Swanson And Long-Term Commitments

C

clvclv

<B>"What is a clvclv"</B>
Kinda wonder if the brass would consider offering Dansby a deal similar to the one the Rays gave Evan Longoria before they promoted him. Doing so would eliminate any concerns either side would have about there ever being contentious arbitration obstacles as well as giving him enough financial security to possibly be the first of the many "homegrown kids" (Mac, Frenchy, Heyward) to turn out to be a Brave for life.

If you follow Longoria's initial contract and bump the salaries 25% for inflation, you'd be looking at:

2017 - $625,000
2018 - $687,500
2019 - $1,187,500
2020 - $2,500,000
2021 - $5,625,000
2022 - $7,500,000
2023 - $9,375,000 ($3 million buyout)
2024 - $13,750,000 (club option)
2025 - $14,375,000 (club option)

If both options were picked up, that'd pay him $55,625,000 through his age 31 season - which would cover exactly the same age Simmons would have been at the end of his deal if he had been kept.

That would put the organization in great position to extend Freeman and Teheran for an extra few years at the end of their current deals (if that made sense, of course). If you could lock up say Albies and/or Smith early and get one or two of the arms to sign Teheran-like extensions after their first year or two, you'd be WAY ahead of the game.
 
Longoria was drafted in 2006. He played in the minors in 2006 and 2007. He started the 2008 season in AAA, but was promoted April 12. He signed his first long-term deal on April 18 2008. By that point he had accumulated 556 plate appearances in AA and 158 in AAA in addition to a handful at the ML level.

I do think the subject of extenting some of the young talent coming up is an interesting and important one. In general, these early extensions have worked out well for the teams. So I would favor getting them done in most cases. But probably not before the player has shown something at the ML level. And certainly not before he even plays at the AA level.
 
nsacpi said:
clvclv and i obviously have too much time on our hands...why does it matter to you...if you want to discuss 2016 why not start your own thread or add to the discussion in one that already exists
Click to expand...

Because nobody's ever yet to show me why I should give 2 ****s about what so and so player will make in year XXX. That's why there's no urge to start a new thread on a subject that does not matter.
 
Knucksie said:
Because nobody's ever yet to show me why I should give 2 ****s about what so and so player will make in year XXX. That's why there's no urge to start a new thread on a subject that does not matter.
Click to expand...

Uh, if you don't understand at this point why fans should care about how long certain players are under team control and how much of our budget they take up, I can't help you.
 
Knucksie said:
Because nobody's ever yet to show me why I should give 2 ****s about what so and so player will make in year XXX. That's why there's no urge to start a new thread on a subject that does not matter.
Click to expand...

What I gather from your reply is that you do not and do not choose to contribute anything positive to the board. I think I actually prefer Niners to you.
 
nsacpi said:
Longoria was drafted in 2006. He played in the minors in 2006 and 2007. He started the 2008 season in AAA, but was promoted April 12. He signed his first long-term deal on April 18 2008. By that point he had accumulated 556 plate appearances in AA and 158 in AAA in addition to a handful at the ML level.

I do think the subject of extenting some of the young talent coming up is an interesting and important one. In general, these early extensions have worked out well for the teams. So I would favor getting them done in most cases. But probably not before the player has shown something at the ML level. And certainly not before he even plays at the AA level.
Click to expand...

I think this is exactly what's driving the demotions of all three of Swanson, Albies, and Smith at this point, but Swanson in particular. While he won't reach quite the same number of ABs Longoria got to in AA without spending the entire season in Mississippi, I'm not sure the exact number of them is as important in Dansby's case. Don't get me wrong - I'm not discounting your point about wanting to see him have some success against better competition at all - I'm just not sure it has to be quite as extended as in Longoria's case. Given the fact that he was in our backyard, we've been scouting him for 6 years already and probably have as good a feel for what he is as anyone out there. We saw him struggle a little early in camp and it looked like he was pressing a bit IMO. It would've been easy to simply chalk it up to "a learning experience" and leave it at that, but he kept grinding and closed really strong despite bouncing between positions.

I do think you're completely right about him needing to be successful for an extended period at at least the AA level, but I don't know that there's a specific number of PAs or ABs that goes along with that to be able to quantify the line of thinking that a deal like that could turn out to be beneficial to the organization over the long haul. I thought Bowden and Duquette made some really good points on XM about Swanson when they were in camp earlier this week - their general take was that while neither expect him to be that elite "star" at SS (Correa/Lindor/Seager), they described him as one of those "winning players", the type that will have some standout seasons and make several All-Star appearances and will be one of those cornerstone glue guys when you get talent around him. A couple names they mentioned as comps were Nomar and Jeter when compared to A-Rod - not necessarily the "best", but players who were arguably as important when you looked at the total package.

To me, that sounds a lot like Longoria - which is why I wonder if the brass might value Dansby much the same way.
 
I'm assuming AA is where Swanson will be sent. It would be a good test to see what we have. In his 2007 stint in AA Longoria put up a slash line of .307/.403/.528 with 21 HRs.
 
This got me thinking about what would have happened if we had locked up Heyward. Actually IMO it could have still worked out the same. St. Louis wanted Heyward and had excess starters. We were coming off a bad year including losing a ton of starters to injuries.
 
Eyeman said:
This got me thinking about what would have happened if we had locked up Heyward. Actually IMO it could have still worked out the same. St. Louis wanted Heyward and had excess starters. We were coming off a bad year including losing a ton of starters to injuries.
Click to expand...

In general these kinds of early extensions have worked well for the teams. There are exceptions, but given the overall results I think it is worth considering doing them with most of the better prospects. They are much less likely to become albatross contracts than with older free agents, which means that you also have the option of trading some of these players for something of value (as we did with Simmons and Kimbrel).

If you look at the early extensions we've done (McCann, Freeman, Simmons, Kimbrel, Teheran), you can't help but be impressed with how well things have turned out for the team.
 
nsacpi said:
I'm assuming AA is where Swanson will be sent. It would be a good test to see what we have. In his 2007 stint in AA Longoria put up a slash line of .307/.403/.528 with 21 HRs.
Click to expand...

Would make for a really interesting discussion if Dansby puts up something along the lines of a .300-ish/.380-ish/.420-ish slash with 12-15 bombs while playing well defensively at SS in Mississippi IMO. If he's able to accomplish or even exceed that, that type of investment almost becomes a no-brainer to me.
 
nsacpi said:
In general these kinds of early extensions have worked well for the teams. There are exceptions, but given the overall results I think it is worth considering doing them with most of the better prospects. They are much less likely to become albatross contracts than with older free agents, which means that you also have the option of trading some of these players for something of value (as we did with Simmons and Kimbrel).

If you look at the early extensions we've done (McCann, Freeman, Simmons, Kimbrel, Teheran), you can't help but be impressed with how well things have turned out for the team.
Click to expand...

Yeah, these deals are typically fantastic for teams. The deals typically are typically low enough in price that even if a prospect busts, the impact is minuscule, and if they do succeed the team has a very team-friendly deal. I'd imagine the reason we don't see that many is due to the player's side of things.
 
mqt said:
Yeah, these deals are typically fantastic for teams. The deals typically are typically low enough in price that even if a prospect busts, the impact is minuscule, and if they do succeed the team has a very team-friendly deal. I'd imagine the reason we don't see that many is due to the player's side of things.
Click to expand...

The benefit for a guy like Longoria (or Swanson) in signing a deal like this is they are guaranteed their first fortune at a very young age...years before they would have been had they gone through arbitration. Some people would rather have $30M now vs $40M in 3 years if they play well and stay healthy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top