I was only going to do one post but we do need to talk about this.
This does not look good.
Not because it's not a fair offer. The Nats are nothing if not (low-market) fair in their offers. If we are to believe it it's 7/215 (max) with payments through 2033 because of god damn course there is deferrals. Hey wasn't the MASN money supposed to open up a world of free agents?*
The bar was set at Arenando's 8/260 (no deferrals). Depending on how much you believe in defensive stats, Rendon either just put up a season as good as Arenado's best, or put together a season that Arenado cannot touch. Rendon is simply a better offensive player making how you judge the two solely come down to defense. But taking the easy way out and Rendon's a better hitter, but Arenado's a better fielder and younger and saying it's a wash - Rendon should get about the same. The Nats did not offer about the same.
But still like I said - that's not the issue. It's the expected offer from the Nats. The question is if they raise it or not. What does not look good about it is the timing of this drop. If it's a management drop, and there are reasons to believe it is**, this would be a news drop. Something put out right before the WC in order to get it out, get it not discussed, and get it possibly (probably not) forgotten. Why put it out here unless it's a "Hey we tried, but we aren't going higher" story? If it is a Boras drop then it would be a weird time for it. I suppose maybe you are afraid Rendon will be a big goat in the WC? Or the notorious "do your job" Rizzo won't talk and this is your way of re-opening the discussion. Seems like a distracting time for it.
What this also makes me wonder is what offer the Nats had on the table BEFORE the season? 6/180 with 10 year deferrals? Whatever it was it was I can imagine it was insulting.
Anyway let's get this ugliness out of the way. New Game Post up for commenting around 5:00
*That was always a lie but thanks for playing along and getting the Lerners more golden sinks for their Mediterranean yachts.
**Boras drops don't usually come through the post
I agree the timing is not good, but like....why is anybody surprised? Last year when folks were like “I’d rather have Rendon than Bryce!” I was like...uh...sorry, why do you guys think they’re going to get Rendon done if they don’t get Bryce. This isn’t a buffet.
ReplyDeleteNow, I gotta say. I don’t think Arenado would have received 8/260 on the free market. And I don’t think Rendon will receive appreciably more than 7/215. Perhaps 7/215 with no deferrals. 30 AAV is fair. And the length is right at the amount that teams will pay somebody his age (year older than Arenado). I really do not believe a team is going to go higher than 30 AAV or longer than 7 years. *Maybe* a team like Dodgers offers like 4 years, 155m or something.
The timing is the key issue here. It's easy to see why the Nats would leak this news - to provide PR cover when Rendon does not sign. It's not so easy to see why the Nats would leak this news NOW, as opposed to a week ago or some time after the season is over. The benefit of leaking NOW compared to some other time seems quite small (moreover, I have no idea whether it's even a benefit; we're talking about managing public reaction, so leaking now could be worse!), and the cost of leaking NOW compared to some other time seems quite large - it could have an effect on the players before the Most Important Game of the Season.
ReplyDeleteGiven the timing, it seems more like a Boras tactic, though I don't know what the angle is. If we think it's a Boras leak, we still have to ask the same questions: what does Rendon gain from leaking now compared to some other time?
No way it’s Boras. It’s Lerners. They did exact same thing last year. Last day of the season leaked offer to Bryce. The difference this year is they’re too stupid to realize they’re needlessly creating a distraction before WC game.
ReplyDeleteMy theory is if its a Boras leak, then it would have been optimal to drop the news the day following the Nat's elimination from the playoffs, making it apparent how much the Nats need Rendon and possibly making them raise their offer. If its a Nats leak, it would be optimal leak it now, as Harper said. That way, the news gets quickly swept aside in favor of the WC game tonight. Nats get their headline, Lerners show people they tried, and we're moving on to the next story.
ReplyDeleteI think its a Lerner drop. Anything they can do to wash their hands clean.
@Bx - Lerner's saving face in anticipation of ticket sales declining if Rendon doesn't come back, all at the expense of distracting the team heading into a playoff game? Noooo, not the Lerrrnerrrrssss...
ReplyDeleteStupidity, no. That would imply they don't know what they're doing. It's all intentional, with consequences weighed appropriately (in their minds).
Can 40,000 fans defer paying for their tickets for tonight's game?
ReplyDeleteone thing to think about - the Braves, Phillies, and Mets all could use a 3B. If they sign Rendon they are getting better and weakening the Nats too. That could be worth paying a little more.
ReplyDeleteHonestly, it's bad news no matter who leaked it, because regardless of who did the leaking it tells us that 7/215 with Max-like deferrals wasn't enough to get it done. He's probably worth more AAV, but I can't see him getting more years than that (I mean, Arenado got 8 years, and Rendon is a year older and getting his contract a year later so he could reasonably expect 6/195 if we assume the two players are about equal...which honestly, they're not). At this point the argument goes into amounts over $30M, the lack of deferrals, and the possibility of things like opt-outs or no-trade protection, and I'm not sure the Nats are willing to match the potential competition.
ReplyDelete(At this point, our willingness to give a seventh year may end up being our best opportunity to close the deal, much as the sixth year was with Corbin last offseason.)
The deferrals are so lame. Make a clean offer and don't leak it right before an elimination game as a distraction! No idea what is going on
ReplyDeleteI read somewhere that the 8th year on Arenado was buyout of an arb year so the extra year is kinda a moot point. This deal seems fair without deferrals and if the Nats bump up $5-$10M and keep deferrals, hopefully will get it done
ReplyDelete1) is this similar to what the Nats did last year with Bryce? We know Ted Lerner gave Bryce the contract offer on the last day of the season, but I don't think we KNEW that until much later. In fact, the first reporting of the Bryce offer I've seen comes from the WaPo on November 8. Given that the key issue here is WHEN the media became aware of the offer, I do not think the experience last year resembles what's going on now AT ALL.
ReplyDelete2) "If its a Nats leak, it would be optimal leak it now, as Harper [the blogger] said. That way, the news gets quickly swept aside in favor of the WC game tonight." This argument doesn't make sense to me. If the point of the leak is to provide PR cover for when Rendon signs elsewhere, why do the Nats want the news set aside quickly? There's no PR cover if the public forgets about what happened.
I have no idea who leaked it. It's a puzzle as far as I'm concerned.
Everybody put down your tinfoil hats and calm down. Who cares if it was a leak or who it was by? What matters is the Nats made exactly the offer we knew they would, setting the floor for other teams and (hopefully) leaving the door open to match by not being insulting. We'll see what happens come the winter meetings, but for now let's focus on the WC
ReplyDeleteThe Lerners leaked it. They think that with national attention on the team today, reporters will say "wow looks like they gave Rendon a solid offer, how come he won't take it?" The idea being that this will either pressure Rendon to sign (ha-ha), or failing that, provide cover when he decides to sign elsewhere (we tried, but he's too greedy).
ReplyDeleteRemember the fancy envelope they handed Bryce last year? They thought they NAILED it. 300 million smackeroos! Who could say no to that? Sure, it was deferred until the end of the century, but come on, 300 million! This is how they think.
"Who cares if it was a leak or who it was by?"
ReplyDeleteBecause if it was Boras who leaked it (rather than the Nats), the conclusions we draw from the existence of the leak are very different. If it's Boras, the timing would suggest that he's using the media to get the Nats to improve their offer, which would suggest a possibility that an offer might actually get done before free agency.
If it's the Nats, the rationale is that they want the media and fans to think they made Rendon a real offer and Rendon chose not to take it. Again, this is an exceedingly plausible explanation for why the Nats would leak it. I have heard no good explanation for why the Nats would leak this NOW instead of any other day that isn't the day before the wild card game. Indeed, there appear to be two (unconvincing) explanations that point in opposite directions: (1) they did it because people will ignore it and forget about it because of the wild card or (2) they did it because people are paying attention because of the wild card and will remember it because of it. Neither strikes me as a good reason to leak now instead of some other time, mainly because people are going to remember either way, and leaking another time has the benefit of not being the day before the wild card game.
I don't think it's about the money with Rendon. I think the Nats pissed him off by not getting this done sooner and now he's so close to free agency, there's really not a number he'd accept. This would go along with his car dealership comments about seeing what's out there. The Lerners don't seem capable of learning from their mistakes, what they should be focused on is re-signing Robles and Soto or even Turner instead of waiting until the 11th hour. I'm afraid Rendon will playing somewhere else next year.
ReplyDeleteGood news, Suero did not make the Wild Card roster, bad news, Strickland did. However, I can't argue too much with the roster they put out. Personally, I would have had another reliever instead of a 3rd catcher in case of extra innings, and possibly because I was at that 16 inning game against the Giants, stupid Brandon Belt, but it's a minor thing.
ReplyDeleteI like the third catcher. The only time the third catcher is necessary is if you've already used one catcher as a PH and you want to sub out the catcher in the game for a pinch hitter or (more likely), a pinch runner.
ReplyDeleteLet's say the game is tied going into the 9th, Gomes has pinch hit earlier in the game, and Suzuki hits a leadoff double. The roster choice they've made makes it much easier to pinch run for Suzuki in that situation.
I think having four starters on the roster gives them enough cover for a game that goes deep into extra innings.
Not a serious theory, but can see a 15-20% chance given the timing that it's an annoyed Rizzo airing out the Lerners for not authorizing a better offer and trying to motivate Rendon ahead of the WC game.
ReplyDeleteIn reality it's probably the Lerners doing poor damage control for talks going sour with another high-profile Boras client.
The Nats would leak it now because tonight may be Rendon's last game as a National. If--when?--the Nats lose the conversation turns to the offer, not yet another gut-punch post-season failure.
ReplyDeleteIncidentally, every agent, not just Boras, tries to squeeze every owner's nickels until shit comes out of the buffalo (from the classic buffalo nickel, for you numismatically challenged).
Besides, Boras never negotiates money with the Lerners. He negotiates deferrals.
@Ole PBN. The reason it’s dumb is that I don’t think the Lerners understand delicate the fan base they are building is. Nats ticket sales dropped a LOT this year despite an exciting season with contention. The WC game wasn’t even sold out as of 2 days ago. That is incredibly pathetic as a metric for health of franchise. And I don’t think they realize what refusing to extend a second consecutive superstar could do, when they just won MASN dispute and are as insanely wealthy as they are. If they let Rendon walk, even if it’s not to an NL East team, it’s just foolish even from a pure financial perspective. Nats fans aren’t dumb.
ReplyDeletePS According to Baseball Tonight Podcast, Rendon wants a shorter term deal with super high AAV, because he isn’t interested in playing baseball until his late 30s and has plenty of other interests....just wants to cash out as much as possible in next few years. Again, this is from Buster Olney on BBT podcast. Take it or leave it. But frankly given what we know about Rendon I believe it. And that means that (1) the cash flow obsessed Lerners will never pay him and (2) Dodgers are a good fit. They love high AAV short term deals a la their offer to Bryce
ReplyDelete"The Nats would leak it now because tonight may be Rendon's last game as a National. If--when?--the Nats lose the conversation turns to the offer, not yet another gut-punch post-season failure." Ok, so the point of leaking it is for the conversation to turn away from the (future) post-season failure and toward the offer? Another way to do that, which requires no mental jujitsu, is to leak the content of the offer after the postseason failure occurs, or, after the season. As in, not the day before the Wild Card game.
ReplyDeleteSomebody made an affirmative choice to talk *YESTERDAY* to Barry S. about Nats-Rendon negotiations. That choice *HAD* to be made for strategic reasons. "Somebody is dumb" may turn out to be the correct explanation, but we should search for better candidate explanations before turning to that one.
@BxJaycobb If Olney is right, there's even less reason not to get this done. The reason the Dodgers love shorter term high AAV contracts is because they're smart and they carry far less risk. Rendon is as consistent as they come, but there's just no way to know how he'll age. However, with a shorter term contract that becomes less of an issue.
ReplyDeleteAs for the fanbase, the Lerners are playing with fire. A big issue with the MASN deal isn't just the money, it's that the network is run by the Orioles, consequently, the Nats play on MASN2 far more often, which reaches far fewer households. Head over the the MASN mobile page and you have to scroll half way down to get to the Nationals, this is not good for a team trying to build a fanbase. All that to say, the Lerners don't have the same margin of error that a typical expansion team would.
Anon 10:47:
ReplyDeleteMy reasoning--suspicion, perhaps--is that the leak of the offer (assuming there is such an offer) provides insurance against another nightmarish, post-season debacle.
Far better to subject the offer itself to public scrutiny, and have it dematerialize in the same sort of Brycian cacophony we saw last year. Far, far better than to focus on vivisecting the organizational failure of this team and laying it at the feet of the Lerners where it belongs.
Looks like 1) Turner, 2) Eaton, 3) Rendon, 4) Soto, 5) Kendrick, 6) Cabrera, 7) Suzuki, 8) Robles. Thank god. I was really worrying Zimm was going to be batting cleanup or something lol.
ReplyDelete$30m per year is a solid offer. Deferrals are just a matter of net present value math. Who cares?
ReplyDeleteThe arenado deal was not market rate. I think benchmarking against it is unwise. I would love to see Mets, Phillies or Atlanta outbid $30 mil per för a 31 year old. Never going to happen. Maybe a weird short term deal. I like a short term deal, but Nats would happily match a short term deal.
The leak is weird but the offer seems fine. $225/7 surely gets it done?
With Rendon literally weeks away from free agency, it would be bizarre for him to just accept an offer by the Nationals at this point, unless it's an over-the-top offer that Boras thinks no one else will beat. So I can't really see Boras leveraging it to get a better pre-free agency offer from the Nationals. He could be using it for other reasons though, e.g. to set a decent floor on Rendon's contract. If that's the purpose, I also have no idea why he would it to leak today.
ReplyDelete