Carlos Correa to Mets - 12 Years, $315 Million

[markedman5]

 

[brewerfan82]

Haha, who had Correa as the guy that would eventually fall through the cracks and sign with the Brewers on a 1 yr $20M-"Grandal" deal?

[StearnsFTW]

You may get him yet @Brock Beauchamp!

[sveumrules]

Not sure why Cohen required a physical in the first place, can’t he just like buy Correa a new cybernetic exoskeleton or whatever?

[Brock Beauchamp]

35 minutes ago, StearnsFTW said:

You may get him yet @Brock Beauchamp!

No matter what happens, this year's owners dinner will feature several toasts to Carlos Correa. The amount of news he has driven to the site is breath-taking. Like maybe 500,000 page views just through this series of debacles.

And all the while, my interest in signing him has dropped to the point I'm not sure I even care anymore. I dislike the Twins' offseason procedures so much that I find myself paying a lot more interest in the Brewers and what this team will look like in 2023.

[MVP2110]

Seems the Twins also have/had concerns. Makes me think this is something that doctors feel could pop up in the future as opposed to something short term

[igor67]

Someone will certainly pay him to play next year, but I find myself wondering if anyone would go past 2 years at the moment.

[markedman5]

1 hour ago, igor67 said:

Someone will certainly pay him to play next year, but I find myself wondering if anyone would go past 2 years at the moment.

They will…..lots of room between 12 years and 2.

 

[wallus]

Correa signs an 11 year, 270 million deal with the Padres *pending physical. 

[MadThinker88]

Despite what Scott Boras & his PR machine wants fans to believe, there is a tangible issue that is causing concern for teams when Correa goes thru a physical..    The length of deal being signed is inviting the level of scrutiny by the teams.

Correa might be a case better suited for ongoing shorter deals with higher annual value each year in order to quiet team concerns and keep the money flowing..

[Austin Tatious]

Article on Cohen spending money   

https://fox59.com/sports/sports-illustrated/1827972f/mets-owner-steve-cohen-is-embarrassing-his-peers-and-its-awesome/

Milwaukee can’t spend like that but probably can spend substantially more than they do.  The delta shows you there’s room.  I wish we could see how much cash flow each team has.  The Brewers probably have far more cash flow than fans think. It’s never released because the fans’ heads would explode when we worry about relatively inconsequential contracts.  When you hide information you can infer the worst   The value of teams isn’t skyrocketing to lose money.  

Regarding the Mets, is this a one year thing or will the Mets keep going and will it work? Some teams spend a lot of money but it’s not done shrewdly.  Correa could get hurt and be an albatross if he has the prospect of a structural injury looming.  Moneyball can work but once you start paying up for the Haders you can’t get the toothpaste back into the bottle, so the Brewers do what they do.  

Teams like the Mets, Padres, and Phillies are letting the cat out of the bag. They are spending way out of proportion from their past.  The Pads used to act like a small market franchise.  The Brewers can’t spend like that but they can spend above their prior thresholds.  Attanasio doesn’t even deny it lest his books get exposed. 

[wntrtxn21]

42 minutes ago, Austin Tatious said:

Article on Cohen spending money   

https://fox59.com/sports/sports-illustrated/1827972f/mets-owner-steve-cohen-is-embarrassing-his-peers-and-its-awesome/

Milwaukee can’t spend like that but probably can spend substantially more than they do.  The delta shows you there’s room.  I wish we could see how much cash flow each team has.  The Brewers probably have far more cash flow than fans think. It’s never released because the fans’ heads would explode when we worry about relatively inconsequential contracts.  When you hide information you can infer the worst   The value of teams isn’t skyrocketing to lose money.  

Regarding the Mets, is this a one year thing or will the Mets keep going and will it work? Some teams spend a lot of money but it’s not done shrewdly.  Correa could get hurt and be an albatross if he has the prospect of a structural injury looming.  Moneyball can work but once you start paying up for the Haders you can’t get the toothpaste back into the bottle, so the Brewers do what they do.  

Teams like the Mets, Padres, and Phillies are letting the cat out of the bag. They are spending way out of proportion from their past.  The Pads used to act like a small market franchise.  The Brewers can’t spend like that but they can spend above their prior thresholds.  Attanasio doesn’t even deny it lest his books get exposed. 

Apstein is an idiot. She's a New Yorker whose lone theory for baseball is to just spend, spend, spend.  Her last statement in the article shows what an idiot she is; " the best way to push open a door is to stack loads of cash in front of it".  The value of a franchise going up doesn't mean the team can spend more and more and more. If your house just got reassessed for $125,000 more, does that mean you have an additional $125K to spend? How much more do you think MA should spend? 

[UpandIn]

39 minutes ago, Austin Tatious said:

Article on Cohen spending money   

https://fox59.com/sports/sports-illustrated/1827972f/mets-owner-steve-cohen-is-embarrassing-his-peers-and-its-awesome/

Milwaukee can’t spend like that but probably can spend substantially more than they do.  The delta shows you there’s room.  I wish we could see how much cash flow each team has.  The Brewers probably have far more cash flow than fans think. It’s never released because the fans’ heads would explode when we worry about relatively inconsequential contracts.  When you hide information you can infer the worst   The value of teams isn’t skyrocketing to lose money.  

Regarding the Mets, is this a one year thing or will the Mets keep going and will it work? Some teams spend a lot of money but it’s not done shrewdly.  Correa could get hurt and be an albatross if he has the prospect of a structural injury looming.  Moneyball can work but once you start paying up for the Haders you can’t get the toothpaste back into the bottle, so the Brewers do what they do.  

Teams like the Mets, Padres, and Phillies are letting the cat out of the bag. They are spending way out of proportion from their past.  The Pads used to act like a small market franchise.  The Brewers can’t spend like that but they can spend above their prior thresholds.  Attanasio doesn’t even deny it lest his books get exposed. 

It's a pretty good article save for this one paragraph;

 

Quote

Cohen is one of three MLB owners who seem to understand the equation that underpins sports: Money buys good players, and good players produce wins. It’s no accident that the other two met in the National League Championship Series in October: the Phillies’ John Middleton, who once promised to “spend money and maybe even be a little bit stupid about it,” added to his pennant-winners 11 years and $300 million for shortstop Trea Turner; and the Padres’ Peter Seidler, who after trying for Turner and the Yankees’ Aaron Judge, pivoted to 11 years and $280 million for shortstop Xander Bogaerts.

Sorry...but the three owners that really seem to get it are the Pads, Phillies and Mets?

So that's zero World Series, 1 since 1980 and 2 in ~145 years and then the Mets who've got one since 1986.

Money does buy good players...and it's also buying a lot of years of VERY expensive VERY bad players who in all likelihood, wouldn't be able to get a job if...they weren't signed to the deals they are. 

 

I do think the Brewers can spend more money, but I don't think you can reasonably use the Mets as the rationale. Just because they're spending SO much. Their owner is worth roughly 30X what our owner is worth AND they generate a couple hundred MILLION more in revenue than we do. 

I'd guess we could probably spend another 25M without losing money(probably closer to 160-170 this year with 30 million each team is making)...but the latter is a one year thing and I don't really think they're just refusing to spend money so much as the contracts that are being signed are outrageous. 

When you look at the projected revenue by Forbes(which most people seem to believe is too high. I have no idea and it's Forbes, so I'll defer to them). And then you start going through the expenses the Brewers really have, not just payroll, it all adds up. The ~12M on the international signings/MLB draft, the 290 players in their system overall. Maintaining the leagues, the upgrades they've made in any number of area's. 

I just understand why they're able to commit money for a year or two years, but cannot get sucked under on these just stupid deals that the top FAs get. 

I said it last year when Mark Attanasio looked like he'd been kicked in the gut with the Hader trade, I don't think the GM is being told constantly, "no, we just can't do it," I think Stearns...and now Arnold are conservative and they'd add a player if he made sense. But looking at the list of upcoming FAs, the best the board could come up with(so far as I can remember) was Jose Abreu as a player everyone agreed would be a reasonable signing and that the Brewers could afford. He was snatched up very quickly by the Astros. The best team in MLB the last 5 years, no state taxes...

So I definitely think they can spend more. There also hasn't been a move, Renfroe aside, that I've really disagreed with or thought they should make this year. 

[UpandIn]

32 minutes ago, wntrtxn21 said:

Apstein is an idiot. She's a New Yorker whose lone theory for baseball is to just spend, spend, spend.  Her last statement in the article shows what an idiot she is; " the best way to push open a door is to stack loads of cash in front of it".  The value of a franchise going up doesn't mean the team can spend more and more and more. If your house just got reassessed for $125,000 more, does that mean you have an additional $125K to spend? How much more do you think MA should spend? 

For starters, I don't thinks he was referencing the valuation of the franchise there. I think she was talking about winning. And there's no question being able to spend like Cohen SHOULD put the Mets in position to be one helluva team. They'd likely be even better if deGrom had given them the chance to match as I suspect they'd have been more than happy to.

 

As for how the Brewers spending, should and could are different, but since I just replied in a long post, I'll reply in a shorter one. I think they could spend another ~25M and this year more than that. 

That doesn't mean I think they SHOULD be signing Bogaerts for 25.5M a year for 11 years. I think you're just throwing away probably 140M dollars there.

I don't even think Mark A is disputing this. Didn't he effectively say as much in front of the media last year? That they could have afforded to make ANY trade out there...then hesitated a bit and said something along the lines of "maybe not a 3 player trade," which I think just meant they couldn't take on contract like Soto and then eaten Corbin's deal(For example). But he was adamant finances were not the reason they missed out on Soto who was making 17, will make 20+ and likely close to 30 next year.

 

[Austin Tatious]

I do like that the Brewers are tactical with spending. Yelich didn’t work out so far under his deal but Mark has always said he will spend money for the right tactical spots.  The Brewers have some impact talent and we will find out if they generate proper asset value either through prudent extensions or getting value via trades.   

As for the Phillies, Mets, and Padres we will see how they perform on the field over the next couple of years to judge their strategy.   

[wibadgers23]

The lack of impactful corner bats is likely a factor in the Brewers sitting out free agency so far. A large portion of the free agent market was made up of shortstops, pitchers and outfielders, none of which are priorities at this point. Catcher was the one position I figured they’d look to sign but they ended up acquiring via trade. Doesn’t surprise me all that much that they haven’t spent any money.

[Axman59]

I suspect Correa's deal will be amended to lop off 2-3 years if he misses x number of games with a lower leg injury. I think the deal will still get done and for more than 8 years.

The Twins offered him a 10 year deal and they knew his medicals intimately.

But if teams really back off the long term deals I see the Dodgers swooping in with a high AAV 3-4 year deal. Now saddled with Trevor Bauer's $22 million salary hit for 2023 I think they will abandon their idea of staying under the luxury tax to reset their rate. They are only $1 million under right now.

[sveumrules]

Using the Phils, Mets & Padres as evidence of anything is some pretty strong recency bias.

Phils started spending again in 2019, $161M (10th), went 81-81. 2020 payroll ranked 12th, went 28-32. 2021 payroll jumped to $192M (4th), went 82-80. Finally broke through in 2022 spending $229M (4th) to win 87 games and that extra $100M still wouldn’t have been enough to even get them in the playoffs to make the WS if half our rotation and Best Closer In Baseball hadn’t imploded.

Obviously Mets have Cohen now so they are in a whole other stratosphere, but their big spending before that yielded less than desired results following their 2015/16 postseason trips. 2017: $149M (15th), 70-92. 2018: $152M (12th), 77-85. 2019: $146M (12th), 86-76. 2020: $83M (3rd), 26-34. 2021: $199M (3rd), 77-85.

Padres big spending really kicked in for 2020 ($76M, 3rd) and it worked in the shortened season. 2021 full season follow up ($184M, 7th) didn’t go as well at 79-83. They spent over $80M more than the Brewers to win those three extra games in 2022.

I wish the Brewers could (or would) spend more on payroll but ultimately it wouldn’t guarantee anything.

OD Payroll 2018: $91M
Brewers win 96 games.

OD Payroll 2019: $123M
Brewers win 89 games.

OD Payroll 2021: $99M
Brewers win 95 games.

OD Payroll 2022: $132M 
Brewers win 86 games. 

[torts]

On 12/24/2022 at 11:57 AM, markedman5 said:

 

[TURBO]

2 hours ago, Axman59 said:

 

The Twins offered him a 10 year deal and they knew his medicals intimately.

 

Yeah, but I think they knew one of the big market teams would beat that offer.  The offer was to save face, kind of like the Brewers do.  "hey, we tried..."

[UpandIn]

2 hours ago, Austin Tatious said:

I do like that the Brewers are tactical with spending. Yelich didn’t work out so far under his deal but Mark has always said he will spend money for the right tactical spots.  The Brewers have some impact talent and we will find out if they generate proper asset value either through prudent extensions or getting value via trades.   

As for the Phillies, Mets, and Padres we will see how they perform on the field over the next couple of years to judge their strategy.   

Once you get to the territory the Mets are currently in, it'd take...sooo many things going wrong for them to not be successful. 

You normally can't just outspend to win...but clearly they're taking that to the extreme and I'm not sure how they can be bad. I could be the GM of the Mets and win 100 games each year(meaning any idiot who follows the sport could win with a 400M dollar payroll). 

[UpandIn]

15 minutes ago, TURBO said:

Yeah, but I think they knew one of the big market teams would beat that offer.  The offer was to save face, kind of like the Brewers do.  "hey, we tried..."

Maybe, but I think this might be a unique case where they were serious about it and after last year, REALLY wanted to keep him around. I wouldn't be surprised if they offered 10/300. 

That's just the sense I get...it wasn't like the Brewers with Prince or...likely with Burnes. But I could be wrong. 

[Axman59]

40 minutes ago, TURBO said:

Yeah, but I think they knew one of the big market teams would beat that offer.  The offer was to save face, kind of like the Brewers do.  "hey, we tried..."

It would be insanely idiotic for them to play that game if they knew his medicals would flunk him.

[Brock Beauchamp]

18 hours ago, TURBO said:

Yeah, but I think they knew one of the big market teams would beat that offer.  The offer was to save face, kind of like the Brewers do.  "hey, we tried..."

I'm inclined to agree with this. Everybody knew damned well someone was going to offer Correa over $300m, yet the Twins are still at $285m. I view their attempt to retain Correa half-hearted at best. If they were legitimately serious about keeping him, they would have come in somewhere just over $300m the moment Turner signed with the Phillies.

[MrTPlush]

On 12/25/2022 at 1:06 PM, Axman59 said:

I suspect Correa's deal will be amended to lop off 2-3 guaranteed years if he misses x number of games with a lower leg injury. I think the deal will still get done and for more than 8 years.

Well, you can’t do it in the way you are describing…because guaranteed years are exactly that, guaranteed. You’d have to make them player options contingent on health. Not sure if you can direct it towards a specific injury or have to just base it on IL stays in general. If it can’t be directed towards a specific issue then it definitely isn’t going to happen.

I can’t imagine a guy signing a massive deal over a decade long is going to agree to that though. He would be better off just taking less money that is actually guaranteed.