Signing Sugar

[Benjamin Grimm]

Right now, as far as baseball goes, this is the only thing I care about.

[Guest Swan Swan H]

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: I think DW is referring to Mike Puma's report today that getting a bigger deal than Santana had was "important" to Wright.

Yup. Nothing wrong with getting as much as you can, but wanting a number just because it's more than the other guy sounds petty. If it's not true I'm sure it must rankle, and if it is true you start to wonder how it got out there.

[bmfc1]

http://didwrightsignyet.com/

[Frayed Knot]

Swan Swan H wrote: John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: I think DW is referring to Mike Puma's report today that getting a bigger deal than Santana had was "important" to Wright. Yup. Nothing wrong with getting as much as you can, but wanting a number just because it's more than the other guy sounds petty. If it's not true I'm sure it must rankle, and if it is true you start to wonder how it got out there.

That's why I'm wondering if someone on the mgmt side is preemptively leaking things intended to make Sugar seem like the bad guy if things break down - and by doing so winds up increasing the chances of things breaking down.
But again, if the dollars being talked about are even close to accurate then I suspect this is only a matter of i-dotting and t-crossing.

[Edgy MD]

Nobody ever gives a shit about the j's and x's. They need love too.

[Edgy MD]

$140 million? That's a biggish number.

[ashie62]

Edgy MD wrote: $140 million? That's a biggish number.

Does that include the 16 million he gets this coming season?

[Guest Swan Swan H]

Ashie62 wrote: Edgy MD wrote: $140 million? That's a biggish number. Does that include the 16 million he gets this coming season?

The last quote I read about did include the $16 million for next year in the numbers in the $140 million range.

[Frayed Knot]

Mike Puma's latest:

Agent Levinson -- �We don�t anticipate a deal any time soon,� to the website MLB Trade Rumors (why the hell would anyone talk to them?!?) adding that discussions were ongoing.

Wright -- �I wish I could elaborate" (about his previous comments about "inaccuracies"), "but it was important to me from the very beginning that these negotiations remain confidential and private,� Wright said in an email to The Post. �I plan on sticking to that.�

Puma adds that snags are apparently centered around the amount of deferred money.

[Edgy MD]

It's hard not to think of every extra dollar the Levinson's milk out of the House of 'Poncakes adding to the likelihood that any potential Dickey deal gets scuttled.

[ashie62]

The Mets are not doing this the way Tampa did Longoria.

[Edgy MD]

And you know all about that.

[metsmarathon]

if hte mets did this the way tampa did things, they would have offered him the 7 year - $100M extension after the 2009 season. though, that might not have looked like such a smart move at the time. or for the two years immediately thereafter.

[metirish]

Every time I open this thread it is in hope that I see a big fat "SIGNED" report.

[metsmarathon]

write signed and it will all be ok.

[MFS62]

Aren't all the major league teams getting that additional $10 million per year in national tv contract money real soon?
Yes, there's money coming off the books next year (I'm not sure how much because of the structure of the Bay buyout), but have any of the writers even mentioned the use of the new tv money?
Why can't the Mets add that (or part of it) to the back years of any contracts they are offering?


Later

[Ceetar]

MFS62 wrote: Aren't all the major league teams getting that additional $10 million per year in national tv contract money real soon? Yes, there's money coming off the books next year (I'm not sure how much because of the structure of the Bay buyout), but have any of the writers even mentioned the use of the new tv money? Why can't the Mets add that (or part of it) to the back years of any contracts they are offering? Later

it's more than $10. I think it's like $25..

[ashie62]

Edgy MD wrote: And you know all about that.

Longoria had said he didnt want to eat up all the payroll and management is committed to working with Longoria moneywise to try and keep this small market team competitive each season.

No.. the Mets do not seem to be taing this approach with Wright or the deal would be done and the chances of R.A remaining a Met might be better than they look now.

[Edgy MD]

Firstly, as noted above, Longoria is in a very different situation.

Secondly, the scenario you describe (whether or not it's accurate) is not so much about the team behaving differently so much as the player.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Ask not what the Mets can do for David Wright
By Howard Megdal
11:15 am Nov. 29, 2012

It's decision time for the New York Mets and David Wright. Andy Martino reported in the Daily News Thursday morning that the Mets have presented "their best offer" to David Wright, and it would pay the third baseman a guaranteed $140 million over eight years. That's $16 million for 2013, an option already picked up by the Mets, along with $124 million over the following seven years. The payout, purely based on money and years, is a bit shy of the eight years, $160 million many observers believe Wright would earn on the free agent market next season. But it also means Wright avoids the risk of playing out another season without getting anything new in return. As presented to the media, it's a very fair offer. This being the Mets, though, there's more to the story. Martino also reported that the deal is backloaded. He didn't have specifics, but suggested that the structure of the contract was similar to that of Jose Reyes with his now-former team, the Miami Marlins. Reyes, remember, signed a six-year, $106 million deal with the Marlins last winter, but earned just $10 million in each of the first two seasons, $16 million the third year, and $22 million in each of the final three years. It is worth remembering that a dollar in hand today is worth more to Wright or anyone else than a dollar tomorrow. So the extent to which the contract is backloaded has a real effect on the total value of the package, particularly if Wright (accurately) believes he can earn the same contract from another team, paid out more evenly. $140 million is not $140 million, regardless of contract. But there's more. Just as the Mets management used to do with their players in the years they were heavily invested in Bernie Madoff's schemes, they are apparently asking Wright to defer a portion of his contract payout. How much deferred money is unclear, but this, too, has a real impact on the total value of the deal. For instance, the deferrals Johan Santana agreed to called for $5 million to be deferred each season for seven years, with 1.25 percent compound interest. So $5 million of his 2008 salary was withheld, earned interest, and gets paid out to Santana on June 30, 2015. That may sound like a good deal for Santana, but it isn't. It brings the overall value of his contract down from $137.5 million to $123.1 million, a drop of more than 10 percent of the total value. If the Mets are asking the same of Wright, along with the backloaded structuring of a deal, what appears to be a $140 million offer could easily be more akin to another team offering him $100 million, paid out without deferrals and evenly over the life of a contract. Exactly how much the Mets are asking Wright to sacrifice is unknown without the particulars of the deferrals and contract structure. But it's not safe to assume the Mets have made a fair market deal without those particulars. And you can bet if those particulars do manifestly change the nature of the offer, the team won't leak them. It was a six-year, $100 million deal, remember, that Ken Rosenthal described back on Monday as "an offer that Wright is certain to refuse." What the Mets are doing, in terms of these negotiations and attendant leaks, makes sense above all as a public-relations strategy. If Wright signs, they get an off-season trophy, something in short supply in Flushing in recent winters, and they get it at a better-than-market rate. If Wright refuses, they get to paint him as a greedy and disployal villain, earning themselves a pass at least with whatever portion of the fan base will buy that Wright, an exemplary team guy, is just being selfish here. The "best offer" rhetoric seems to set the Mets up either finalize a deal with Wright for real, or to try to deal him at baseball's winter meetings, which begin Monday. For now, the Mets and their fans wait, and hope that Wright, who has gamely provided the public face of this team for years while ownership insulted his talent and the front office pressured him to play hurt, will take one more for the team.

http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/sports/2012/11/6715620/ask-not-what-mets-can-do-david-wright

[Ceetar]

"market value" is not "What people speculate Wright could get given an averagish Wright season in 2014" it's more akin to what other players of his ilk get, the Zimmerman's and the Longoria's et al. No comparisons are perfect of course, tax rates, cities, teams, even the players themselves are not identical, but it's a lot more telling than projections about 2014. It's easy for someone 'close to' the people making the decisions to fictionally spend that $160/8 on Wright a year from now.

[Edgy MD]

It diminishes me to read that guy, but then I do anyway.

[metirish]

Martino also reported that the deal is backloaded. He didn't have specifics, but suggested that the structure of the contract was similar to that of Jose Reyes with his now-former team, the Miami Marlins

no specifics?, a minor detail, do carry on.

[batmagadanleadoff]

metirish wrote: Martino also reported that the deal is backloaded. He didn't have specifics, but suggested that the structure of the contract was similar to that of Jose Reyes with his now-former team, the Miami Marlins no specifics?, a minor detail, do carry on.

That's what Martino wrote:

But league officials briefed on the talks revealed new information about the structure of the Mets� offer. Those sources said that the proposed extension was backloaded with a structure similar to the contract Jose Reyes got from the Marlins last winter. Reyes, who was later traded to Toronto, made $10 million in the first year of his deal, and will earn $10 million in the second. From there, the annual value skyrockets to $16 million and $22 million. While the numbers in the offer to Wright are different, and specifics are not known, the structure is similar to that of the Reyes contract, according to those sources. There is deferred money in the potential deal, consistent with the Mets� past agreements with Carlos Beltran and Johan Santana. Both of those players, who represent the largest contracts in team history, deferred about $5 million of their annual salary during many of their seasons in New York.

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/mets/offer-wright-alley-article-1.1209909#ixzz2DdsLbDnp

Edgy MD wrote: It diminishes me to read that guy, but then I do anyway.

I don't see anything wrong with this Megdal piece, even if the author overstates the obvious -- namely that one can't accurately assess a contract without knowing the details regarding backloading and deferrals -- the payment schedule.

[Edgy MD]

Extra, extra: The Mets are the only team that seeks to backload contracts. In fact, they're the only known entity that seeks to put off paying their obligations as long as possible.

If this goes down, I do hope they'll invite Steve Phillips to the signing, as I imagine Wright is that last asset remaining from his tenure. And heck, invite Minaya as a way to thank him for signing the last Wright contract.

I don't see anything wrong with this Megdal piece, even if the author overstates the obvious -- namely that one can't accurately assess a contract without knowing the details regarding backloading and deferrals -- the payment schedule.

Welcome back.

I guess it's so common --- or the target is so easy --- that he gets a free pass for it. But see a lot wrong with the snarky insinuation that there's something nefarious and pathetically typical in the Mets GM acting in his team's interests. Deferred compensation and backloading are as common as pine tar in baseball, as he himself kinda makes clear in citing the Reyes case.

Make a phone call, Howard.

[metirish]

Thanks Batmags.....I was taking the piss a little.....anyway, I thought Wright couldn't turn down this contract but reading this if true then he could.

It is worth remembering that a dollar in hand today is worth more to Wright or anyone else than a dollar tomorrow. So the extent to which the contract is backloaded has a real effect on the total value of the package, particularly if Wright (accurately) believes he can earn the same contract from another team, paid out more evenly. $140 million is not $140 million, regardless of contract. But there's more. Just as the Mets management used to do with their players in the years they were heavily invested in Bernie Madoff's schemes, they are apparently asking Wright to defer a portion of his contract payout. How much deferred money is unclear, but this, too, has a real impact on the total value of the deal. For instance, the deferrals Johan Santana agreed to called for $5 million to be deferred each season for seven years, with 1.25 percent compound interest. So $5 million of his 2008 salary was withheld, earned interest, and gets paid out to Santana on June 30, 2015.

[Ceetar]

The insinuation that they were doing crooked things with Madoff is still there. Ultimately, it doesn't really matter. It was the return on the money invested that mattered, and it's not like they're the complete idiots bumbling along they're made out to be sometimes. If they're backloading and deferring and investing that money, it's with a very clear mind to get ahead, the same it was back then. That they're still doing it only suggests it remains a viable strategy. (Although Santana's was presumably destined for Madoff depending on the timing)

It's NOT accurate that Wright can get the same contract elsewhere (for one, it's a year way. for two, he's not actually permitted by baseball rules to discuss that with other teams, meaning it's just speculation)

What's with this 'current value' stuff lately? seems like a new buzzword. I get the concept behind it, but there's plenty of value and security in putting money away too. That deferred money Santana's "giving up"? it's only actually giving up money if he could turn a profit by investing it into future value beyond bank interest right? Sure, a dollar down to me or you lowers our debt and therefore mortgage interest payments and all that, but presumably Wright and Santana aren't quite burdened with this stuff. he's choosing a conservative investment, but investing with the Wilpons, and will end up earning more than his contract's cold hard numbers all the while extending the date in which he'll earn a paycheck and helping out his teams financial flexibility.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Ceetar wrote: What's with this 'current value' stuff lately? seems like a new buzzword.

Present value. Some crazy money theory cooked up by the newfangled wave of economists. It's like the sabermetrics of finance.

I will gladly pay you Tuesday, for a hamburger today.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Coleman: Is Mets� Offer To Wright Worth Its Weight In Gold?
November 29, 2012 1:41 PM
By Ed Coleman

Not so fast there, people. David Wright has himself a pretty nice deal on paper or in print, doesn�t he. Or does he? Well, it depends who you talk to, and right now the only people talking are the Mets, making sure they get their point across after taking heat from fans concerning their inaction during what seemed like long and somewhat dormant negotiations for both Wright and R.A. Dickey. Wright had three wishes that he desired as he approached this off-season looking at a contract extension that could possibly take him to the end of his career. First, as he stated many times during the season, he wanted to remain a Met-for-life like the Ripkens, Jeters, etc. that have preceded him, be a one-uniform guy. Secondly, it was his desire that the negotiation process remain confidential, free from outside pressures that constantly seem to derail talks, especially here in New York. Hard to do? Yes. But that�s already been broken, because one side talked and it wasn�t Wright�s. And finally, Wright wanted to know what the plan was, the team�s commitment to winning, if he was going to sign up long-term for it. Wright wants to finish what he started with this team and bring a championship to the organization during his time. There have been a lot of comparisons drawn to Evan Longoria�s recent contract extension, but how valid they are can certainly be debated. Longoria is 27 and coming off an injury-shortened season in which he hit 17 HR and had 55 RBI in 74 games. He also plays for a team that has had 3 consecutive 90-win seasons. Longoria has also played in more than 133 games just twice in his 5-year career. Wright will be 30 on December 20, has been an island in a depleted Met lineup for several seasons now, and has averaged 149 games per during his 8 seasons thus far. The MLB Players Union has valued Longoria�s new contract at 10 years and $131 million - the present day value reduced from $136.6 million due to deferred money. And therein lies the sticking point with Wright�s contract. There are significant deferrals in Wright�s deal, as well as back-loaded money towards the end of the contract. If money�s back-loaded, it�s within the confines of the deal, just toward the back end. If it�s deferred, it�s outside or after the context of the deal. So what rubs the Wright camp the wrong way is to say that the deal is worth $140 million � that�s inaccurate, and not even close in present day value. And it�s why Wright wanted to keep these dealings confidential. If indeed Johan Santana�s franchise-record $137.5 million contract is a benchmark that the Wright camp is shooting for, it won�t be topped when you factor in the considerable deferred money. Is Wright happy with the way this was handled? No. Is he angry? No. Somewhat disillusioned? Yes. Do I think a deal will eventually get done? Yes, probably within a week�s time. But it might have been already done if people had kept their lips sealed....

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2012/11/29/coleman-is-wrights-deal-worth-its-weight-in-gold/

[metirish]

I need to take a blow after reading that.