Zack Greinke close to hiring an agent.....

[KCBrewerfan34]

All these examples lead me to one conclusion. The Brewers MUST hit on some more young players that are cheap. They almost are committed to Gamel because he's dirt cheap (big advantage not paying a 1b big money if he produces).

[Oldcity]

Aren't we getting a bit carried away to expect this by opening day? He just hired the agent today; isn't it likely that they're going to take more than a couple days to negotiate a $100 million deal?

 

Not that I wouldn't want to give him a standing ovation when he's announced on Saturday, but still...

[endaround]

Aren't we getting a bit carried away to expect this by opening day? He just hired the agent today; isn't it likely that they're going to take more than a couple days to negotiate a $100 million deal?

 

Not that I wouldn't want to give him a standing ovation when he's announced on Saturday, but still...

There was some speculation that he would only hire an agent now if he had a contract pretty much agreed to. If not he would hold off until later. Greinke doesn't seem to be one to look for endorsement deals.

[PrinceFielderx1]

There was also a report that Greinke wouldn't hire an agent until after the 2012 season,

 

THURSDAY: Greinke will hire an agent if he reaches free agency next winter, Ken Rosenthal of FOX Sports tweets. The right-hander is open to discussing a long-term deal with the Brewers on his own. Michael Weiner of the MLBPA told Jim Bowden of ESPN.com and MLB Network Radio that he's not concerned that Greinke doesn't have an agent (Twitter link).

 

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2012/03/greinke-plans-to-hire-an-agent.html

 

Something apparently speed up the process. Perhaps the write-up of the contract?

[Oldcity]

Yeah, I had heard that speculation. I figured it would take more than a couple days even to go over the fine print of the contract or whatever, but maybe not.

[TooLiveBrew]

Or maybe Greinke doesn't care if the deal gets done before OD or on the 8th (or whatever) day of the season, if what's left to be done is work out the details in the contract language & not the larger terms.

[Eye Black]

Maybe he will send cryptic messages via his walkup music on Saturday.

[Nader Raider Tim]

Regarding the Brewers long term financial commitments and there ability to sign Grienke long term.

 

To preface this I am by no means a baseball economist, simply a fan who has to much time to think about stupid [expletive deleted by mod (1992)] at work.

 

Lately I've been thinking about where average payrolls are going to be in 3-5 years and then going forward. Personally I think we are going to see a heck of a lot more money being thrown around. It seems like baseball is an ascending sport. It also, IMO, seems like the new rules in baseball are pushing more money into the ML rosters.

 

TV deals seem to be exploding, foolishly so. (Have the Brewers released details on their deal?) That right there is going to push more teams towards the Luxury cap threshold. It is reasonable to assume that in 3-5 years that the Yankees, Red Sox, Angels, Dodgers, Rangers and Phillies all could be pushing up near the luxury tax. Texas is the only one that might be a reach. After that there are a few complete wild cards whose payroll could bottom out in a rebuilding process or skyrocket in an instant, including the Cubs, Mets, Mariners, Tigers and Nationals. With more teams spending more money the value of players should skyrocket. I think we are in for a whole lot more $140 - $240 million dollar contracts.

 

On a smaller scale it seems like the new Draft rules seem to be taking away the approach that a few teams have taken to recently which is to try and build long term strength by going extreme in spending in the draft and in the International markets. With that avenue being taken away owners should theoretically be able to put that money back into the ML rosters.

 

So for a team like the Brewers might be in a bit of a tough spot. They will never have a TV deal that will be competitive with major markets. They also won't be able to do what the Pirates and Nationals have done over the last few years and spend foolishly (don't mean that as a negative just that they spend crazy money in the draft, I wish the Brewers would have when they could have). So Mark A might have to decide is it worth it to boost payroll into the $120 million + range to stay in the top 12-15 for payroll or try and compete payroll wise. The positive is that if Baseball is ascending as much as I think it is then team values should skyrocket also. So can/could the Brewers afford $120-140 million dollar payroll and come out with a profit over a 5 year time frame? Probably not, but hopefully an owner like Mark A would look at it as a long term investment. Perhaps taking a bit of a loss each year but keeping the value of the team ascending.

 

 

 

So after my thoughts that are probably half incoherent and half flat wrong, my impression is that Grienke should be affordable by the Brewers at roughly $20 million a year. The cost of elite talent will not be going down so sign it while you can. It would push the Brewers core of long term commitments past $70 million as stated previously but it should allow for enough roster flexibility to stay very competitive.

 

If Gamel is having an impressive season try and get him to sign a $10 million 5 year deal with 3 option years. Look at doing something similar to at least 1 of the upcoming pipeline of pitching. Peralta, Thornburg, Jungman, or Bradley. Getting a few cost controlled young players would obviously be key to the Brewers being able to afford so many high salary players.

[captkirk16]

I don't think it's about the money, I don't think he wants to play for the Brewers, just saying

[Ennder]

I don't think it's about the money, I don't think he wants to play for the Brewers, just saying

 

Any reason for this, I haven't seen anything at all that suggests this.

[brettac1]

99.99% of the time it's 100% about the money.

[jjfanec]

I don't think it's about the money, I don't think he wants to play for the Brewers, just saying

 

Please share your reasoning for this if you are going to make a statement like this that contradicts things even Greinke himself has said.

[Invader3K]

I doubt Greinke would have even accepted the trade to Milwaukee if he didn't at least have some interest in possibly staying long term.

 

I don't think there's any way to point to him hiring on Casey Close and not thinking negotiations must be ongoing. Otherwise, I don't see why he would bother hiring an agent right now.

[brwrsfan]

Unlike Prince Fielder, Greinke has given no indication that he's definitely leaving at the end of the year and has in fact stated otherwise, that he really does enjoy Milwaukee and loves it here. Doesn't mean he's staying, but unless there is some information out there that I have yet to see, to simply state that he doesn't want to play here seems pretty far fetched.

 

If in fact this agent hiring means terms are close, we'll find out soon enough. If we don't hear anything in the next couple of weeks, then I would start to get concerned as this is really our only window to resign him. If he gets close to FA, he's as good as gone unless he's willing to take significantly less money to stay with the Brewers.

[monty57]

Lately I've been thinking about where average payrolls are going to be in 3-5 years and then going forward. Personally I think we are going to see a heck of a lot more money being thrown around. It seems like baseball is an ascending sport. It also, IMO, seems like the new rules in baseball are pushing more money into the ML rosters.

 

Player salaries have risen faster than inflation and should continue to do so. I think you're correct in assuming salaries and payrolls will continue to escalate. This may be financially sound or financially foolish by the owners. We won't know unless a team declares bankruptcy, as the MLB financial books are closed to the public.

 

TV deals seem to be exploding, foolishly so. (Have the Brewers released details on their deal?) That right there is going to push more teams towards the Luxury cap threshold. It is reasonable to assume that in 3-5 years that the Yankees, Red Sox, Angels, Dodgers, Rangers and Phillies all could be pushing up near the luxury tax.

 

A New York paper wrote a story which said something to the effect of "the old Brewers deal was $10 million a year and the new deal triples that." This is why many are projecting around $20MM of additional revenue for the team. Note that this does not necessarily mean $20MM more in payroll, just in revenue. Shortly after this was announced, the Angels announced a deal for (I believe) $130 million a year - a full $100 million a year more than we presume the Brewers will make on their deal. Recently, I saw a interview with Stan Kasten, former Braves President and part of the Dodgers' new ownership team. He discussed the TV deals and said the days of the superstation are past, the model of team ownership of stations is going away and the local deals (FSN-type) "seem to be working really well right now." This leads me to believe that the Dodgers will have a shiny new nine-digit-per-year TV deal soon.

 

While this leads to more big market / small market worries, when the Reds signed Votto, one exec (I don't remember who) mentioned not only that he expected a new TV deal during the tenure of the contract, but also that things like MLB Network and the internet are funnelling more money to everyone. I remember a few years ago when Selig put in the rule that all games over the internet would share revenue, that I thought this was a smart move by Selig to eventually even out TV revenues, as eventually all games are going to be shown over the internet... it's just a matter of time. Kasten mentioned "the internet or whatever may replace it" as his view of the future of TV deals.

 

On a smaller scale it seems like the new Draft rules seem to be taking away the approach that a few teams have taken to recently which is to try and build long term strength by going extreme in spending in the draft and in the International markets. With that avenue being taken away owners should theoretically be able to put that money back into the ML rosters.

 

I think you're seeing that with the Nationals and Pirates. They're starting to see the fruits of their draft spending and are now beginning to lock up their young talent. Deals like the first Braun extension are becoming more popular and allow for smaller markets to keep their stars for an additional couple of years. This helps even the playing field. It's the extensions beyond that which are very expensive, and is the realm Melvin has entered (probably too often) in recent years, and is where I (and to a larger extent TheCrew07) say Melvin is trying to act too much like a big market team than a small market team.

 

To this point, but on a side note, I think the Phillies' run is nearly over, as their core is now mid-30's. The Nationals, Braves and Marlins are all young and talented and can lock up their "cores" and fight for that division for the foreseeable future. As weird as it is to say it, the Pirates and possibly the Reds are positioning themselves to be the teams to beat in the Central in the near future. As the Pirates continue to lock up their young players and guys like Cole and Taillon (overpays in the draft) reach the majors, they could be pretty good.

 

So for a team like the Brewers might be in a bit of a tough spot. They will never have a TV deal that will be competitive with major markets. They also won't be able to do what the Pirates and Nationals have done over the last few years and spend foolishly (don't mean that as a negative just that they spend crazy money in the draft, I wish the Brewers would have when they could have).

 

I agree, and in my opinion the worst thing they can do is act in a financially foolish manner. Many on this board are extremely well informed about the draft, and they were screaming (as loud as you can on a message board) for the Brewers to overpay for some players during recent drafts. I'm with you that I wish the Brewers would have taken advantage of this opportunity while it existed. Overpaying some for a super-prospect and extending them when they're pre-arby was a way for smaller markets to succeed. Instead, we chose to offer expensive extensions to guys who were already in their "expensive" years, trade our farm system for more expensive players with limited "team control" remaining, and sign expensive, market-value deals to free agents. Now we're tied into these expensive deals into the future and don't have much of a farm system left.

 

So Mark A might have to decide is it worth it to boost payroll into the $120 million + range to stay in the top 12-15 for payroll or try and compete payroll wise. The positive is that if Baseball is ascending as much as I think it is then team values should skyrocket also. So can/could the Brewers afford $120-140 million dollar payroll and come out with a profit over a 5 year time frame? Probably not, but hopefully an owner like Mark A would look at it as a long term investment. Perhaps taking a bit of a loss each year but keeping the value of the team ascending.

 

Mark A is smart about money. Too smart to let a "baseball guy" run him into bankruptcy. I begin to wonder if he is trying to push up the value of the franchise as high as possible so he can sell the team for a big profit. Right now, he could probably net an easy couple hundred million in long-term capital gains in a sale and leave the new owner with a bunch of expensive long-term deals.

 

So after my thoughts that are probably half incoherent and half flat wrong

 

Not at all. I enjoyed reading your post.

 

my impression is that Grienke should be affordable by the Brewers at roughly $20 million a year. The cost of elite talent will not be going down so sign it while you can. It would push the Brewers core of long term commitments past $70 million as stated previously but it should allow for enough roster flexibility to stay very competitive.

 

I think Greinke will probably be extended, and I agree that the cost of elite talent is on the rise. However, I don't agree that we'll have financial flexibility if $70+MM is tied up in five players. I think we'll have to trade someone else, I my guess is Weeks (because I feel Ramirez's contract makes him untradeable, Braun is the face of the franchise and trading Yo would seem foolish if the thought of signing Greinke was to have two "aces"). I think a Weeks trade is financially smart, and maybe baseball smart. By the time I see him being traded, he'll be past his prime (31 or 32), but still good enough and with enough team control that other teams would probably fall over themselves to trade for him. Meanwhile, we have Green and by that time Gennett to step in and take his place, and we could get some good young talent in the trade which would help us fill in pre-arby (inexpensive) talent around our "core."

 

If Gamel is having an impressive season try and get him to sign a $10 million 5 year deal with 3 option years. Look at doing something similar to at least 1 of the upcoming pipeline of pitching. Peralta, Thornburg, Jungman, or Bradley. Getting a few cost controlled young players would obviously be key to the Brewers being able to afford so many high salary players.

 

Agreed. We still need young talent coming up through the system, and we need to pick who our "future core" will be and lock them up early, buying out a year or two of free agency. This is a strategy we need to continue. However, we also need to be able to realize when the correct time is to cut ties with them. I think one of our problems right now is that we made some good moves a few years ago and have now grown emotionally attached to some of our players, which is leading us to either continue to offer extensions when they are no longer available at a value, or allowing the players to play through to free agency, when we get nothing in return.

[RobDeer 45]

ZG saying he likes it here is probably not just player speak. He says what's on his mind. I think we have a shot but agree it is a small window here. If we do t get it done soon it will be really tough. I think Zach knows that he probably wouldn't enjoy a huge market and so that takes some of the huge spenders off the table. I really believe he will look to get a deal done here soon and they will just try to get as much out of Milwaukee as they can. If we put a respectable offer out there I really think he takes it. If we don't, he gets to try the open market. I just really have to believe there aren't too many options out there that fit what he would need. Small market, competitive, let's him do his thing, and can afford him. I guess we will see. I have my fingers crossed.

[RightFieldCoder]

Mark A is smart about money. Too smart to let a "baseball guy" run him into bankruptcy. I begin to wonder if he is trying to push up the value of the franchise as high as possible so he can sell the team for a big profit. Right now, he could probably net an easy couple hundred million in long-term capital gains in a sale and leave the new owner with a bunch of expensive long-term deals.

 

I don't believe this is true. The group he would sell the team to would go over all contractual obligations. Expensive long-term deals would lead to the price paid going down. Remember the outrage when it got leaked that Wendy the Witch was dropping payroll to $27M for ?2004? It was so they could sell the team the next year. No long term or expensive contracts drove the price of the team up. She knew she would get more money if the new owner was free to build the team they wanted. I think these long, risky deals (like A-Ram) are signs that he is not going to sell any time soon.

[monty57]

Mark A is smart about money. Too smart to let a "baseball guy" run him into bankruptcy. I begin to wonder if he is trying to push up the value of the franchise as high as possible so he can sell the team for a big profit. Right now, he could probably net an easy couple hundred million in long-term capital gains in a sale and leave the new owner with a bunch of expensive long-term deals.

 

I don't believe this is true. The group he would sell the team to would go over all contractual obligations. Expensive long-term deals would lead to the price paid going down. Remember the outrage when it got leaked that Wendy the Witch was dropping payroll to $27M for ?2004? It was so they could sell the team the next year. No long term or expensive contracts drove the price of the team up. She knew she would get more money if the new owner was free to build the team they wanted. I think these long, risky deals (like A-Ram) are signs that he is not going to sell any time soon.

 

Back then they were a doormat, and were going to remain a doormat whether they had expensive contracts or not. Today, a back-to-back NL Central Division Champion will sell for a lot more than a doormat.

 

I doubt he's looking to sell, but he is a financier, and could turn a huge profit if he were to sell today. Maybe not so much if he lets Greinke walk and they're doormats for a few seasons while they get their books in order and see which prospects pan out while Richie Sexson, oft-injured Geoff Jenkins and Ben Sheets... Oops I mean Ryan Braun, oft-injured Rickie Weeks and Yo Gallardo keep the loyal fans tuning in.

[dlk9s]

Mark A is smart about money. Too smart to let a "baseball guy" run him into bankruptcy. I begin to wonder if he is trying to push up the value of the franchise as high as possible so he can sell the team for a big profit. Right now, he could probably net an easy couple hundred million in long-term capital gains in a sale and leave the new owner with a bunch of expensive long-term deals.

 

http://img816.imageshack.us/img816/405/hato.png

[logan82]

I remember a few years ago when Selig put in the rule that all games over the internet would share revenue, that I thought this was a smart move by Selig to eventually even out TV revenues, as eventually all games are going to be shown over the internet... it's just a matter of time. Kasten mentioned "the internet or whatever may replace it" as his view of the future of TV deals.

The internet would replace it if or when they ever stop their stupid blackout rules. I would seriously drop my cable if I could legally get live games in market any other way.

[monty57]

Is it a conspiracy theory to think that a guy who has made hundreds of millions through the valuation of distressed debt would take a "distressed franchise," make some shrewd moves to greatly increase it's value and then sell it for a monumental monetary gain? If baseball is indeed a business, then that would indeed be one good business move.

[SoCal Brew Crew Fan]

I remember a few years ago when Selig put in the rule that all games over the internet would share revenue, that I thought this was a smart move by Selig to eventually even out TV revenues, as eventually all games are going to be shown over the internet... it's just a matter of time. Kasten mentioned "the internet or whatever may replace it" as his view of the future of TV deals.

The internet would replace it if or when they ever stop their stupid blackout rules. I would seriously drop my cable if I could legally get live games in market any other way.

With all the TV deals going at big prices and some teams even having their own piece of a cable network, preserving the multi-channel eco-system may be in their near term financial best interests. The stick of going exclusive or over the top can drive prices higher, but will likely carry some digital rights and restrictions along with them over time.

[TooLiveBrew]

Just posted on McCalvy's blog

 

After dealing directly with right-hander Zack Greinke during Spring Training, Brewers general manager Doug Melvin will shift talks about a potential contract extension to Greinke’s newly-hired agent, Casey Close.

 

Greinke had been previously represented by Close at CAA Sports, but had been operating without representation for more than a year. Close has since left CAA to form Excel Sports Management.

 

Melvin and Close will talk via telephone Thursday to “fill each other in on where discussions stand,” according to Melvin, who declined to say whether Grienke’s decision to select an agent indicated the sides were making progress toward an extension. Greinke is due to reach free agency in October.

 

“From here on out, Casey and I will talk,” Melvin said.

 

Greinke has not said whether he is open to discussions extending into the regular season. Opening Day is Friday against the Cardinals at Miller Park, and he’ll debut Saturday.

[chuckiehacks]

While I'm sure the long-term merits of any deal will be discussed ad nauseum (especially here), there is only one certainly if this somehow comes together before Friday at 3:10. An increase in liver failure in the 5-county area. That, and an ovation on Saturday that will probably eclipse anything (even Braun) on Friday.

[umphrey]

Well 1-2 years ago he was telling KC fans he wanted to be traded