Rickie Weeks 2014

[DHonks]

The play Scooter made to lead off the top of the 9th....Weeks definitely doesn't make the play

[SRB]

Who is disputing that it's smart business? Of course it's the smart thing for the Brewers to do, but from Rickie's perspective he's still getting screwed. In his mind I'm sure he's still better than Scooter, and when they signed the contract nobody was thinking that Rickie would be 100% healthy but would be deliberately relegated to a PH-only role this season.

 

There is no explicit language because (I'm pretty sure) they are prohibited by the CBA from including that kind of performance-based language in the contracts. That's why teams use things like PA as a proxy for health and award/all-star voting as a proxy for performance. The downside for the player is that what was likely intended as a proxy for health is now being used as a (fully legal) excuse to duck the option.

 

It's very obvious that they were sitting him for the first fifth of the season. Now we are past the point where there is no way he can accumulate 400 PA and they are going to start using him more and more. So suddenly they ask him to play LF (now, once he will no longer get his option to vest)?

 

I absolutely want the Brewers to do this, because I don't want to pay Rickie $11M next season, but from his point of view I would be irked too.

 

Why should any player, especially an underperforming, aging player, ever assume that he will be guaranteed playing time if he's healthy? He can make it up in his own mind that he's being 'screwed', but no player in any professional team sport should ever make an assumption of playing time given. Especially a guy who's put up the numbers (and defense) that Rickie has the past few years. A guy pushing into his 30's, sporting negative WAR 2 years running, with significant playing time, doesn't get more playing time, he gets less.

 

I think we are talking past each other. When Weeks signed his contract, he was an oft-injured but elite 2B (arguably the best 2B in baseball from 2010-11 on a WAR/game basis, coming off a 5.8 fWAR season when he signed the contract). Nobody foresaw that in 2014 he would be benched for a (previously) non-prospect like Scooter Gennett. That simply was not the purpose of the PA-requirement. I know people on here may disagree on fairness/policy grounds, but the entire contractual framework in professional baseball is designed under the principle that money is guaranteed regardless of on-field performance. That is what the MLBPA has fought for and that's what distinguishes baseball from some other sports.

 

The Brewers are fully within their rights to point out Weeks's bad performance and to bench him, but he's still getting screwed. If he had been a healthy player throughout his career, the $11 million option would have been guaranteed (or at least would have had a guaranteed buyout). He was oft-injured, so they negotiated a PA-based option. He's 100% healthy, but he's still not getting it. Nothing wrong with what the Brewers are doing, but I don't see how you can't empathize with Week on some level?

[DuWayne Steurer]

 

I think we are talking past each other. When Weeks signed his contract, he was an oft-injured but elite 2B (arguably the best 2B in baseball from 2010-11 on a WAR/game basis, coming off a 5.8 fWAR season when he signed the contract). Nobody foresaw that in 2014 he would be benched for a (previously) non-prospect like Scooter Gennett. That simply was not the purpose of the PA-requirement. I know people on here may disagree on fairness/policy grounds, but the entire contractual framework in professional baseball is designed under the principle that money is guaranteed regardless of on-field performance. That is what the MLBPA has fought for and that's what distinguishes baseball from some other sports.

 

The Brewers are fully within their rights to point out Weeks's bad performance and to bench him, but he's still getting screwed. If he had been a healthy player throughout his career, the $11 million option would have been guaranteed (or at least would have had a guaranteed buyout). He was oft-injured, so they negotiated a PA-based option. He's 100% healthy, but he's still not getting it. Nothing wrong with what the Brewers are doing, but I don't see how you can't empathize with Week on some level?

 

But what we're not agreeing on is that a vesting option is NOT a guaranteed contract. I get what you're arguing, I just disagree with it.

 

I also understand what you're asking me. Put myself in Rickie Weeks' shoes. Would I feel like I'm getting screwed over? Sure, I can agree to that. But I'm not Rickie Weeks.

 

I'm looking at this from 2 different angles. Rickie Weeks the person, and Rickie the player. The player shouldn't be on the field full time. He just shouldn't. His last 4-5 games of infield hits notwithstanding, he's a negative WAR player for the last 300 games or so. That's more than enough sample size for me to say "he's not coming back."

 

When it comes to sports, I don't really get sentimental. I just don't. I don't like holding onto players longer than we should, and I abhor the idea of bringing back ex-Brewers just because we liked them 10 years ago. What is ABSOLUTELY best for the Brewers is that the vesting option money that Rickie could be making next year is freed up and spent elsewhere in areas of need for this team. (And I ABSOLUTELY suspect that you agree with that notion, yes?) I want what is best for the Brewers as a team, not Rickie Weeks.

 

So....yes, I understand why Rickie feels cheated out of his money, but what he needs to do is suck it up, and go out and perform to the best of his capabilities for the other 24 guys that are counting on him still. IF that includes playing outfield.....then so be it. If the option is (or was?) Rickie starting in the OF, or Logan Schafer starting vs. a LH starter, I don't think the question was out of line. Heck, we've already seen Mark Reynolds play RF this year, and he has four, yes, four entire games in his big league career in the outfield, for a total of 12 innings played out there. If Reynolds can do it, even poorly, then so can Rickie.

[SoupTown]

"professional baseball is designed under the principle that money is guaranteed regardless of on-field performance"

 

Yes, Weeks gets his $11 mill regardless in 2013.

 

The key here is the word OPTION vs GUARANTEED. 2014 is an OPTION. 2013 is GUARANTEED. A subtle, but important, difference.

[HiAndTight]

Who is disputing that it's smart business? Of course it's the smart thing for the Brewers to do, but from Rickie's perspective he's still getting screwed. In his mind I'm sure he's still better than Scooter, and when they signed the contract nobody was thinking that Rickie would be 100% healthy but would be deliberately relegated to a PH-only role this season.

 

There is no explicit language because (I'm pretty sure) they are prohibited by the CBA from including that kind of performance-based language in the contracts. That's why teams use things like PA as a proxy for health and award/all-star voting as a proxy for performance. The downside for the player is that what was likely intended as a proxy for health is now being used as a (fully legal) excuse to duck the option.

 

It's very obvious that they were sitting him for the first fifth of the season. Now we are past the point where there is no way he can accumulate 400 PA and they are going to start using him more and more. So suddenly they ask him to play LF (now, once he will no longer get his option to vest)?

 

I absolutely want the Brewers to do this, because I don't want to pay Rickie $11M next season, but from his point of view I would be irked too.

 

Why should any player, especially an underperforming, aging player, ever assume that he will be guaranteed playing time if he's healthy? He can make it up in his own mind that he's being 'screwed', but no player in any professional team sport should ever make an assumption of playing time given. Especially a guy who's put up the numbers (and defense) that Rickie has the past few years. A guy pushing into his 30's, sporting negative WAR 2 years running, with significant playing time, doesn't get more playing time, he gets less.

 

I think we are talking past each other. When Weeks signed his contract, he was an oft-injured but elite 2B (arguably the best 2B in baseball from 2010-11 on a WAR/game basis, coming off a 5.8 fWAR season when he signed the contract). Nobody foresaw that in 2014 he would be benched for a (previously) non-prospect like Scooter Gennett. That simply was not the purpose of the PA-requirement. I know people on here may disagree on fairness/policy grounds, but the entire contractual framework in professional baseball is designed under the principle that money is guaranteed regardless of on-field performance. That is what the MLBPA has fought for and that's what distinguishes baseball from some other sports.

 

The Brewers are fully within their rights to point out Weeks's bad performance and to bench him, but he's still getting screwed. If he had been a healthy player throughout his career, the $11 million option would have been guaranteed (or at least would have had a guaranteed buyout). He was oft-injured, so they negotiated a PA-based option. He's 100% healthy, but he's still not getting it. Nothing wrong with what the Brewers are doing, but I don't see how you can't empathize with Week on some level?

 

 

Actually, I disagree. Given the fact that Rickie Weeks had struggled mightily, not just with injuries, but with performance, so much so that he actually had to be sent back down to the minors at one point because he'd performed so poorly(for a short period of time, but the demotion was performance based).

 

I'm not sure why you're so stuck on this option year. Teams routinely add an option year for a player, especially a player who's been up and down throughout his career, has dealt with injuries and you're signing him to a long term deal that ends with his age 32 season.

 

Rickie may personally FEEL however, but you're making assumptions, ie, that the vesting option was tied exclusively(or almost exclusively) to health and that the fact that Rickie has struggled so badly that he lost his job(deservingly so) wasn't what the "vesting option," was meant for.

 

A vesting option is to protect the team. Period. From injury or from a dramatic decline in performance. And if Rickie and his camp had such an issue with it, they should have insisted upon another year, but they likely wouldn't have gotten it as based on his history, the deal he signed at the time was a fair deal both in terms of years and AAV.

 

 

Players feel slighted for all types of reasons....it doesn't mean they've actually been slighted. And I do hope that Rickie is pissed off that he's lost his playing time. Great athletes don't become great athletes by being alright with losing playing time. But everything has been about as straight forward as possible here. And...frankly..if Rickie was willing to move to LF and he performed like he did in 2010, he could STILL get enough PA's to make that option vest. So if he's irked, he COULD be doing more about it by forcing his bat into the lineup regardless of position.

[monty57]

If Weeks wants to be ticked off (not saying he is, but if he is), he should be ticked off at himself for not performing at a high enough level to keep the team from starting a so-so prospect over him, and he could be ticked off at his body for failing him so often during his career.

 

I'm sure the Brewers would love for him to have done what he's been paid to do, namely post an .800-.900 OPS the last couple of seasons. Gennett would either be traded or still in the minors had Weeks lived up to his end of the deal. Instead, he stunk and on top of that he got injured, forcing the Brewers to pay someone else while they paid him not to play (which ended up benefiting the team). Through this, the Brewers have upheld their end of the deal by paying him like a good player while getting less than "fair value" in return. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't remember the Brewers publicly complaining about how much they've overpaid Weeks. A deal was signed by both sides. That the team is working within that deal to make sure they don't have to overpay the underperformer for another season isn't "screwing him over" or slighting him in any way. If anyone has been slighted, it's the Brewers and their fans.

 

The underperformance has been somewhat easier to swallow given the (possibly media influenced) belief that Weeks is a "team guy who everyone likes." Now, when given the opportunity to help the team by making a position change, he turns them down. I don't think the Brewers should care if he is somehow upset by these proceedings. The Brewers are paying him, so they should use him in whatever fashion they think will best help the team in 2014, but under no circumstance should he come anywhere near the number of plate appearances he'll need to vest his option. Then he should be unceremoniously dumped as soon as the season is over. The buyout will be "parting gift" enough.

[bani1717]

By now it's pretty obvious that his option won't vest. Just throwing this out there, but maybe Rickie knows he's basically done for and doesn't want to expend all the extra effort that a mid-season position switch would require.

 

Between injuries and ups and downs in performance, his professional baseball career has been a physical and mental grind I'm sure. If he's been smart with his money then he would be financially secure for life at this point. So maybe he just wants to do what he needs to to finish out the season and then call it quits.

[adambr2]

Sorry Rickie, that's incorrect! We were looking for, "Sure skip, whatever I can do to help the team win."

[HiAndTight]

By now it's pretty obvious that his option won't vest. Just throwing this out there, but maybe Rickie knows he's basically done for and doesn't want to expend all the extra effort that a mid-season position switch would require.

 

Between injuries and ups and downs in performance, his professional baseball career has been a physical and mental grind I'm sure. If he's been smart with his money then he would be financially secure for life at this point. So maybe he just wants to do what he needs to to finish out the season and then call it quits.

 

 

That may be true in terms of reality, but I don't believe for a second that it was Rickie believes. I think that he still believe he's one of the best 2nd basemen in baseball when given the opportunity to play. And I think it's possible Weeks could have a great year this year. Not because he's hot right now, but just because he is and always has been pretty good when healthy.

 

I think part of the reason is that he hasn't really played LF(I keep seeing he played there at Southern, but he was primarily a 2nd basemen, so how many games could he have gotten in LF in college) and it would be a major adjustment and the other part is I don't think he's ready to concede the 2nd base job to Gennett.

[SoupTown]

We seem to have a spare all star 2nd baseman with an ops well over .800 and an incredible obp on our hands

 

Dear Other 29 teams. Opening bids please

[gregmag]

Does anybody actually think an unplanned, in-season position switch/addition from 2b to of -- for a guy whose notorious problem at 2b has been diminished range -- is a good idea? Can anyone think of a time when a team has made such a switch successfully? Because people keep insisting on talking about this situation like Weeks was selfish, and I haven't heard anyone explain why Weeks wasn't just being smarter than his manager.

 

BTW, he can still hit.

[SRB]

A vesting option is to protect the team. Period. From injury or from a dramatic decline in performance. And if Rickie and his camp had such an issue with it, they should have insisted upon another year, but they likely wouldn't have gotten it as based on his history, the deal he signed at the time was a fair deal both in terms of years and AAV.

 

That's really not true, because contracts in MLB are not supposed to be tied to performance whatsoever. They used his poor performance in 2013 as a legitimate but opportunistic justification for sitting him for the first part of the season. I suspect they only asked him about trying new positions after it was clear he would miss the vesting cut-off.

 

I'm sure Rickie was confident all along that he was good enough to be in the lineup, so the fact that they were only letting him pinch-hit must have seemed a clear attempt to avoid the option. Reasonable strategy on the part of the Brewers, but unfair from Rickie's perspective.

 

And oh look, he now had a >.400 OBP and is close to having the best offensive line on the season of anybody on the team. Good thing they sat him just long enough to avoid that option...

 

But we are all talking in circles here so I'll agree to disagree.

[SRB]

We seem to have a spare all star 2nd baseman with an ops well over .800 and an incredible obp on our hands

 

Dear Other 29 teams. Opening bids please

 

Doesn't "spare" imply we have two of those? Pretty sure our other 2B neither has a >.800 OPS, nor an incredible OBP.

[HiAndTight]

A vesting option is to protect the team. Period. From injury or from a dramatic decline in performance. And if Rickie and his camp had such an issue with it, they should have insisted upon another year, but they likely wouldn't have gotten it as based on his history, the deal he signed at the time was a fair deal both in terms of years and AAV.

 

That's really not true, because contracts in MLB are not supposed to be tied to performance whatsoever. They used his poor performance in 2013 as a legitimate but opportunistic justification for sitting him for the first part of the season. I suspect they only asked him about trying new positions after it was clear he would miss the vesting cut-off.

 

I'm sure Rickie was confident all along that he was good enough to be in the lineup, so the fact that they were only letting him pinch-hit must have seemed a clear attempt to avoid the option. Reasonable strategy on the part of the Brewers, but unfair from Rickie's perspective.

 

And oh look, he now had a >.400 OBP and is close to having the best offensive line on the season of anybody on the team. Good thing they sat him just long enough to avoid that option...

 

But we are all talking in circles here so I'll agree to disagree.

 

 

Well of course contracts in baseball are tired to performance. Obviously the contract itself is tied to performances, but there are bonuses for winning gold gloves, MVP's, playoff MVP awards, among other things. So that's not true unless this is a recent development(as in the last 2-3 years). Adam Dunn get a bonus if he wins a Gold Glove.

 

But beyond that, beyond the guaranteed part of the contract, of course option years are going to be based on performance. Otherwise you'd see grievances filed every year when a team turns down an option year for a player who's healthy.

 

 

I can't understand why you believe that the Brewers made the decision to sit Weeks(actually platoon him) just long enough to make sure the option doesn't vest(and by the way it still could).

 

They had one player who was 23 years old and took over for him after he got hurt and hit .324/.356/.479 with an OPS of .834.

This after Weeks put up lines of;

.209/.306/.357 OPS of .663 in 2013

230/.328/.400 OPS of .728 in 2012

 

He'd CLEARLY been regressing. Oh, and Gennett was playing better defensively at 2nd base.

 

I could under your logic if this was a 50/50 type situation. Where Gennett and Weeks had performed equally and they decided to go with the younger and cheaper player, but Gennett was outstanding over 70 games last year and Weeks was awful.

How many chances should Weeks have been afforded before it became obvious that someone else should get an opportunity?

 

And yes, Rickie has an outstanding line right now. But we're talking about the thought process going into the season. Options are routinely declined due to performance, you can include performance based incentives into deals and Weeks had been very-VERY clearly outplayed coming into the year.

[HiAndTight]

Does anybody actually think an unplanned, in-season position switch/addition from 2b to of -- for a guy whose notorious problem at 2b has been diminished range -- is a good idea? Can anyone think of a time when a team has made such a switch successfully? Because people keep insisting on talking about this situation like Weeks was selfish, and I haven't heard anyone explain why Weeks wasn't just being smarter than his manager.

 

BTW, he can still hit.

 

 

I don't think Rickie would really struggle much with the range in LF. I don't think his range is that big of an issue at 2nd base, I think it's the fact that he doesn't have soft hands.

 

But yes, I think it would have been a good idea. Especially when you're missing Gomez,Ramirez, Braun and others for stretches of time and Khris Davis has struggled so badly. He likely wouldn't have been very good out there, but how many balls are hit to a LF'er on average? 2 a game? I'm sure he would have played out there sporadically, so he wouldn't have been the everyday LF'er, just a guy who can play there when there are injuries, or when they want to get another bat in the lineup.

 

 

Weeks has always been my favorite Brewer, but his refusal to TRY LF at his managers(and I'm guessing the organizations request) is something I'm just not a big fan of. I do understand it though.

[fondybrewfan]

At this point you have to get Weeks in the lineup as much as you can. It really sucks that neither Gennet or Weeks can play 3rd because man that would really be useful right now.

 

Gennett is still probably the long term answer at 2B, I still can't envision a scenario where Weeks is on the team next year. When Weeks gets hot he can be really good but we have also experience some really low lows. Ride the hot hand while you can

[SRB]

Well of course contracts in baseball are tired to performance. Obviously the contract itself is tied to performances, but there are bonuses for winning gold gloves, MVP's, playoff MVP awards, among other things. So that's not true unless this is a recent development(as in the last 2-3 years). Adam Dunn get a bonus if he wins a Gold Glove.

 

But beyond that, beyond the guaranteed part of the contract, of course option years are going to be based on performance. Otherwise you'd see grievances filed every year when a team turns down an option year for a player who's healthy.

 

Award bonuses are in contracts because it is a workaround for the prohibition on performance-based incentives. The only statistics they are allowed to incorporate are appearance-based, like PA/IP, and those are clearly meant as a proxy for health. I can see how you could argue that a secondary purpose of PA requirements is to incorporate a performance proxy for players that completely fall off a cliff, but my original point is that when Weeks signed his contract nobody had that in mind. There was no other Brewers 2B on the horizon and Weeks looked like he was a perennial All-Star. The intent of everybody involved when the contract was signed was that Weeks would get the option if he was healthy.

 

There's nothing wrong with declining an option, that's part of the game. But the issue here is that Weeks was guaranteed $11M if he hit 600 PA this season. They sat him just long enough to ensure that he can't meet that. And indeed there is virtually no way he can hit that anymore even if he starts every remaining game. So, coincidentally, he is getting more playing time now.

 

If the 2013 performances of Weeks and Scooter had been closer, then he might have a plausible grievance for the MLBPA to file on his behalf. I'm not saying he does - the Brewers had legitimate reasons to justify sitting him. But my point remains that from his perspective he is getting screwed.

 

(Ok, my last post on the issue, sorry for cluttering the thread!)

[saget]

Weeks now with a robust .902 OPS. Time to start the all-star campaign?

[liveforoctober]

Weeks now with a robust .902 OPS. Time to start the all-star campaign?

 

It would be really, REALLY nice if we can take advantage of the next few days of Rickie swinging a good bat and then nurse that batting average over the next month with good match-ups to keep it above .300. If we can mask him as a good hitter over the next month+, is there a chance we can get rid of a portion of that contract to a contender and get a mild prospect in return?

[endaround]

Weeks now with a robust .902 OPS. Time to start the all-star campaign?

 

It would be really, REALLY nice if we can take advantage of the next few days of Rickie swinging a good bat and then nurse that batting average over the next month with good match-ups to keep it above .300. If we can mask him as a good hitter over the next month+, is there a chance we can get rid of a portion of that contract to a contender and get a mild prospect in return?

 

Or instead of getting a guy who likely will amount to nothing, the Brewers keep him because Gennett can't hit lefties and Bianchi can't hit at all.

[yfinn6]

Weeks now with a robust .902 OPS. Time to start the all-star campaign?

 

It would be really, REALLY nice if we can take advantage of the next few days of Rickie swinging a good bat and then nurse that batting average over the next month with good match-ups to keep it above .300. If we can mask him as a good hitter over the next month+, is there a chance we can get rid of a portion of that contract to a contender and get a mild prospect in return?

 

If us internet dorks can see that Weeks has a high BA over a lower amount of at-bats than someone who has played every day, then I think every GM in the league will pick up on that, too.

[liveforoctober]

Weeks now with a robust .902 OPS. Time to start the all-star campaign?

 

It would be really, REALLY nice if we can take advantage of the next few days of Rickie swinging a good bat and then nurse that batting average over the next month with good match-ups to keep it above .300. If we can mask him as a good hitter over the next month+, is there a chance we can get rid of a portion of that contract to a contender and get a mild prospect in return?

 

Or instead of getting a guy who likely will amount to nothing, the Brewers keep him because Gennett can't hit lefties and Bianchi can't hit at all.

 

I know this is an opinion and a hypothetical... but Herrera is a switch hitter and offers a LOT of roster flexibility and with Rickie having little to no chance of being on our roster next year, I'd take Herrera + prospect and a 2 million dollar savings (estimate? which may allow us to go out and get a left handed bench bat at the deadline) over Weeks for the stretch run.

[SoupTown]

"The only statistics they are allowed to incorporate are appearance-based, like PA/IP, and those are clearly meant as a proxy for health."

 

I really disagree with that statement. You are trying to write your version of the unwritten rules. If a pitcher had bonus, say for 200 ip (a very, very common scenario) and he ended up with an 8 era mid year, but is healthy, can he (should he) file a grievance when he loses his rotation spot.

 

I hardly think that PA and IP incentives and options are guarantees to be the starter, no matter what, as long as you are healthy. And who decides health? Rickie is much, much slower now because of his ankle/legs/hammy/age. Say he is pinch ran for, say by Shafer, and misses an at bat later in the game. Does he file a grievance with MLB Players Association?

 

SRB, it may be true that you are right and the 99% are wrong. But you should consider your position carefully if you are in the 1%. Maybe you are wrong?

[JohnBriggs12]

OK so he won't play OF, but what about 1B especially with Ramirez out? Ernie Banks was a HOF caliber shortstop, and moved to 1B for weak hitting Don Kessinger and extended his career. Roenicke should ask Ernie to have a sit down with Weeks this weekend.

[jerichoholicninja]

OK so he won't play OF, but what about 1B especially with Ramirez out? Ernie Banks was a HOF caliber shortstop, and moved to 1B for weak hitting Don Kessinger and extended his career. Roenicke should ask Ernie to have a sit down with Weeks this weekend.

 

Have you ever watched Weeks field 1st on a bunt? He's a disaster. If the Ramirez injury forced a move for Weeks it should be to 3rd.