Castro and Theo to meet Friday

[jersey cubs fan]

Why did you ask a question and then immediately answer it?

 

Because I wanted to see other peoples' answers.

 

What's in it for him is a lifetime of financial security without the risk of injury or decline ruining that opportunity.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

What's in it for him is a lifetime of financial security without the risk of injury or decline ruining that opportunity.

 

That risk is real. The Cubs currently have him under team control with no guaranteed money for the next five seasons. I'm in no hurry to assume that risk when there's no need to do so, for speculative gains in seasons six through ?.

[jersey cubs fan]

What's in it for him is a lifetime of financial security without the risk of injury or decline ruining that opportunity.

 

That risk is real. The Cubs currently have him under team control with no guaranteed money for the next five seasons. I'm in no hurry to assume that risk when there's no need to do so, for speculative gains in seasons six through ?.

 

Why are you being so obtuse?

 

What's in it for the Cubs is getting him at a reduced rate over the next several years and what's in it for him is security. There's a mutually beneficial point in there that makes sense.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Why are you being so obtuse?

 

What's in it for the Cubs is getting him at a reduced rate over the next several years and what's in it for him is security. There's a mutually beneficial point in there that makes sense.

 

I'm not being obtuse. You guys are misestimating one of two factors: Either you think Castro's agent is dumb and doesn't realize how much Castro will be in line for if he continues to develop, or you are considering the risk of him not living up to such a contract to be negligible.

 

If Castro were a free agent this offseason, and you had a choice between 7/$55 guaranteed or 5/$25 non-guaranteed, it'd be absurd not to choose the latter.

[jersey cubs fan]

Why are you being so obtuse?

 

What's in it for the Cubs is getting him at a reduced rate over the next several years and what's in it for him is security. There's a mutually beneficial point in there that makes sense.

 

I'm not being obtuse. You guys are misestimating one of two factors: Either you think Castro's agent is dumb and doesn't realize how much Castro will be in line for if he continues to develop, or you are considering the risk of him not living up to such a contract to be negligible.

 

If Castro were a free agent this offseason, and you had a choice between 7/$55 guaranteed or 5/$25 non-guaranteed, it'd be absurd not to choose the latter.

 

You are absolutely being obtuse. You are asking what's in it for him and then when that is explained you are acting as though nobody has explained what's in it for him.

 

Castro is not a free agent this offseason and so it is downright stupid to bring that up in the discussion.

[jersey cubs fan]

any player who has interest in a longterm deal that offers security at this stage of his career has no choice but to leave money on the table. They can choose to go for the maximum every year and wait until his first free agent year to sign big, but that choice has risk.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

You are absolutely being obtuse. You are asking what's in it for him and then when that is explained you are acting as though nobody has explained what's in it for him.

 

Castro is not a free agent this offseason and so it is downright stupid to bring that up in the discussion.

 

I'm trying to get you to see your own obtuseness: Signing Castro to a long-term deal will apparently save the Cubs many millions of dollars, straight out of his pocket, but he's going to do it because he doesn't want to take on the risk of decline or injury, but the Cubs shouldn't care about about the risk of decline or injury. It's circular logic. Of course there's a price where it'd make sense for the Cubs, but I don't think it's safe to assume that Castro and his agent will be offering that price.

 

The free agent thing was a crutch to help you understand, because you seem to need it.

 

The Cubs have Castro on a five-year, non-guaranteed contract that's going to be worth somewhere between $20 and $30 million dollars.

 

That's such an absurdly team-friendly deal, they have little incentive to tear it up and replace it with a guaranteed deal.

[jersey cubs fan]

I like how you manage to be so incredibly wrong and such a jerk at the same time.

 

 

 

if the middle ground didn't exist no team would ever sign a guy before the last minute

[C.C.]

Kyle I know you are trying to prove a point that can't be proven. Just suck it up and say it's good for both Castro and the Cubs. There's no losers here.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I like how you manage to be so incredibly wrong and such a jerk at the same time.

 

I'm suddenly reminded of the "I learned it from you, Dad!" PSA.

 

if the middle ground didn't exist no team would ever sign a guy before the last minute

 

The closer you get to the end of the contract, the easier it is to assess the values and the less risk there is for both sides, making it easier to come to a mutually beneficial agreement.

 

With Castro, we are half a decade away from the end of his contract. Yes, there are examples of those deals getting done, but they are rare for a reason.

[Guest]

With Castro, we are half a decade away from the end of his contract. Yes, there are examples of those deals getting done, but they are rare for a reason.

 

Castro doesn't have a "contract", Kyle. He is under team control for the next half decade. If he declines tomorrow, there is no guarantee of anything for him going forward. Jersey is 100% correct that it's a two way street to work out an agreement early on in the stages, both assuring Castro of financial security and the Cubs getting an extension of his talent at somewhat of a discount than what he might make if he puts up big numbers.

 

These kinds of deals are not rare for young premium talent.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

With Castro, we are half a decade away from the end of his contract. Yes, there are examples of those deals getting done, but they are rare for a reason.

 

Castro doesn't have a "contract", Kyle. He is under team control for the next half decade. If he declines tomorrow, there is no guarantee of anything for him going forward.

 

That's a *good* thing for the Cubs. Why should they be in a hurry to negotiate it away?

 

If Castro gives them a big enough discount, sure, but it'd have to be a humongous discount, and I doubt he'd be willing to give that up. Not everyone is as bad at negotiating as Longoria.

 

Jersey is 100% correct that it's a two way street to work out an agreement early on in the stages, both assuring Castro of financial security and the Cubs getting an extension of his talent at somewhat of a discount than what he might make if he puts up big numbers.

 

These kinds of deals are not rare for young premium talent.

 

There's Longoria, which was absurdly team-friendly. There's Carlos Gonzalez's, which I'm not all that impressed with for Colorado.

[Conky]

The two sides of this debate were played out in Milwaukee with Braun/ Fielder. Braun signed the early/ team friendly/ security for his family deal, while Fielder gambled for the big payday. Looks in hindsight like both methods worked out for the player. Braun has undoubtedly left money on the table the way his scenario has played out, but he had the early security and payday over Fielder.

 

There is no correct way to go about it. Situations are different for different players.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

:shock: I had no idea Braun was on guaranteed money through 2020. That's insane.

[Guest]

With Castro, we are half a decade away from the end of his contract. Yes, there are examples of those deals getting done, but they are rare for a reason.

 

Castro doesn't have a "contract", Kyle. He is under team control for the next half decade. If he declines tomorrow, there is no guarantee of anything for him going forward.

 

That's a *good* thing for the Cubs. Why should they be in a hurry to negotiate it away?

 

To save tens of millions of dollars during prime seasons after he's not under team control. What are the odds of Castro not living up to a 7/60 or 8/70 deal right now? And what are the odds of 21 year old Starlin Castro saying "no, I'm good" when he's being offered at least $60,000,000.00? This is a logical loop on your part that's more befitting of another poster.

[SouthSideRyan]

Check your math Kyle. Castro's due to be arb eligible in 2013, but not a free agent until 2017. He'd have to flame out spectacularly to make only 25M pre-FA.

[SouthSideRyan]

I'd offer him 11/110

[seanimal]

This is my issue with what you're saying: you're talking about replacing him in the middle of his prime. Not after it. If he was 32ish in your scenario, I wouldn't question it at all.

 

if he gets the 11-year ssr special than this is all moot anyway. in an 8-year contract that brings him through his year 29 season, after which he hits free agency, there are a few scenarios:

 

- he has sizemore'd and we let him walk

- he signs a club-friendly 3-4 year deal for big money but not a lot of potentially regrettable years (unlikely unless we're talking extension before the termination of the contract)

- he signs one last big deal with the cubs or, most likely, another team willing to commit to 6-8 years/big money to get a superstar infielder in his prime and eat the risk of overpaying for his less productive years

 

if he'd be willing to do the second option, then of course you keep him. but more than likely, we'd be looking at the third scenario, in which case what i said before is true.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

To save tens of millions of dollars during prime seasons after he's not under team control. What are the odds of Castro not living up to a 7/60 or 8/70 deal right now? And what are the odds of 21 year old Starlin Castro saying "no, I'm good" when he's being offered at least $60,000,000.00? This is a logical loop on your part that's more befitting of another poster.

 

I'd say the odds are pretty good that he turns down 8/70. 7/60, I'm not seeing the appeal for the Cubs.

 

Check your math Kyle. Castro's due to be arb eligible in 2013, but not a free agent until 2017. He'd have to flame out spectacularly to make only 25M pre-FA.

 

If I'm wildly underestimating how much he gets in his arbitration years, then that changes my opinion on signing him to a long-term deal, but I don't think I am.

 

He's a free agent for the 2017 season, meaning he'll be eligible for free agency in late 2016 after the 2016 season.

 

He's got the following years left:

 

Pre-Arb, Arb 1, Arb 2, Arb 3, Arb 4

 

Pre-arb is going to be a little less than 500k.

 

I'm guessing $2, $4, $8 and $12 for his arbitration years, which would put him at roughly $26.5 million for the five years.

 

Anyone have a different estimate of his arb years?

[Guest]

Why did you ask a question and then immediately answer it?

 

Because I wanted to see other peoples' answers.

 

What's in it for him is a lifetime of financial security without the risk of injury or decline ruining that opportunity.

I'm not sure what is so hard to understand. Castro will be paid handsomely with security and the only "price" is he gives up some potential amount of money for a year or two.

 

It's a no brainer. That said, I'd wait until next year to do it. I share IMBs trepidation.

[jersey cubs fan]

I'm guessing $2, $4, $8 and $12 for his arbitration years, which would put him at roughly $26.5 million for the five years.

 

Anyone have a different estimate of his arb years?

 

If he's good, his final year of arbitration will easily surpass $12m. Also, Theriot got $2.6m in his first year of arbitration, and that was by losing to the Cubs and taking their number. Castro will start at a higher level than you are assuming and make more every year.

[seanimal]

plus, if vlad is an accurate comparison, then letting him walk after 29 makes some sense. that was his peak. he didn't fall off a cliff thereafter by any stretch of the imagination, but he never put up an 1.000 ops after he left montreal, and he most certainly started to slow down.

 

man, vlad was amazing in '02. he was definitely the mvp of the nl in the not-barry bonds division.

[jersey cubs fan]

plus, if vlad is an accurate comparison, then letting him walk after 29 makes some sense. that was his peak. he didn't fall off a cliff thereafter by any stretch of the imagination, but he never put up an 1.000 ops after he left montreal, and he most certainly started to slow down.

 

man, vlad was amazing in '02. he was definitely the mvp of the nl in the not-barry bonds division.

 

The goal is not to let guys go the minute they pass their prime. He was still quite productive and valuable after his peak.

[Guest]

Yea, $2M sounds incredibly low for his first arby number.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I'm guessing $2, $4, $8 and $12 for his arbitration years, which would put him at roughly $26.5 million for the five years.

 

Anyone have a different estimate of his arb years?

 

If he's good, his final year of arbitration will easily surpass $12m. Also, Theriot got $2.6m in his first year of arbitration, and that was by losing to the Cubs and taking their number. Castro will start at a higher level than you are assuming and make more every year.

 

It was his first arbitration year, but he wasn't a Super-2 like Castro. Unless I'm misunderstanding the arbitration rules, which is very possible, then his $2.6 million for his 4th season would be compared to the $4 million I'm projecting for Castro in his fourth season.