Well if Prospects Braves says all they have to do is "buy out the 7th year" it should be easy as pie!Originally Posted by thethe
Well if Prospects Braves says all they have to do is "buy out the 7th year" it should be easy as pie!
jpx7 (03-15-2018)
It's going to be difficult obviously but the ill will generated in screwing him over might be harder to overcome.
If he turns out to be what we hope he will be there is a 0% chance the Braves would be able to sign him at the end of his rookie deal, so it makes absolute sense to hold him down for 2 weeks to get that extra year of control before he becomes a Yankee at age 28.
jpx7 (03-15-2018)
I just want to keep him till he's 30. Let some other team pay him afterwards. Is their precedent for that contract? No, but I think it's possible if you put the money out there along with the desire of the player. A big step in that earning that desire is to not screw him over when he's 20 and impressionable.
I’ve never wanted to give anybody an extension before their MLB debut but Acuna may just be the exception. What would be reasonable? Say a 7 year deal for 70 million with an option or 2 for 25 per?
There's a bit of naivete about players with Acuna's skill set signing early career extensions, and how easy it is to get them done.
Players who hit HRs are already going to be paid well in arbitration. Players know this. Agents know this. Teams know this. It's precisely why the only extensions signed the last few years have been by players with skill sets not traditionally paid well in arbitration...namely, players whose value to derived from defense. Ender being a good example. Albies is another good example.
Impact players similar to what Acuna projects to be are not signing extensions very often anymore. If Acuna is as good as we all hope, he has a legitimate chance to hit the FA market in his mid-20s and command a Machado/Harper sized deal...plus 5 years of inflation.
That's a $500M deal over 10-12 years with multiple opt-outs and whatever new contract clauses are invented between now and then. Acuna isn't going to be selling himself short with some extension through his 20s.
If Acuna reaches his 75th percentile outcome or better, the Braves will not able to afford him after 2024 no matter what, so they may as well ensure themselves that 2024 season.
Last edited by Enscheff; 03-15-2018 at 06:16 PM.
It's never been done before, but that's a crazy high number. Bryant is probably going to make something like 7/75 over his control years with the Cubs, and that is record setting cash for a perennial MVP caliber player. No way the Braves offer Acuna 7/70 now.
The highest ever extension given to a player with less than 1 year service time is the deal DeJong just got...6/26 plus 2 option years (which beat Anderson's $25M deal from last year by $1M).
Waiting until after this season would mean the Braves have to smash DeJong's contract record. Something like 6/30 with 2 options at $20M each would make sense based on precedent.
Trouble is, Acuna is already looking to make much more than that in arbitration going year to year, and he knows it. It is unlikely he settles for such an extension.
What would it take? I'm guessing 6/50 minimum after this season to get Acuna to bite, and I'm not sure any team would be willing to take on that risk so early in a player's career. A team would probably be willing to pay 6/30 after this season if Acuna plays well, but it's unlikely an impact offensive player would settle for that. The gap might end up being too much to overcome.
If Acuna pulls a Kris Bryant and posts 6+ fWAR over 150 games in 2018, would the Braves shatter all precedent and offer him 6/70 with 2 options to control him through age 28? It will be fascinating to see how this is handled.
Clearly a slow starter.
AerchAngel (03-16-2018), Managuarantano's Volunteers (03-15-2018), Prikichi (03-16-2018), tomahawkchop (03-15-2018)
Since no one else has mentioned it, I have noted that Lane Adams has hits in three of his last four ST games (including no hit his PH AB yesterday). Today he went 2-3 with a bunt hit and a double and 1-2 in the other two games. It is important to finish well in ST more than overall numbers. So this is a good sign for him, esp. since he has a history of doing little in ST.
Again, the Braves’ heretofore standard posture in arbitration is probably as likely to cause irritation or ill will than holding him down for two weeks. Moreover, there’s never been a case when it mattered, anyways—Bryant, for instance, seems fine with the Cubs.
"For all his tattooings he was on the whole a clean, comely looking cannibal."
Bryant situation is different. He got money when drafted. I think you can leverage the fact Acuna hs made no money along with the fact that the braves are not trying to screw him further for service time. It probably eont work but I hate this service time manipulation. It's a crime this is allowed. It should be mid season and not a couple of weeks. It's inviting teams to have disputes with players.
Other differences were that he was 3 years older than Acuna and had accumulated over 100 more PAs in AA and AAA than Acuna.
The chances that Acuna is sufficiently bent out of shape to materially affect our chances of extenting him are less than 1% imo. ymmv
The rules are what they are and it would be a folly for the club not to use them to maximize their chances for success. Especially when other teams have done the same thing.
Last edited by nsacpi; 03-15-2018 at 08:17 PM.
"I am a victim, I will tell you. I am a victim."
"I am your retribution."
jpx7 (03-15-2018)
Him being 3 years older makes it more advantageous to mess with his service time. Cubs have his rights up until his age 30 season. That's basically the perfect control length and they won't have to pay for decline years.
I'm not interested in keeping Acuna till his age 26 season. I want to keep him through age 30 and it's my humble opinion that getting on his and his families good side is a nice card to play in any extension discussions.
Natural Immunity Croc
The Braves have aggressively promoted him to even get him to this point. You could easily spin it that he is in a position to make bank in his prime years because of this team.
Also you are forgetting the great equalizer. Winning. If the Braves are winning the chance to get him on an extension is more likely. I would rather have him for his age 26 season than worry about a three week grudge.
Coppy
jpx7 (03-15-2018)
When your opinion proves to be right just once it will carry some weight. Until then, we can safely assume that Acuna’s situation will mirror all the others that came before it.
Thanks bro
thethe has been right once before...about Gattis...maybe more than once, but my memory fails me...but Jenkins...sheesh
"I am a victim, I will tell you. I am a victim."
"I am your retribution."
I would love to see the quote where tehteh projected Gattis to be a 1-2 win bat only player haha.
I think it's hard to imagine someone holding a grudge 7 years down the road. If he's performing and he's happy and we're winning and we offer him a fair deal, what happened 7 years ago isn't gonna matter imo
nsacpi (03-16-2018)
The first part just isn't true. Controlling a 20 year old superstar for 7 years > than controlling a 23 year old superstar for 7 years.
Would it buy good will with you when there are potentially millions of dollars in play? I personally don't think I would give a crap if they "did the right thing" and only had me for 6 years. I'd be happy that I could hit free agency sooner, but I wouldn't give the team "bonus points" because of it. We are talking about a lot of money. If Acuna is staring down the barrel of a 50 million AAV contract and the most the Braves can possibly offer him is 30, then I don't think us having him on the OD roster is going to buy us 20 million dollars of good will (or 10-15... whatever you think Acuna will get in FA).
Another thing: Some have talked about how manipulating his service time is within the rules, but just a little sketchy and they don't like it. They object to it morally. Well, how moral is it to leverage the fact that you are dealing with a kid from a poor country who was signed to a cheap contract so that you can give him a little extra money up front to gain future years of cheap control of a kid who could possible earn hundreds of millions in that time frame. Its possible that this mindset could cost this kid 4 years (if we are keeping him till he is 30 like you said) of making 50 million dollars per. To me that doesn't seem any more/less moral than keeping him down for a couple weeks to gain an extra year of control.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote