Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Follow Giants Fans During The Game At Big Blue View

The Felix Hernandez Contract Makes the Greinke Deal Look Better... And Worse

The Felix Hernandez contract is the biggest news in baseball this week and predictably the sizable Mariner-fan presence online is rejoicing. Royals fans dearly remember how they feel, as it was just last off-season that Dayton Moore signed Zack Greinke to a four year contract. Although the situations weren't entirely the same (more on that below) for each fanbase the extension was an unexpected gift.

The Greinke & Hernandez contracts are in fact highly similar, and considering that it is our job as fans to understand everything about our team in as much detail as possible, the Hernandez contract provides a useful data point for further analyzing one of the three or four good moves that Dayton Moore has made.

First, here's a summary of where both Greinke and King Felix stood prior to inking their new contracts:

Age Career Starts Record ERA K/9 HR/9 K/BB Reputation
Greinke 24 103 34-45 4.28 6.9 1.1 2.92 Promising talent who has overcome off-field struggles
Hernandez 23 138 58-41 3.45 8.1 0.8 2.82 All-Star, Cy Young Contender & Ace for years to come

 

Star-divide

Obviously, I've spent the last half-decade more focused on Greinke, and of course as a Royals fan I think "HE'S THE GREATEST!!!!" I haven't fully appreciated just what King Felix has done in Seattle. Incorrectly, I had assumed that 2009 was his breakout campaign, like Greinke's. There's some truth to that, but only a little. Felix essentially had Greinke's fun and promising rookie season for four straight years, then he kicked it up a notch. Sure, there's some [Corp Name] park effects here, but there's little denying that Hernandez has been very good.

As such, while their talent levels and reasonable projections are very close, there's no denying that heading into his final two seasons of arbitration, King Felix had a more accomplished resume. (As an aside, I very much like that Greinke had that long period off/in the bullpen instead of posting a 4.50 ERA for a horrible Royals team.)

Now, here are the deals they signed. Importantly, both contracts came at the same point in their service time lifespans:

Greinke Hernandez
Year 1 $3.75 (arb-e) $7.2 (arb-e)
Year 2 $7.25 (arb-e) $11 (arb-e)
Year 3 $13.5 $19
Year 4 $13.5 $20
Year 5 $21

 

(Felix has a $3.5 million dollar signing bonus that is presumably spread out over the life of the contract, which is why those numbers are a little higher than some you may have seen. I also rounded to the nearest million for Felix, simply because we don't totally know the details yet.)

Three things stand out to me about these two contracts:

  • As mentioned a few weeks back, from a money perspective, Moore really ended up doing a tremendous job with this deal. Greinke only made $3.75 million last year and will only make $7.25 in 2010, when he's expected to be one of the top five pitchers in the game. Down the road, Greinke's salaries in 2011-12 remain extremely reasonable. In ever widening retrospect, Moore timed the Greinke extension perfectly: Greinke had fully re-established himself as a good starting pitcher, but had not fully taken over the world yet. At the time, I actually thought that the money offered to Greinke was even perhaps slightly too generous.
  • Both contracts buy-out or avoid the arbitration process for two seasons. So Seattle and Kansas City both were able to avoid a potentially (I'd say this threat is overblown since no one ever even goes to arbitration hearings anymore.) contentious contract situation two times over. They also got payroll certainty for two important pieces for those years, which is important in allowing Jack Z to make another brilliant move or in allowing Dayton Moore to acquire another former White Sox/Mariner/Brave who went to high school in the 1990s. Greinke's "buy-out" is especially interesting because, even by his old standards, his 2009 payday is still very low, while his 2010 payday looked a little high at the time. Why the Royals structured it this way I'm not sure. On the whole, both players aren't truly being bought out much regarding their arb seasons: they're just setting down in stone what they probably would have made anyway.
  • From a Greinke perspective, what kills me about the contract he signed with the Royals is that the Royals only got two extra years. Essentially, the contract dynamic is this: the Royals aren't (by the standards of the time, before Greinke became a Cy Young Winner) giving him a huge raise in 2009-10 and as such Greinke isn't going to give up more than two FA-eligible seasons. Basically, Greinke signed a 2 year/$27 million dollar contract extension that begins after two seasons. Hernandez however, who as stated above probably has a stronger pedigree than Greinke right now and definitely does compared to 2009 Greinke, agreed to a 3 year/$60 million dollar extension.

The whole point of the "lock-up" contract is that you gamble on the player's health and insecurity and end up sneakily signing them to a cheap (in effect) free agent contract that covers their prime. The Royals did that, to an extent, with Greinke, but as these things go, there's a big difference between getting two years and getting three. Two is effectively the minimum since you almost never see contracts that delay free agency by merely one year. Moreover, as mentioned earlier, there's a growing industry & media dynamic that pressures teams to trade players prior to the end of their contracts, meaning that if you want certainty, you don't end up buying as much by merely avoiding arb as you might think. Then again, the team does assume risk for that extra high-salaried year as well.

Essentially, it comes down to what do you want: a player making less or a player being around longer? Considering it isn't my money and I don't trust the GM to spend any extra cash wisely anyway, I'll take the extra year, every time.

Comment 37 comments  |  2 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

one more thought...

The more I look at the Greinke contract, I’m struck by an overall sense of fairness behind it. On the day it was signed, it was setup so that both parties could really feel good about it. In a brutally competitive industry however, that doesn’t mean it’s necessarily a great contract for winning games.

by Freneau on Jan 20, 2010 3:12 PM EST reply actions  

The Greinke contract was good at the time

and obviously looks great now

of course, to dig up the horse’s moldering corpse, there’s very little chance the Royals will be contenders even by 2012 at this point, so…

I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.

Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.

by Matt Klaassen on Jan 20, 2010 3:26 PM EST reply actions  

...so?

Coffee. The NEW Performance Enhancing drug for Sport's Writers. Just ask Ken Rosenthal.

by 306008 on Jan 20, 2010 3:34 PM EST up reply actions  

He's probably not going to be around for the next good Royals team

I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.

Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.

by Matt Klaassen on Jan 20, 2010 3:47 PM EST up reply actions  

And the Royals will have paid $27M in 2011 and 2012

for Greinke to add what will probably be some ultimately inconsequential wins in those seasons. I’ll surely enjoy watching Zack pitch during those years, but d_f is right….it’s money that will probably be spent on payroll for teams that won’t be going anywhere anyway.

"Now…put that in your [BLEEP]ing pipe and smoke it." -Hal McRae

"I was doing this when BJ was in his father's nutsack." -Renzo Gracie

by Sweep_the_Leg on Jan 20, 2010 4:42 PM EST up reply actions  

A contract is an asset

You’re thinking about it the wrong way. It doesn’t matter if the Royals are good or bad in 2011-12; it matters whether the right to Zack Greinke’s services (and the corresponding obligation to pay him) are a valuable asset. Only good things will accrue to the Royals if Greinke stays healthy and pitches well; either he will help the Royals win, or he will help them bring in new players who hopefully can restore the franchise’s fortunes.

by aquaman213 on Jan 20, 2010 5:13 PM EST up reply actions  

yup

I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.

Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.

by Matt Klaassen on Jan 20, 2010 6:09 PM EST up reply actions  

Sure, Zack's contract is an asset now...

but it’s value dimishes with each passing month. The longer the Royals wait to trade him, the less they will get in return. And the issue that was raised was that if they don’t trade him and try (and fail) to re-sign him to another deal, then they will have paid $27M over those last two years for additional wins, but wins that will probably be completely inconsequential (except perhaps for Dayton’s resume) given the likely state of the rest of the team. I think the contract is a good-to-great deal for the Royals, but if the ultimate goal is to return the team to contention, then it could ultimately end up being meaningless. We’ll see what the Royals are able to do with him over the next couple years.

I’d be all in favor of never trading him and having him serve as the cornerstone of the team’s rotation for years to come, but the Royals would have to devote probably 25-30% of their probably payroll to him. A big risk for a small-market team.

"Now…put that in your [BLEEP]ing pipe and smoke it." -Hal McRae

"I was doing this when BJ was in his father's nutsack." -Renzo Gracie

by Sweep_the_Leg on Jan 20, 2010 7:01 PM EST up reply actions  

I would argue that his trade value will never be higher

Unless of course, he tops 2009 in 2010. Even then, he’s not as valuable in trade because there is 1 less year of team control. I hate to say trade him now, but if we were going to do it, now might be the best time. I hate myself for even thinking this. Could you imagine the haul of prospects though?

by AxDxMx on Jan 20, 2010 7:21 PM EST up reply actions  

I don’t think Zack should be traded. Most teams who would give up a lot to get him aren’t going be interested because they have doubts about his mental toughness in a more hostile environment.

by WURoyal on Jan 20, 2010 7:34 PM EST up reply actions  

I disagree with your reasoning.

I don’t want him traded right now either but there are plenty of teams out there that would offer up a boatload of prospects for him.

I believe it was commenter “gashousegang” who pointed out earlier that Greinke holds the keys to the future for the Royals. Either he continues to dominate and the rest of the pieces fall in place or the prospects acquired for him MUST turn into a few above average major league pieces.

Glad I came, just wish I hadn't stayed so long.

by Warden11 on Jan 20, 2010 7:40 PM EST up reply actions  

I recall thinking the same thing
Either he continues to dominate and the rest of the pieces fall in place or the prospects acquired for him MUST turn into a few above average major league pieces.

about Beltran several years ago.

God, it's so awesome to be a Royals fan.

"Now…put that in your [BLEEP]ing pipe and smoke it." -Hal McRae

"I was doing this when BJ was in his father's nutsack." -Renzo Gracie

by Sweep_the_Leg on Jan 20, 2010 7:42 PM EST up reply actions  

Lets just hope that chapter of this story is over.

That’s all part of the rising action. Greinke domination this last year is leading to the climax. What will the resolution be?

Glad I came, just wish I hadn't stayed so long.

by Warden11 on Jan 20, 2010 7:47 PM EST up reply actions  

i'd say that there's a chance that the royals compete in the central in 2011 or 2012

its not insanely unlikely

but its a lot less likely thanks to moore’s non-rebuild that took place from 2008-9

by Freneau on Jan 20, 2010 9:16 PM EST up reply actions  

there's a chance in 2012

I can’t see Moustakas and/or Hosmer being ready before then… and really, what other position player prospects that might be big league starters are there? Bianchi, I guess. Lough has a chance, but even then, we’ll be lucky if he’s as good as decline-period DDJ

I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.

Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.

by Matt Klaassen on Jan 20, 2010 10:08 PM EST up reply actions  

Greinke is more comparable to Josh Johnson

Johnson got almost the exact same deal from the Marlins last week as Greinke got last year. Johnson had TJ surgery in 2007; I guess past TJ surgery and past mental-health issues weigh about the same in a GM’s mind. (Though to be fair, Johnson might have gotten more because of the union’s public beef with Marlins’ management just before Johnson’s deal was announced.)

by aquaman213 on Jan 20, 2010 3:47 PM EST reply actions  

King Felix is Great, but did the M's Overpay??

I think $25mm is a fairer estimate for his 2 arb years— several guys have gotten 8-figure awards (K-Rod, Howard, Soriano), and King Felix has proved he belongs in that elite company. I figure he’d get $10mm this year, and that number would only rise in 2011.

So the M’s paid $53mm to buy out 3 years of free agency— that’s $17.67mm/yr. If we use Sabathia’s AAV ($23mm) as market value, the M’s got roughly a 23% discount. With King Felix still two years from free agency, that’s an overpay— you’d expect to see something more like a 50% discount.

The question, then, is whether this is a good overpay. My gut says it is. I’ve been a big King Felix fan since he broke in, and he hasn’t done anything to make me think less of his skills. The next five years are also a good window durability-wise; pitchers who don’t develop arm trouble by 25 generally don’t have problems for the first time in their late 20s.

It’s unrealistic to suppose the M’s will get 1000 innings for their investment, but 800-900 seems realistic. If he’s good for 4 WAR per 200 IP (a conservative assumption), that’s 16-18 WAR over the life of the contract. $78mm is a high price to pay for that production, but keep in mind the contract is backloaded— if the economy recovers and salaries begin to rise again, the M’s may get an acceptable deal, even if Felix’s production is in line with my fairly conservative projections.

There is, of course, the possibility that King Felix will become a future first-ballot Hall of Famer and make this deal, lucrative though it is, look like a bargain. In fact, with the possible exception of Tim Lincecum, there’s probably no other pitcher in baseball with the upside King Felix has. And that’s why, at the end of the day, most of us see this as a pretty good deal for the M’s.

by aquaman213 on Jan 20, 2010 3:51 PM EST reply actions  

just one more example

of DM not waiting for the market to develop…what a dumbass.

"He once had an awkward moment, just to see how it felt...he lives vicariously...through himself- He is the most interesting man in the world"

by Home Run Tony Cogan on Jan 20, 2010 4:03 PM EST reply actions  

nearest million
I also rounded to the nearest million for Felix, simply because we don’t totally know the details yet.

If only people could talk about my salary that way.

by Trey Hillman's Chin on Jan 20, 2010 5:34 PM EST reply actions  

not to make assumptions about most of us here

but it we talked about our salaries that way, we’d be saying, ‘well, i make about 0 per year’.

Conversation b/t Special baseball operations consultant Zapp Brannigan and GM Dayton Moore: "...but paper covers rock and rock crushes scissors...we have a conundrum. Get me some paper, a rock, and some scissors."

by SagehenMacGyver47 on Jan 20, 2010 6:12 PM EST up reply actions  

I think you are safe in assuming that most of us don't make over 500k per year.

Last I checked, 500k and up fit into the top 1% of all earners. So 1 in every 100. And my guess is someone making that much money doesn’t have time to post here.

by AxDxMx on Jan 20, 2010 7:26 PM EST up reply actions  

only quibble with the Greinke contract (and it is a minor one):

I would have loved to see an option year or two – even if they were at 20 or 25m per.

I’m sure DM would have to have offered a mutual option of some kind to give Greinke any reason to allow an option in the first place.

It’s good to give DM credit when credit is due – RR commenters get occasionally lambasted for criticizing Moore – this post shows that commenters here praise Moore when warranted as well…

Mr Glass, this is a pro sports team, not a retail store - run it like one!

by loyal2sdad on Jan 20, 2010 6:12 PM EST reply actions  

speaking of which

FIRE GMDM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! j/k

Conversation b/t Special baseball operations consultant Zapp Brannigan and GM Dayton Moore: "...but paper covers rock and rock crushes scissors...we have a conundrum. Get me some paper, a rock, and some scissors."

by SagehenMacGyver47 on Jan 20, 2010 6:14 PM EST up reply actions   1 recs

I would have liked for the Royals to get more years out of Greinke

And I bet the Royals would have loved it too. But there were two parties to that contract. The Royals don’t just get everything they want.

The immoderate moderator

by Scott McKinney on Jan 21, 2010 11:30 AM EST reply actions  

"The Royals don’t just get everything they want."

Are you kidding me? They got Jason Kendall AND Scott Podsednik in the same off-season. Let’s count our blessings.

I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.

Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.

by Matt Klaassen on Jan 21, 2010 11:35 AM EST up reply actions  

I agree

Although it’s fair to ask if the Royals really would have wanted more years at the time the deal was done.

The last two years are at $13.5m as they are. Year 5+ would probably have been tipping in at $15m. I can’t blame the club for not wanting to commit that kind of money to him at that time.

by kcbottom9th on Jan 21, 2010 11:36 AM EST up reply actions  

but making the 5+ years options, yes

That way, if the options are attractive (i.e., below his true value), even if they don’t fit in KC’s budget, they still increase the trade value for Greinke.

Mr Glass, this is a pro sports team, not a retail store - run it like one!

by loyal2sdad on Jan 21, 2010 11:48 AM EST up reply actions  

But it would have made no sense for Greinke to agree to that

It offers him no additional guaranteed money, but offers his team the opportunity to keep him around longer for what will likely be less than market value. Additional years only benefit Greinke if they are guaranteed.

The immoderate moderator

by Scott McKinney on Jan 21, 2010 11:53 AM EST up reply actions  

I really think that would have been overjoyed with paying an additional year for $15M

…although of course I don’t know. I’m just speculating. I think Greinke wanted the deal limited, so that he’d still be in his pitching prime when the deal ran out, guaranteeing him another huge multi-year deal when the contract was up.

The immoderate moderator

by Scott McKinney on Jan 21, 2010 11:49 AM EST up reply actions  

that is most likely correct, NY

if Greinke’s agent was worth his salt at all, he should have studied other pitching careers and concluded that a career can only garner so many FA opportunities, and it made sense to have one at age 29 instead of 31.

Looks like that is what the agent did/

Mr Glass, this is a pro sports team, not a retail store - run it like one!

by loyal2sdad on Jan 21, 2010 11:53 AM EST up reply actions  

Nothing to lose

One of the Royals’ most interesting moves of the last decade was the wins clause in Sweeney’s 5 year deal (the final 2 years were voided if the team didn’t finish at .500 or over during the first 3). Of course it blew up in both of their faces ($$ for the Royals and wins for Sweeney, though obviously he got the better of it), and I’m not even sure it was their idea. But it was an innovative way for a team like the Royals to keep a big talent and for that player to be protected from a team’s ineptitude.

Why not offer Greinke an extension for 2013 and 2014 at 17-18 million per year that only kicks in if the Royals get to .500 by 2012? Dayton is under contract through 2014 now, and if he’s serious about staying that long and putting the team in contention, he should take another shot at keeping his most valuble asset here longer.

If they get to .500 by 2012, then something is going right by design or at least by accident, and Greinke has a chance to pitch for a non-sucky team. The extension would be a nice insurance policy against (knock on wood and say a prayer) injury. If they don’t, then Dayton should be fired, or at least be on the hot seat and fired in 2013. Greinke can still walk after 2012, or even be traded (voiding the extension if traded could be an option – I don’t know if Sweeney’s deal had that wrinkle.) If Greinke has his heart set on wearing pinstripes or a halo and turns it down, as least Dayton tried.

17-18 mil is 20% of an 85-90 mil payroll, which is what it would realistically cost to build a competitive roster over the next few years. If you want me to trust the process, then that is where the process better be going.

by thelaundry on Jan 21, 2010 4:32 PM EST reply actions  

one extra season for more than 30 million extra dollars? umm… Greinke’s deal in a landslide.

by fightwookies on Jan 26, 2010 12:23 AM EST reply actions  

It’s two extra years – 2013 and 2014 (Greinke’s deal is through 2012). If the Royals don’t want to pay that kind of jack for a pitcher because of injury risk, that’s fine. But if one of the position players breaks out and that kind of money is required to keep them, they’d better be ready to cut that check by 2012-13-14 (the fruition of “the process”). If you have a transcendant talent and enough around him to compete, you need to at least come to the party salarywise, even if the Yankees go home with him. Royals fans should pay attention to what happens with Joe Mauer. If our Mauer comes along and the Royals can’t at least make a strong offer, it would be sad.

by thelaundry on Jan 26, 2010 4:48 PM EST reply actions  

It's two!

Greinke is signed through 2012. If anything, it’s 5 vs. 3 now that 2009 is over.

2009 Year 1 $3.75 (arb-e)
2010 Year 2 $7.25 (arb-e)
2011 Year 3 $13.5
2012 Year 4 $13.5

End of Greinke’s current deal———-

My extension proposal:

2013 Year 5 $17-18?
2014 Year 6 $ 17-18?

by thelaundry on Jan 27, 2010 5:35 PM EST reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about Kansas City Royals.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Nacho_small
Interview with Royals Review Editor Jeff Zimmerman
Small
OT: Determining the exact date of Ice Cubes "Good Day"
Royalsretro_small
The 100 Greatest Royals of All-Time - #26 Al Cowens
Small
2 years, 2 months and 22 days ago: Never Forget

Recent FanPosts

Small
2012 Omaha and NWA Rosters
The_laz_small
KU / MU OPEN THREAD
Nacho_small
Friday Open Thread - Super Bowl Rematch Issue
Maverick_tank_7_small
TBFIB Strike Again
Small
Royals TV Broadcast Deal
Royalsretro_small
Friday Open Thread - Year of the Dragon Edition
Matt_ssv_pic_small_small
A Lesson In Patience: Brad Lidge, Jonathan Broxton And The Settled Market

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Managers

Cimg0036_small Freneau

Editors

Dayton_small Jeff Zimmerman

Authors

Royalsretro_small RoyalsRetro

Headshot_small Old Man Duggan