The K-Rod trade -- kind of suspiciously cheap?

[adambr2]

I'm sure someone has a logical explanation for this so I'd really like to hear what it is. For the life of me, I can't figure out how we got K-Rod so cheaply. I understand that we can't really judge this until we know who the PTBNL's are, but judging by Melvin's comments, it isn't guys like Peralta and Thornburg. Couple points I'd like to make:

-- K-Rod is a projected Type A free agent. Presumably, there's no way we'll let him make his option, we'll offer him arby after using the Mets money to buy him out, and collect the Type A compensation when he likely declines in favor of another long-term deal.

-- Bullpen help, especially for a setup man or closer, is notoriously expensive and hard to come by this time of year. The Royals are asking the moon for Soria, and K-Rod is having a pretty respectably better year (though Soria isn't a rental like K-Rod).

-- Our farm system is already pretty weak, and Melvin said that the two PTBNL's aren't top prospects. We can't know who they are at this point without speculating, but especially coming from our farm system, they can't be much. Am I meaning to understand that the Mets gave us K-Rod for a (guessing, speculating, hypothetical) future 4th OF'er prospect and middle relief prospect? Do they not realize that Type A compensation alone would quite possibly exceed that?

-- This wasn't a strict salary dump. The Mets gave us money, about half of his remaining contract this year, plus his buyout money next year. They got very little for prospects and had to pay most of his remaining obligations? That just makes no sense to me.

So, help me understand how this happened. I mean, I'm not complaining, but am I missing something? Are we unlikely to offer K-Rod arbitration to get the picks at the risk of him accepting? I would think he would opt for the longer term contract especially being the top closer on the market this winter. Was this just a situation where the Mets were stuck between a rock and a hard place, and had no other options for closer the rest of the year but were scared to death of being on the hook for $17.5M for him next year, so rather than appear shady by pulling him out of the closer role, they decided to just trade him and steer clear of any controversy and/or overpriced closer contracts? Were other teams that afraid of the possible controversy of either letting him reach his vesting option or not making him the primary closer that they were just afraid to make a decent offer to the Mets? It just all seems a little surprising to me.

[umphrey]

Simple. If the Mets didn't trade him they would have had to pay him $17.5M next year either through vesting his option or a grievance hearing if they stopped using him as a closer.

 

Why did we get him? The Mets had to trade him to a team that:

-wasn't on his 10 team no trade list

-had an established closer so the team didn't have to pick up his option next year

-preferably wasn't in their division or the Yankees

-was a buyer at the trade deadline

 

so that eliminates probably 25 teams or more, and since they wanted to get rid of him as soon as possible to minimize risk of reaching his 55 game option, they probably jumped all over the first offer, and pretty much gave him away.

[dlk9s]

were scared to death of being on the hook for $17.5M for him next year, so rather than appear shady by pulling him out of the closer role, they decided to just trade him and steer clear of any controversy and/or overpriced closer contracts?

 

This is the answer. ^^^^

 

They had to get out from under that contract. We were able to get him so cheaply because the Mets had no leverage whatsoever. I'd have to review every other team to see which ones might have been able to work a similar deal (read: have a good closer already but still need bullpen help), but I guess there weren't many other options for the Mets and those options for some reason wanted more cash.

[NYChez]

More comfort comes from the Mets' forums, where their fans say that moving K-Rod was one fire sale move that was understandable. They don't endorse getting rid of Reyes, Wright, or Beltran; but they do endorse getting rid of a closer that could possibly demand a lot of cash that the Mets don't currently have.

Nothing on their forums say that he's damaged goods.

[1992casey]

I'd have to review every other team to see which ones might have been able to work a similar deal (read: have a good closer already but still need bullpen help), but I guess there weren't many other options for the Mets and those options for some reason wanted more cash.

 

Somewhere in the main K-Rod topic, it's mentioned that the Mets explored deals with other teams, but the Brewers won out because they required the least amount of cash back.

[wcswimmer712]

Just to clarify... We got money for K-Rod's salary for the remainder of the year ALONG with the money to buy him out? This could be a sweet deal. Relief ace + first round draft pick in the 2012 draft for two PTBNL's.

[fondybadger]

Compensation picks may be removed from the new collective bargaining agreement, so may not get any picks for him?

[DHonks]

Also, if he's making $11.5 million this year while being a very good closer, I wonder how likely the Brewers would be to offer arbitration. I doubt he'd accept for a myriad of reasons, but it's also a huge risk for the Brewers.

 

As for MLB possibly eliminating compensation, I wish they would go with an NFL-like system (except make it effective, unlike the NFL's weak system). That is, I'd like the league to have a committee that evaluates all off-season moves on the whole. All picks should be compensatory round picks, with no losing of team picks. For instance:

 

a) Brewers lose K-Rod, Fielder, Betancourt, Hawkins, and Saito

sign nobody of significance

 

Brewers get 2 picks after first round, 2 after 2nd round

 

b) Brewers lose the same players

Brewers sign Jose Reyes, a 3b, and a setup man

 

Brewers get no picks, or just a pick after the 2nd/3rd round depending on how free agents lost/gained compare

[danzig6767]

I'd have to review every other team to see which ones might have been able to work a similar deal (read: have a good closer already but still need bullpen help), but I guess there weren't many other options for the Mets and those options for some reason wanted more cash.

 

Somewhere in the main K-Rod topic, it's mentioned that the Mets explored deals with other teams, but the Brewers won out because they required the least amount of cash back.

Yep

 

Moving K-Rod for the Mets wasn't a matter of if for them, only a matter of when they would trade him, how much money they'd have to include, and if they could get a halfway decent prospect or two.

 

The one thing that wasn't an option for them was allowing Rodriguez to reach his finished games total, thus locking him in at 17.5 million next year. Then you also mix in that Rodriguez switched agents to Boras 2-3 days ago and right away Boras goes to the media saying

"Francisco Rodriguez is a historic closer. He's not going anywhere to be a setup man.

"Closers don't make good setup men. Does anyone want an unhappy setup man in their clubhouse?"

 

That wasn't exactly going to help in trading K-Rod to teams that would only want him as a set-up man. So i think that Alderson simply just decided to cut his losses ASAP to any team willing to take Rodriguez and pay basically for the 3.5 million dollar buyout. Just getting Rodriguez and his vesting option off the team was vastly more important than what he got in return.

[DuWayne Steurer]

Basically, the Brewers were the benefactors of the Mets absolutely having to get out from under that horrible vesting option. I realize closers pitch 'high leverage' innings, but there's just no way any closer is worth 17.5 mil, (unless he's giving you 70 shutout innings I suppose). The Mets ultimately had no choice but to move him for whatever someone was willing to give. In this case, yes, the Mets had to give the Brewers a lot of cash. But I don't think the money Rodriguez was making *this year* was the issue. It was the vesting option, and as others have said, if the Mets pulled him out of the closers' role just to avoid the vesting condition, the union would have absolutely filed a grievance on Rodriguez's behalf.

[Patrick425]

DHonks[/b]]Also, if he's making $11.5 million this year while being a very good closer, I wonder how likely the Brewers would be to offer arbitration. I doubt he'd accept for a myriad of reasons, but it's also a huge risk for the Brewers.

 

I would have to agree with this. I don't think it's a given that the Brewers should just automatically offer him arbitration in hopes of getting extra draft picks. Seems like a big risk to me.

[theavrock]

If KRod pitches lights out with the Brewers, there is no way that Boras lets him accept arbitration. It may be a risk, but its a calculated one and one that should pay off. There is always someone out there willing to give closers a deal. He might not get the blockbuster deal, but if he pitches well he will almost certainly be able to find something better than an arby deal.

 

Unless of course he pitches poorly, but then he would be Type B anyways and you probably don't offer him arby.

[interestobserver]

The vesting option wasn't so significant since any team he would be traded to would not let it vest. Depending on who the NTC listed, he could have more leverage. However, the value of a pretty good reliever, who is paid below market cost because of $6.5 million included, and the opportunity to pick up extra draft picks should net a couple of decent players back. I doubt they're scrubs.

[Dragonbait]

Last story I heard (linked on JS) said his previous agent didnt submit a 10- team list.... so before Boras could submit one, they traded him... (not sure if thats an accurate desc...)

[interestobserver]

In which case, picks, cash, and reliever should equal decent return. Part of what makes this so hard to judge is the facts are so murky. The only thing that's clear is that Rodriguez threw one of the most expensive punches in the history of sports.

[Raw Biz]

In which case, picks, cash, and reliever should equal decent return. Part of what makes this so hard to judge is the facts are so murky. The only thing that's clear is that Rodriguez threw one of the most expensive punches in the history of sports.

I don't think the potential picks should come into play because the Mets were never going to see those picks, at least not this offseason. With the exception of an injury, the option was going to vest so the picks were never going to be in play for the Mets. Again, this was all about the Mets not having to pay 17.5 mil next year, nothing more, nothing less.

[interestobserver]

Everything comes into play. The value of the trade to the Brewers is what he is worth. An option that will not vest is not in the equation. Picks can be used create value. Money not paid together with picks means the Brewers can use those picks and select good players, replenishing any talent lost. That's the point of trading. It's not what the other guys gains or gives up so much and what you gain vs. give up.

[TheCrew]

$17.5 million reasons why they got him so cheap - Axford gets hurt, Brewers are basically on the hook for that contract next year. No way they can legitimately have anyone else close without that going to grievance. Fangraphs has a good write up on it, this could blow up in the Brewers face and leave them in a bad spot next season. Not many teams wanted/needed to take that risk.

[Raw Biz]

Everything comes into play. The value of the trade to the Brewers is what he is worth. An option that will not vest is not in the equation. Picks can be used create value. Money not paid together with picks means the Brewers can use those picks and select good players, replenishing any talent lost. That's the point of trading. It's not what the other guys gains or gives up so much and what you gain vs. give up.

I know the picks come into play with the Brewers. I was saying that it shouldn't come into play from the Mets perspective. In other words, the Mets shouldn't be looking to get 2 1st round talent guys out of the trade just because the team trading for KRod could receive picks. Also, since it appears that the Mets GM called Melvin (not the other way around like we may have assumed), it really does look like the Mets were just simply trying to get rid of KRod for whatever they could get.

[Raw Biz]

$17.5 million reasons why they got him so cheap - Axford gets hurt, Brewers are basically on the hook for that contract next year. No way they can legitimately have anyone else close without that going to grievance. Fangraphs has a good write up on it, this could blow up in the Brewers face and leave them in a bad spot next season. Not many teams wanted/needed to take that risk.

I would say it depends on when the injury would occur (and I really hope it doesn't). If it's early on, then yeah I would think KRod basically becomes the closer. But if it happens say late August, early September and KRod is struggling and other guys are pitching better, I could see someone else taking over the role or going to a closer by committee. I don't think the union would have a grievance claim if KRod were struggling. But if he pitches lights out for the next month and Axford goes down, then we could be in trouble. But if the option vests, maybe someone would be willing to trade for him if the Brewers eat part of that salary.

[tommyboy42609]

In which case, picks, cash, and reliever should equal decent return. Part of what makes this so hard to judge is the facts are so murky. The only thing that's clear is that Rodriguez threw one of the most expensive punches in the history of sports.

I don't think the potential picks should come into play because the Mets were never going to see those picks, at least not this offseason. With the exception of an injury, the option was going to vest so the picks were never going to be in play for the Mets. Again, this was all about the Mets not having to pay 17.5 mil next year, nothing more, nothing less.

The picks were never going to be in play for the Mets but any team that acquires him without hitting the vesting option clause is going to get those picks so although the Mets won't be getting the picks that would not affect his potential value which goes back to the OP of how we got such a good deal.

[Nottso]

I like to think this Karma, repaying the Crew for the compensatory screwing they got when they lost Sheets and Sabathia.

 

Ask a baseball guy about anything and they say "it all evens out in the end."

[adambr2]

IMO you have to offer him arbitration.

 

Worst case scenario, he accepts, and you have to overpay him a $10M - $12M contract next year. So you've probably got $5M or so more than you otherwise would want to tied up in K-Rod, and you're completely set at the top of your bullpen with Ax and K-Rod next year. Could be a lot worse than that. In the end it's just a 1 year deal anyway, just like the one we gave Gagne a few years ago.

 

In all likelihood I don't think they would have to worry about it. Boras isn't going to want a 1 year arbitration deal for the top FA closer on the market, and neither one of them are going to want him to be anywhere where he's not guaranteed to be closing full time and thus affecting his future value.

 

For a team that has completely gutted the farm like the Brewers, extra picks at the top of the draft are golden. If you end up getting burned and end up having to overpay K-Rod for a 1 year deal, so be it. But I still think that he'd be unlikely to accept.

[RockCoCougars]

What is he making this season? Isn't there a maximum wage cut a guy could get through arbitration.

[Funketown]

What is he making this season? Isn't there a maximum wage cut a guy could get through arbitration.

He's making $11.5 million this season, and I believe 20% is the maximum wage cut a player can receive through arbitration. That would put him at about $9.25 million.

 

Realistically K-Rod should be worth $5-7 million over the course of the season, so paying him $10 million wouldn't be a disaster, more of a mild annoyance.