5-8 years. Would love to be able to use Anderson to get our catcher of the future.

I'm with ya on hopes of these guys tearing it up next year and dont forget about little Jacob May, but ya lost me with Anderson. Even if Saladino were to cement himself as the SS of the future, I think Anderson has the speed and arm to become a good outfielder if given time and patience. I haven't looked around at young catchers so I really don't know much about who's out there but I would be hesitant on trading a talent like Anderson for a catcher.

[Lillian]

Allow me to summarize this strategy of offering a player a contract, with a higher pay out up front, and an option for the player to "opt out" of the contract.

Here are the benefits to the team:

 

1) The player remains highly motivated, because he has not necessarily obtained his final contract.

2) The player has an incentive to leave, and thus reduce the total number of years, in which the organization is obligated to pay him, and keep him on the roster.

3) If the player does not opt out, the contract is more manageable, as the annual salary is smaller, in the later years.

4) The contract is more tradable, for the same reasons.

 

Let's consider Cespedes, as an example. He is 30 years old. Ideally, a team would like to sign him to a 3 year deal, taking him through the rest of his prime years.

However, he wants 6 years, which means that a team would be paying him, when he is 33 through 35, no longer in his prime. He would not consider leaving, if he were going to make as much on his current guaranteed contract, as he could get by opting out, and reentering free agency.

Moreover, and most importantly, he becomes complacent, as he has already signed his last contract, and there is less incentive. Oh sure, he plays up to the best of his ability, when on the field, after all, he wants to win, and he takes pride in his play, but he doesn't necessarily continue to work out as hard, maintain the best health regimine, practice with same focus, or study the pitchers as diligently, as he might, especially during the off season. It's just human nature!!

 

Contrast that scenario, with one in which he is getting paid significantly more money, during the first half of his contract. He remains highly motivated, with an eye toward that 4TH year, when he knows that he can opt out, and seek a more lucrative deal, as a free agent.

He continues to stay in the best shape he can, he practices diligently and approaches the game, as most players do, who are in their free agency season. Then, after 3 years of his prime playing days, with outstanding effort and production, still in great shape, he opts out. Signs a better deal, and immediately succumbs to the irresistible temptation to begin to relax a little bit. His new team is now stuck with an aging, more injury prone, less motivated, high salaried player.

 

If Cespedes wants, and could get, 6 years and let's say $150 million. Why not give him $90 million ($30M per year) for the first 3 years, and $60 million ($20M per year), over the final 3 years? There is never any guarantee on any deal, but by structuring the contract in this manner, a team maximizes its chances for a satisfactory outcome.

 

Does the team receive a draft pick, if the player opts out?

[caulfield12]

The problem is very simple...the White Sox don't want to go $30 million into red ink when they would prefer to spend $17.5 million.

 

Neither Cespedes or Upton is worth that amount alone. Neither is quite a superstar. You're going to be devoting 20-22.5% of the payroll to a single player, and neither's as good as Chris Sale or maybe even Quintana. At least not to an organization with a middle class payroll and mid-market mentality.

 

It was true in 2005, it's just as true today.

 

Even having two of the best pitchers in the game like Kershaw and Greinke that would warrant such a deal...they weren't even able to get the Dodgers to the World Series.

Edited December 29, 2015 by caulfield12

[Lillian]

The problem is very simple...the White Sox don't want to go $30 million into red ink when they would prefer to spend $17.5 million.

 

Neither Cespedes or Upton is worth that amount alone. Neither is quite a superstar. You're going to be devoting 20-22.5% of the payroll to a single player, and neither's as good as Chris Sale or maybe even Quintana. At least not to an organization with a middle class payroll and mid-market mentality.

 

It was true in 2005, it's just as true today.

 

Even having two of the best pitchers in the game like Kershaw and Greinke that would warrant such a deal...they weren't even able to get the Dodgers to the World Series.

 

The actual worth, or even realistic market value of Cespedes, or any other player, is a separate topic. Whatever the total amount of the contract, I'm interested in your opinion as to the merits of this front loaded, with an opt out, concept.

[LDF]

The problem is very simple...the White Sox don't want to go $30 million into red ink when they would prefer to spend $17.5 million.

 

Neither Cespedes or Upton is worth that amount alone. Neither is quite a superstar. You're going to be devoting 20-22.5% of the payroll to a single player, and neither's as good as Chris Sale or maybe even Quintana. At least not to an organization with a middle class payroll and mid-market mentality.

 

It was true in 2005, it's just as true today.

 

Even having two of the best pitchers in the game like Kershaw and Greinke that would warrant such a deal...they weren't even able to get the Dodgers to the World Series.

 

you make a great point, but why not a series of 1 opt contract with the last one at 33. for both the player and the team.

 

now this scenario would work with cesp b/c there the team will not loose a draft pick.

 

who knows, maybe even upton, he is young enuf. but the lost of the pick would hurt.

 

now the mid market statement. i hate to bring up another sport, but look at the hawks and the signing of hossa. like the hawks, maybe, just maybe the sox will need to over pay, maybe in the front end.

 

this is just a guess or an opinion.

[caulfield12]

It makes sense for Upton because of his age and ability to remain at or near peak three years from now...but not for Gordon and Cespedes is debatable.

 

Part of the problem is the White Sox historically have never been known to break ground in the escalation of player salaries...and a deal similar to Heyward's would do just that.

 

And I can hardly think of a time where they front-loaded a deal, let alone massively fron loading. If anything, they want to limit the payroll impact...you could imagine $15 million this year, $25-30 million in 2017, but that's still going to restrict financial flexibility to put together those 2-3 smaller ($5-10 million) signings to make the roster as competitive as possible going into the most important year of the current contention window.

[LDF]

It makes sense for Upton because of his age and ability to remain at or near peak three years from now...but not for Gordon and Cespedes is debatable.

 

Part of the problem is the White Sox historically have never been known to break ground in the escalation of player salaries...and a deal similar to Heyward's would do just that.

 

And I can hardly think of a time where they front-loaded a deal, let alone massively fron loading. If anything, they want to limit the payroll impact...you could imagine $15 million this year, $25-30 million in 2017, but that's still going to restrict financial flexibility to put together those 2-3 smaller ($5-10 million) signings to make the roster as competitive as possible going into the most important year of the current contention window.

 

ref the bold, you make a great point, i am just not looking at that, that far down the road. i am looking at next yr group of FA's. give a nice front end contract to make their wild to sign and then next yr they opt out. the hitters in that yr fa's is..... well not as strong.

 

plus the will mean money coming off the books with danks, laroche and just maybe one of the of'ers that was sign???? even make a promise you will not give them an QO ...... to sweeten the deal.

 

i know it is just a wild arse pipedream of trying to think out side the box.....

[caulfield12]

you make a great point, but why not a series of 1 opt contract with the last one at 33. for both the player and the team.

 

now this scenario would work with cesp b/c there the team will not loose a draft pick.

 

who knows, maybe even upton, he is young enuf. but the lost of the pick would hurt.

 

now the mid market statement. i hate to bring up another sport, but look at the hawks and the signing of hossa. like the hawks, maybe, just maybe the sox will need to over pay, maybe in the front end.

 

this is just a guess or an opinion.

 

Agent would never go for that. Too much risk of injury to risk losing a huge guaranteed amount.

[LDF]

Agent would never go for that. Too much risk of injury to risk losing a huge guaranteed amount.

 

you make an excellent counter.

 

but let me clarify something. i am talking about a 5-6 yr contract with a series of yrly options... since i do not know the in's and out's of that baseball legal systems in baseball contracts. i am wondering why that would not work. the contract is valid for 5-6 yrs????

 

i do not know the answers .... i am just asking.

[OmarComing25]

Part of the problem is the White Sox historically have never been known to break ground in the escalation of player salaries...and a deal similar to Heyward's would do just that.

Dick Allen, first player to break $250,000 in salary... with the White Sox.

 

Albert Belle, first player to break $10 million in salary... with the White Sox.

[southsider2k5]

Dick Allen, first player to break $250,000 in salary... with the White Sox.

 

Albert Belle, first player to break $10 million in salary... with the White Sox.

 

Both of which probably happened before you were born, one of which happened before this ownership group took over.

[knightni]

Dick Allen, first player to break $250,000 in salary... with the White Sox.

 

Albert Belle, first player to break $10 million in salary... with the White Sox.

Fact. Schmacts.

 

What we need is more off-topic name-dropping.

[Dunt]

It's terrifying to me that Cespedes might end up on the Sox. Dude has regret written all over him.

Edited December 29, 2015 by Dunt

[Jose Abreu]

It's terrifying to me that Cespedes might end up on the Sox. Dude has regret written all over him.

I feel that way about Gordon as well. Both have potential to perform below expectations here

[flavum]

It's terrifying to me that Cespedes might end up on the Sox. Dude has regret written all over him.

 

I can't get over him standing prone in LF while an inside-the-park homerun was going on.

 

He's got power, and we'll take it. But he seems like the type that would be part of the problem if things go bad quick. Hope I'm wrong, but I get the concern.

[blackmooncreeping]

I think Cespedes is a guy who would probably make a big splash initially, but the last few years, I'd be worried he would be Alfonso Soriano with the Cubs.

Another good comp

[Lillian]

To those of you who assert that the best way for an organization to structure a contract is to "back load" it, I disagree, if the objective is to give the team flexibility by

encouraging the player to opt out. If the big money comes later in the deal, why would the player opt out. Reverse the numbers in my hypothetical example with Cespedes:

 

6 years for $150 Million

1ST 3 years at $20 Million per year

Last 3 years @ $30 Million per year

 

That would all but guarantee that the team will be paying the entire contract, as Cespedes would have little incentive to opt out.

Please explain what I am missing, and don't quibble about the total amount, as it is a hypothetical example.

[Bob Sacamano]

To those of you who assert that the best way for an organization to structure a contract is to "back load" it, I disagree, if the objective is to give the team flexibility by

encouraging the player to opt out. If the big money comes later in the deal, why would the player opt out. Reverse the numbers in my hypothetical example with Cespedes:

 

6 years for $150 Million

1ST 3 years at $20 Million per year

Last 3 years @ $30 Million per year

 

That would all but guarantee that the team will be paying the entire contract, as Cespedes would have little incentive to opt out.

Please explain what I am missing, and don't quibble about the total amount, as it is a hypothetical example.

 

I think posters just mean backload it after this year. I know I do. So if you gave him a 5 year deal, the first year would be less than the other 4, but then the other 4 would be equal payments.

[Chicago White Sox]

To those of you who assert that the best way for an organization to structure a contract is to "back load" it, I disagree, if the objective is to give the team flexibility by

encouraging the player to opt out. If the big money comes later in the deal, why would the player opt out. Reverse the numbers in my hypothetical example with Cespedes:

 

6 years for $150 Million

1ST 3 years at $20 Million per year

Last 3 years @ $30 Million per year

 

That would all but guarantee that the team will be paying the entire contract, as Cespedes would have little incentive to opt out.

Please explain what I am missing, and don't quibble about the total amount, as it is a hypothetical example.

The part you're missing is front-loading a contract hurts your financial flexibility now. I'm sure most teams would love to see annual salaries in contracts decrease over time along with expected production, but the desire to win now (usually why you're adding a big FA) typically prevents that.

[Marky Mark]

Backloading just moves with the flow of inflation too.