Reyes: bigbux longterm contract after 2006 or go with arb.?

[Vic Sage]

If i'm Omar Minaya, and im working for Fred Wilpon, I know Freddie won't want to eat any part of a bad deal (and if i make him do so, my job hangs by a thread), so if Jose goes in the crapper, i'm stuck with him. Therefore, until he shows me more than speed and an arm, i'll go one year at a time, thank you very much.

Of course, if i'm freddie, i would take the chance on Jose's upside and, if he goes south, i eat it and move on. But i'm not freddie, apparently.

AS for David Wright, he's as close to a Pujols as this organization has ever gotten. A 5-tool 3bman with 5-tool production, plus an unquestioned work ethic, a good guy in the clubhouse, no real health issues, and YOUNG. If there is EVER money that would be well spent by Mr. Wilpon, it would be locking him up to a bigbux 7-year deal.

[Frayed Knot]

"I'd insist on at least one of the FA years if he gets the security he wants"

Well, there you take a big jump in both money and risk. Making an offer at the end of '06 in anticipation for what you'll pay him anyway while he remains under your control is a lot different from anticipating what it'll take to buy him on the free market 4 years hence. Since you're worried about making a committment in case he's not the real deal, you should be even more leery about doing so further out rather than insisting upon it. I am.



"If you're paying him 14 mil the next few years and instead of getting a modest improvement to a .311 OBP you get a decline down to Ordonez levels, .280 or so, you're totally screwed."

Hey, longer deals are a gamble and there's always the chance of things backfiring. But, assuming progress in '06 - remember, we're assuming he showns progress this coming year (I wouldn't give him a deal now) - I think it's a reasonable risk as opposed to the scenario where he becomes a bench or non-tender player in that same time and the team is eating money like that Japanese guy at Coney Island every summer.




"Also I'm sure not why you've picked Soriano as your model"

Just the first guy that sprung to mind as someone who's currently getting paid piecemeal for his 4th, 5th, and 6th seasons. Different age/different skills: similar OBP, more power, worse defense; but useful as an example of how salaries progress.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

Thank you for summarizing my position so pithily.

Yeth, I wrote that.

[Guest abogdan]

I agree with Bret's sentiments that it only makes sense for the Mets to do a long term deal if they can buy out a year or two of free agency. It's not like the Mets can't afford arbitration if it gets to that point. The long term advantage is that they can get Reyes at a cheaper rate 3-5 years from now than he will get in his last year of arb or on the open market and get cost certainty at the position for the next five years.

Why would Reyes agree to buy out two years of free agency at let's say 5 years, $30 million? First, the inherrent risk that not having a guaranteed contract poses. He signs a deal he's guaranteed to make $30 million. He doesn't he's guaranteed to make nothing if he slips and falls tomorrow and busts up his ACL. Second, Reyes will still become a free agent during what should be the prime of his career. If the contract run to 2010 he'll be a 27 year old free agent, still much younger than most players are when they first enter the market.

Yes, there's a huge risk for the Mets that Reyes will become less productive than he is now. I hate having a .311 OBP in the lead off spot as much as the next guy, but Reyes does more with that .311 OBP than anyone else in the league would. He scored over 50% of the time he reached base, despite having Miguel Cairo hitting behind him most of the year. I believe that Reyes scored on the highest percentage of times on base, but I can't find where I read that. (Quick tangent: it looks like baseball1.com isn't updating their database anymore. Anyone know a free downloadable database of baseball stats updated through 2005?)

If he ever got up to even .340, he'd be a ridiculous threat at the top of the lineup. Of course that raise the question of whether there's any reason to expect him to ever get to .340. Baseballreference's most similar players is filled mainly from players who were around during the deadball era. Baseball Prospectus' Pecota most similar players before last season inluded a number of contemporary players who did see OBP spikes in their early 20's after a few years of low OBP: Cesar Izturis, Felipe Lopez, Luis Castillo.

I think it's worth the risk. Even if Reyes doesn't improve his OBP, as long as his baserunning ability remains, someone would be willing to trade for him.

[seawolf17]

="abogdan"]I believe that Reyes scored on the highest percentage of times on base, but I can't find where I read that.

abog, this isn't terribly precise, but...

Of the top 40 players in runs scored in 2005, here are the lowest OBPs:

Renteria .335 (23rd in runs - 100)
Crawford .331 (22nd in runs - 101)
Pierre .326 (32nd in runs - 96)
Biggio .325 (35th in runs - 94)
Soriano .309 (21st in runs - 102)
Reyes .300 (26th in runs - 99)

Only Soriano was even close to Reyes' OBP. In fact, you have to go down to Pudge Rodriguez, who tied for 97th in the majors in runs (71) until you find someone with a lower OBP (.290) than Reyes.

Your statement might be correct.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

abogdan wrote: Reyes does more with that .311 OBP than anyone else in the league would.

You do realize, don't you, that the .311 OBP is a projection for 2006 that hasn't actulaly occured yet? His lifetime OBP as of now is .303.

Jose scored 99 runs in 696 at-bats in front of the middle of the order. Floyd and Jacobs, neither of them speed merchants, scored 104 in 650 at-bats,coming up before the end of the order. Why? Because they had. halfway decent OBPs. Don't get fooled by glitz.

[Guest Rotblatt]

The Twins bought out 2 of Santana's FA years at well below what he probably would have commanded ($12.65M/year on average). The 2 arb-eligible years they also bought out ($5.5M in 05 and $9M in 06) were probably at around what he would have received in arbitration, so there is some precident there . . .

So I guess if arguably the best pitcher in the majors was willing to take less than he's worth to get guaranteed years, then Jose should be more than willing to do the same thing.

Of course, the Twins went to arbitration with him in 2004 before signing him to his current deal, which, it strikes me, isn't a bad model. It would give us one more year to try and assess Reye's value. If Reyes sucks, then we go to arb with him; if he's good, we try to buy out a couple FA eligible years.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

OK now define "Sux" and "good"--my concern, of course, is that Metsaholics will repeat The Ordonez Error (sounds like a Ludlum thriller, don't it?) and scream "SIGN HIM!" when there's no compelling to, other than in their private fantasies.

Just because you want him to be a star, and because he's shown some glimmers of star ability, doesn't mean you want to pay him like an established star gets paid, does it? I've been focussing this discussion on OBP, but you can frame it however you want: I'd actually suggest Win Shares myself. But there should be in your mind at this point some clear level Jose must reach in 2006 before you'll throw money and years at him.

[Guest abogdan]

]Why? Because they had. halfway decent OBPs. Don't get fooled by glitz.

Right, if Reyes gets on base more, he'll score more runs. No argument there. My point was that Reyes' ability on the base paths makes him more valuable than your typical .300 OBP hitter. To use the example put forth as comparison, Floyd scored 39% of the time he was on base compared to Reyes' 50%. Yes, Reyes hit before the heart of the lineup, but he also hit directly in front of one of the worst hitters in all of major league baseball in 2005 - Miguel Cairo.

If Reyes gets up to a .320-330 OBP this season, combined by a spike in his walk rate, and continues to show his superb base running skills, I would sign him long term.

[Valadius]

We need to begin to make a commitment to keeping our young core intact. Going through arbitration would only cause tension between Reyes (or Wright, Heilman, Seo, Diaz, etc.) and management. Sign them to multiyear deals that increase in salary every year, such as a gradual increase from $2 million to $6 million in Reyes' case.

[Elster88]

If the only reason you're signing a guy is to "ease tension" among the other players....then you really need another reason. See the earlier posts in this thread for more compelling arguments one way or the other.

[Zvon]

This is a most interesting thread.

So your projecting Reyes has a .311 OBP in 2006.

mmmmmm.

Id want to see a higher OBP in 2006, a real improvment, not so much in his number of walks, but in his discipline at the plate. The walks will come as a result of that. I dont want to deminish his agressiveness, but I want to see it tempered with patience.

I do believe we have to think of him in terms of the top end of the line up. Anything else would fall short of his potential.

Grabbing afew of his FA years could be wise, but I dont think any agent would advise that he does this if he shows a marked improvment in 2006. But, given your projection, the Mets would be foolish to go there.

I rarely say "this i have to think about", but
"this, i have to think about."

Great thread Bret.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

Zvon wrote: Great thread Bret.

Why, thank you, sir.

The truly scary part under discussion, it seems to me, is that Valadius's view is one of the things (one of the non-baseball-related ways of looking at baseball) that screw the Mets up time after time.

Once that sort of stuff is validated, even in part, we end up with multi-year commitments to not-very-good ballplayers and then, after a few years pass, we wonder how ended up in such a fix. Obviously, in the "most hated shortstops" thread, I maintain that is how the Mets ended up playing millions to a player who, upon reflection, probab ly didn't deserve to be in the majors and certainly didn't deserve to start on a team that wanted to contend. Valadius, if I may burlesque his position, wants to sign Jose to an LT contract for serious money regardless of what his OBP and other critical stats and signs are at the time of signing. Why? Because he's Jose Reyes. He's our young star. He's our future.

But wishing isn't what makes that so. Performance has got to rule your emotions.

[nymr83]

Reyes has 3 more potential trips to the arbitrator, right? why not let the first one occur and then see another year (2007) before making any kind of long term plans

[Zvon]

Bret Sabermetric wrote: ="Zvon"] Great thread Bret. Why, thank you, sir. The truly scary part under discussion, it seems to me, is that Valadius's view is one of the things (one of the non-baseball-related ways of looking at baseball) that screw the Mets up time after time. Once that sort of stuff is validated, even in part, we end up with multi-year commitments to not-very-good ballplayers and then, after a few years pass, we wonder how ended up in such a fix. Obviously, in the "most hated shortstops" thread, I maintain that is how the Mets ended up playing millions to a player who, upon reflection, probab ly didn't deserve to be in the majors and certainly didn't deserve to start on a team that wanted to contend. Valadius, if I may burlesque his position, wants to sign Jose to an LT contract for serious money regardless of what his OBP and other critical stats and signs are at the time of signing. Why? Because he's Jose Reyes. He's our young star. He's our future. But wishing isn't what makes that so. Performance has got to rule your emotions.

The fan in me knows where Val is coming from.
The GM in me hears ya.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

A little stat for you: Reyes's OPS+ last year was 80.

That means, roughly, that his offensive contribution, adjusted for park influences, was about 4/5ths of the average ballplayer's. Only Cairo among the starters had a lower OPS+ than Reyes (64)--of the six bench players with 100 or more ABs, only Kaz matsui's OPS+ was lower (72).

I understand you love the guy. But you cannot be even thinking about a LT contract for this guy, unless he shows major signs of improvement. Though they have to say otherwise in public, I can't believe the Mets' front office aren't very concerned about his 2007 contract when, without the major breakthrough,

1) they'll need to offer him arbitration, and risk alienating Jose and worse have fans screaming "How can you not offer Jose Reyes a LT BB contract? He's a STAHHHH!"

or

2) offer him a LT BB contract and risk the fans around 2009 screaming "Get rid of the bum--whose stupid idea was it to sign this stiff, anyway?"

[Frayed Knot]

Keep in mind that simply because Reyes will be eligible for arbitration next year doesn't mean that route will be used. The two sides could always agree to terms on their own and not have to result to outside help; which is the way the Mets have usually solved their contracts.
Prior to that they'll often offer arb to various player (this'll happen in the next few weeks for whoever is eligible now) but that's just a procedural step neccesary to keep the paperwork in line. There will still several months after that for the sides to come to an agreement which they could do for anywhere from 1 year to a lifetime services contract.
Arbitration is simply there as a fall-back if the player thinks the team is being unfair in it's negotiations and, in general, the mere threat of the process is usually enough to prevent that. That's as opposed to the first 2-3 years of a player's ML life where a team can dictate that a player take whatever they offer. Theoretically, for instance, the Mets thank Wright for the great year he had and then offer him a 35 cent raise ...and he'd have no recourse but to accept it or take some job that involves the phrase: "Want fries with that?".

This whole Reyes debate keeps slipping into a 'acrimoniously decided small salary' vs 'set-for-life contract' dichotomy as if there's no middle ground. There's plenty.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

There seems to be a wide disparity between those who value Jose's virtues highly ("60 Steals! 17 triples! Fabulously fielding shortstop! Only 22 years old! Buy Now!") and those who don't ("He's an okay middle infielder, with a lot of potential. So? I should go nuts over that?")

If you were Jose's agent and getting a 35 cent raise offer, and you had arbitritation available, why would n't you see if maybe you got an arbitrator in the first category?

If you're Omar, and you think Jose's worth a 35 cent raise, doesn't it kinda wreck your salary structure to give him a bigbux deal while other players must, by definition, then get underpaid?

[metsmarathon]

i'd have no problem with buying out some of jose's early FA years with a salary commensurate with his past performance and a well-reasoned expectation of his future performance for the duration of the contract.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

metsmarathon wrote: i'd have no problem with buying out some of jose's early FA years with a salary commensurate with his past performance and a well-reasoned expectation of his future performance for the duration of the contract.

What's commensurate?

[Frayed Knot]

Bret Sabermetric wrote: There seems to be a wide disparity between those who value Jose's virtues highly ("60 Steals! 17 triples! Fabulously fielding shortstop! Only 22 years old! Buy Now!") and those who don't ("He's an okay middle infielder, with a lot of potential. So? I should go nuts over that?")

And plenty who are in between those disparate extremes.

]If you were Jose's agent and getting a 35 cent raise offer, and you had arbitritation available, why would n't you see if maybe you got an arbitrator in the first category?

If he had arbitration available he wouldn't be getting offerred a 35 cent raise. That example was to show what could theoretically happen when arbitration is NOT available.

]If you're Omar, and you think Jose's worth a 35 cent raise, doesn't it kinda wreck your salary structure to give him a bigbux deal while other players must, by definition, then get underpaid?

If you think he's worth a 35 cent raise well then you wouldn't be offering a LT deal now would you?

[metsmarathon]

i dunno... where can i find good data on the contractual obligations for the remainder of the major league shortstops out there?

i mean, a cursory glance at this years' crop of qualified ML SS's tells me that $3M looks to be about mean, with a reasonable ceiling, excepting furcal, tejada and jeter, of $6M, but i have no idea how that all changes with time- it was, afterall a cursory glance.

so, given those assumptions, and a 2006 full of offensive progress - ie raising his OBP to at least 350ish with promise of more discipline in the future, no injuries, and, dare i say, a modest increase in power at no expense of speed, i'd be cool with something on the order of 3, 4, 5, 6, 6, (7 opt) to secure our shortstop for the next 5-6 years.

i hope this adequately convys neither the impression that i think him to be deserving of a superstar salary, nor the impression that i consider him a fluke-waiting-to-happen.

provided he remains healthy, reyes offers FAR MORE to an offense than REY-0 ever has, and therefore is deserving of a max salary remarkably similar to what 000rdonez got. sure, its a risk, betting that he continues to develop at a meager pace, but i think it is a safer bet that he develop into a somewhate above average OPSman with well-above average speed figures, than it is to think that he will regress into rey-0 incompetence.

and therefore, the financial stability proposed in my above contractual offer strikes me both fair to the player and smart to the team.

[nymr83]

]so, given those assumptions, and a 2006 full of offensive progress - ie raising his OBP to at least 350ish

.350 would be a HUGE step and if he did t hat i'd sign him long term on the spot, but its also awfully optimistic, i'd put the chances at about 2% or equal to the chances of him slipping down to about .250

[Zvon]

Ive given this some thought.
At the top though, let me say strapping him to a .311 OBP and saying he shows small growth in other areas is a tuff projection to work with. It limits where the small growth can occur and ultimately will effect his worth.

i was going to type this long break down as to why, but i hate typing.
And Im the GM. I shouldnt have to explain in any more detail that this.

using the projection, as Mets general manager, Id offer:

3 years at 10.5 on the low and I might go up to 12m.
There would be bonuses for things like stolen bases, triples and the usual stuff.

As well as his numbers, i would factor in certain intangables, like what he does to make the team go and when the team goes people buy tickets. I would also factor in that in 2005 i paid him only $332,000 and his performance that yr was a steal for the team, even given the room for improvment.

If he had the projected year, and then showed even more improvment in 2008, especially in areas like walks, OBP, batting average, and runs scored, i would consider renegotiating an extension (mid season '08 or '09-depends on how much improvment and where as to when I would do this) that would include buying out some of his free agent years.

For the consideration of a mid season extension, in 2008 or 2009, I would REALLY like to see:
An OBP of .340 or better. (above .355 id throw alot of money at him)
A batting average of .290 or better.
50 walks or better.
100 runs scored, or better.

Dont forget, this is thinking as a GM. And this all assumes he stays healthy, continues to flourish, and plays complete seasons (150 games or better)

As a fan I want to take the ride with Reyes wherever it leads for however long. (by ride, I am refering to as him being the leadoff batter/shortstop for the Mets. If he doesnt live up to that potential, i wont hate the guy, but id sure be disappointed. As a fan I think giving Reyes a nice payday is a risk id be more than willing to take.I want him to grow as a Met)

[Frayed Knot]

"There would be bonuses for things like stolen bases, triples and the usual stuff. "

Not legal. Incentives are not allowed for specific outcome-based statistical goals, only appearence-type ones such as ABs, games played, etc., or post-season awards like MVP & CY.



"I would also factor in that in 2005 i paid him only $332,000 and his performance that yr was a steal for the team, even given the room for improvment."

Every player plays his 1st year or two at near minimum wage. There's nothing unique about this w/Reyes to where the club should look to "make up" the difference later on.

[Zvon]

="Frayed Knot"]"There would be bonuses for things like stolen bases, triples and the usual stuff. " Not legal. Incentives are not allowed for specific outcome-based statistical goals, only appearence-type ones such as ABs, games played, etc., or post-season awards like MVP & CY.

This is probly why Im not a GM.
lol.
then the usual bonuses.

] "I would also factor in that in 2005 i paid him only $332,000 and his performance that yr was a steal for the team, even given the room for improvment." Every player plays his 1st year or two at near minimum wage. There's nothing unique about this w/Reyes to where the club should look to "make up" the difference later on.

If I was GM, I would. Not every player sparks a team like Reyes did his 1st full season.
Wouldnt make it up to him. I would consider it.
Wouldnt have to, but I would.
Again, I probly would not make a good G.M. in real life.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

Zvon wrote: Ive given this some thought. At the top though, let me say strapping him to a .311 OBP and saying he shows small growth in other areas is a tuff projection to work with. It limits where the small growth can occur and ultimately will effect his worth. i was going to type this long break down as to why, but i hate typing. And Im the GM. I shouldnt have to explain in any more detail that this. using the projection, as Mets general manager, Id offer: 3 years at 10.5 on the low and I might go up to 12m.

For a GM, you make a pretty good fan.

Up to 4 Million per year for a leadoff man whose peak OBP is .311 at the time of signing? Don't you think an arbitrated one-year deal would be a lot less than 4 mil? I do.

Your plan gives nothing beyond the Jose's arb. years. It's true that at this point, with Jose's track record, as FK notes, I don't really want to be buying out his FA years, but that's ordinarily a huge advantage in signing a LT contract with a three-year player, a la Pujols.

Further, if he gets hurt or backslides in the three years of your contract, you go on paying him.. That's true with any LT contract, of course, but this is one you don't need to sign at the risk of losing the player: The Mets have Jose locked up through 2009 either way. It's just a question of how much they pay him.

You're paying him as a fan. It's not your money. It's not your salary structure.

The base you should want to be working off is: What would an arbitrator award him off a projected .311 OBP season in 2006 such as we've projected? 4 Mil is crazy high. 3 mil is crazy high. I think 2 mil is high.

Look at Jimmy Rollins for comparison: bbref has him getting paid

2001 Philadelphia Phillies $200,000
2002 Philadelphia Phillies $355,000
2003 Philadelphia Phillies $450,000
2004 Philadelphia Phillies $2,425,000
2005 Philadelphia Phillies $3,850,000

Obviously he made the jump to hyperspace after 2003, at which point he had a lifetime OBP of about .320 (in our projections Jose's will be about .306 after a .311 season in 2006), and a rock-solid durability record. Same position, same a lot of stuff. I'm not sure whether the Phillies signed Rollins to a LT contract or if that's a series of arbitrator's rulings, but that's about his value on the open market. And I think Rollins is comparable to (or better than) Jose based on stats as of now. I might not trade them even up, but that's because I like Jose's future. A Phillies fan would prolly feel very differently.

Look at his bbref page and show me where Jose is demonstrably better such that he would reasonably demand and get a higher salary:

http://www.baseball-reference.com/r/rolliji01.shtml

[metsmarathon]

i keep forgetting that we're projecting jose to have a .311 obp in '06...

[Zvon]

Bret Sabermetric wrote: ="Zvon"]Ive given this some thought. At the top though, let me say strapping him to a .311 OBP and saying he shows small growth in other areas is a tuff projection to work with. It limits where the small growth can occur and ultimately will effect his worth. i was going to type this long break down as to why, but i hate typing. And Im the GM. I shouldnt have to explain in any more detail that this. using the projection, as Mets general manager, Id offer: 3 years at 10.5 on the low and I might go up to 12m. For a GM, you make a pretty good fan. Up to 4 Million per year for a leadoff man whose peak OBP is .311 at the time of signing? Don't you think an arbitrated one-year deal would be a lot less than 4 mil? I do. Your plan gives nothing beyond the Jose's arb. years. It's true that at this point, with Jose's track record, as FK notes, I don't really want to be buying out his FA years, but that's ordinarily a huge advantage in signing a LT contract with a three-year player, a la Pujols. Further, if he gets hurt or backslides in the three years of your contract, you go on paying him.. That's true with any LT contract, of course, but this is one you don't need to sign at the risk of losing the player: The Mets have Jose locked up through 2009 either way. It's just a question of how much they pay him. You're paying him as a fan. It's not your money. It's not your salary structure. The base you should want to be working off is: What would an arbitrator award him off a projected .311 OBP season in 2006 such as we've projected? 4 Mil is crazy high. 3 mil is crazy high. I think 2 mil is high. Look at Jimmy Rollins for comparison: bbref has him getting paid 2001 Philadelphia Phillies $200,000 2002 Philadelphia Phillies $355,000 2003 Philadelphia Phillies $450,000 2004 Philadelphia Phillies $2,425,000 2005 Philadelphia Phillies $3,850,000 Obviously he made the jump to hyperspace after 2003, at which point he had a lifetime OBP of about .320 (in our projections Jose's will be about .306 after a .311 season in 2006), and a rock-solid durability record. Same position, same a lot of stuff. I'm not sure whether the Phillies signed Rollins to a LT contract or if that's a series of arbitrator's rulings, but that's about his value on the open market. And I think Rollins is comparable to (or better than) Jose based on stats as of now. I might not trade them even up, but that's because I like Jose's future. A Phillies fan would prolly feel very differently. Look at his bbref page and show me where Jose is demonstrably better such that he would reasonably demand and get a higher salary: http://www.baseball-reference.com/r/rolliji01.shtml

Jimmy Rollins signed a deal for 2005 season worth 3.85M (plus award bonuses) on 1/18/05.
In June of 2005 he signed 5year extention worth 40million thru 2010 season. He receives a 5M signing bonus that is payable in installments of 1million in July of each year of the deal.
He receives salaries of 4million in 2006, 7million in both 2007 and 2008, and then 7.5million in both 2009 and 2010.
The deal includes a Team Option for the 2011 season worth 8.5million or a 2million buyout.

Using Rollins as a yardstick to measure by, I do believe Reyes should get 3 million in 2007.
The additional 2 years are a risk Id be willing to take to assure he remains a Met during these years that should distinguish him as a bonifide all star calibre player. Which I believe he will be.
I could lose my GM job over this, but id take that risk.

And yes, its hard keeping my fan sentiments out of the equation.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

Zvon wrote: The additional 2 years are a risk Id be willing to take to assure he remains a Met during these years that should distinguish him as a bonifide all star calibre player.

The only way he's not a Met during those years is if they no longer want him. It's not about feelings.

Thanks for the info about JR's contract.