Is it time to sign Quentin?

[iamshack]

And also, let's get this s*** done with Beckham too if we can. Lock that guy up NOW. Ditto with Danks.

Why would Q sign now? Unless he is entirely not confident that he will ever stay healthy, then he will just wait.

 

Beckham, on the other hand, I would like to see him signed to a Longoria-esque sort of deal. I posted a thread about this several months ago.

 

Danks declined the same deal we gave to Gavin, so I have a feeling he's not going to want to sign now either. Plus, you run the risk of alienating Floyd a bit if you go and offer Danks something bigger than what you gave him...

[Kenny Hates Prospects]

Why would Q sign now? Unless he is entirely not confident that he will ever stay healthy, then he will just wait.

 

Beckham, on the other hand, I would like to see him signed to a Longoria-esque sort of deal. I posted a thread about this several months ago.

 

Danks declined the same deal we gave to Gavin, so I have a feeling he's not going to want to sign now either. Plus, you run the risk of alienating Floyd a bit if you go and offer Danks something bigger than what you gave him...

We won't know if Quentin will sign unless we offer him something. So, offer a package and hope he signs because that makes the most sense for us. If Quentin doesn't sign then he doesn't sign, but there's no reason to not pursue it.

 

No very good player should want to sign any of these deals because of the amount the player could end up forfeiting, but the security aspect can be pretty important, and sometimes they work out extremely well for the players. For example, our former CF prospect Chris Young is going to get millions upon millions above what his production thus far would be worth. Longoria OTOH is probably going to get screwed. You never know though and anything can happen.

Edited October 13, 2009 by Kenny Hates Prospects

[iamshack]

We won't know if Quentin will sign unless we offer him something. So, offer a package and hope he signs because that makes the most sense for us. If Quentin doesn't sign then he doesn't sign, but there's no reason to not pursue it.

 

No very good player should want to sign any of these deals because of the amount the player could end up forfeiting, but the security aspect can be pretty important, and sometimes they work out extremely well for the players. For example, our former CF prospect Chris Young is going to get millions upon millions above what his production thus far would be worth. Longoria OTOH is probably going to get screwed. You never know though and anything can happen.

 

I fully understand the concept of signing to get some security and possibly missing out on some dollars. But there is a difference between that and signing a deal when you just came off a year in which you had turf toe all season. You're not asking him to sign early for some financial security. You're asking him to sign when his value is extremely low because of injury.

[SoxAce]

I'd bait him on it.. lowball him, but put a s*** ton of incentives on the deal, since he's basically an injury prone player.

Edited October 13, 2009 by SoxAce

[iamshack]

I'd bait him on it.. lowball him, but put a s*** ton of incentives on the deal, since he's basically an injury prone player.

 

Just put yourself in the position of his agent though...after the year he came off of in 08', you have to tell him to wait at least one more year before signing anything that isn't quite lucrative for him.

[Jeremy]

I just don't see a ton of upside in buying out his arbitration years, since we retain the rights to him through those years no matter what. Sure, it's beneficial if we work out a good deal that ends up making him more affordable over the long run, so it's alright to make him an offer that's good for the team. However, I don't see any urgency to buy out those years and I'd want to do whatever's possible to minimize the risk, considering his health history.

 

Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes and yes again.

 

Think about this: we go to arb with Quentin and he probably gets like $3M or thereabout. If he has a monster 2010, then he could be looking at $8-10M easily (look at the arb situations for Prince and Howard). Now, if in 2011 he gets hurt and doesn't put up big numbers then he becomes a non-tender OR trade for very little candidate simply because through arbitration we won't be able to cut his salary sufficiently.

 

Giving Carlos an extension that buys out his 3 arb years plus one FA year full of team options with buyouts makes the most sense IMO.

 

The problem is, that's only one possible scenario and hence not a terribly likely one. Furthermore, if CQ is coming off a season where he did nothing, non-tendering him isn't the end of the world.

[Kenny Hates Prospects]

I fully understand the concept of signing to get some security and possibly missing out on some dollars. But there is a difference between that and signing a deal when you just came off a year in which you had turf toe all season. You're not asking him to sign early for some financial security. You're asking him to sign when his value is extremely low because of injury.

We asked him to sign coming off of an MVP-type season last year and he said no. Don't you think he'd be likelier to sign after an injury-plagued season instead of an MVP-type one? And either way, I don't see why any of this is important. The thread is about whether or not we should attempt to sign Quentin to a deal that buys out his arb years. I believe we should try to do that. Whether or not Quentin will sign such a deal is irrelevant to the discussion because nobody here is Carlos Quentin.

 

He'd still be signing for security BTW, that's the whole point of these deals. If Quentin re-injures his wrist in 2010 and plays 60 games then instead of being a non-tender candidate, he's got X amount of millions coming to him after 2010. It's not like a such a deal wouldn't be risky for the Sox.

 

If the Sox offer something like $3.5M in 2010, $6.5M in 2011, $9M in 2012 ($3M buyout, last arb year), $13M in 2013 ($4M buyout) then the Sox would be guaranteeing him $13M over the next 3 years even if he never plays another baseball game again. If he's healthy, they'd be committing up to $32M to him over the next 4 years. That's a lot of money to turn down. The same Floyd deal probably isn't going to work, but it's still a deal that could give the Sox cost certainty and potentially save them some money during the final two arb years and the first FA year.

Edited October 13, 2009 by Kenny Hates Prospects

[iamshack]

We asked him to sign coming off of an MVP-type season last year and he said no. Don't you think he'd be likelier to sign after an injury-plagued season instead of an MVP-type one? And either way, I don't see why any of this is important. The thread is about whether or not we should attempt to sign Quentin to a deal that buys out his arb years. I believe we should try to do that. Whether or not Quentin will sign such a deal is irrelevant to the discussion because nobody here is Carlos Quentin.

 

He'd still be signing for security BTW, that's the whole point of these deals. If Quentin re-injures his wrist in 2010 and plays 60 games then instead of being a non-tender candidate, he's got X amount of millions coming to him after 2010. It's not like a such a deal wouldn't be risky for the Sox.

 

If the Sox offer something like $3.5M in 2010, $6.5M in 2011, $9M in 2012 ($3M buyout, last arb year), $13M in 2013 ($4M buyout) then the Sox would be guaranteeing him $13M over the next 3 years even if he never plays another baseball game again. If he's healthy, they'd be committing up to $32M to him over the next 4 years. That's a lot of money to turn down. The same Floyd deal probably isn't going to work, but it's still a deal that could give the Sox cost certainty and potentially save them some money during the final two arb years and the first FA year.

 

No, I don't think he would be likelier to sign coming off an injury-plagued season. Why on earth would he? Why would you sign a long-term contract based on production that occurred while you were injured? The fact that he wouldn't sign last year shows that he believes in his abilities and that the arbitration system will compensate him moreso than whatever deal the Sox offerred him to buy out his arbitration years. The fact that he turned that extension down only makes it more likely that he will not be willing to sign a deal now, not less likely.

 

As for the security being the point of these deals, I agree with you. But there is a huge distinction between signing a deal based on production that occurred when one was healthy and one based on production that occurred when one was injured. What Longoria and Braun did was take the guaranteed money offerred them in case they were struck by injury or suddenly lost their ability to perform at a high level. However, that guaranteed money was still substantial because it still recognized their ability to perform at a high level, it just guaranteed the money (and a lesser amount, at that), than what they might earn were they to continue to stay healthy and perform at such a level. What you're asking Carlos to do is to sign a contract based upon a level of performance that he no doubt believes he is capable of far exceeding. Not one that just provides the consideration of guaranteeing the money, but one that is based on his performance while he was injured. There is a huge distinction there.

 

As for the relevance of whether he might sign such an extension, to claim that we should not discuss whether he would accept such an extension because we are not Carlos Quentin is foolish. None of us are Kenny Williams or Rick Hahn either (at least not that I am aware of), and yet we discuss the concept of whether to offer such an extension to Carlos. By your logic, it is irrelevent to discuss such an idea because none of us has the ability to offer said extension in the first place.

Edited October 13, 2009 by iamshack

[Kenny Hates Prospects]

No, I don't think he would be likelier to sign coming off an injury-plagued season. Why on earth would he? Why would you sign a long-term contract based on production that occurred while you were injured? The fact that he wouldn't sign last year shows that he believes in his abilities and that the arbitration system will compensate him moreso than whatever deal the Sox offerred him to buy out his arbitration years. The fact that he turned that extension down only makes it more likely that he will not be willing to sign a deal now, not less likely.

 

As for the security being the point of these deals, I agree with you. But there is a huge distinction between signing a deal based on production that occurred when one was healthy and one based on production that occurred when one was injured. What Longoria and Braun did was take the guaranteed money offerred them in case they were struck by injury or suddenly lost their ability to perform at a high level. However, that guaranteed money was still substantial because it still recognized their ability to perform at a high level, it just guaranteed the money (and a lesser amount, at that), than what they might earn were they continue to stay healthy and perform at such a level. What you're asking Carlos to do is to sign a contract based upon a level of performance that he no doubt believes he is capable of far exceeding. Not one that just provides the consideration of guaranteeing the money, but one that is based on his performance while he was injured. There is a huge distinction there.

 

As for the relevance of whether he might sign such an extension, to claim that we should not discuss whether he would accept such an extension because we are not Carlos Quentin is foolish. None of us are Kenny Williams or Rick Hahn either (at least not that I am aware of), and yet we discuss the concept of whether to offer such an extension to Carlos. By your logic, it is irrelevent to discuss such an idea because none of us has the ability to offer said extension in the first place.

Look at the numbers I suggested. Those are NOT numbers you give to player who you expect to put up 2009-type seasons. Those are numbers you give to a player that you expect to well exceed his 2009 performance. I'm suggesting the Sox give him a far better deal than they offered the first time, which is what Floyd signed. I'm suggesting that the Sox express confidence in Quentin and offer to buy out his arb years at a reasonable price, ***NOT*** try to rip him off. I am saying that the Sox should act as if 2009 was the aberration, not 2008.

[iamshack]

Look at the numbers I suggested. Those are NOT numbers you give to player who you expect to put up 2009-type seasons. Those are numbers you give to a player that you expect to well exceed his 2009 performance. I'm suggesting the Sox give him a far better deal than they offered the first time, which is what Floyd signed. I'm suggesting that the Sox express confidence in Quentin and offer to buy out his arb years at a reasonable price, ***NOT*** try to rip him off. I am saying that the Sox should act as if 2009 was the aberration, not 2008.

 

Oh, ok, I was confused about that part. I was not sure if you were talking about Quentin there still or had switched to Danks. When I mentioned how it might be tough to offer Danksy a different extension than Floyd now, I did so because I think Floyd would think he would be being penalized for trying to work with the organization a year earlier. So I thought maybe when you started making comparisons to the extension Floyd signed, maybe that you were referring to that.

 

I'm not really sure why you are comparing a possible Quentin extension to what Floyd signed though...isn't that a bit of apples to oranges there?

[Kenny Hates Prospects]

Oh, ok, I was confused about that part. I was not sure if you were talking about Quentin there still or had switched to Danks. When I mentioned how it might be tough to offer Danksy a different extension than Floyd now, I did so because I think Floyd would think he would be being penalized for trying to work with the organization a year earlier. So I thought maybe when you started making comparisons to the extension Floyd signed, maybe that you were referring to that.

 

I'm not really sure why you are comparing a possible Quentin extension to what Floyd signed though...isn't that a bit of apples to oranges there?

The Sox came out and said they offered the exact same deal to Floyd, Danks, and Quentin last year. Floyd signed, the others didn't. I believe the Sox should trying locking up Danks and Quentin both by offering them reasonable deals, which at this point would have to be higher because they're going to get more than Floyd in 2010 just be being first-year arbitration players.

 

Edit: Also, Floyd's deal only matters in that Floyd's deal was both of their original offers. The Sox should in no way think about hurting feelings or whatever by offering Danks and Quentin more money than Floyd. Floyd signed the deal early because he wanted security at that point. CQ and Danks held out, now they get more. Floyd would have gotten more had he also held out. There should be no hard feelings anywhere.

Edited October 13, 2009 by Kenny Hates Prospects

[iamshack]

The Sox came out and said they offered the exact same deal to Floyd, Danks, and Quentin last year. Floyd signed, the others didn't. I believe the Sox should trying locking up Danks and Quentin both by offering them reasonable deals, which at this point would have to be higher because they're going to get more than Floyd in 2010 just be being first-year arbitration players.

 

Edit: Also, Floyd's deal only matters in that Floyd's deal was both of their original offers. The Sox should in no way think about hurting feelings or whatever by offering Danks and Quentin more money than Floyd. Floyd signed the deal early because he wanted security at that point. CQ and Danks held out, now they get more. Floyd would have gotten more had he also held out. There should be no hard feelings anywhere.

Ahh, I was not aware that they offered Quentin the same deal as Floyd and Danks.

 

I disagree with regards to what you said about Floyd, but I will leave it at that.

[Kenny Hates Prospects]

Ahh, I was not aware that they offered Quentin the same deal as Floyd and Danks.

 

I disagree with regards to what you said about Floyd, but I will leave it at that.

Going to arb with Danks and Quentin each year is going to mean both players end up getting a lot more than Floyd. If the Sox want to save money in arb, they're still going to have to offer more than Floyd's deal to keep Danks and Quentin from hitting arbitration. Therefore, unless Danks and Quentin end up getting hurt very badly or regress severely, to the point of being non-tendered and signed for a base well below the arb figure, it will be physically impossible for the Sox to sign either Danks or Quentin over Floyd's contracted term without giving each player more than what Floyd signed for.

 

Floyd's deal:

09:$0.75M, 10:$2.75M, 11:$5M, 12:$7M, 13:$9.5M club option

 

Danks and Quentin should both hit $3M+ in arb this year which is more than Floyd. Even if they have very average years in 2010, they would be expected to at least get what Floyd gets in 2011 and 2012, but they'd likely get more. 2013 would be a free agent year for all of them had Floyd not signed. Danks and CQ, if healthy, are going to get a lot more than $9.5M as free agents.

 

Put it this way: does anyone think Alexei Ramirez's feelings are hurt because he signed for this: 08:$0.95M, 09:$1.1M, 10:$1.1M, 11:$1.1M? If the Sox bring back Kotsay, then Kotsay will probably make as much or more than Alexei will next year. Including Alexei's signing bonus, Scott Linebrink in 2010 will make $250K more than Alexei will make from 2008-2011 combined. That's hardly fair, but I doubt anyone has their feelings hurt.

 

The economics of the game force players and teams to make decisions that end up screwing some players who deserve a lot more and burying other guys who suck in piles of cash. That's just the nature of the game and everyone involved has to accept it. If Scott Linebrink wants to give back some of the $10.5M he's owed through 2011 then I'm sure the Sox will have no problem recommitting it to Floyd and Alexei as raises. But until MLB teams are allowed to cancel out bad contracts mid-term and readjust them to accurately reflect performance, those players who end up signing for far less for security reasons shouldn't be allowed raises mid-term either, and that's basically what would have to happen in order for Floyd's deal to look good for him. So, Floyd's deal should serve as nothing but a base point for Danks and Quentin in their negotiations.

 

And besides, I doubt Floyd and his agent are hoping everyone else gets paid less than he does. The best thing that can happen for Floyd individually is for Danks to get paid a s***load, because that means that when the Sox want to extend his deal he can get a whole lot more.

[iamshack]

I understand all this stuff, KHP.

 

And if Danks is offered another extension, it should offer a more lucrative sum of money only in that it would seek to buy out more of his lucrative years of service time and/or FA years than Floyd's due to the later stage of his career it was signed. That is the nature of the gamble Danks takes and wins each year he stays healthy and productive while being paid less than Floyd in his prearb years because he chose not security but instead chose to allow the system to compensate him more in his arb years. The contract may also reflect changes in the general economy or in the market for which baseball players are compensated.

 

 

 

[hometeamfan]

Ahh, I was not aware that they offered Quentin the same deal as Floyd and Danks.

 

I disagree with regards to what you said about Floyd, but I will leave it at that.

Quentin was offered MUCH MORE than Danks or Floyd. Remember, Danks is two years younger than Gavin...is lefthanded, and has a year more ML under his belt. You might not think that matters, but trust me it does in the baseball front office. Danks started the season off strong and only faltered due to dealing with a nasty finger issue. Even with that, he finished strong and reached 200 innings. Were it not for the the unfortunate 7 NDs his W/L outcome wouldve been much different too.

[Steve9347]

I think you offer the same deal that was offered last year. This would show the organization still views him the same as they did coming off that unreal season, but we will not raise our offer after such a terrible 2009.

Edited October 13, 2009 by Steve9347

[hometeamfan]

I think you offer the same deal that was offered last year. This would show the organization still views him the same as they did coming off that unreal season, but we will not raise our offer after such a terrible 2009.

I assume youre referring to CQs "horrible" season?

[East Side Z]

There's a time for each club to make a decission on its "young core" that shouldnt be all about the money they can save.It should be about wheter they belive in the player and IMO CQ should be signed long term as well as Danks.It wouldnt be a bad idea to approach Beckham as well.

[Steve9347]

I assume youre referring to CQs "horrible" season?

Well, I said "terrible" so if you're going to quote it, quote it. But yes. And if you're questioning whether that was "terrible" or not, well, dropping .200 points in OPS is terrible.

[hometeamfan]

Well, I said "terrible" so if you're going to quote it, quote it. But yes. And if you're questioning whether that was "terrible" or not, well, dropping .200 points in OPS is terrible.

Agree completely....

[lostfan]

iamshack I don't see how you came to the conclusion that Floyd would feel alienated if Danks ended up getting more than he got. Floyd knew what he was doing when he signed his deal, in fact he probably felt relieved considering his shaky history with Philly and finally getting a nice payday. Danks rolled the dice on the assumption that he would continue his level of performance, knowing that if he did his contract would be worth more. These guys understand it's a business.

[Kenny Hates Prospects]

Quentin was offered MUCH MORE than Danks or Floyd. Remember, Danks is two years younger than Gavin...is lefthanded, and has a year more ML under his belt. You might not think that matters, but trust me it does in the baseball front office. Danks started the season off strong and only faltered due to dealing with a nasty finger issue. Even with that, he finished strong and reached 200 innings. Were it not for the the unfortunate 7 NDs his W/L outcome wouldve been much different too.

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2009/03/whit...four-years.html

3:04pm: Scot Gregor has the breakdown of the years. Floyd will receive $750K this season, $2.75MM for 2010, $5MM for 2011, and $7MM for 2012.

 

Gregor adds that they also offered the same deal to Carlos Quentin, who passed as well.

 

Kenny also stated this himself in an interview. Danks, Floyd, and CQ all got the exact same contract offer. Floyd was the only one to sign.

[iamshack]

iamshack I don't see how you came to the conclusion that Floyd would feel alienated if Danks ended up getting more than he got. Floyd knew what he was doing when he signed his deal, in fact he probably felt relieved considering his shaky history with Philly and finally getting a nice payday. Danks rolled the dice on the assumption that he would continue his level of performance, knowing that if he did his contract would be worth more. These guys understand it's a business.

 

I just think it fosters an atmosphere where players will resist signing these kind of contracts if after one year, we come back and substantially increase the deal. I understand there are necessary increases over what Floyd got simply because Danks' contract would likely cover more lucrative years, but I think it is important that the years the contract has in common with Floyd's, that the amounts only be increased in that they recognize Danks was paid less in his prearb years because he was working within baseball's system, whereas Floyd chose to sign a deal designed to pay him more in his prearb years in exchange for some cost certainty in the arb years for the Club.

 

As KHP said a while back, the Club WANTS these guys to sign these "secure" deals, as it works both for the Club and for the player. If after one year of taking this gamble, Danks is rewarded with a substantially more lucrative offer simply because the Club wants him signed, then what does that say to Floyd? And trust me, I understand baseball is a business, and I understand these guys are adults, but men tend to measure their self-worth in their jobs by how much money they make, and I just think you want to try and keep Floyd and Danks on a fairly similar salary plane.

 

I guarantee you Mark is a bit salty about what Peavy is going to be paid by the White Sox, considering the whole song and dance they fed him about contracts they normally hand out for pitchers, etc., when they signed him.

[son of a rude]

I just think it fosters an atmosphere where players will resist signing these kind of contracts if after one year, we come back and substantially increase the deal. I understand there are necessary increases over what Floyd got simply because Danks' contract would likely cover more lucrative years, but I think it is important that the years the contract has in common with Floyd's, that the amounts only be increased in that they recognize Danks was paid less in his prearb years because he was working within baseball's system, whereas Floyd chose to sign a deal designed to pay him more in his prearb years in exchange for some cost certainty in the arb years for the Club.

 

As KHP said a while back, the Club WANTS these guys to sign these "secure" deals, as it works both for the Club and for the player. If after one year of taking this gamble, Danks is rewarded with a substantially more lucrative offer simply because the Club wants him signed, then what does that say to Floyd? And trust me, I understand baseball is a business, and I understand these guys are adults, but men tend to measure their self-worth in their jobs by how much money they make, and I just think you want to try and keep Floyd and Danks on a fairly similar salary plane.

I guarantee you Mark is a bit salty about what Peavy is going to be paid by the White Sox, considering the whole song and dance they fed him about contracts they normally hand out for pitchers, etc., when they signed him.

Peavy is a much better pitcher than Buehrle. I'm sure Buehrle can see that they are trying to put the club in contention to win a world series too. I doubt he is that bitter about it.

[iamshack]

Peavy is a much better pitcher than Buehrle. I'm sure Buehrle can see that they are trying to put the club in contention to win a world series too. I doubt he is that bitter about it.

 

Didn't something come out about Mark making a comment about Peavy's salary the first time we traded for him?

http://fannation.sportsillustrated.cnn.com...ors/view/112656?

Edited October 13, 2009 by iamshack