RealGM

Simple question and maybe it should've gone in the Moore thread, since his signing inspired the thought, but if you're AA, how much guaranteed cash would you offer Lawrie to get a Mooresque 8 year deal?

Moore got 14/5 and 3 team options (last year of arby and 2 FA years if he stays healthy) for an additional 26 (numbers were like 38-40 over 8, but I never got a totally clear picture).

Now, I'm sure most of you would take the same deal Moore got for Lawrie in heartbeat, but how much more would you do? Considering the next 5 years should be incredibly cheap (well if he plays like a superstar, then arby won't be that cheap), how much would you pay him now to potentially save later? 5/25 and 8/60 total? Less? More?

100 million x 15 years

15 years is insane, you can never predict how players will fare that far into the future. As for Lawrie I would say the Evan Longoria contract would be an excellent example to use. I believe that one bought out 2 of is FA years when all the options are done.

UN-Owen wrote:100 million x 15 years

+1

WpgPage wrote:15 years is insane, you can never predict how players will fare that far into the future. As for Lawrie I would say the Evan Longoria contract would be an excellent example to use. I believe that one bought out 2 of is FA years when all the options are done.

Three years, actually; it's a 6 + 3, with his control years costing $20.5m (including the option buyouts) and his FA years costing $27m-29.5m, depending on whether he triggers a couple incentives. So roughly $50m/9 all told, which is stupid-cheap for a player of his calibre.

I'd be surprised if Lawrie came at that reasonable a price, actually; Longoria signed in his first month in the bigs, whereas Lawrie posted a pretty surreal line in about a third of a season, and Lawrie is a little younger to boot. I'd quite happily give him a 6 + 2 (doubt he'd go further, might not even go that far; if he wants a 6 + whatever, you go for as long as possible, really) with $25m guaranteed over the control years and another $25m in options over the last two. Heck, I'd go $30m guaranteed without a second thought.

It's a fair shake more than Longoria, but it would still be unbelievably good if Lawrie becomes the player many expect, and a pretty small sunk cost if he were derailed.

I'd give him a 10 year extension for 80 million dollars (starting in the 2013 season as a sign of good faith and to possibly negate what I will cover in the next paragraph) in an instant. That would lock him up until his mid 30's and for the last 7-8 years of the deal we'd have the best bargain in baseball. By waiting 3-4 years to give him an extension (which the Jays can do having all the control) the Jay's will probably have to pay more in the range of 80-90 million for 7 years and that's on the very low end in all likelihood.

The only issue I can see is after being the most underpaid player in the bigs for 3-4 years he holds out for a renegotiation which frankly considering how good I think he is going to be I couldn't blame him. I understand "you signed the contract play it out" but I also see the other side of the coin when you severely outplay your contract and after a few years you feel entitled to more. That type of thing happens in the business world all the time when a guy becomes indispensable to a company.

There are very few players in baseball I would feel comfortable in giving a 10 year deal but I would have no issues at all if the Jays showed that type of faith in Lawrie and made him a career Jay right now at a reasonable price. He's young, very self motivated, a conditioning freak and with the exception of Bautista is easily the most popular Jay. If the Jays are ever going to commit those type of years to a player than Lawrie is the guy.

While there are no guarantees in baseball I think Lawrie is about as sure fire as it gets. While it's entirely possible he never turns out to be a top 10 superstar I just can't see anyway possible Lawrie isn't at least a .275 hitter .350 OBP that hits around 25-30 HR steals 25-30 bases and plays a decent 3rd base. Even if he tops out at that (if last year is any indication he will be much better than that) than he's still a steal and worth an 80 million dollar risk.

We can talk all day about a good value contract for us, but it is still up to him and his agent to accept it. Most don't sign away more than their first two years of free agency.

If he puts up a 7-8 WAR this year, I say we offer him that buys out his arby years at around 7.5 million and his first two free agency years at 12.5 mil. I think that's a realistic contract he would sign.

If he regresses and only puts up say a 3-4 WAR. We buy out his arby years at around 4.5 million and his first two free agency years at 8.5 million.

Maybe I am a pessimist, because I do like Lawrie but I wouldnt sign him long term based on 43 games and 150 at bats, maybe after a season you can handicap his value a little more?

If this was the precedent of the organization I can only imagine the cash we would still be paying to Josh Phelps after his 2002 end of season run.

Homer Jay wrote:We can talk all day about a good value contract for us, but it is still up to him and his agent to accept it. Most don't sign away more than their first two years of free agency.

If he puts up a 7-8 WAR this year, I say we offer him that buys out his arby years at around 7.5 million and his first two free agency years at 12.5 mil. I think that's a realistic contract he would sign.

If he regresses and only puts up say a 3-4 WAR. We buy out his arby years at around 4.5 million and his first two free agency years at 8.5 million.

If he puts up 7-8 WAR, there's no way he signs that cheaply, I'm afraid; he'd make far more than that in arbitration alone.

Phelps' 2002 season isn't a comparable. He had a .399 BABIP and struck out 28.6% of the time (and played 1B). Lawrie's peripherals were very reasonable, he was just impossibly good during his run and will face a regression to the unimpossible. He'll still be a fantastic hitter.

If we could buy out his arb years at a team-friendly rate, I'm all for it.

cosmostein wrote:Maybe I am a pessimist, because I do like Lawrie but I wouldnt sign him long term based on 43 games and 150 at bats, maybe after a season you can handicap his value a little more?

If this was the precedent of the organization I can only imagine the cash we would still be paying to Josh Phelps after his 2002 end of season run.

Agreed. Signing him now is the wrong move. He only had 150 at bats, and he played better than anybody else during that term. Whether hes amazing (in the future) or not, we have to wait for him to cool down (all players cool down eventually, yes, even Fielder had a few down years) and possibly have a bad year, then we offer him a reasonable contract.

If we played it year by year and went to arbies I bet he would command less than a potential extension, just due to natural variance. I would wait until he a) has a down year b) is 2 years away from FA, then do a Escobar 2+2 deal.

He looks to be at least a solid starter, so I wouldn't mind signing an extension long term if he comes back down to earth.

Schadenfreude wrote:

Homer Jay wrote:We can talk all day about a good value contract for us, but it is still up to him and his agent to accept it. Most don't sign away more than their first two years of free agency.

If he puts up a 7-8 WAR this year, I say we offer him that buys out his arby years at around 7.5 million and his first two free agency years at 12.5 mil. I think that's a realistic contract he would sign.

If he regresses and only puts up say a 3-4 WAR. We buy out his arby years at around 4.5 million and his first two free agency years at 8.5 million.

If he puts up 7-8 WAR, there's no way he signs that cheaply, I'm afraid; he'd make far more than that in arbitration alone.

What might be a better baseline then? Say Joe Mauer's contract? I hope not!
I was kind of basing Lawrie on Longoria, who so completely fuxored himself. He is dramatically underpaid, as his arby years were bought out at only 6 million and his first free agency years at 11 million. Who wants to bet he demands a trade if Tampa Bay picks up those options instead of renegotiating?

Homer Jay wrote:

Schadenfreude wrote:

Homer Jay wrote:We can talk all day about a good value contract for us, but it is still up to him and his agent to accept it. Most don't sign away more than their first two years of free agency.

If he puts up a 7-8 WAR this year, I say we offer him that buys out his arby years at around 7.5 million and his first two free agency years at 12.5 mil. I think that's a realistic contract he would sign.

If he regresses and only puts up say a 3-4 WAR. We buy out his arby years at around 4.5 million and his first two free agency years at 8.5 million.

If he puts up 7-8 WAR, there's no way he signs that cheaply, I'm afraid; he'd make far more than that in arbitration alone.

What might be a better baseline then? Say Joe Mauer's contract? I hope not!
I was kind of basing Lawrie on Longoria, who so completely fuxored himself. He is dramatically underpaid, as his arby years were bought out at only 6 million and his first free agency years at 11 million. Who wants to bet he demands a trade if Tampa Bay picks up those options instead of renegotiating?

Sonrise?

Weems wrote:Phelps' 2002 season isn't a comparable. He had a .399 BABIP and struck out 28.6% of the time (and played 1B). Lawrie's peripherals were very reasonable, he was just impossibly good during his run and will face a regression to the unimpossible. He'll still be a fantastic hitter.

If we could buy out his arb years at a team-friendly rate, I'm all for it.

also should be mentioned, Lawrie did all of his damage prior to September

These extensions aren't a means to pay them for the hell of it, it's to lock them up for longer for less than they're worth. Worth mentioning is that Lawrie's floor is very high. An extension for him would be a can't lose proposition.

Weems wrote:Worth mentioning is that Lawrie's floor is very high.

What? 150 at bats? Already his floor is borderline HOF?

Where did you get that? He's always been labelled as a future corner outfielder (more than likely) with 30/30 potential.

LBJSeizedMyID wrote:Where did you get that? He's always been labelled as a future corner outfielder (more than likely) with 30/30 potential.

I know but its crazy to think Lawrie, after 150 at bats is worthy of 80M/8 years or whatever you guys are saying. He would make less through arbitration followed by a FA contract. Just like with "buy high", you don't "re-sign high".

We have like 6 years of team control, why waste the cheapness of it. I'm pretty sure the NL MVP last year got 12.6M per year (average) AFTER being named MVP. That covered 3 years of Arbies, so lets assume that Lawrie gets AL MVP.

2013: 414k
2014: 414k
2015: 414k
2016: 12.6M
2017: 12.6M
2018: 12.6M
(I think that's right, correct me if I'm wrong)
Total = 39.046M/ 6 years

If you were to resign him (being the MVP) It will probably cost you 25M/year
2019: 25M
2020: 25M
(I was conservative)
Total = 50M/2 years
___________________
Grand total = 89.046M/8 years

So yes, the bold 80M projection makes sense. If Lawrie is the AL MVP in 3 years. Just about anything short of that it's a bad deal for us.

I might be wrong on some of the things (I wasn't sure about if its 3 years renewal and 3 Arbies or 2-4) but either way do the math and you'll see it's insane to pay that much.

Chances are hes human and will have at least 1 bad year on which we can resign him longterm.

I would give him 6 years and 22 million with another 3 option years at $36 million.

Something like this

2013: 450k
2014: 500k
2015: 750k
2016: 5M
2017: 7M
2018: 8M

Options
2019: 10M
2020: 12M
2021: 14M

Something like that.

flatjacket1 wrote:

Weems wrote:Worth mentioning is that Lawrie's floor is very high.

What? 150 at bats? Already his floor is borderline HOF?

Er, I didn't say that at all. I knew saying that his floor being "very high" was ambiguous, but in no way would I ever have thought it'd be interpreted like that.

I'm more pessimistic about him than anyone on the internet (including you), but I accept that his floor is high. I think you're being insensible towards him. I think you're also being insensible about the whole buying his arb years out thing. Matt Moore just signed for 8/$39m. Where'd the $89m for Lawrie come from and why in the world would we do that?