Royals 2009 Payroll Update (including projections)
by NYRoyal on Dec 17, 2008 3:51 AM EST
87 comments
The Royals payroll has undergone significant changes over the last month and the murky picture of who would be included in that payroll has become considerably more clear. The bottom line is that the Royals 2009 payroll currently projects to be about $77.8 million, including estimates for players eligible for arbitration and those who are still pre-arbitration.
Last year's payroll was approximately $67 million. But this should not lead one to the conclusion that the Royals have only spent $10 million in new outlays. A significant part of that $67 million came off the books at the end of the season (including almost $10 million from Berroa's and Grudzielanek's contracts alone). There's so much more the Royals could have done with that $78 million, but they've chosen to do this:
Crisp + Fransworth + Jacobs + Ramirez + Waechter = $15.94 million. Kudos to you, Mr. Glass for increasing payroll when most organizations are not. I only wish Dayton Moore had done better with your money.
3 recs |
87 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Michael
“You must spend this surplus or else next year’s budget will be cut.”
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Dec 17, 2008 9:52 AM EST reply actions 2 recs
pink slips
Wow, by my count, we will likely drop 10 of these players from 2010 roster and still end up with $75M committed. How do we fill that many vacancies?
I don’t care for how the future holds financially.
Time for a youth movement!!!
by David Howards Legacy on Dec 17, 2008 10:10 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Hell Yeah!!!
We always did feel the same, We just saw it from a different point of view, Tangled up in blue.
-Bob Dylan
by Royal Kingdom on Dec 17, 2008 10:27 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
how do you figure?
the commitments listed for 2010 total approximately $52 million, and approximately $17 of that is options. Yabuta and Gload surely won’t be picked up, so you’ve got about $35 guaranteed plus Crisp’s $8 (I have no clue as to whether or not this would be picked up) and that’s a total of $43 plus Olivo’s option which gets us to about $46 for 7 players. I actually think that a positive of the roster setup is that it appears to give Moore a lot of flexibility from year to year. Yes the Farnsworth signing sucks. But, it’s a manageable number still. 2010 and beyond is when the talent in the minors should begin to bear some serious fruit, giving us even more flexibility to sign our best pre-FA players long-term and/or possibly get an impact player in FA as needed.
I hereby resign from this post.
by Home Run Tony Cogan on Dec 17, 2008 10:29 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
estimates
These are the values I see changing for 2010 (rounded) and a crude estimate of arbitration
Gains:
Meche +1 (1M increase in 2010)
Coco +2 the only reason to trade for Crisp is to keep him
Grienke +3
Jacobs +1.5
DDJ +1
Banny +1
Davies +1
Hoch +1.5
Soria +2
Gordon +2.5 first year of arbitration
= +16M
Loses from the 2009 salary:
Mahay -4
Teahen -3 non tendered or traded
Buck -3 non tendered or traded
Yabuta -3
Gload -2
HoRam -2
Gobble -2
Bale -1
German -1
Ducky -.5
Pena -.5
= -22M
That’s a difference of -6M with 11 players dropping and several backup positions to fill. That’s .5M each or rookie level cost. Not much flexibility to build a team to compete in 2010. Plus no new starters. Everything will have to come in trades and need to unload somebody else.
by David Howards Legacy on Dec 17, 2008 10:41 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
The Guillen contract
It’s the gift that keeps on giving all year round.
by Top Ramen on Dec 17, 2008 12:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Still only get $64.6 million
Instead of trying to factor in the adds and subtracts, why not just list the players and their actual/estimated salaries?
Guillen 12
Meche 12
Crisp 8
Farns 4.5
Greinke 6
Jacobs 4
DeJesus 4.6
Olivo 3
Davies 2
Hochevar 2
Soria 3
Gordon 2
Butler .5
Callaspo .5
Aviles .5
That’s 15 players for a total cost of $64.6. If I didn’t list a player my prediction is that they’ll be non-tendered or their option won’t be picked up. Most of the rest of the roster would be backups/bench players anyway, as these 15 players include 4/5 of the probable pitching staff, the entire infield and outfield, one reliever and one closer.
I would expect that any significant changes to these starters would mean a subtraction from somewhere else. For example, if we decide that Jacobs isn’t worth it or we’re confident in our other available options, there goes another $4 million off of the total. If Rosa can be the 5th starter, there’s a hole that’s filled for the league minimum.
The other side of the coin is that several players will or may receive arb increases and/or contract extensions, but that isn’t really a factor until 2011 and beyond.
To summarize, there’s nothing in here that has crippled the franchise. Guillen’s albatross goes away after next year and that coincides with several talented players (in theory at least) coming to the bigs.
I like where we’re at and where we’re going. It’s not perfect, and maybe we could have done better, but I think the near and medium term future is bright.
I hereby resign from this post.
by Home Run Tony Cogan on Dec 17, 2008 1:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
its amazing that soria is only making one million next year
his agent is wise
by royalsreview on Dec 17, 2008 12:40 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
well, without the long-term deal,
he would be making $420,000 as a player still one year away from free agency.
by Gopherballs on Dec 17, 2008 12:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Greinke
After looking over comps for starters with 4+ years, Greinke’s salary might be more in the $6-$7 million range for 2009. Eric Bedard is probably Greinke’s best comp from last year’s arbitration eligibles, and he received $7 million (he signed a contract splitting the difference between the team’s arbitration offer of $6 million and his offer of $8 million). In addition, the arbitrator would base Greinke’s salary on what other similar starters made or will make in their fourth year, which include:
Jeremy Bonderman, $9.5 million
Scott Kazmir, $9.5 million
Roy Oswalt, $8.45 million
Ben Sheets, $7.7 million
Mark Buehrle, $6 million.
The half year in the bullpen in 2007 and the lack of gaudy Win totals should keep him from getting Oswalt money, but he profiles right in line with Buehrle, Bedard, and Sheets.
Greinke would be in line for an even bigger payday in his last year of arbitration, as the arbitrator’s consideration is not restricted to players in the same service time class, but to all players, including those who signed big money free agent contracts.
This again illustrates that Moore needs to sign Greinke to a long-term deal yesterday, but everyone already knew that.
by Gopherballs on Dec 17, 2008 1:03 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I think his low innings pitched (and the other counting stats that go with it) in 2007 will keep his number down somewhat
But $4M may indeed be too low.
The immoderate moderator
by NYRoyal on Dec 17, 2008 4:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
All told, I don't believe...
…that GMDM spent this money badly. Considering that some of our players are underpaid this year, and are arbitration eligible/protected, we can overpay in spots to get talent. I personally think that Jacobs and Crisp are worth more than we’re paying them.
In sum, good job GMDM on making the best of the special situation that is KC baseball under the Glass family. – TL
[In 2008] Kila Ka’aihue had the best on-base percentage of any hitter in the minor leagues. - Joe Posnanski, 11/9/2008 ... Ergo, let's give him a shot at first base in KC in 2009.
by timlacy on Dec 17, 2008 1:37 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
80+ Million payroll next year
after Zack goes 23-2 with a 1.50 ERA and Alex hits .330 with 51 HRs KC will be forced to pay 10+ mil each
It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.
by kcscoliny on Dec 17, 2008 1:55 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
you're talking by the ASB, right?
I hereby resign from this post.
by Home Run Tony Cogan on Dec 17, 2008 2:00 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No Killer Contracts Here
Some unwise ones, but if one wanted to “nuke” the roster only two guys absolutely have to be paid in 2010—-Meche and Soria—-probably the the top two to retain, and even they could be traded.
Lots of flexibility here as the pipeline of homegrown talent starts to reach the bigs.
by howserfan2 on Dec 17, 2008 2:34 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
Looks like
You’re assuming Butler spends most of 2009 in AAA!
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Dec 17, 2008 3:21 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
How could I leave off Butler?
Any other glaring omissions or mistakes?
The immoderate moderator
by NYRoyal on Dec 17, 2008 4:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh wait, Butler is there
Are you saying that my pre-arb/arb. years are off for him?
The immoderate moderator
by NYRoyal on Dec 17, 2008 6:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Butler's a ninja
now you see him, now you don’t
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by devil_fingers on Dec 17, 2008 6:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No
Trust me, you see him.
Founder of the Johnny Giavotella fan club.
by doublestix on Dec 17, 2008 7:35 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
it's the Baconator you don't see
by Fernando Vina School of Linguistics on Dec 17, 2008 11:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The Zebra Cakes are always there, though
(Or at least, Photoshop and I say they are there.)
WTF, self?
by minda33 on Dec 18, 2008 3:41 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
YES!
any pictures of Billy during the goatee period you told us about?
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by devil_fingers on Dec 18, 2008 11:27 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I always prefered...
Swiss Cake Rolls myself.
Then again, I’ve never been a professional “athlete,” so who I am to question what’s on Billy’s training table?
"Quit trying to strike everybody out. Strikeouts are boring...besides that they're fascist. Throw some groundballs. It's more democratic."
by Sweep_the_Leg on Dec 18, 2008 11:47 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
We are all gonna be surprised when Billy comes into ST totally YOLKED
I’ve never understood that phrase does it have to do with eggs or something else
It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.
by kcscoliny on Dec 18, 2008 4:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
must be health
through drinking raw eggs, ala Rocky,… and Mick. Yo, Mick.
I may not be much, but I've got great intangibles.
by kabrink on Dec 18, 2008 5:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Or
the yolkes that oexn use to pull weight!??
by true_blue on Dec 18, 2008 5:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I thought of that too but wasn't sure.
It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.
by kcscoliny on Dec 19, 2008 11:10 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
There is, of course, a story here.
There were a bunch of Zebra Cakes in the clubhouse before a rain delay in Omaha one night…obviously I’m not allowed to go in the clubhouse so I asked someone to go in there and get a Zebra Cake for me and one other gal. Around that time, Butler went into the clubhouse.
A few minutes later, the guy I had asked to get me one actually went into the clubhouse to fetch it. Around that time, Butler came out of the clubhouse. Then, my person emerged from the clubhouse to report that the Zebra Cakes were all gone. I’m not saying Butler ate all of the Zebra Cakes, and I’m not saying he didn’t….
…but he totally did.
WTF, self?
by minda33 on Dec 18, 2008 6:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Best stories ever
Seriously…can you give a lecture in KC sometime or something?
by Bornin85 on Dec 18, 2008 7:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Seriously?
Thanks. Maybe I’ll do a weekly podcast of these random stories.
(OK probably not.)
WTF, self?
by minda33 on Dec 18, 2008 8:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, hopes up...
then down. Feels like…being…I dunno
a Royals fan…
by Bornin85 on Dec 18, 2008 10:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I can't wait...
to get some “Zebra Cakes” chants going at Kauffman this summer whenever Billy comes up. Maybe I’ll see if I can get him to autograph an empty Zebra Cake box.
"Quit trying to strike everybody out. Strikeouts are boring...besides that they're fascist. Throw some groundballs. It's more democratic."
by Sweep_the_Leg on Dec 19, 2008 12:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Or that photo that I saw somewhere
of him holding a photoshopped box of them. That’d mess with his mind.
I’m his friend on facebook, and that means a lot, so I shouldn’t make fun of him.
by Bornin85 on Dec 19, 2008 12:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, haha
by somewhere I meant right above…haha.
And the facebook thing was a joke
by Bornin85 on Dec 19, 2008 12:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
My friend and I referred to him as
“Little Debbie” from that point forward.
WTF, self?
by minda33 on Dec 19, 2008 12:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
"LITTLE Debbie"?
I could easily see that changing into just “Debbie” or “Big Debbie” very quickly.
"Quit trying to strike everybody out. Strikeouts are boring...besides that they're fascist. Throw some groundballs. It's more democratic."
by Sweep_the_Leg on Dec 19, 2008 1:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I heard he ATE Little Debbie
AND CLEAN UP YOUR DIRTY MINDS – I DIDN’T MEAN IT THAT WAY!
I may not be much, but I've got great intangibles.
by kabrink on Dec 19, 2008 7:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I just thought it was weird
Him and Aviles will hit arb at the same time but I guess Butler only spent a few months in KC in 2007 didn’t he.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Dec 18, 2008 9:38 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I think it is the combination of a few months in the majors in 2007 along with his demotion in 2008 that adds up to an extra year of team control.
The immoderate moderator
by NYRoyal on Dec 18, 2008 11:42 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Moving Teahen and Buck makes the most sense to me
to reduce payroll. They would have some trade value to other teams and KC can replace them with players already on the roster. Savings of $6-8 million. Just don’t see Guillen getting traded with his salary and clubhouse attitude. Eating his salary in order to trade him negates the move in the first place.
I see KC making one more move in for the everyday roster whether FA or trade. The log jam at first has to be broken either in off season or spring training. KC doesn’t have the bench space for Gload, Butler, Jacobs and Shealy.
I am looking for addition of a utility infielder type and/or a corner OF. I thought Alex Cora might be a good fit for KC. So long, TPJ.
by daveyork on Dec 17, 2008 4:42 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Is Cora really much different from TPJ?
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Dec 17, 2008 4:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I guess he is
Who knew? TPJ is awful.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Dec 17, 2008 4:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Buck needs to go. B. Pena is tearing up
the Dominican Winter League which we all know translates 100% to the majors.
Pena is 2nd in the league with a 1.04 OPS not too bad.
What about Dusty Hughes is he still KC property?
It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.
by kcscoliny on Dec 17, 2008 5:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I assume Hughes is still with the Royals
Pitched for NWA and OMA last year. And I don’t think he became a minor league FA or anything, so I think he’s still in org.
The immoderate moderator
by NYRoyal on Dec 17, 2008 5:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That's alot of Lefties that I can checkout for the soon to be Sarpy County Royals
It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.
by kcscoliny on Dec 17, 2008 5:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, really
Lots of lefties both for the KC Royals bullpen and the Sarpy Royals BP/rotation. I hope Moore moves one or two of them before the deadline.
The immoderate moderator
by NYRoyal on Dec 17, 2008 5:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Who needs a Catcher, OF/1b, Lefty Bullpen Pitcher(s)
and has a SS to return to us? Are you listening Doug Melvin?
It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.
by kcscoliny on Dec 17, 2008 5:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
According to Chones
Olivo and Buck should both go and House and Pena should play for us.
Go Royals!
by BabyBlues on Dec 18, 2008 3:56 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
So you could quickly become disappointed with House and Pena?
AAAA players usually have pretty good projections. Don’t be fooled.
The immoderate moderator
by NYRoyal on Dec 18, 2008 12:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
they're cheaper
AAAA catchers than the ones we have already.
I may not be much, but I've got great intangibles.
by kabrink on Dec 18, 2008 1:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, just don't expect them to be better
I don’t think the Royals should have re-signed Olivo and now I think they should trade either Olivo or Buck. But I don’t expect House or Pena to be particularly good.
The immoderate moderator
by NYRoyal on Dec 18, 2008 1:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
fair 'nuf
I may not be much, but I've got great intangibles.
by kabrink on Dec 18, 2008 1:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think they are both able backups
But I do hear that House’s defense at catcher is pretty awful. I think what the Royals should have done is let Olivo go and go with a Buck-Pena or Buck-House tandem. Now, I think the Royals should trade either Olivo or Buck and have Pena or House as the backup. If there are no trades, you have to go with Olivo/Buck.
The immoderate moderator
by NYRoyal on Dec 18, 2008 3:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Buck-House
Sounds like a winner goes with the KC BBQ mystique.
Go Royals!
by BabyBlues on Dec 18, 2008 4:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Did you guys see that Izturis signed with BAL, 2/6M? Would he have been a fallback position on the Furcal sweepstakes?
Insurance for Aviles, dumping TPJ, adding depth to the middle infield, etc.
by Steve Hovley on Dec 17, 2008 5:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Nope...
"We’ll always look to get better," he said. "But the depth of our middle infield is strong. … We’ve done, in my mind, the best we could at this point, based on our roster and payroll."
"Quit trying to strike everybody out. Strikeouts are boring...besides that they're fascist. Throw some groundballs. It's more democratic."
by Sweep_the_Leg on Dec 17, 2008 5:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I hope the Royals are done with the middle IF
Actually, I wouldn’t mind signing a decent utility IFer who can ably backup SS. But I think much of anything beyond a one-year deal for the mediocrities out there is pointless. For this team, I think 2/6 for Izturis would have been pointless. That’s a fair contract but I’d much rather see a full season of Callaspo and get a good read on how good/bad he really is, and then make a move next offseason if necessary. O. Cabrera would be a disastrous signing. Hudson doesn’t move me unless he comes quite cheap. I have concerns about him and Seehan at BP wrote an article today absolutely tearing him to shreds. Too many red flags for too much money and a lost draft pick.
The immoderate moderator
by NYRoyal on Dec 17, 2008 6:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn't want them to go after...
either Cabrera or Hudson either. Fangraphs had an article yesterday saying basically the same thing about Hudson. Fortunately, I don’t think we have to worry about the Royals signing either one, even if they do turn out to be cheap, because the money just isn’t there and Guillen isn’t going anywhere.
I DO think, though, that the Royals need to give TPJ more competition in spring training than just Luis Hernandez, or they need to flat out go and get a low-level FA that will clearly be an upgrade over him…even if it is just another pure defensive replacement or backup. The lack of a ML-quality backup SS is the Royals last glaring need this offseason.
"Quit trying to strike everybody out. Strikeouts are boring...besides that they're fascist. Throw some groundballs. It's more democratic."
by Sweep_the_Leg on Dec 17, 2008 6:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t think we have to worry about the Royals signing either one, even if they do turn out to be cheap, because the money just isn’t there and Guillen isn’t going anywhere.
That’s likely true, but I could see the Royals trading Buck and/or Teahen for pre-arb. players/prospects and using the savings to O. Cabrera to a 2-3 year deal. It’s possible.
I DO think, though, that the Royals need to give TPJ more competition in spring training than just Luis Hernandez, or they need to flat out go and get a low-level FA that will clearly be an upgrade over him…even if it is just another pure defensive replacement or backup.
Agreed. I think they should throw a little money at some genuinely good, reliable defensive SS who can’t hit (TPJ but with a reliable glove). I mean, Adam Everett signed for $1M. And there are always lots of middle IFers out there with impressive defense who can’t hit their weight.
The problem is that Moore is a tools guy. And TPJ’s raw defensive tools are spectacular. The problem is that they’ve always been raw. He’s never refined his defensive game and become that rock solid vacuum cleaner at short who rarely misses a ball or makes a bad throw. If Moore paid more credence to performance, he’d see that TPJ’s defense isn’t getting better, it’s getting worse. And there’s no reason to believe at this point that he’s ever going to refine his great skills into great overall defense.
The immoderate moderator
by NYRoyal on Dec 17, 2008 6:18 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
ECKSTEIN NOW!
GRIT FOR 2009!
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Dec 17, 2008 10:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It was admirable
that, at least publicly to our knowledge, TPJ never really did pout and complain about losing his job. But, what drives me crazy is there was never any indication that he cared enough to try to change his huge “swing for the fences” swing to something more appropriate to him. I mean, what a waste. Try to learn to hit for contact and hit nice little line drive bloops, anything. He’s got a chance at one of the best jobs in the world but seems to think he’s good enough. He probably takes the same attitude to fielding practice. Do you think he’s got “entitlement” problems because of Papa?
by kabrink on Dec 18, 2008 1:24 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Do you think he’s got "entitlement" problems because of Papa?
I don’t know, but I think it is much harder to change your swing and your approach than fans often think. I mean he could just randomly take the first three pitches, but no pitching coach or manager is going to suggest or support that. All they can do is tell him to try to be more selective and only swing at good pitches in the strike zone. But that is much more easily said than done. Lots of baseball players are just bad at reading pitches in that split second that they have to make the swing-or-take decision. I don’t think the problem is his attitude; I think it is about hitting skills and gifts which he simply doesn’t have.
The immoderate moderator
by NYRoyal on Dec 18, 2008 1:38 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
probably right
As I said, his public attitude has been great so it may be an indication that his attitude to learning could certainly be good or accepting. The swing or take decision is, of course, critical and I agree probably not very teachable. However, it seems to me he ought to be able to learn how to shorten his swing and thereby work toward better contact when he does swing.
I know it’s very much easier said than done. But, just sayin’….
by kabrink on Dec 18, 2008 12:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I read the Fangraphs piece as more positive
I don’t know how much of Sheehan’s piece is below the “free” zone, but almost everything he says about Hudson could be said about Furcal (other than the fact that Hudson can’t play SS) — the ambiguously good offense, the injury issues, the age, the defensive reputation not matching up with recent stats.
Of course, I can’t see if Sheehan talks about contract size or not — and really, any talk in FA has to discuss that. FOr the record Sheehan is a guy who thought that Jose Guillen was a good signing because he projected as a league average player (he didn’t) once you threw out his injury-ridden 2006 (you shouldn’t) and that 3/36 is was an appropriate contract for a league average player (it isn’t even this year). We all make mistakes… me too.
Thankfully, Sheehan uses EqA rather than VORP. However, his contention that the bat won’t play anywhere else doesn’t hold up against positional adjustments. this may be missed due to him using VORP — which starts .from league average at the position year-to-year, rather than wins/year adjustments. With that in mind, Stat Corner has O-Dog’s park-adjusted offensive linear weights over 600 ABs (cloe to how often he has played) the last three years as 10.1, 10.9, 14.9. Thtat averages to good enough to be sufficient at any position other than first base, and 14.9 is good enough for first base.
I guess I have to disagree with Sheehan on this one.
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by devil_fingers on Dec 17, 2008 6:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I posted some excerpts from Sheehan's piece down in the Furcal thread where you mentioned possibly signing him for Furcal money
The immoderate moderator
by NYRoyal on Dec 17, 2008 6:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm probably not as negative on Hudson...
as either article, but the Royals spending that kind of money on Hudson (at this point) doesn’t make sense for a number of reasons:
1. Just doesn’t seem like the cash is there…without making some sort of difficult or unlikely moves first (moving Guillen, moving both Buck AND Teahen);
2. If you were going to spend that kind of money, it made more sense to spend it on Furcal, so you can shift Callaspo and have the good backup middle IF;
3. With where the Royals are now (close to .500, not close to contention), it makes more sense to take more of a risk (as far as performance is concerned) and give Callaspo a full year to see what you’ve got. If the risk pays off, then you’ve got a really solid (if not good) middle IF for another couple years…and it will REALLY be cheap.
The risk that I don’t want them to take, though, is Aviles struggling or getting injured and only having TPJ to start for the rest of the year (barring a desperate, in-season trade or promotion). That just seems silly when there are other affordable “TPJ options” who do what TPJ is supposed to do…only better.
"Quit trying to strike everybody out. Strikeouts are boring...besides that they're fascist. Throw some groundballs. It's more democratic."
by Sweep_the_Leg on Dec 17, 2008 6:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Good points, and I don't think it is an easy call
…but the loss of a second round draft pick I think is the tiebreaker for me. Any significant contract over multiple years decreases future flexibility when the Royals might actually be contending (that’s the downside; of course the upside would be his good performance on the field for some period of time). Add the loss of a second round draft pick to that lack of future flexibility and I think it is a pass.
That is, unless he can be had for Ellis-like money.
The immoderate moderator
by NYRoyal on Dec 17, 2008 6:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
heh heh
now I’m profilerating. You can check the other version of my post down below. I don’t think the Royals should go all out for Hudson, but I didn’t think so for Furcal, either. Indeed, the only thing I see Furcal as having over Hudson is his position. I see them as roughly equal defensively at their respective positions, with Hudson being the superior hitter (although ZiPs disagrees — I think the way Szym. weights things combined with the small sample of Furcal’s 2008 might distort things there, though).
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by devil_fingers on Dec 17, 2008 6:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Let's say the Royals had payroll room for it
What is your threshold for Hudson. Clearly you wouldn’t do a 4/48 contract for him and you’d jump at a 2/12 (me too on both). I remember you saying you’d be willing to do 3/36 on Furcal (with some very understandable hesitancy). Would you do the same for Hudson? Or if Furcal ends up signing with the Dodgers for 3/30, does that become Hudson’s ceiling for you in this market?
The immoderate moderator
by NYRoyal on Dec 17, 2008 6:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn't judge it completely by the other contracts
do that too much and you end up saying, “well, Jose Guillen got 3/36, so….” and then pretty soon you’re screwed. I know you aren’t suggesting that’s how one should go about things, I’m just try to get some perspective.
So while I would hope that 3/30 for Furcal would mean I could get O-Dog for less than that, I would be willing to go to 3/30 for Hudson. I don’t know if I’d go much higher than that.
I don’t know how no-trade clauses work, but I’d try to be really bitchy in the negotiations about it — make it sound like a major concession (which it would be). The more teams it covers, the lower my ceiling gets.
Won’t the team be getting a second-round pick if Grudz signs elsewhere? Either way, at 3/30 I’m not that worried about a second-round pick (right?). A first-rounder would be another matter. As Gopherballs put it elsewhere, you’d hope that DMGM was budgeting to keep signing guys like Melville who drop due to signability issues — if KC keeps that advantage going, then losing a second-rounder for signing a guy like Hudson to a good deal is not as devastating.
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by devil_fingers on Dec 17, 2008 7:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn’t judge it completely by the other contracts
I know that. I’m just saying it affects market value. Even if, theoretically, a crunching of the numbers shows that a player’s likely performance is worth $11M per season, but the market is currently pay less than that for that kind of production, it wouldn’t make sense to ignore those market forces and sign a bigger than necessary check.
Won’t the team be getting a second-round pick if Grudz signs elsewhere?
The Royals will be getting a Supplementary Round pick (between round 1 and round 2) if Grudz signs elsewhere.
Either way, at 3/30 I’m not that worried about a second-round pick (right?).
Yes, since Hudson was a Type A FA, given the Royals 2008 record, the Royals would lose a second round pick to sign him. The fact that the Royals will likely have a Supp. Round pick doesn’t make me feel any better about losing a second round pick. It has the same value, regardless.
As Gopherballs put it elsewhere, you’d hope that DMGM was budgeting to keep signing guys like Melville who drop due to signability issues
And the Royals can draft signability guys, as well as that second round pick, or without that second round pick. I’d rather have the Royals 2008 draft including their second round pick, than that draft without it.
Furcal is a lot like Hudson. If one is willing to go 3/30 on Furcal, then you should be willing to go 3/30 on Hudson. I just worry more about Hudson. In part that is because of what some have said and written about him (worry about his injuries, worry about his defense dropping off). In part it is likely irrational. I’d like to see some more, high quality projections for him. For any player, hanging my hat on Marcel and BJ feels pretty thin.
One more thing. I’d feel a lot better about signing Hudson (or Furcal for that matter) if the Royals were closer to contention. I don’t think they are close. I think 2009 is a definite no. I think 2010 is a stretch. 2011 is possible. By 2011, I wouldn’t expect good things from either Furcal or Hudson by 2011. I’m not saying they’d suck by then, but decline should definitely hit them by then, especially their defense. By 2011, I don’t think they’d be big $10M pluses who are keys to their teams contend. By 2011, I think they’ll be functional assets who aren’t quite making the money they are owed. Considering where the Royals are and likely will be in the coming years, maybe that’s not the best strategy. Maybe, if these two players have big question marks, it would make more sense to sit tight and maintain the financial flexibility in 2010 and/or 2011 to make a better FA signing then. I don’t know. Just a thought.
The immoderate moderator
by NYRoyal on Dec 17, 2008 7:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
"Actually, I wouldn’t mind signing a decent utility IFer who can ably backup SS"
Aaron Miles
Founder of the Johnny Giavotella fan club.
by doublestix on Dec 17, 2008 7:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
hee hee
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by devil_fingers on Dec 17, 2008 7:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
you know you like it
he’s just oozing grit.
Founder of the Johnny Giavotella fan club.
by doublestix on Dec 17, 2008 8:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Oozing it?
Dang, he should really get that checked out. Sounds painful.
WTF, self?
by minda33 on Dec 17, 2008 9:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
"ably" was the funniest word in there
since its questionable whether he can “ably” field is primary position(s)
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by devil_fingers on Dec 17, 2008 10:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It sickens me
that Captain Tightpants is the 4th most expensive player on the team in 2009. That is all.
"If a tie is like kissing your sister, then losing is like kissing your grandmother with her teeth out." -- George Brett
by u l washington's toothpick on Dec 17, 2008 8:42 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
It's pretty insane
The immoderate moderator
by NYRoyal on Dec 17, 2008 8:49 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I wish I could hear
the eventual conversation where Greinke realizes he makes less money than Farnsworth
by gilmeche55 on Dec 19, 2008 9:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It will probably sound like
a bottle of Prozac rattling.
WTF, self?
by minda33 on Dec 20, 2008 1:10 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on Royals Review
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
