Francisco Lindor signs monster extension (10 years, $341 million)

[mmc]

 

[mmc]

 

[mmc]

 

[Lou]

Haha i read a couple of days ago that he had turned down 10/$340M.

I guess that extra $100K/yr sealed the deal. 

 

[Stradling]

Had to get more dollars than Tatis. 

[wopphil]

Such an over-pay. He is a good player, but arguably the most over-rated in baseball. 

[mmc]

16 minutes ago, Lou said:

Haha i read a couple of days ago that he had turned down 10/$340M.

I guess that extra $100K/yr sealed the deal. 

 

Mets were offering 10/$325, he countered with 12/380

[Angelsjunky]

So we've got, for players owed $200M or more:

Trout (remaining, age 29-38): 10/$371M

Betts (age 28-39): 12/$365M

Lindor (age 27-36): 10/$341M

Tatis (age 22-35): 14/$340M

Harper (age 28-38): 11/$291M

Cole (age 30-37): 8/$288M

Machado (age 28-35): 8/$256M

Stanton (age 31-38): 8/$233M (or 7/$218M with last year buyout)

Rendon (age 31-36): 6/$220M

Yelich (age 29-37): 9/$217M (or 8/$197M without last year mutual option)

Arenado (age 30-36): 7/$214M

Strasburg (age 32-37): 6/$210M

I'm guessing that Cody Bellinger, Ronald Acuna, and Juan Soto will join them within the next year or two - possibly Shohei Ohtani, and maybe Alex Bregman (he's signed through 2024, but I could see the Astros wanting to extend him if he bounces back).

Anyhow, wondering which of these will start looking bad in a couple years. The Stanton contract has looked awful for a couple years now, with 41 games played over the last two seasons. Arenado and Strasburg are teetering, but could redeem themselves with a resurgence in 2021. I expect Yelich to bounce back, and his deal might turn out to be one of the best (he never makes more than $26M in a season). Harper could fall if his old player's skill-set equate to early decline. Trout...we won't go there.

 

Edited April 1, 2021 by Angelsjunky

[Lou]

25 minutes ago, wopphil said:

Such an over-pay. He is a good player, but arguably the most over-rated in baseball. 

Him getting more than Tatis is ridiculous.

[Angelsjunky]

6 minutes ago, Lou said:

Him getting more than Tatis is ridiculous.

I agree, or at least I'd much rather have the Tatis contract, but we have to take into account where they are in their careers. Lindor would have been a free agent next year, while the Padres have four (maybe five) more years of club-control for Tatis. The Tatis contract is relatively "cheap" because he's so early in his career.

Of the $200M+ contracts, if I was the GM of a new franchise and could take any of them, I'd probably grab Tatis without losing too much sleep. After that it would probably be Yelich because of its relative affordability. But Lindor would be in the next group with Trout, Betts, and Machado (I don't love Machado, but his contract is decent - if only because it doesn't go into his late 30s).

[Pancake Bear]

Bag on Heyman all you want, but the dude sometimes breaks news first. Here he is making Passan look behind the times:

[failos]

 

[aznhockeyguy]

I'm not as high on Lindor either, but he's still top tier SS.  You don't find those everyday. 

[totdprods]

Wonder what Javier Baez will get this winter.

[Dtwncbad]

9 hours ago, Pancake Bear said:

Bag on Heyman all you want, but the dude sometimes breaks news first. Here he is making Passan look behind the times:

Looks like Paasan had all the actual details and Heyman got word of the signing first.

I’m not sure how that makes Passan look “behind the times.”

Heyman is terrible at getting and reporting accurate inside information compared to Passan.

Heyman sometimes gets news of something actually happening just before others.

What is the real value in that?  We get a Heyman headline 7 minutes before we would have gotten it anyway?  So what?

Heyman is basically the fat guy in a pickup basketball game spending the whole game lingering at half court watching everyone else actually play basketball, just cherry picking the whole game to get his three or four uncontested layups.

I think Heyman is pretty lame regardless of him sometimes hearing about an actual agreement five minutes before everybody else.

“First reported by” is trivial versus actually breaking news that others were not gong to get at all.

[Stradling]

Before anyone shit talks Passan I present to you this:

 

Anyone that trolls the Red Sox is a friend in my book. 

[Warfarin]

10 hours ago, Angelsjunky said:

I agree, or at least I'd much rather have the Tatis contract, but we have to take into account where they are in their careers. Lindor would have been a free agent next year, while the Padres have four (maybe five) more years of club-control for Tatis. The Tatis contract is relatively "cheap" because he's so early in his career.

Of the $200M+ contracts, if I was the GM of a new franchise and could take any of them, I'd probably grab Tatis without losing too much sleep. After that it would probably be Yelich because of its relative affordability. But Lindor would be in the next group with Trout, Betts, and Machado (I don't love Machado, but his contract is decent - if only because it doesn't go into his late 30s).

Yeah, this is the key point.  Baseball's salary structure is rather defined, and Tatis was still in the "cheap years" that the Padres effectively bought out.  Tatis is the better player, but if he wasn't given the contract and allowed to go through arbitration, he would have cost them pennies on the dollar for those years.

If Tatis were instead where Lindor (the year before free agency), he probably would have broken 400 million or gotten awfully close to it over less years.

[Warfarin]

Personally, I think this particular contract is an overpay.  Lindor is a great SS, but a significant amount of his value is derived from being an elite defensive SS.  His offense is certainly good, but not great.  He should maintain his defensive edge for a few more years, but defense can sharply decline with age.  Tatis, by comparison, is offensively elite wherever he plays and, even if he one day has to move off SS, his bat will play anywhere.

Of note, Lindor's 10 year deal doesn't actually start until next year, so this contract is through his age 37 season (not 36, as @Angelsjunky mentioned above).

[Dtwncbad]

It is an interesting question to ask which big contract you would prefer to have on your team or which you would hate having on your team.

But it is more than a little skewed to judge them against each each other in raw years/dollars when many were negotiated in entirely different circumstances.

A 14 year deal signed five years from free agency is dramatically different from a contract negotiated in pure free agency.

[Don]

1 hour ago, Warfarin said:

Personally, I think this particular contract is an overpay.  Lindor is a great SS, but a significant amount of his value is derived from being an elite defensive SS.  His offense is certainly good, but not great.  He should maintain his defensive edge for a few more years, but defense can sharply decline with age.  Tatis, by comparison, is offensively elite wherever he plays and, even if he one day has to move off SS, his bat will play anywhere.

Of note, Lindor's 10 year deal doesn't actually start until next year, so this contract is through his age 37 season (not 36, as @Angelsjunky mentioned above).

Yeah, if Lindor is still putting up an .850-ish OPS and playing good defense six or seven years from now then it’s not a terrible deal. But I feel like there’s an equally good chance that he’s an average or below average defender putting up a .750-ish OPS by then, and that is not good. Just seems like a risky deal, but credit to his agent for getting in on the mega contract thing while they could.

[Docwaukee]

54 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

It is an interesting question to ask which big contract you would prefer to have on your team or which you would hate having on your team.

But it is more than a little skewed to judge them against each each other in raw years/dollars when many were negotiated in entirely different circumstances.

A 14 year deal signed five years from free agency is dramatically different from a contract negotiated in pure free agency.

Is Trout's deal becoming a bargain?   I'm inclined to sort of think so.  It's kinda funny that for everyone below him there is some debate on paying those guys that much.  For Trout, everyone is like 'f it'.  Give him whatever. 

[Warfarin]

35 minutes ago, Don said:

Yeah, if Lindor is still putting up an .850-ish OPS and playing good defense six or seven years from now then it’s not a terrible deal. But I feel like there’s an equally good chance that he’s an average or below average defender putting up a .750-ish OPS by then, and that is not good. Just seems like a risky deal, but credit to his agent for getting in on the mega contract thing while they could.

Yeah.  He wasn't that good offensively last year, but last year was an odd year, so I'll give him a pass.

I think this deal will end up being a bad one for them.  Of the deals listed above, I think Trout's deal will be looked at as great given the production we'll get, as will Tatis' deal and Betts' deal.  I don't think this one will fair that well.

[WicketMaiden]

According to NYPost $50m is deferred, to be paid out at $5m per year from 2032 to 2041. So quite a lot of depreciation in the actual value of that contract to Lindor. 

https://nypost.com/2021/03/31/mets-francisco-lindor-reach-342-million-contract-extension/

[WicketMaiden]

14 hours ago, Angelsjunky said:

 

I'm guessing that Cody Bellinger, Ronald Acuna, and Juan Soto will join them within the next year or two

 

Acuna was signed in 2019 to an 8/100 or 10/124 if team options are taken up. Now THAT is looking like an absolute steal of a deal. 

[mmc]

Curious what the reactions would be if the Angels gave him this deal in free agency next year