Prince's Future

[Invader3K]

Just received a slew of tweets from Tom Haudricourt that say Doug Melvin and Mark Attanasio are in the process of putting together an offer for Prince Fielder. "There's no show about it", says Attanasio. Also don't have a deadline.

 

Very interesting to hear.

[carniesandrubes]

Didn't they give that "no show about it" line with Sabathia as well? I wouldn't put much value into a comment like that.

[Invader3K]

Adam McCalvy with more: http://brewersbeat.mlblogs.com/archives/2010/02/attanasio_no_deadline_for_fiel.html

 

I think Attanasio knows some people had that impression on the Sabathia deal, so I don't think it's just idle talk.

 

 

Edit: Some further comments from Attanasio, along those lines (via Witrado):

He also said that when the team made its offer to CC Sabathia, they

were serious about that and had an offer sheet on the table and only

needed Sabathia to sign for it to happen.

"It's too much time and effort if it's just a show," he said.

"(Fielder's agent) Scott (Boras) is very busy and I'm very busy and

Doug Melvin is maybe the busiest of all of us, so I don't think there's

any show about it.

"If CC signed that (contract offer), we were committed to that

nine-figure proposal. It's easy for someone whose money it isn't to say

(it's a show)."

 

[monty57]

One good thing about having an individual, as opposed to a corporation, as an owner: If he really wants to, he can dig into his own pockets and accept a monetary loss from the team. Not many are willing to do it often, but it can be done.

[paul253]

I know there was an article today in the paper about Mark A. willingness to make an offer, but does anyone think there's a chance that if some of the pitching prospects take major steps forward this year, especially at higher level, he'd be more willing to spend more knowing that he won't be as likely to have to overspend on pitching the next few seasons? If guys like Jones, Butler, Anundson, Rivas, Rogers, and Braddock post sub 4 ERA's with good secondary numbers, maybe he'll be much more confident that he can spend that much money on one player. Similarly, if a lot of the guys struggle maybe he'll say, "these players aren't as close as I thought so even if I sign Prince I'll still have to sign a bunch of guys to help in out". Just a theory of course. Does anyone agree?

[brewerguy71]

I dont think any of the pitchers you mention having a "nice year" would help make the FO's decision on whether or not to offer Fielder a long term deal. Not one of them is going to be the type of pitcher that is going to have a major impact on the team, so much so that they wouldnt have to go find pitching outside of the organization.

 

The more I think about this offer that is potentially being put together, the less I think that Melvin or Attanasio knows about running a major league baseball team. Paying one player over $20 million to get you about 4 more wins a year makes no sense at all, especially for a small market team like the Brewers, when trading him can get you 4 guys, who are virtually free, and bring you 12 extra wins. If they do in fact pull this off, Attanasio will lose lots of money for a few years and the team wont be any better than it is now.

[paul253]

I don't blame Mark A. as much as I blame some of the "fans" who have no idea what it takes to run a team. People will look at a trade of Fielder and whine "oh see here we go again. Rebuilding. We're just the Yankees minor league team". The don't look at the return. As far as they are concerned, a prospect is a prospect. To them, Eric Arnett is the same as Chris Cody...someone who isn't a major league player. Mark A. then feels the need to keep the popular guys who fans recognize and will show up to see. Don't get me wrong, I think having Fielder in the lineup will only make the team better, but if his price tag prevents the team from improving in 3 other areas, is it worth the cost?

[kramnoj]

Paying one player over $20 million to get you about 4 more wins a year makes no sense at all, especially for a small market team like the Brewers, when trading him can get you 4 guys, who are virtually free, and bring you 12 extra wins.

 

Can you construct a scenario that makes sense for a team to give up 4 guys that can bring you 12 extra wins, just so they can have Fielder, and then pay him market value?

 

This is like those trade scenarios where people talked about trading Hart for something good, and then signing some undervalued OF. Why would another team trade for Hart and give up pitching when they can just sign that undervalued OF?

[Ennder]

The more I think about this offer that is potentially being put together, the less I think that Melvin or Attanasio knows about running a major league baseball team. Paying one player over $20 million to get you about 4 more wins a year makes no sense at all, especially for a small market team like the Brewers, when trading him can get you 4 guys, who are virtually free, and bring you 12 extra wins

 

You are overvaluing the return Fielder is likely to get and undervaluing the price of marginal wins as you approach playoff contention. If the Brewers plan on being in playoff contention on a regular basis they do need to keep a couple 3+ win players or it will be almost impossible to do it. I think the Cardinals have shown that having a few star players and a bunch of scrubs is a plausible way to make the playoffs. What they can't afford is dead money like Suppan and Hall this season, that is what kills a small market team, not paying to keep a star player.

[brewerguy71]

I dont think that the team the Brewers would possibly trade Fielder to would necessarily resign him when he becomes a free agent. Much like the Braves did with Teixeira, if the Brewers dealt him this year at the deadline to a team trying to make a playoff push, the receiving team might turn right around and deal him again next offseason.

 

I believe that the Rays, Rangers and A's are all good candidates to (if in contention) make a deal for Fielder, hopefully get that team far in the playoffs, and then turn right around and deal him for nearly what is lost in a trade with the Brewers. The Rays for instance could offer up a deal something like Reid Brignac (who has fallen out of favor in TB and is blocked and has a higher rated prospect behind him), Matt Moore, Alex Colome and Nick Barnese. If the Rays had a middle of the lineup with Fielder, Longoria and Pena to go with the pitching they had, the Yankees would have to spend another $600 million to get to the World Series in 2012. Rays then turn around and deal Fielder in next years offseason and still get 2 or 3 very nice prospects in return just like the A's did when they sent Matt Holliday to the Cards.

 

I personally do not believe it is good business sense for the Brewers to lock up Fielder long term, and it makes even worse business sense not to trade him by July 31 this year.

[kramnoj]

Fielder is a player that can provide 5 or 6 wins +, so you think those 4 players are going to consistently provide 17 wins in a season? Keep in mind that Braun hasn't yet been worth 5 wins in a season.

 

Also, Tampa only needs to give up that much talent if another team is competing with them in a trade offer.

[endaround]

Well neither Tampa nor Oakland can likely afford Fielder. The Rangers could but they could likely bring up Smoak at a much lower cost.

 

I don't like making an offer to Fielder at this time. At least wait until the Mauer deal gets done if not the Pujols deal. Fielder likely isn't a $20m player in this market, closer to $18m. Now $12m over 6 years isn't that much but no reason to overpay a good 9 months before you need to really do anything.

[monty57]

Don't forget that Mark A. is a junk bond manager, and a good one. I'm sure he has a far greater understanding of this team's finances (past, present and future) than anyone here. In fact, I'll bet he has every revenue and expense stream, current and projected, with best case, worst case and probable case scenarios developed for each. I've had a very brief glimpse of TCW's model, and I'd just say it's probably safe to not doubt Mark A when it comes to the financial aspects of the Brewers. The methodology as I've seen it is to make sure you are still in a good position even if the "worst case" scenario comes into play. As an example, last year's injuries and underperformance was probably near "worst case" from a probable variance prospective, (meaning something ridiculous like everyone on the team getting hurt could have happened, but it's out of the probable realm) and we still ended up near .500 and I believe they turned a profit.

 

I'd highly doubt that Mark A. will pay so much to Prince that he will not be able to field a competitive team around him. That sounds like something a tort attorney like Angelos or the seemingly-not-too-bright Mets owners would do. Rather, I'm sure Mark has combed through the numbers very closely and is pretty certain what he could afford to pay Prince and still remain competitive. All risk equations and revenue and expense streams will have been considered.

[stalton]

I don't like making an offer to Fielder at this time. At least wait until the Mauer deal gets done if not the Pujols deal. Fielder likely isn't a $20m player in this market, closer to $18m. Now $12m over 6 years isn't that much but no reason to overpay a good 9 months before you need to really do anything.

I think I agree, but my question (fear) is will 9 months later be too late with Boras most likely pushing Prince to at least see whats available in FA

[paul253]

Can you construct a scenario that makes sense for a team to give up 4

guys that can bring you 12 extra wins, just so they can have Fielder,

and then pay him market value?

This is like those trade scenarios where people talked about trading

Hart for something good, and then signing some undervalued OF. Why

would another team trade for Hart and give up pitching when they can

just sign that undervalued OF?

 

I think what he meant was players who would eventually bring more wins but aren't quite there yet. For instance, trading for Brett Lawrie now will not bring a team any additional wins in 2010 but will help tremendously in the future. So the obvious answer to your question is teams who are looking to win now and don't have to rely as heavily on their farm system as other teams do.

 

As far as the other part of your post. Why would a team trade for Hart when they can sign someone just as good? Well in this case you most likely aren't going to get anyone just as good as Fielder. In other words, there is no equal replacement. I believe St. Louis will do anything and everything to resign Pujols. Adrian Gonzalez is going to get traded. There is no way San Diego will let him walk, so if you want him, you'll have to give up just as much as you would to get Fielder. Who else is there at first base that is as good as Fielder and available?

 

Well neither Tampa nor Oakland can likely afford Fielder. The Rangers

could but they could likely bring up Smoak at a much lower cost.

They could afford him for the post season run and then trade him again after the season to recoup some of their loss, just like Brewerguy suggested. And yes, Texas could bring up Smoak for a much lower cost but what if he struggles? The guy was less than impressive in AAA last season (.244 with 4 hr's and 23 rbi in 197 at bats. Strikeout about once every four at bats). They won't rely on him down the stretch to get them into the playoffs. They'll want an established every day player and at this point in their careers Fielder is universes ahead of Justin Smoak.

[logan82]

Fielder likely isn't a $20m player in this market, closer to $18m. Now $12m over 6 years isn't that much but no reason to overpay a good 9 months before you need to really do anything.

 

I am definitely on board if we can get Fielder for $15M a year or less. It is when the money gets up over that and pushes to $20M that I don't like. I agree that we have to wait and see where Pujols and Maur sign.

 

I still think Fielder will be one of the top FA's and those guys have still been getting paid very well in FA. The middle guys are the ones who don't get big contracts anymore. I would still be shocked if Fielder doesn't test free agency.

 

My guess is that Fielder will get $15M or there about in arbitration next year. I doubt he would accept a contract for less than that on a yearly basis.

[monty57]

I agree, Logan. I think the Brewers will put an offer on the table which is fair and which they are hoping Prince will accept, but I think Boras will convince Prince to test free agency. When and if that happens, I feel the Brewers will need to trade Prince (this trade deadline or next offseason) rather than lose him. As has been said, 5-6 years (each) of multiple good players will likely be worth more to the Brewers than one year of Prince.

[Invader3K]

Buster Olney has some thoughts here.

[pete]

There are other factors to consider, like how much revenue he generates. The existence of prior bad trades don't make it easy to make another one.

[Invader3K]

Attanasio won't be foolish with his money. I think whoever was talking about him probably looking at various financial scenarios was probably pretty accurate.

 

If they offer him a huge contract and Boras turns them down (again), I would like to see them use the media to paint Fielder and Boras in a negative light. Players get off far too easily when they hurt the fans and ditch the teams that developed them. If both sides give it an honest go and it doesn't work out, fine...but if Boras isn't interested in negotiating, the team should use that to their advantage after Fielder leaves. It will help to minimize any PR hit they take.

[endaround]

Yes Fielder provided tens of millions in excess value to the Brewers but we should demonize him for not giving the Brewers even more value!

[Invader3K]

I'd rather see that than see the franchise get criticized "for not being willing to pay the man."

[logan82]

There are other factors to consider, like how much revenue he generates. The existence of prior bad trades don't make it easy to make another one.

I won't say that Fielder doesn't provide some revenue, but I think keeping the team competitive would generate more revenue than one marque player. Fielder may be the difference between having a $83M payroll and $85M.

[Mr QL]

I don't have a problem showing Prince the money. It's better he gets it than overpaying a bunch of mediocre players.

[pete]

Having Prince is not a $2 million difference in team revenue. That's just one of the considerations that is involved. I also don't buy that its a choice between Prince and having a competitive team.