May 1, 2020 at 12:42 pm #127855
I don’t see why Molina would go for team options. He again gives up control, which is what he just took back. His only choices would be to keep playing with the Cards or retire.
The team would have a greater assurance that they lock him up for life, but what is in it for him? If he did not want to continue or it turned out he did not like the terms later, he would have to retire. If I am him, I would just go year to year and take it as it comes.
Though nobody suggested it, my experience is that mutual options are pretty much worthless. They are no different than just going year to year, other than you lock in the terms ahead of time. But as soon as one side or the other feels it is imbalanced, the option gets turned down anyway. This is not specific to Molina, but a general view. That is why mutual options are relatively rarely used across the game. More window-dressing than anything – but who knows, maybe that is what the two sides would want here – the appearance of a commitment that isn’t really firm?May 1, 2020 at 1:05 pm #127856blingboyParticipantPaid - Annual
No one knows what the economics of an MLB are going to look like going forward. Or the economics of a player’s post-playing days. Yadi and anyone else are smart to keep their future options as open and unrestricted as possible at this moment. On the other side, an organization is taking a chance when it makes a commitment based upon assumptions of what future revenue will look like for them.May 1, 2020 at 2:06 pm #127857
Glad you stopped by, blingboy!May 1, 2020 at 3:54 pm #127862mudvilleParticipantPaid - Annual
I don’t think this is about the money at all for Yadi. I think he just wants to keep playing because he likes it, and definitely because he wants to pad his stats for the HOF. Last year in an interview he even said ‘I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t interested in the HOF’. Of course, if he’s a free agent and one team wants to offer him millions more than another team, the money is all that’s talked about.May 2, 2020 at 9:26 am #127893Bw52ParticipantPaid - Annual
As far as I am concerned Molina can take his “expected” contract to another team willing to overpay for a declining player.Why let Molina hold the team hostage because of his overinflated ego that thinks he is still a star.Enough.If he wants to make big dollars then let him go elsewhere.Wainwright has proven willing to work with the team so why can`t Molina?Legacy or not Molina does not deserve a big paycheck at this stage of his career.Enough paying for what he did………pay him for what he is doing now and that certainly is not worth anything close to 10 milling IMHO.May 2, 2020 at 9:30 am #127894Bw52ParticipantPaid - Annual
Extending Molina would rank with Carpenter
s extension,Fowlers terrible contract,Cecil
s continuing misfortune,Gregerson etc.You just cant continue to make judgement calls on contracts that backfire.May 2, 2020 at 9:39 am #127895stlcard25ParticipantPaid - Annual
It’s easy to say “good riddance” to Yadi if you’ve got confidence in finding a usable starter. While we diehards tend to understand the analytics a bit better, the average Cards fan will blame the team for letting a Hall of Famer walk unless Knizner improves his defense or Herrera really takes off and is ready to roll in 2021.May 2, 2020 at 9:47 am #127896Minuteman3ParticipantFree
I am not in favor of extending Molina’s current contract before he hits free agency. Then, if he hasn’t signed with another team offer him the same as Adam Wainwright gets with incentives to add up to no more than $10 mil. I think he is strictly shooting for personal records now. He pretty well has HOF locked up. Haven’t seen it mentioned yet that he also has had injuries that take him out for significant periods. Having his ‘junque’ repacked cost him a month and the thumb problem was another month plus nobody knows how much it was affecting him before it was fixed. He is smart when it comes to the game and managing the pitchers and his future is in coaching but I don’t feel the Cardinals have to pay him an exorbitant salary because they respect him. In summary: Free Agency – Offer one year $5 mil with $5 mil incentives but NO incentive based on how many games he plays. What is going to happen if we continue to amuse him with another 2 year contract is another losing deal. Wieters and Knizner are more than adequate to handle the catching duties. Plus, usually every season there is a veteran catcher available for the calling – Wieters is one example and Lucroy has bounced around too. JMHO.May 2, 2020 at 9:48 am #127897Minuteman3ParticipantFree
Wieters is still around and veteran catchers are usually available. Some can even hit but Knizner needs time behind the plate and with the bat. Carson Kelly proved that but he was held down by Yadi.May 2, 2020 at 11:17 am #127903
It sounds like most objections are to the money involved. I don’t know why, in this case, it should be a problem.
If we don’t re-sign Yadi, we will have a net $25 million coming off the books between Molina’s, Cecil’s and DeJong’s contracts. Then we have to figure arbitration for Gant, Flaherty, Bader, Hicks and Brebbia. Then there’s the options for Wong and Andrew Miller. Wieters and Brad Miller are only signed through 2020. Then, Fowler comes off after 2021 and maybe Carpenter, too. The money is there to make it work unless we want to do a major upgrade to some position in the next year.May 2, 2020 at 11:58 am #127904
The money is there to make it work unless we want to do a major upgrade to some position in the next year.
Spending money as wisely as possible is always better then spending just because you can. If the only choices are upgrading the team at another position or overpaying Molina as a legacy player, then I am all for the former. Of course, reality is never that simple. This is an extreme scenario, but what if Arenado came available, but the team felt it had committed too much money to others to swing a trade?May 2, 2020 at 12:37 pm #127906
Then DeWitt would not be living up to his word that the money is there to make a significant upgrade. If $5 million is enough to make or break the club, then the Cardinals are in trouble. (The $5 million figure comes from the difference of where I think is the club’s Max offer to Molina and where others think is the club’s Max offer.)May 2, 2020 at 12:47 pm #127907
If we don’t re-sign Yadi, we will have a net $25 million coming off the books between Molina’s, Cecil’s and DeJong’s contracts.
The Cardinals control DeJong through 2025. His money isn’t coming off the books next year. It is increasing.May 2, 2020 at 1:34 pm #127908
The increase in DeJong’s contract offsets some of the decrease from the others to net $25 million. I did not mean that DeJong’s contract comes off the books.May 2, 2020 at 2:01 pm #127910
Assuming that Wong and A. Miller have their options picked up or vest for 2021 the Cardinals will have Molina ($20), Cecil ($7.25), Wainwright ($5), Leake ($4), B. Miller ($2), and Wieters ($2) coming off the books after 2020. That is $40.25M. DeJong will get a $2.5M increase so the nest savings will be $37.75M. (Actually all of these numbers will be pro-rated.)
Then you have to factor in how much it will cost to bring Molina back, possibly Waino back, possibly Wieters back, etc… Then you have to factor in arbitration increases for Gant, Hicks, Flaherty, Brebbia, Bader, and Reyes.
I see very little room for outside additions in 2021, especially if you consider it is going to take awhile for revenues to get back to where they were pre-covid 19.May 2, 2020 at 2:19 pm #127915
That is going to be the major question across baseball this coming off-season. What is going to happen to team payrolls in 2021? The only obvious and easy lever for teams to pull would be to cut back on free agents. Will the union try to negotiate something proactive or let the free agents this coming winter (which will already be shortened by at least a month) take the arrows one by one? And by the way, the two sides will be trying to negotiate a new CBA in parallel. In other words, the current chaos is going to continue for some time.May 2, 2020 at 2:28 pm #127916
On future spending, even if the numbers look tight, there is always a chance that a trade could include moving some payroll out, lowering the net increase. I am for trying to maintain some flexibility.May 2, 2020 at 3:29 pm #127917blingboyParticipantPaid - Annual
Hi Brian and thanks for the mention. After a couple years of frustration trying to get Scout to stop charging me they finally just disappeared some while ago. There were times I would have dropped you into boiling lava for getting me mixed up with them. (I am the type to find someone to blame and sticking to it). BTW, I think I still owe you pizza and beer for something. Hope all is well.May 2, 2020 at 3:48 pm #127922
gscott, Reyes will probably not be eligible for arbitration this offseason. He has been optioned to the minors and is not getting service time, nor will he once the season begins unless he shows he has control of his pitches. Of the others eligible for arbitration, I see Hicks and Flaherty as the only 2 who will get a large increase in salary. The others will only get a small increase.May 2, 2020 at 4:40 pm #127924
blingboy, I am sorry Scout/247 did that to you and trust me, I wish I had never been affiliated with them, either. For others, when all else fails, the best way to go is to contest the charges with your credit card company. That gets action.May 2, 2020 at 4:47 pm #127926May 3, 2020 at 12:40 pm #127946
forsch, you might be right about Reyes but Cot’s still shows him to be arbitration eligible in 2021 but that might be assuming he plays in MLB in 2020.
May 3, 2020 at 3:10 pm #127968jj-cf-stlParticipantFree
- This reply was modified 2 months ago by gscottar.
Reyes has 2 yrs and 65 days service time (2.065). He needs to make it to 2.172, which is equal to 3.000, because a player gets a full service year every 172 accumulated. So he needs 107 active days.
If we don’t have a season in 2020, my understanding is all players get their 2019 service time for 2020, which for Reyes was 10 days (+ or -), so he’s still pre-arb for 2021.
Here’s where it gets fuzzy for me. 2020 is pro-rated, so if MLB plays 81 games, service time during 2020 gets doubled? If so, Reyes, who Forsch noted has been optioned down, would need to be called up and be active and/or MLB IL, for 54 days of the 81 games. 54 active days doubled, gives Reyes the 107 days needed.
During a all hands on deck season scenario, carrying 40man rosters, I could see him active and becoming arb eligible for 2021, but it’s anybody’s guess how 2020 turns out.
Would appreciate other perspectives on the pro-rated version of a season.May 3, 2020 at 3:13 pm #127969
Cots cannot tell the future. They clearly made an assumption. To be specific, Reyes has two years, 65 days (typo corrected) of MLB service time. In a normal year, he would need another 60-90 days to reach Super Two and arbitration eligibility. So in a pro-rated year, will he spend at least between a third and a half of the season with St. Louis? That is the guess to be made. I would neither assume it nor count it out.
However, it is worth noting that Reyes did not seem slated to open the season with St. Louis. So he would have to pitch his way back up – but that assumed there would be a Triple-A to be assigned to. Maybe not the case in 2021. Will the full 40-man be up and active (with all getting service time)? Or will there be taxi squads of non-active players (who are not getting service time)? How do inactive players stay sharp? Lotsa questions, like everything else to do with this season…May 3, 2020 at 3:49 pm #127973jj-cf-stlParticipantFree
The Super2 cutoff was 2.115 this past winter. Using that benchmark for next winter, Reyes would need 0.050 days active to add to his 2.065
In an 81 game season he needs 25 active days, doubled, if I’m understanding the pro-rated season correctly, and the cutoff date doesn’t change significantly.
But, Super2 also has it’s own 86 days active the previous season qualifier. If that stays in place he needs 43 active days, during a 81 game season, easily making the Super2 cutoff date. Or 54 days doubled to make the 3.000 benchmark.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.