Jeff Francoeur Contract Extension Reaction Roundup
A selection of reactions to the Francoeur extension. The curious thing is, I think there was an almost counter-revolutionary moment here, where many pro-Francoeur people were overly defensive and ready to attack the anti-Francoeur people for being haters. There was some negative reaction along predictable lines, but the anti-negative-preemptive response seemed more virulent. Oh, I bet the statheads are going to be real steamed about this one, well screw them!!!!!!!!11 Maybe that's just me. But that's the fun of Twitter, it's kinda an open thread for the entire world and you can see what's out there.
Is Jeff Francoeur The New Kyle Davies? - Rob Neyer
But again, it comes back to the money. There's a decent chance that Francoeur will be worth nothing in 2013 and beyond, in which case whatever the Royals are paying him will be utterly wasted, like the $4.2 million spent on Kyle Davies this season. Sometimes being an ex-Brave can be highly profitable.
Royals Sign Francoeur to Keep Outfield in Place | FanGraphs Baseball
While it might appear at first to be a laughable move, stemming from GM Dayton Moore’s affinity for Francoeur, the extension might work out well for the Royals. Francoeur has been quite good this year, producing career highs in many categories. At age 27, it’s possible that he has turned a corner and will remain moderately productive during this short extension.
The Jeff Francoeur Renaissance Continues " Kings of Kauffman | A Kansas City Royals BlogI hope I'm wrong, but there's just a lot of evidence there that Francoeur is not a guy you can play every day in the big leagues. Over his career, he's hit lefties and not hit righties. Even this year, he's basically built his season off hitting lefties. But with a pretty hefty two year contract, the Royals will play him every day, and I just think that over the long haul he will probably get back to being around replacement level. I have a feeling that in 2013 especially, that contract will feel uncomfortable.
I’m not going to be one to rail against the extension. It’s not the worst move the Royals could make and it’s not a franchise-crippling move. It’s just odd (though unsurprising). Yes, Francoeur can play reasonable defense and his arm is an asset. Dayton Moore has stated that right-handed power is turning into a commodity in baseball and Francoeur fits the bill. He’s hit 29 homers before, so it’s possible to occur again (though I’m not sure how likely given still-questionable pitch selection). Many Royals fans are elated that Francoeur will spend two more years here, and to an extent, I like him on this team. Will that be the case this time next season or in two years? That’s up to Francoeur.
Finding Meaning In Francoeur Extension - Royals Authority
While The Frenchman is having one of his better seasons, the fact that his secondary rate statistics have remained unchanged from the last several years, lead me to believe that the Royals won’t get the kind of production they seem to be counting on over the next two seasons.
60 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I guess I just don't see it as a big deal.
It’s not my money, and he’s not Yuni.
I should go work on my thesis.
Its the HoRambo special on steroids
Fluke year rewarded with extension only to end in regression to the mean.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
Something I haven't seen discussed...
…and, admittedly, I haven’t looked. But, did we give him significantly more than he would have gotten elsewhere? The contract seems high to me, but not crazy. In other words, I don’t think Frenchy is worth $13.5MM over two years, but I can see him getting that as a free agent this off-season anyway… or do you all think no one (except DM, of course) was going to offer him 2 years at that kind of money?
i think there's a solid chance
he wouldve gotten something like 2/10 but im not sure. If the market was in fact 2/10 or so, then signing him for 2/13.5 two months before the season ended was incredibly stupid. However, we’ll never know.
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Aug 22, 2011 10:25 AM EDT up reply actions
I was thinking 2/8
I can maybe see 2/10. 2/13.5 seems way too high to me.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Aug 22, 2011 11:01 AM EDT up reply actions
I think there would have been a lot of reluctance to give him a 2-year deal
So I think a 2/8 deal somewhere else would have been about what he might have gotten. But I think 1/5 (plus possibly significant performance incentives) would have been more likely.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Aug 22, 2011 11:14 AM EDT up reply actions
yeah...there's absolutely no chance that he was going to get more than what he got...
so, signing him now is pointless. If he loves it sooooo much in KC playing for the Royals, then why not wait until FA when surely, he’d give DM the chance to match whatever offer he got.
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Aug 22, 2011 11:16 AM EDT up reply actions
Right
If he likes it so much, isn’t that what the pointless mutual option is for?
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Aug 22, 2011 11:18 AM EDT up reply actions
mutual options are so fucking pointless...
what are the odds that the player and team are going to agree exactly on the terms for a contract after the season? has a mutual option EVER been picked up? All that results from mutual options that i can see is internet ridicule
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Aug 22, 2011 11:20 AM EDT up reply actions
interesting...didnt know that
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Aug 22, 2011 12:05 PM EDT up reply actions
Actually, I think they mutually agreed to a new contract
They didn’t exactly exercise the mutual option. They agreed to a new contract which I think was for the amount of the mutual option, and tacked a mutual option for the next year onto that.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Aug 22, 2011 12:07 PM EDT up reply actions
Aren't they just a way of adding a buyout for the mutual option year?
Basically just an under the radar way to increase their salary? Because deep down, Moore knows he should be ashamed of the base salary as-is.
Often mutual options have no buyout
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Aug 22, 2011 1:17 PM EDT up reply actions
Besides Francoeur
how many mutual options had no reported buyout or other contingency (such as the option vesting or becoming a player option if traded or certain performance criteria are met)?
How can it be a "mutual" option if there is a buyout?
Buying a player out means that you’re paying a smaller amount to avoid having to pay a larger, previously-agreed-upon salary for the upcoming year. If the option is “mutual”, then doesn’t that mean that the team has the option of not retaining for the next season without having to pay anything? Otherwise, it’s really just a player option with a buyout for the team. The player indicates he’s going to exercise the option to play for the team next season at X salary, and the team can either accept the exercise of the option or pay the player Y amount to be free of the salary obligation.
by Sweep_the_Leg on Aug 22, 2011 1:37 PM EDT up reply actions
"Mutual" just means both the player and team have the right to decline the option
So, in essence, every mutual option is really just a situation where there is both a team option and player option. The buyout just means extra compensation is due if both sides do not exercise their respective sides of the mutual option. The extra compensation can vary depending upon which side declines the option.
For example, per Cot’s, when Rick Ankiel signed with the Royals, he got a $6 million mutual option for 2011 with a $500,000 buyout, but if the team exercised the option and Ankiel declined, the buyout was reduced to $250,000. Thus, the three outcomes were (1) $6 million 2011 salary if both team and player exercise their sides of the mutual option, (2) $500,000 buyout if the team declines its side of the option, or (3) $250,000 buyout if the team exercises its option but Ankiel rejects it.
The thing is
if he slumps to the end of the year, or just doesn’t hit that well, will his final numbers be particularly impressive?
We saw what his market value was last year (not much)…is he really going to finish the season with stats that really blow anyone away and make them reevaluate their opinion of him to the point that he goes from cheap 1-yr contract to 8 figure 2-yr contract? Anyone that doesn’t have a Francouer poster hanging over their bed I mean?
Rany just posted
a story about the Frenchy signing, and it is a pretty good take. He basically says that he dislikes the signing because, down the road, it will hurt more than help even if Frenchy does the same things he did this year. Instead of optimizing their outfield by moving Melky to a corner outfield spot (and keeping his switch hitting bat in what will be a right handed heavy lineup) and a better defender in Cain to center field, they have opted for the same type of move the Royals have become known for. Instead of building and forging forward with a definite win, the Royals have again just done meh.
You and Rany forget one thing...
LEADERSHIP
by Sweep_the_Leg on Aug 22, 2011 10:36 AM EDT up reply actions
If Dayton Moore has ANYthing to do with player X's initiail signing...
he will have to pretty much be convicted of baby-rape to lose favored status. Because if DM had something to do with him, that, in and of itself means he’ll be a good ballplayer, and even better human being. Such is the mere touch of Moore when he annoints you.
If women only slept with nice guys...guys would only be nice. And they don't. And we're not.
Jose Guillen was ACQUITTED of baby rape
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Aug 22, 2011 11:02 AM EDT up reply actions
I Hate It
I hated the initial signing and I hate the inevitable extension. His batting approach makes my teeth hurt, and his defense is overrated. The odds of this turning out to be a good move are miniscule, and if he somehow works out I’ll still hate it. This whole episode never should have happened.
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Aug 22, 2011 11:02 AM EDT reply actions 2 recs
and the odds of the original melky/frenchy signings working out were minuscule (is that right? red squiggly says so)
i just dont get the urgency of the deal…if you really NEED to bring him back, why not wait until the offseason?
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Aug 22, 2011 11:17 AM EDT up reply actions
AUSTIN KEARNS NOW!
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Aug 22, 2011 11:29 AM EDT up reply actions
Rany's final paragraph was unusuallly negative and blunt for him
There were better ways to spend that money. Love may be blind, but it ain’t cheap. If Dayton Moore’s love is requited, this contract won’t hurt the Royals. Unfortunately, "not hurting the Royals" is about the best we can hope for.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Aug 22, 2011 11:35 AM EDT reply actions 3 recs
Sounds a lot like you, Scott.
I'm a 14 year old freshman in high school with a love for all things Royals and Packers.
Very much so
I commend him for not working hard to shine the brightest light on this pile of…..well you get the idea.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Aug 23, 2011 12:50 AM EDT up reply actions
I don't mind the extension.
The Royals have hardly any contract obligations for the next two years and Will Meyers probably will need a couple more years in the minors.
even if there's no long term harm...
which is far from a certainty (blocking cain, possibly myers), throwing away money by paying francoeur more than market value is a terrible move. did you like the extra spending the royals did in the draft/IFA? i’d love if the extra 2-3 million a year they paid francoeur over what anyone else wouldve paid him wouldve gone to another bryan brickhouse or adalberto mondesi instead of into frenchy’s teeth whitening account. that might just be me though.
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Aug 22, 2011 11:40 AM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
Yeah, I really don't agree with the "hey, there's money for everything" sentiment
I’m not saying Royaliron is necessarily saying this, but it seems like many people are saying that given the Royals limited payroll obligations for 2012, adding $7M per year is fine, regardless of Francoeur’s value. The problem is that for a team like the Royals, getting good value for the money is always important. There are many things the Royals can and should spend money on over the next two years, which includes but is not limited to 1) improving the Royals starting pitching, 2) extending Gordon and perhaps others, 3) the draft, 4) L.A. free agents. Every dollar spent on someone like Francoeur is a dollar not spent on one of these other things. The Royals really can’t afford to overpay for meh talent like Francoeur. Resources are scarce.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Aug 22, 2011 12:05 PM EDT up reply actions
yeah...the resigning of francoeur to me is pretty meh...
but the complete disregard for the market is stupid
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Aug 22, 2011 12:09 PM EDT up reply actions
Man this team is hard to follow
Jeff Francoeur. Jeff Francoeur. Jeff. Francoeur. Anybody that seriously considers him as a valuable starting player for a contender (which we plan on being in 2013, right? Or are we moving that back again and the signing is okay because we’re just gonna e marginal again?) has some serious holes in their baseball philosophy.
SBN's most random and mysterious lurker guy who posts too much
Follow me on Twitter if you want: Lum_SM
by Lum on Aug 22, 2011 12:55 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
raul ibanez, yuni betancourt and countless others are starters on contenders....
francoeur wont be what holds us back from contention…the pitching will be
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Aug 22, 2011 1:01 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
So... that makes it okay to sign those kind of players? What?
SBN's most random and mysterious lurker guy who posts too much
Follow me on Twitter if you want: Lum_SM
I think he's just saying that the Francoeur signing won't keep the Royals from competing by itself.
There will be other more important factors that will keep them from being a contender, namely starting pitching.
Sporadically musing on the Royals at Royalscentricity and on Twitter at Old Man Duggan
by Old Man Duggan on Aug 22, 2011 4:08 PM EDT up reply actions
Francoeur will just exacerbate the issue.
Sporadically musing on the Royals at Royalscentricity and on Twitter at Old Man Duggan
by Old Man Duggan on Aug 22, 2011 4:08 PM EDT up reply actions
Precisely. At His
Peak he could be a pretty good player on a bad team. I don’t want us to be a bad team.
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Aug 22, 2011 1:02 PM EDT up reply actions
I've heard too often from the DM defenders at other sites that this deal "won't hurt the Royals."
Well, when one of the main arguments for a deal is that it “won’t hurt us,” then it’s a bad deal. No, this deal will not kill us, but neither would moving Melky over to RF and letting a legitimate CF with good AAA numbers (and good MLB numbers in his only stint) play CF. Neither of those moves will “hurt us,” but one of those moves doesn’t require a 13.5 million dollar commitment.
Killing time until time kills me
by EspeciallyK on Aug 22, 2011 1:27 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
No One Lauds
A physical abuser for beating a victim in a fashion that does relatively little harm.
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Aug 22, 2011 1:46 PM EDT up reply actions
It seems that
you can predict what Neyer is going to say about the Royals without even reading the comment. Didn’t he drink the Kool-Aid at one time? Man, he should get back together with his pal Rany and maybe they can come up with a middle ground. Although, Rany’s reaction to this one sounds a bit like Rob’s.
Although, Rany’s reaction to this one sounds a bit like Rob’s
That should tell you something. And Rany’s not even a Francoeur “hater.” He called for Francoeur to be signed even before Moore did it. And even he doesn’t like this new contract.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Aug 22, 2011 1:52 PM EDT up reply actions
Did he call for Francoeur to be signed?
I thought he said the Royals should trade for him because he would cost virtually nothing and could yield a positive net-return based on the price tag (eventually that price tag was Joaquin Arias). I could be temporally misplacing when he wrote that column, though.
Sporadically musing on the Royals at Royalscentricity and on Twitter at Old Man Duggan
by Old Man Duggan on Aug 22, 2011 4:02 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, he didn’t actually call for Francoeur to be signed, but he did advocate for Francoeur being acquired…back in 2009.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Aug 22, 2011 4:29 PM EDT up reply actions
Worst Of All
This contract makes him untradable.
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
To be fair, that's a moot point
Because Moore wouldn’t trade him anyway.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Aug 22, 2011 1:52 PM EDT up reply actions
True (sobbing)
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Aug 22, 2011 2:08 PM EDT up reply actions
probably just "less tradable"
Money’s an obstacle, but not an impossible one.
Kila's slash for Apr 20 to May 4, 2011, right before he was sent down: .276 / .344 / .448
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Aug 22, 2011 2:32 PM EDT up reply actions
When does Dayton
Start signing the good players from Atlanta? Seems we have covered all his other pet projects. Did he not scout McCann or any of their players who don’t suck?
Pro-Dayton Moore = Blogger
Anti-Dayton Moore= Troll
by DaytonSucks on Aug 22, 2011 3:55 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
McCann hasn't hit free agency yet.
He was signed to a six-year extension (arb-buyout plus first two FA years with a $12MM option/$500K buyout for 2013) in March of 2007.
Sporadically musing on the Royals at Royalscentricity and on Twitter at Old Man Duggan
by Old Man Duggan on Aug 22, 2011 4:06 PM EDT up reply actions
I hate this signing
There’s no sense in building up a surplus of outfielders when we are so short of quality pitching.
However, at this point, I don’t much like being on the same side of the argument as Rob Neyer or anyone else making disingenuous arguments about bringing Davies back this year.
It’s a bad decision because we need pitching. Bringing back Davies was a good decision because we need pitching. Davies didn’t work out, but that’s hindsight. Franacouer’s extension is a bad signing in foresight.
Criticizing the Davies deal seems like hindsight QBing
I don’t remembering tendering his contract being remotely controversial. He was a youngish pitcher who had put up decent “back of the rotation” numbers with some flashes of brilliance and still some upside. And $4 million was not prohibitively expensive.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
Yes, complaining about bringing Davis back is silly
He had some decent production, youth, stuff and absolutely no one blocking him. And bringing him back amounted to a cheap one-year deal.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Aug 22, 2011 5:04 PM EDT up reply actions
don't get it at all
just from a logic standpoint, it would seem that you wait until the offseason and see what you can bring him back for, if that’s what you want to do…in my case i would have let him go and kept melky, thus freeing that money to go towards a legit starting pitcher.
it’s really going to piss me off if we have a shitty rotation next year because we couldn’t afford to go out and get some pitching help.
Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts."
--Albert Einstein
by Home Run Tony Cogan on Aug 22, 2011 11:30 PM EDT reply actions



















