What Would A "Fair" Freeman Extension Look Like?

[clvclv]

Mainly for the numbers gang, but anyone feel free to chime in.

What would the expected production decline for Freddie look like dollars-wise?

I still keep going back to the Goldschmidt extension as what I think they ought to offer him - tacking 3 years and $66 million onto his current deal would line up with the money (more or less), while also keeping the team to paying for his age 36 and 37 seasons (like the Cardinals will do with Goldschmidt).

We've all heard the "he's a 1B" objections (and I think most people understand that reasoning when it comes to offering him a 5+ year deal), but is it really unreasonable to expect Freeman to be a 3+ win player through age 35 (and why)?

[BeanieAntics]

I wouldn't be totally opposed to extending Freeman to his age 34 or mayyybbbeee 35 season for a reasonable number (~25 million). The problem is that its really not a great idea to invest large long term resources into a first baseman, especially an older first baseman. They don't age particularly well and there is usually an abundance of bat-first free agents who are capable of playing an adequate first base. Maybe that will give us some leverage and allow us to extend Freeman for a somewhat team-friendly deal, but this will be Freeman's last opportunity to get paid. There is a good chance that he walks and one of the less advanced teams ends up giving him a huge long term deal.

If that happens, use the 22 million coming off the books to address a more primary position and fill 1st base similarly to how the Rays have done it with Choi and Martinez. It really just boils down to whatever Freeman wants to do. He will almost certainly get more on the open market than he would through an extension with us, but maybe he really likes it here and is willing to punt a few million and a year or two to stay.

[clvclv]

I wouldn't be totally opposed to extending Freeman to his age 34 or mayyybbbeee 35 season for a reasonable number (~25 million). The problem is that its really not a great idea to invest large long term resources into a first baseman, especially an older first baseman. They don't age particularly well and there is usually an abundance of bat-first free agents who are capable of playing an adequate first base. Maybe that will give us some leverage and allow us to extend Freeman for a somewhat team-friendly deal, but this will be Freeman's last opportunity to get paid. There is a good chance that he walks and one of the less advanced teams ends up giving him a huge long term deal.

If that happens, use the 22 million coming off the books to address a more primary position and fill 1st base similarly to how the Rays have done it with Choi and Martinez. It really just boils down to whatever Freeman wants to do. He will almost certainly get more on the open market than he would through an extension with us, but maybe he really likes it here and is willing to punt a few million and a year or two to stay.

That's kinda the question in a nutshell - and the big problem - isn't it? HOW MUCH less than market value could the Braves offer him that wouldn't be taken as an insult?

Freeman's one of the few players I think can be taken at his word when he talks about how much it would mean to him to stay. You're right in pointing out that this will be his last chance to get a significant deal, but would he really be offended if they offered him an extension that lines up with the deal Goldschmidt got?

Would it be the "perfect" expenditure of those resources? It wouldn't be ideal, agreed. The difference is, we should still be in our window and obviously have more available resources than the Rays (who have to pinch every single penny). Assuming we have several other deals coming off the books that SHOULD be inexpensively replaced from within (Pache replacing Ender, Waters replacing Ozuna/Markakis/Duval, Langeliers/Contreras replacing d'Arnaud/Flowers) plus Hamels, Melancon, and Greene coming off the books as well, is it really that unreasonable to spend some of that money on the luxury of having a homegrown hero like Freeman instead of someone like a Choi/Martinez platoon?

If Freddie's looking for a raise and a 5 year deal BEYOND the end of his current deal, I think most fans would understand if the Braves took the time to explain to them why they had to walk away. This just feels like the situation at the end of Chipper's career - if it's handled the right way (and respectfully without making him feel like he's simply being reduced to a number) that he might accept 3/$66-$75 million tacked on now. While that's far from top dollar, it would push him over the $200 million career earnings mark and would make him a free-agent while he'd still have enough left to become a mercenary-type year-to-year DH to make even more money if he wants to keep playing or chasing championships even if the Braves don't want him or can't use him in that role at that point.

[Skeeter31]

As much as I love Freeman (he’s my favorite current Brave), I really hope we let him walk at the end of his current deal. I don’t want to see this team paying 20+M per year to a declining 1B. I know I’m most likely going to be wrong, but I really hope he goes and signs with the Angels so he can move back home and finish his career as their DH.

Now, if Freeman will take an insanely team friendly deal of say 12M per year for 2-3 years, hell I’d resign him, but that’s not going to happen either.

[BeanieAntics]

As much as I love Freeman (he’s my favorite current Brave), I really hope we let him walk at the end of his current deal. I don’t want to see this team paying 20+M per year to a declining 1B. I know I’m most likely going to be wrong, but I really hope he goes and signs with the Angels so he can move back home and finish his career as their DH.

Now, if Freeman will take an insanely team friendly deal of say 12M per year for 2-3 years, hell I’d resign him, but that’s not going to happen either.

12 million is unreasonably nitty on a Freeman contract. We could pay him close to what he's making now for a few years an still probably end up with some value out of him. Its just the idea of him getting a 4-5 year extension at 25-30 million that scares me. But knowing what I know about AA, I don't think a contract like that is going to happen.

[Slippyjms]

I think you just let him go. I don’t like the idea of overpaying Freeman after underpaying Albies and Acuna. If Riley’s bat sticks he can move to first and we can spend our money on a better 3B. If not Freeman’s money could be used all around the roster.

[Enscheff]

The only position that ages worse than 1B is C. Freeman is likely to be a 2-3 win player by the time his contract runs out. Those types of hitters (or a close approximation) are available every single off-season for almost nothing.

There is very little reason to extend Freeman. One only has to look at the Goldy contract to find yet another example of why it's foolish to lock up 1B into their mid-30s.

I'm guessing AA is too smart for that.

[The Chosen One]

The only position that ages worse than 1B is C. Freeman is likely to be a 2-3 win player by the time his contract runs out. Those types of hitters (or a close approximation) are available every single off-season for almost nothing.

There is very little reason to extend Freeman. One only has to look at the Goldy contract to find yet another example of why it's foolish to lock up 1B into their mid-30s.

I'm guessing AA is too smart for that.

I'm guessing that ownership and AA would slightly overpay for Freeman to keep him for a few years, but not til he retires.

I do think this is where the organization looks at Freeman from a marketing perspective and a fan perspective and feel it might be better to keep him and unload him when he truly declines, than risk fan backlash. Freddie is the most popular player on the team since Chipper retired.

I'm not saying I agree with it, but I think it's one of those decisions that gets made beyond the statline. He gave us a discount before when we were headed into a black hole. I'll be interested to see if McGirk plays the old school loyalty card, or they just dismiss it.

[Metaphysicist]

The idea that we will just be able to replace a 2-3 win 1B for free through FA is... optimistic.

Freeman should retire a Brave. Lifers are good.

[Enscheff]

The idea that we will just be able to replace a 2-3 win 1B for free through FA is... optimistic.

Freeman should retire a Brave. Lifers are good.

Who said he could be replaced for free? Please provide the quote that straw man was built upon.

It is a statement of fact that 2-3 win bats are available every single year for reasonable prices. Therefore, it makes no sense to commit to such a player long term right now.

Very simple resource management employed by all competent modern FOs.

[Carp]

The only position that ages worse than 1B is C. Freeman is likely to be a 2-3 win player by the time his contract runs out. Those types of hitters (or a close approximation) are available every single off-season for almost nothing.

There is very little reason to extend Freeman. One only has to look at the Goldy contract to find yet another example of why it's foolish to lock up 1B into their mid-30s.

I'm guessing AA is too smart for that.

Eh, I don't know about that. Especially for a player who is "likely" to produce 2-3 WAR as a 1b. Jose Abreu, a 33 year old 1b coming off a 2 WAR season, signed his QO for 17 million and then renegotiated for 3/50. Unless the market returns to what it was 2-3 years ago, I doubt we'll be able to find a FA 1b who is likely to produce 2-3 WAR and will sign for significantly less than 3/60.

Now sure, we could take a chance on someone for super cheap, like Eric Thames, and hope he works out. But that route carries risk as well, just not much of a financial one. The risk you take is that sort of player is more likely to regress into a replacement level player than put up 2-3 WAR, and you have to make an in-season trade to fix a gaping hole in your lineup.

[clvclv]

Eh, I don't know about that. Especially for a player who is "likely" to produce 2-3 as a 1b. Jose Abreu, a 33 year old 1b coming off a 2 WAR season, signed his QO for 17 million and then renegotiated for 3/50. Unless the market returns to what it was 2-3 years ago, I doubt we'll be able to find a FA 1b who is likely to produce 2-3 WAR and will sign for significantly less than 3/60.

Now sure, we could take a chance on someone for super cheap, like Eric Thames, and hope he works out. But that route carries risk as well, just not much of financial one. The risk you take is that sort of player is more likely to regress into a replacement level player than put up 2-3 WAR, and you have to make an in-season trade to fix a gaping hole in your lineup.

This is the main reason for extending him (as long as it doesn't take something ridiculous - or even market value) to do so IMO. We should still be squarely in our window, and finances shouldn't be an issue at all.

I think the Abreu situation is a good point. He really wanted to stay - and was willing to take less than top dollar to do so. As the unquestioned leader of a young team that's ready to win now, taking him away from the group of kids that have only known him as the voice of the team would have been playing with fire. Those guys don't just suddenly appear - remember the gap between the time Chipper retired and Freddie became that guy?

The decline is unavoidable, I don't think anyone's hiding from that. The point is that if you happen to slightly overpay for the production the heart of the team provides, that's not necessarily the worst thing - and the Braves should be in a position to afford that small luxury.

[BeanieAntics]

Eh, I don't know about that. Especially for a player who is "likely" to produce 2-3 WAR as a 1b. Jose Abreu, a 33 year old 1b coming off a 2 WAR season, signed his QO for 17 million and then renegotiated for 3/50. Unless the market returns to what it was 2-3 years ago, I doubt we'll be able to find a FA 1b who is likely to produce 2-3 WAR and will sign for significantly less than 3/60.

Now sure, we could take a chance on someone for super cheap, like Eric Thames, and hope he works out. But that route carries risk as well, just not much of a financial one. The risk you take is that sort of player is more likely to regress into a replacement level player than put up 2-3 WAR, and you have to make an in-season trade to fix a gaping hole in your lineup.

Enscheff is right. You're thinking in terms of finding someone who has been strictly a 1st baseman their whole career. In reality, you can teach almost any MLB position player to play first base. If you're in a spot where you have to fill a hole at first, its probably a better idea to find good bats that platoon well together regardless of their position rather than giving 3/50 to a guy like Abreu.

Hypothetically, let's say that last year was Freeman's final contract year and we needed to find a replacement with the 22 million we had coming off the books. We could have targeted some cheap platoons to replace him fairly easily. Guys like Thames, Corey Dickerson, Kole Calhoun, Brock Holt, Eric Sogard, or someone like that if we wanted a lefty. If you want to platoon that guy, we could have gone after Todd Frazier, Hunter Pence, Jonathan Schoop, or Starlin Castro. Any combo of those players would come in well under 22 million and still be capable of easily putting up an .850+ OPS if platooned correctly. If you'd prefer to replace him with someone who would play everyday, both Edwin Encarnacion and Howie Kendrick were on the market for far less than Freeman is getting paid now. You could have found quality production with most of those guys, basically all of them are capable of playing or learning to play first base, and all of them would save you money that you could use elsewhere.

I'm not saying we shouldn't try to extend Freeman. We should; he's a great player. But if his demands make us even slightly uncomfortable, I think that players like the ones above give us enough justification to let him walk.

[MadduxFanII]

This is one of the reasons I was kind of Seth Beer-curious back in the 2018 draft.

[clvclv]

Enscheff is right. You're thinking in terms of finding someone who has been strictly a 1st baseman their whole career. In reality, you can teach almost any MLB position player to play first base. If you're in a spot where you have to fill a hole at first, its probably a better idea to find good bats that platoon well together regardless of their position rather than giving 3/50 to a guy like Abreu.

Hypothetically, let's say that last year was Freeman's final contract year and we needed to find a replacement with the 22 million we had coming off the books. We could have targeted some cheap platoons to replace him fairly easily. Guys like Thames, Corey Dickerson, Kole Calhoun, Brock Holt, Eric Sogard, or someone like that if we wanted a lefty. If you want to platoon that guy, we could have gone after Todd Frazier, Hunter Pence, Jonathan Schoop, or Starlin Castro. Any combo of those players would come in well under 22 million and still be capable of easily putting up an .850+ OPS if platooned correctly. If you'd prefer to replace him with someone who would play everyday, both Edwin Encarnacion and Howie Kendrick were on the market for far less than Freeman is getting paid now. You could have found quality production with most of those guys, basically all of them are capable of playing or learning to play first base, and all of them would save you money that you could use elsewhere.

I'm not saying we shouldn't try to extend Freeman. We should; he's a great player. But if his demands make us even slightly uncomfortable, I think that players like the ones above give us enough justification to let him walk.

Which is the main point of the discussion IMO. If he's looking for 5 years and $100 million beyond the end of his current deal, you have no choice other than to walk away (and I think the fans would understand) - I just get the feeling that Freeman's going to be more reasonable than that.

[Metaphysicist]

Enscheff is right. You're thinking in terms of finding someone who has been strictly a 1st baseman their whole career. In reality, you can teach almost any MLB position player to play first base.

I heard from Wash that it was actually incredibly hard.

[Enscheff]

Eh, I don't know about that. Especially for a player who is "likely" to produce 2-3 WAR as a 1b. Jose Abreu, a 33 year old 1b coming off a 2 WAR season, signed his QO for 17 million and then renegotiated for 3/50. Unless the market returns to what it was 2-3 years ago, I doubt we'll be able to find a FA 1b who is likely to produce 2-3 WAR and will sign for significantly less than 3/60.

Now sure, we could take a chance on someone for super cheap, like Eric Thames, and hope he works out. But that route carries risk as well, just not much of a financial one. The risk you take is that sort of player is more likely to regress into a replacement level player than put up 2-3 WAR, and you have to make an in-season trade to fix a gaping hole in your lineup.

The point is Abreu was available for 3/50 or 1/17. Those types are always available.

Worst case scenario is Freeman's elbow problems continue to erode his productivity as he ages into his 30s. Paying a one-armed Freeman $20M+ after an ill-advised extension just so he can be a "lifer" would be hard to overcome from a payroll perspective for this organization.

Therefore it is pointless to take on the risk of extending such a contract to Freeman now. However, if a healthy and productive Freeman becomes a FA and then re-signs with the Braves for 3/60 that's not the same thing as guaranteeing him more cash through an extension...and we are discussing different scenarios.+

[Carp]

The point is Abreu was available for 3/50 or 1/17. Those types are always available.

Worst case scenario is Freeman's elbow problems continue to erode his productivity as he ages into his 30s. Paying a one-armed Freeman $20M+ after an ill-advised extension just so he can be a "lifer" would be hard to overcome from a payroll perspective for this organization.

Therefore it is pointless to take on the risk of extending such a contract to Freeman now. However, if a healthy and productive Freeman becomes a FA and then re-signs with the Braves for 3/60 that's not the same thing as guaranteeing him more cash through an extension...and we are discussing different scenarios.+

That's a fair point. Though, a FA Freeman likely doesn't sign for 3/60. Is there much doubt, if he maintains his current levels, that he won't eclipse JD's deal?

I will say, if he can had for 3/60 right now, there's probably not much difference in waiting 8 more months and then doing it then, when he's going into his last season, and reducing the risk.

[PawPawMaxwell]

The only position that ages worse than 1B is C. Freeman is likely to be a 2-3 win player by the time his contract runs out. Those types of hitters (or a close approximation) are available every single off-season for almost nothing.

There is very little reason to extend Freeman. One only has to look at the Goldy contract to find yet another example of why it's foolish to lock up 1B into their mid-30s.

I'm guessing AA is too smart for that.

Just pulling this back up to get a head start on off season jibber jabber.

[NYCBrave]

It's interesting, I was watching the Mets broadcast of our game yesterday, and even they were surprised an extension wasn't completed yet, since he's the face of our franchise.

This really hasn't turned out like I had expected, especially since both sides initially said their goal was to work out a deal.