McGehee contract -- Latest: Signs one-year deal (pre-arby); unclear if long-term discussions continue

[Menace II Sobriety]

I think the Bill Hall memory looms large on Brewerfandom. I admit being one of the ones in favor of Hall's contract at the time, but it was obviously a mistake in retrospect. I think the difference with Casey McGehee is that he isn't as flawed as Hall was. Sure, defensively, Hall was (and probably still is), a better player. Definitely Hall has the better body type and is more athletic. However, offensively, I think McGehee is the much safer bet. He has a normal stance and a very compact swing, not the open stance and wild swing of Hall. I think the odds of Casey regressing like Billy did are very low. Will he always put up numbers like he did in 2010? Probably not, but I don't think he's going to drop off the map, either.

 

Would I give him an extension? I don't know. It really depends on what the numbers look like and if there are any opt out club options. Casey really hasn't made much money yet in his MLB career, and might not take a ton of money to sign to a 4-5 year deal. The thing for the Brewers is that they can set up some cost certainty. If McGehee has a 2011 similar to his 2010 season, he will become expensive very quickly.

I agree about cost certainty 100%. I feel as though management is trying to figure out exactly how much they are spending at each position over the course of this next 3-4 year run. Once they have all of these figures locked up they will know how much and how to structure the contract offers for possible extensions on the new pitchers during the 2nd half of the season if everything works out.

 

They are trying to get players locked up on the cheap a year before they become expensive, and it is too early to lock up pitchers before they ever make a pitch for the team. The best part about locking up a player like Casey is if he falters they could eat the contract and bring up a league minimum guy in a 2-3 years. This isn't a direct correlation to the Hall contract because Casey isn't getting 4/24.

[Robideaux]

The best part about locking up a player like Casey is if he falters they could eat the contract and bring up a league minimum guy in a 2-3 years.

I don't get this. The best part about not locking up a player like Casey is if he falters they could eat the contract...

 

As others have said, a multi-year deal just doesn't make sense unless it is at a significant discount from his projected arbitration numbers. The impetus for the long-term deal/buying out arby years is generally shared risk between team and player. The team risks the player getting hurt or declining. The player risks missing out on even more money if his health and good play continues. I don't see that here.

[SoCal Brew Crew Fan]

As others have stated, it's all about price. If they get the arby years and maybe a vesting option for a FA year at a discount then it may be worth it. Casey could set himself up and get an upfront bonus which may mean a lot to him. There's probably a deal in there that both sides could agree on, but I wouldn't do a fair market deal just to do it when they have the extended flexibility they already have.

[Menace II Sobriety]

The best part about locking up a player like Casey is if he falters they could eat the contract and bring up a league minimum guy in a 2-3 years.

I don't get this. The best part about not locking up a player like Casey is if he falters they could eat the contract...

 

As others have said, a multi-year deal just doesn't make sense unless it is at a significant discount from his projected arbitration numbers. The impetus for the long-term deal/buying out arby years is generally shared risk between team and player. The team risks the player getting hurt or declining. The player risks missing out on even more money if his health and good play continues. I don't see that here.

I understand that, my thinking is that Casey's highest paid year wouldn't reach what Hall was getting and Gamel would still be be a league min type guy. Gamel could slide over if a first baseman is ready or play first if a third baseman is ready. I am not saying that I think that they should lock him up long term but if they do it should be before he gets expensive so they have a good gauge of what their costs will be for years to come in order to know how much cash is free for the pitchers. I do not think they should buy out even 1 year of arbitration unless it is a team option. I just believe everything they have been doing the past year is to avoid going to arbitration and having a reasonable deal locked in.

 

Casey is a good solid player who hasn't gotten payed w/ 2-3 kids. I think that he will take a discount and that was what I was basing this on. If you pay him full value their is no point. Also it would be easier to trade him with a locked up contract than a team going through arbitration as long as it isn't an overpay.

[chuckiehacks]

Robideaux[/b]]

The best part about locking up a player like Casey is if he falters they could eat the contract and bring up a league minimum guy in a 2-3 years.

I don't get this. The best part about not locking up a player like Casey is if he falters they could eat the contract...

 

As others have said, a multi-year deal just doesn't make sense unless it is at a significant discount from his projected arbitration numbers. The impetus for the long-term deal/buying out arby years is generally shared risk between team and player. The team risks the player getting hurt or declining. The player risks missing out on even more money if his health and good play continues. I don't see that here.

I understand that, my thinking is that Casey's highest paid year wouldn't reach what Hall was getting and Gamel would still be be a league min type guy. Gamel could slide over if a first baseman is ready or play first if a third baseman is ready. I am not saying that I think that they should lock him up long term but if they do it should be before he gets expensive so they have a good gauge of what their costs will be for years to come in order to know how much cash is free for the pitchers. I do not think they should buy out even 1 year of arbitration unless it is a team option. I just believe everything they have been doing the past year is to avoid going to arbitration and having a reasonable deal locked in.

 

Casey is a good solid player who hasn't gotten payed w/ 2-3 kids. I think that he will take a discount and that was what I was basing this on. If you pay him full value their is no point. Also it would be easier to trade him with a locked up contract than a team going through arbitration as long as it isn't an overpay.

 

He's under team control through 2014, so he's already "locked up" in a sense. He's eligible for arbitration next year, so I don't know how you propose an extension that doesn't buy out any arby years. I'm sure the team has a pretty good handle on what McGehee's max arbitration number will be, I think we've all basically agree on what his ceiling is. The only draw for the Brewers to agree to an extension is for cost savings, not cost certainty. I'd argue they already have relative cost certainty with McGehee. Signing him to an extension that is not team-friendly is basically just buying high on a player you already own.

 

I like McGehee as much as anyone, but an extension for him has to provide some advantage for the team to make sense. I don't think "team friendly" and "attractive to McGehee" are mutually exclusive. The fact that he has kids and hasn't gotten paid is immaterial, that's baseball economics.

[LouisEly]

He's not going to get any better, and I don't think he's in very good shape.

 

Remember, he had knee surgery last offseason which made it much harder to work out and come into camp in shape. That being said, despite the knee surgery he still played in 157 games last year. What's that old saying, talent doesn't do you any good if it's not available? Casey's a guy who will show up to work everyday and is unlikely to need to be subbed out for a below-replacement-level player for 30-40 games a year because of minor injuries. You can say what you want about RBIs but they aren't a fluke; with runners on base his OPS was .833 (compared to .801 overall) and with runners in scoring position his OPS was .943. He gets RBIs because he doesn't poop down his leg under pressure with runners on base. Compare that to Fielder, whose OPS overall was .873, but with runners on base it was .755 and with RISP it was .752. My only concern with Casey is the defensive ability.

 

I think Casey is grateful for the chance the Brewers gave him and will give the Brewers a "hometown" discount. So as long as the deal isn't too long (4 years max, preferably 3) and very reasonable cost (~$3M/year) I don't see any downside. Cost control and predictable salary also make it easier to trade him. Like others said, if Casey repeats 2010 his market value will be a lot higher than that.

[logan82]

RBI's are not a fluke. They do however tell you more about the players hitting ahead of a player than anything about the player with RBI's.

 

I don't see any downside.

 

The downside, as others have clearly and repeatedly pointed out, is that the contract you are describing could very easily be more than he would get in arbitration and best case scenario only gives the Brewers minimal savings. No sense taking on injury risk for a couple million a year. McGehee's 2010 wasn't all that special. It was solid but nothing that will drive up his price much.

 

Not being tied to a contract but having control of a player also make him desirable and tradeable.

[Mass Haas]

The Brewers Media Notes indicate that McGehee signed a one-year deal today, terms not disclosed.

 

So it's good he wasn't "renewed", and perhaps talks are still underway for a long-term deal, or maybe they are tabled for later in the season, or perhaps they won't discuss until next winter.

[Menace II Sobriety]

He's under team control through 2014, so he's already "locked up" in a sense. He's eligible for arbitration next year, so I don't know how you propose an extension that doesn't buy out any arby years. I'm sure the team has a pretty good handle on what McGehee's max arbitration number will be, I think we've all basically agree on what his ceiling is. The only draw for the Brewers to agree to an extension is for cost savings, not cost certainty. I'd argue they already have relative cost certainty with McGehee. Signing him to an extension that is not team-friendly is basically just buying high on a player you already own.

 

I like McGehee as much as anyone, but an extension for him has to provide some advantage for the team to make sense. I don't think "team friendly" and "attractive to McGehee" are mutually exclusive. The fact that he has kids and hasn't gotten paid is immaterial, that's baseball economics.

I also said that they should sign him only on a team friendly deal which would be a cost savings. The fact that he has kids and would be guaranteed X amount of dollars definitely is a factor for a 28 year old player who might never get another shot at a contract is an issue.

 

By cost certainty I was inferring that the Brewers would know what price they had allocated to most of the position players so the could have a guaranteed reference point to attempt to lock up players. If Casey has another good year he gets more expensive, therefore a team friendly deal knowing you have your 3rd baseman locked up at say 6 MM in 2014 makes it easier to work on extensions than having an 3rd baseman locked up at anywhere from 5-8.8 MM or whatever.

 

I think they are locking up the other mid-range players at a fair price now so they know where they stand fiscally for the other big contracts they want to sign. Plus I stated that if they buy out other years after he is eligible for free agency it would be a team option. Buy him out to a fair team friendly contract to guarantee another players cost and give the team the option to keep him longer if he excels.

[thebruce44]

JohnBriggs12]First class citizen. Excellent role model. Wasn't given anything, had to work for it. Produced when given the chance. What's not to like about Casey McGehee?

Defense? Track record?

[logan82]

First class citizen. Excellent role model. Wasn't given anything, had to work for it. Produced when given the chance. What's not to like about Casey McGehee?

Defense? Track record?

I like Briggs criteria. By his criteria I deserve a long term contract.

[TooLiveBrew]

Per McCalvy, it sounds like that, unless something changes drastically, there's no long-term deal on the horizon.

 

Brewers third baseman Casey McGehee didn't get a multi-year contract extension, but he vowed to be a happy Spring Training camper anyway.

 

McGehee, the team's lone unsigned player, agreed to a one-year deal for 2011 on Wednesday.

 

"I want to be a Milwaukee Brewer for as long as I can," McGehee said. "It just wasn't the right time for me. ... There's no reason to be [upset]. Now I can just play baseball, and that's really all I want to do."

...

 

[The Brewers] exchanged proposals for an extension with McGehee's agent, Barry

Meister, but McGehee said those talks never progressed to the brink of

an agreement.

 

"I was hopeful," he said. "My first goal is to take care of my family. You're always hopeful you can work something out. But by no means did I feel we were on the cusp of doing it."

...

 

The sides could always revive talks about an extension for McGehee. Last year, the Brewers renewed right-hander Yovani Gallardo's contract on March 4 because they were not able to reach an agreement with agent Bobby Witt, then announced a five-year extension on April 8.

 

"We're always open to that [but] I'm not big on doing things in the season," general manager Doug Melvin said.

 

Said McGehee: "As far as I'm concerned, I'm under contract to play for this year and the ball is not really in my court. It's time for me to go play baseball, and if the subject comes up in the future, obviously I'd be more than willing to listen. We're all adults, and we can all understand either having a difference of opinion or this not being the right time. I don't take it personally, and I don't think Doug takes it personally."

 

He made it clear he's uncomfortable talking about business.

 

"I want my focus to be what's going on on the field," McGehee said. "With the type of team we've got, I want my focus on that. I don't want something lingering. I'm happy to have this over with, I guess."

Casey doesn't exactly sound thrilled.

[monty57]

Casey doesn't exactly sound thrilled.

 

Could be that, or it could be he knows that players are held under a microscope when discussing contracts/money, so he's nervous that he'll say the wrong thing. I'd guess that Melvin was trying to do exactly what many here said he should do, which is offer a contract that is less than McGehee would likely get if he went year-to-year. McGehee obviously thought the deal was too low, so nothing has been signed.

 

I don't really care too much one way or the other. Casey will be moving out of his prime when his arby years are up, so the additional risk the Brewers would shoulder wouldn't be worth it unless they could get significant (expected) cost savings over the next few years. It'd be nice to have the cost certainty and a happier Casey, but not if the team doesn't save a lot of money.

 

Note: as I type this, McGehee just hit his 2nd HR of the game vs the Cubs :-)

[Baldkin]

Casey's a guy who will show up to work everyday and is unlikely to need to be subbed out for a below-replacement-level player for 30-40 games a year because of minor injuries. You can say what you want about RBIs but they aren't a fluke; with runners on base his OPS was .833 (compared to .801 overall) and with runners in scoring position his OPS was .943. He gets RBIs because he doesn't poop down his leg under pressure with runners on base. Compare that to Fielder, whose OPS overall was .873, but with runners on base it was .755 and with RISP it was .752.

Well, maybe this season Casey can act like there are RISP every time he comes up, and have a .940 OPS overall.

[3Putt]

Sign him. McGehee proved last year that he has the intelligence and work ethic to adjust to opposing pitchers. His defense improved after his knee surgery and this year his repaired knees have allowed him to come into camp in better shape. It's a risky business but this guy is as solid as it gets.

[Invader3K]

I was kind of hoping something would get done, because I really like McGehee as a player and an individual. Note that that doesn't mean I wanted the Brewers to commit huge dollars to him or make a Bill Hall type mistake, as we discussed earlier. My guess is that they do a longer deal next off-season.

[davemakovec]

Doug: "There are no hard feelings. It's not a renewal. Casey made a point of

that [signing a contract] because he didn't want the perception that we were at odds. We're

not upset. It's just business."

 

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/117257313.html

 

That doesn't sound sound like the action of a player who's frustrated. If he was unhappy, do you really think he would insist on signing a contract in order to look happy? Hopefully he plays like Carlos Silva is pitching every day.

[logan82]

I never thought it was a big deal if a player is just renewed. Gallardo, Hart and Fielder were all renewed at some point and that didn't change anything.

[TooLiveBrew]

McGehee proved last year that he has the intelligence and work ethic to adjust to opposing pitchers.

 

Did he prove that by dropping from a .859 OPS in 2010 to .801 last season? I like Casey, but there's quite the fanatical divide on him at BF's forums imo. He's not an amazing player, but the fact that he was plucked off the scrap heap makes him so appealing to many. Likewise, he's not a bum, but the fact that he's posted a career .812 OPS & 117 OPS+ with subpar defense hasn't convinced others that he's as "solid as they come".

 

I just hope he can stay healthy & productive, & cash in come his arbitration seasons so he can set his family up for their lives. Certainly no one questions that Casey is a great person & father. I noticed the USA Today article that was linked in the ML forum stated that Mack does a Uecker impression -- this I have to see!

[dlk9s]

Regardless of what anyone thinks of Casey, we all have to admit that he's sporting a great beard right now.

[CheezWizHed]

I never thought it was a big deal if a player is just renewed. Gallardo, Hart and Fielder were all renewed at some point and that didn't change anything.

 

I think it just shows that the player doesn't agree with the club's assessment of their worth. So it shows some level of unhappiness. Of course, it means different things to different people... If I remember right, Fielder was quite negatively vocal about it.

 

Now, did that change future negotiations? Probably not, but its still nicer to see them sign than not.

[endaround]

I never thought it was a big deal if a player is just renewed. Gallardo, Hart and Fielder were all renewed at some point and that didn't change anything.

 

I think it just shows that the player doesn't agree with the club's assessment of their worth. So it shows some level of unhappiness. Of course, it means different things to different people... If I remember right, Fielder was quite negatively vocal about it.

 

Now, did that change future negotiations? Probably not, but its still nicer to see them sign than not.

Fielder was upset because the CBA just changed raising the minimum. He thought he was going to get the raise based upon the minimum going up and his performance on the Brewers scale. He only got his performance incentive.

[monty57]

I thought he was mad because Ryan Howard got something like $900k in his final pre-arby year and the Brewers only gave Prince somewhere around $600k, using the arguement that Howard had an MVP under his belt, so he was worth more. That was a while ago, so I could very well be wrong.

[logan82]

Bottom line though is it didn't have much bearing on future negotiations.

[monty57]

Bottom line though is it didn't have much bearing on future negotiations.

 

Probably not, but I can't read Prince's mind. He (and Boras) certainly didn't take long to reject the Brewers every time they approached him about an extension. That's pretty typical of Boras, but I can't be certain Prince doesn't have any pent up hostilities. Either way, Prince will be gone and Casey will be under team control for three seasons after this one. The Brewers have done a pretty good job lately at locking up their young talent and I think Melvin will sign McGehee to a multi-year deal when and if he feels he can get it done in a favorable fashion for the Brewers.