Joe Morgan, Contracts, and the 2010 Phillies

For the life of me, I have no idea why this guy chose to ask Joe Morgan this question, but his answer is classic Joe Morgan. From yesterday's ESPN.com chat:

SteveFitz (Cicero, IL)

Joe, is this the offseason where the Phillies have to maybe trade one of its better players due to higher pay raises now or in the near future? Maybe Werth?

Joe Morgan (11:46 AM)

Well if they win another championship, I don't see why you would break them up. Payrolls are not my expertise. I believe that you just go out there to try and win. If you have the winning combination there, you keep them together. I saw the team I was on, the Reds, we won two straight championships and if we had stayed together, we would have won three straight. If you take one player away, you disrupt it and then you don't know what you're going to get.

ESPN describes Joe Morgan as a "baseball analyst," which, as a baseball fan, I would hope signals that he knows at least the basics of team payrolls, contracts, etc.

So since Joe Morgan failed to answer your question, SteveFitz, I'll take a stab at it even though ESPN never gave me the fancy title of baseball analyst:

According to Cot's Baseball Contracts, the Phillies are already committed to $108 million dollars in payroll next season even though they only have 11 players under contract right now. In addition, both Joe Blanton and Shane Victorino are due raises in arbitration this winter. There are also several other important players, who are under contract with the Phillies, but are not yet eligible for arbitration (Happ, Ruiz, Kendrick, Francisco). Hence, none of those guys are eligible for big raises next season.

Let's deal with the two guys, who are due raises: Victorino and Blanton. Victorino is the heart and soul of the Phillies and it would be absolutely crushing for the fans if the Phillies dealt him. It wouldn't surprise me to see the Phillies lock up Victorino long term if the opportunity presents itself. If the Phillies and Victorino go to arbitration, I'd expect Victorino to earn somewhere in the range of $5-$6 million, which is a nice raise for him, but a price that the Phillies should gladly pay. As for Blanton, I'd expect him to earn roughly $6 million next season after arbitration, which is a pretty good price for a middle of the rotation starter. In fact, if the Phillies did look to move anyone, I'd put my money on Blanton, a free agent to be after 2010.

So when you take into account the price of the Phillies arbitration eligibles (roughly $4 million), one would have to think that the Phillies would still have some change left over to deal with the rest of the team (assuming their payroll is between $110-$120 million). Sure they will have a number of holes to fill (3rd base, bullpen), but the cost of filling those holes should not force the Phillies into dealing.

As for Jayson Werth, he is signed through 2010 for $7.5 million and then he will be a free agent. I'd expect the Phillies to at least explore the possibility of extending Werth this offseason...if he's not too expensive. The Phillies might pay the price for their success after 2010 if Werth chooses to bolt for the money.

Thoughts?

****** ******

(Jorge Says No! on Facebook)

(Follow Jorge Says No! on Twitter)

Can Matt Holliday Become Mark Teixiera?

Scott Boras recently caused a stir in the blogosphere by making this statement about his client and the consensus "best free agent position player", Matt Holliday:

"Scott Boras threw out the ceremonial first pitch in free agency today, comparing Matt Holliday to Mark Teixeira in the impact the agent believes each player can have on a club.

"These guys are blue-collar superstars," Boras said. "They don't hit 50 home runs, but they're complete players. They can give you something without swinging a bat."

Teixeira signed with the New York Yankees last winter, for $180 million. Boras would not say what his asking price would be for Holliday, but he made clear he considered Holliday's abilities in getting on base, hitting for power and playing superior defense similar to those of Teixeira.

"There are differences between hitters and complete players," Boras said. "Matt Holliday is a complete player.

"There is, frankly, no one like him in the market."

Boras's remark was met by ridicule and many, many snide comments. No one seems to think that Scott Boras can get Matt Holliday a contract similar to the one he got Mark Teixiera last offseason (in an economic crisis, nonetheless). Of course, there are a number of factors that will determine if Holliday nets roughly $110 million, or $180 million like Teixiera.

1. The market

Most people seem to think that the Teixiera sweepstakes was just another part of the Red Sox-Yankees rivalry, which in a small way it was. But we have remember that there were many other players, who added into this equation.

-There was the Angels, who longed to keep Teixeria and reportedly made an offer somewhere in the 8 year/$160 million dollar range.

-There was the Orioles, who were trying hard to sell Teixiera on the idea of playing for his hometown team. Even though the Orioles were struggling as a franchise, they too, made a decent offer to Teixiera on top of pulling at his heart strings.

-And then there was the Nationals, who were the worst team in the National League in 2008, but desperate to make a splash and catapult themselves onto the stage with the big boys. And depending on your source, the Nationals made Teixiera a huge offer, possibly the most lucrative one he had on the table.

(Note: It helps when the Yankees are involved!)

Will Scott Boras be able to drum up a market similar to that for Matt Holliday?

2. Competition

Outside of Teixiera, there was no other first baseman who was anywhere near his league. Sure, Adam Dunn is a great power hitter, but he did not offer the complete package that Mark Teixiera offered and could not play defense. Outside of Teixiera and Dunn, no other first baseman got more than a one year deal last offseason. For any team looking to pick up a great first baseman, the choice was obvious: Mark Teixiera.

This is the area where Boras will have a tough time because of one man: Jason Bay. Even though Holliday is a better all around player, Bay provides interested teams with a somewhat cheaper alternative to Holliday. Bay is only 31 years old and is one of the best power hitters in the American League. Because both Holliday and Bay are free agents, there is no clear cut obvious choice for teams, who want a franchise quality power hitting outfielder. In addition, it might be more difficult for Boras to get clubs into a bidding war when there are two star quality outfielders on the market, not just one.

So no, I don't think Matt Holliday's contract will come close to matching that of Mark Teixiera's. It will be interesting to watch Boras try and drum up competition and create a market for his client, who undoubtedly is looking to cash in on a monster second half with the Cardinals.

Thoughts?

****** ******

(Jorge Says No! on Facebook)

(Follow Jorge Says No! on Twitter)

Crazy Retro Scott Boras Quote of the Day

*Scott Boras is baseball's most successful and well known agent. Boras is a mix of crazy with a whole lot of genius. He's the master salesman for his clients, but even the great Boras goes overboard every once and awhile. The following is an example of Boras going wayyyyyyyyyy overboard*

********* ***********

On Adrian Beltre (May, 2004):

"You have to look at A-Rod," [Scott Boras] said, referring to the 10- year, $252-million signing of Alex Rodriguez, then 25, by the Texas Rangers in December 2000. Boras said he didn't mean that Beltre would qualify for a similar contract but that there are few 25-year- olds of that stature from which to draw comparisons.

"Adrian's ceiling can only grow," Boras said. "He'll have another five years before he's 30, and he would have a real advantage over other players in the market. In fact, players of that stature rarely get to free agency. Teams generally understand what they have and don't let it happen. In Beltre's case, there's going to have to be a premium paid in years and dollars."

Thoughts?

****** ******

(Jorge Says No! on Facebook)

(Follow Jorge Says No! on Twitter)

How Bad is this Idea: Vladimir Guerrero to the Mets?

Should the Mets make a play for Vladimir Guerrero? Let's hope not:

"This is a big post-season for Vlad, who is eligible for free agency this winter and could have used a defining post-season to help alleviate ever so slightly the always-present injury issues. Vlad will get a contract, but in this cautious marketplace it will likely be with a big-market team that can afford to cover any losses. Baseball people have felt for some time it’s a slam-dunk that he would end up with the New York Mets and their general manager Omar Minaya, but a combination of Minaya’s lack of job security, the Mets recent record of injuries to big-time players and concerns about how much money the Wilpon family lost in Bernie Madoff’s Ponzi scheme no longer make that a certainty. One agent told me in the summer that the best Vlad could hope for would be “to be somebody’s Plan B or Plan C.”

Just for the record, I would have loved it if Guerrero joined the Mets in 2004...but 2010 is a completely different story.

The author of this piece gives us several different reasons why the Mets might not go after Guerrero, but he mercifully fails to mention the most obvious one: defense. Guerrero has not played right field since July and has been the Angels primary DH for most of the season. Simply put, Guerrero is no longer an effective defensive player. There's no way that a hobbling, limping, and slowling moving Guerrero could cover any ground in the spacious Citi Field next season. Hell, Guerrero would be the new Gary Sheffield.

Aside from that obvious point, Guerrero is nothing more than a aging, declining, free swinging, injury prone, defensive liability at this point. Sure Guerrero is a big name, but he belongs nowhere near any National League roster unless he magically becomes 100% healthy.

(Note: I love how the author mentions the Madoff ponzi scheme as a reason why the Mets might not go after Guerrero. Laughable. The only way the "Madoff ponzi scheme" would have prevented the Mets from making a run is if Guerrero was in line for a huge Matt Holliday like contract. But at best, Guerrero should hope for a one year deal with a boatload of reachable incentives.)

Thoughts?

****** ******

(Jorge Says No! on Facebook)

(Follow Jorge Says No! on Twitter)

The Mariners $16 Million Dollar Gift

From MLBTR:

"Catcher Kenji Johjima has opted out of the final two years of his contract, according to a press release from the Mariners. He'll resume his career back in Japan. The Mariners are apparently freed from the $16MM they'd have owed Johjima over 2010-11.

Johjima originally signed with the Mariners as a free agent; he agreed to a three-year, $16.5MM deal in November of 2005. His success in '06 and '07 made that entire contract worthwhile, but Johjima's April '08 three-year extension for $24MM was widely panned."

There's no way else to put this: this decision by Johjima is a gift for the Mariners. Sure Johjima was a solid player for the Mariners a few years back, but at this stage in his career, he was not productive enough at the dish to be considered a starting catcher, let alone an $8 million dollar a year player.

So now comes the big question, what will the Mariners do with their additional funds? They already have close to $50 million coming off the books (before arbitration), so the extra $8 million will give the Mariners even more flexibility.

But with that said, this is a team that has lots of holes entering the offseason:

1. shortstop (do they pick up Jack Wilson's option?)
2. third base (do they re-sign Adrian Beltre)
3. catcher
4. first base (will they re-sign Russell Branyan)
5. DH (will they upgrade from the Sweeney/Griffey Jr. combo)
6. Starting rotation (who will fill the rotation after Felix Hernandez?)

And here are some other questions to consider:

1. will the Mariners offer Felix Hernandez an extension? (YES, YES, YES!)
2. will the Mariners re-sign Erik Bedard?
3. will the Mariners become players for Jason Bay or Matt Holliday?

For now, all I know is this: Mariners GM Jack Zduriencik is going to be one busy man this offseason.

Thoughts?

****** ******

(Jorge Says No! on Facebook)

(Follow Jorge Says No! on Twitter)

Are the Rockies Making a Mistake by Not Trading Brad Hawpe?

Surprising news out of Colorado this morning that GM Dan O'Dowd will not look to trade Brade Hawpe this offseason:

“The Rockies understand the value of Brad Hawpe on the field and off,” said O’Dowd. “We have no desire to move him at all. He has leadership ability and a commitment to the approach we feel is important for a team’s success.”

Hawpe hit .284 with 23 home runs and 86 RBI, ranking fourth on the Rockies in average, third in home runs and tied for second in RBI. He, however, hit only .209 with 10 RBI in September.

There is no financial push to move Hawpe, who is signed for $7.5 million in 2010. He had a $10 million option for 2011, but there is no buyout.

Obviously, the benefit for the Rockies, who had a payroll slightly north of $75 million this season, is that they would cut 10% of their budget ($7.5 million) by trading Hawpe. In addition, the Rockies have three cheap, young outfielders, who one can argue are all better suited for the National League and the Rockies: Carlos Gonzalez, Seth Smith, and Dexter Fowler.

And even though Hawpe struggled in the second half, there is little reason to think that Hawpe wouldn't be able to bring back a solid package for the Rockies. Hawpe is only 30 years old, hits for power, and has a very reasonable contract ($7.5 in 2010, $10 million option in 2011). The free agent market isn't exactly flooded with productive left handed power hitters, which plays even more in the favor of Brad Hawpe.

All signs pointed towards Brad Hawpe being traded this offseason. So why is Dan O'Dowd pulling him off the market? Supposed veteran leadership? Market value?

Your guess is as good as mine on this one.

Thoughts?

****** ******

(Jorge Says No! on Facebook)

(Follow Jorge Says No! on Twitter)

Who will be the Next Manager of the Astros?

By: Evan Levitt

Well it’s that time of year again…managerial musical chairs. Unfortunately for baseball fanatics like myself, there are only 3 teams looking for new managers this year (Nationals, Astros, and Indians). There are so many different ways to go about predicting who the next manager of a team will be—you can go with the safe choice, the stretch, the underdog, the person who has a 1% chance of managing, and the list goes on. For fun, I am going to examine who could be the next skipper of each of the three teams in a three part series. Since my prediction is that the Astros are going to make the first hire, they are the first ones I am going to take a look at:

HOUSTON ASTROS

This team is quite unique. They have not been bad in recent years, yet they have not been good. They have been pretty average. However, they have the talent and potential payroll to put together a team that can win the NL Central next year. However, before that they need someone to lead the ship. With this being said, here is a detailed breakdown of three potential candidates to right this ship

THE “INTERIM” MANAGER: Dave Clark

Why he is a good candidate—He knows the team and has some experience managing the team (if you count 13 games). Clearly the organization also sees potential in him as they gave him the reigns this September when Cecil Cooper got the boot.

Why they should pass on him—He has 13 games of managerial experience at the Major League level and the Astros have said they are looking for an individual with experience to manage in 2010…do 13 games really qualify him to manage?

THE MANAGERIAL PROSPECT IN NEED OF A SECOND CHANCE: Manny Acta

Why he is a good candidate—He is young, bright, and has over 15 years experience in the Astros minor league system. For years he has been dubbed the future managerial star. This might be the perfect organization for him to become that star.

Why they should pass on him—He could not right the Nationals ship when given the opportunity so what’s to say he will be a great manager in Houston?

THE WORLD SERIES MANAGER: Phil Garner

Why he is a good candidate—You know the saying that you don’t know how good you have it until it’s gone? I think the Astros may be realizing how good they had it with Garner leading the ship until that fateful day 2 years ago when he got the pink slip. Additionally, he is the only manager to bring the ‘stros to the World Series so he has brought success to the organization before…why can’t he do it again?

Why they should pass on him—To use another saying, “been there done that,” Garner has been the manager of the Astros and was fired. Obviously, something went wrong for them to fire him a month before the season’s end. Why go back to something that did not work after the first year?

THE UTILITY MAN: Tim Bogar

Why he is a good candidate—He retired after the 2001 season; yet, he has already won 3 manager of the year awards in the minor leagues…not too shabby. He has clearly shown that he can manage in the minor leagues, so maybe it’s time to give him a shot in the big leagues.

Why they should pass on him—He has 1 year of experience coaching in the big leagues—that’s it. Additionally, no one knows anything about him as a player, manager, or coach. In turn, he may have a very small following.

THE MOST POPULAR MAN IN JAPAN: Bobby Valentine

Why he is a good candidate—He has a fire that burns within him that is so unique and powerful. If the Astros are looking for someone to light a fire under the players within the organization, who better than Bobby V? He has managerial experience in Texas (while managing the Rangers) and experience managing in a major city (New York)…maybe Houston is the perfect combo?

Why they should pass on him—Towards the end of his tenure with the Mets, it seemed as though he “lost” the clubhouse. Bobby V just finished a contract out in Japan and was more popular than a Big Mac is in America. Could this have transformed him into a diva? I hope not, but it’s something to consider.

HE GOT FIRED?: Bob Melvin

Why he is a good candidate—He has shown that he can win if given the chance. Unfortunately for him, the Diamondbacks did not want to give Bob a chance to win in 2009 or 2010 and wanted to give that job to a man in their front office for the next four years. Frankly, I think Bob is a very smart man who has a lot of potential as a manager in the majors. All he is really guilty of is working for teams that did not have him in their long term plans.

THE LONGSHOTS

Al Pendrique: his record as a manager with the Diamondbacks a few years ago sucked and he seems to have found his niche in the front office. Chances are, he should and will stay there.

Luis Pujols: He has experience managing in the majors (Detroit in 2002), experience managing in the Astros system since 2008 (Corpus Christi—the Astros AA affiliate). However, I think the only way he gets a nod as the Astros next manager is if he can convince them that hiring him will guarantee that his cousin Albert will join the team after 2010.

Terry Collins: He managed the Astros for 3 seasons and produced a team with a record over .500 each of the 3 years. However, he never brought the team to the playoffs. He has a lot of experience managing and is supposedly quite similar to Bobby V. However, this might have been one ship that already sailed as far as its going to go.

Craig Biggio, Jeff Bagwell, or Brad Ausmus: Biggio and Bagwell are two of the most popular icons in Astros history. Thus, it would seem to be fitting that they manage the team they both spent 20+ years with. However, they have no experience managing or coaching, which makes their chances of managing slim to none. The same goes for Ausmus except he also is still active, thus he needs to retire before being considered a candidate to manage.

The Verdict: Given his history with the organization, extensive upside, and experience managing in the minor and major leagues, I believe that Manny Acta is not only the best candidate for the job in Houston, but also the most likely to get the position (not too often this happens). Only 40 years old, it would not be unreasonable to say that Acta could potentially manage the Astros for 10+ years if things go right.

Thoughts?

****** ******

(Jorge Says No! on Facebook)

(Follow Jorge Says No! on Twitter)