Juan Soto won the HR Derby which is usually fun but a pall has been cast over everything with the news that Soto doesn't seem likely to sign with the Nationals. A PALL!
What does Soto want?
The contract total (440 mill) and years (15) are probably ok on their own but the combination makes his AAV only 29.3. That's 20th most in baseball. That's not good enough. I know you are thinking that "biggest contract ever" is the most important thing but I think really the years and AAV matter. The total contract is a brag at the end. It comes along for the ride based on your other things.
A player most wants a contract that shows the team values them as a long term piece. But players aren't dumb. They don't expect a 10 year deal when they are 36. They know their window - which depends on current age and recent success and health. At 23, health is probably ok and you can buy out anywhere from 12 to 17 years to get to the end of his career depending when you draw the line. While 12 would possibly let another contract happen and 17 would not, there's a clear message with any contract of this length : "We are building around you. You are a franchise cornerstone". I imagine Soto wants something in this 12-17 range.
The player also wants an AAV that shows where they think they should be valued. Players aren't dumb here either (well most aren't). They know about where they rank. Sure, they'll push it - who wouldn't? - and they know that contracts only get larger and you aren't being compared to contracts from 3 years ago even. It's a simple clear message. We think you are this valuable in the sport today and going forward. The Nats are saying they value Soto at about what the sport says is the 20th best player in the game today. Soto thinks he's about the best. Soto is right here.
What does that mean? Well the highest AAVs are 43.3 Million (Max signed 2022 - 3 yrs), 36 (Cole 2020 - 9), 35.5 (Trout 2019 - 12), 35.1 (Correa 2022 - 3), and 35 Stras/Rendon 2020 - both 7). None of these are great comparisons. Trout was THE BEST and it was four seasons ago. Even the Rendon deal is only 7 years. Probably the best comparisons from the last two years are
Lindor - 34 10
Seager - 32.5 10
Betts - 30.4 12
Those are the numbers Soto is looking at. And he's better than Lindor and Seager and Betts. Or at least certainly figures to be over the life of the deal.So figure Soto to be looking at no less than 35 mill a year. Probably something over Trout's 35.5 not because he's better than Trout but because that was 4 years ago and Trout's deal is no longer the line in the sand.
There is wiggle room here. At 12 years you better be right on what Soto thinks, at 17 you can be further below. Figure 12/36 maybe (that $432 million)? 17/30 ($510)? Those would stand a chance at working more than 15/30. If you think that's too much maybe it is. But then again you might have felt Bryce's contract hamstrung a team. Now three years later it's high but workable. Things change fast.
Tomorrow we'll talk about what's out there in deals. Probably. You know things come up.
22 comments:
Buying out two years of arbitration also has value, though. I don’t know what he is projected to make, but it’s a lot less than $30 million. So if you factor that in, the AAV is a bit higher. Still not high enough, obviously.
I saw a reporter tweet that they were going to make him one more offer and if he doesn't take it he's being traded. If true that stinks, because the only way that works is if he *really* wants to stay in DC and they're using that as leverage against him.
That's gross, but I don't know what else the team is supposed to do if Boras won't put up counter-offers. They just don't have any other way to incentivize him to sign ahead of FA. I mean I SUPPOSE they could try cultivating a close working relationship and open dialogue, but that's never really been their MO.
So, if Soto walks or gets traded, um...what's the plan? The rest of the younger guys don't inspire much confidence in the next few years, and I no longer trust this organization to develop talent at any level.
The Nats avoided arbitration and doubled Soto's 2021 salary to $17 million for 2022. Even if the Nats are prepared to humiliate themselves at an arbitration hearing this off-season, $30 million is a lot closer than it looks in the rearview mirror.
Something else, too. (Maybe I can fill you in on some of the we-want-Soto-at-any-price crazy talk in Toronto tomorrow.) It's this:
Players in the clubhouse respect (in most cases) the guy who is earning the most. He is the Big Dog. The organization has acknowledged it and so do the players. They look up to him, they follow him and they try to emulate him. He is the leader.
Did you watch last night during and after the HR Derby? Soto's pride in his Dominican heritage? How all those young (and Pujols!) dudes just love Soto? You couldn't help thinking that EVERY organization would want him.
Except one.
I have to echo Robot...with Soto gone the Nats are going to be in a really ugly spot for years to come. Yes their payroll will be relatively low (especially once Corbin's contract comes off the books), but they have no youngsters that inspire a ton of confidence.
And the recent quote from Voth would seem to indicate, despite the player development teardown, this team is YEARS behind everybody else in terms of analytics. Imagine what would have happened if they'd manage to develop Giolito or MAT or Kieboom or or or. Fedde may have been a solid #3 with proper development, but we'll never know now.
Soto is a cornerstone you build around, and even if you can't develop talent, you can attract other FAs. Without that, who's going to want to sign? It'll be pre-Werth era again.
I sincerely hope new ownership comes in and drops a nuke on the entire organization from the top-down, because it's clear that Rizzo's old school scouting mindset has metastasized the org in an era where motion tracking video, advanced stats, etc are the norm, not the exception. Rizzo's been a great GM, and I've been an apologist for him for a long time, but nature has run its course and it's time to hit the reset button.
It sure seems like this is a situation where the answer is right in front of everyone. If the Nats are willing to spend $440M on Soto, they should just offer 12/$440M instead of 15/$440M.
That keeps the Nats at highest ever total contract, it gives Soto the highest AAV on any long-term contract (only Scherzer's 3-year deal with the Mets is higher). And from a baseball perspective, you can argue this is actually a better deal for the Nats than their current offer. If you look at guys like Pujols, Cano, or Cabrera as a comp, the age 35-38 seasons are basically all replacement level or even a negative-WAR player -- you don't want those seasons at any price anyway. So let someone else overpay for those in a decade.
@NG. Exactly. Same money, higher AAV. The only problem -- and I just don't see it as a big problem -- is that there is a bigger salary cap hit for each of the 12 years. So what? Sign the guy and be done with this already. If, after signing Soto, the Nats can't get their act together in 3, 4, 5 years, they can still trade Soto.
I’m curious how much of that initial offer had deferred money in it? I agree with all the notions above and think that 32-35 AAV is a strong offer… from a solid organization. The Nationals are anything BUT that right now. Nothing in the pipeline, no resources for R&D… this is an antiquated organization AND the owners who are looking to sell the team. Seriously ask yourself: if you were Soto, would you want to stick around for that “rebuild”?
He ain’t signing. Boras is already mad about the public negotiation and leaking. Puts Soto in a bad light and done for the sole purpose allowing the team to explain a trade.
Nats approached a deal with Soto way too late and frankly have been wretched in securing talent prior to FA.
I’m not certain that the Nats leaked those negotiations. It would behoove Boras to leak it because it makes it public knowledge that Soto won’t take that kind of deal—he wants more. By leaking it, they can leverage the Nats offer to other suitors. Makes sense to me anyway. Makes zero sense for for Nats to leak it, other than to absolve themselves of any blame when he eventually signs elsewhere. The classic “hey we tried!” … kind of similar to the aftermath of Bryce signing with PHI.
I think Boras leaked the information about the size of the proposed contract, and that Soto rejected it, but I think the Nats leaked that they were open to trading Soto. I don't see who else would have leaked about the trade possibility. I see all of this as nasty negotiations, which is a bad look for the Nats and certainly won't help to keep Soto.
@Anonymous: You said "Nats approached a deal with Soto way too late and frankly have been wretched in securing talent prior to FA." Let's not forget (and we won't soon forget) that the Nats secured Strasburg for 7 more years prior to free agency.
Juan Soto was going to test the market and likely walk in any scenario. He wants to win. He wants to play for a winning team. Sure he wants as much as possible but he's not only about getting max dollars (as was Bryce).
From his perspective, it must absolutely suck to know that a walk is likely the best outcome of every AB. The only bat in a weak lineup, pitched around ALL the time.
Watch his conversations when he gets to first base. You can almost hear him saying: "Yep. 2 more years, 3 months of this. Unless I can get them to trade me to the Yankees."
If the Nats were set up to win now, he likely accepts an offer close to $450M 15Y --- or they negotiate across a table and not via the media.
He wants to be in games that matter --- and that simply won't happen in DC for 3-5 years. Bye bye.
DM looked really out of place when Soto was winning the HR Derby. When he won it, Juan pretty much ignored his manager.
We know that Rosenthal knows who leaked. We know that Soto has been public about his disappointment that the team leaked. We know the team has not blamed him for leaking. And we know if they did, Rosenthal would have an even bigger story. To continue to litigate who leaked is now ridiculous. There is only one party that is in control of what happens to Soto over the next 2.4 years, cares what the public thinks, benefits from publicizing the number, and did it last time around too.
Someone commented earlier (maybe in another post?) that they hope the Nats don’t try to sell off a bad contract as part of a package deal for a Soto trade. Well, it looks like they’re trying to do just that.
Wholeheartedly agree with that earlier commenter: that significantly diminishes any return we get from Soto, no? Sad days commeth.
https://fansided.com/2022/07/20/juan-soto-rumors-patrick-corbin-package-trade/
Sounds like nonsense, #Ole PBN. If that's true, the Nats might as well throw in Strasburg's contract while they're at it.
Bowden, of course, cites the usual suspects: "according to sources." It wasn't true once upon a time, but of all the four major North American sports, baseball's reporters are today the least reliable. Particularly and especially when speculating on trade rumours.
From our viewpoint, it would be crazy to pair Corbin and Soto and get a lesser return. However, from the point of view of a bidding team--hopefully, there will be five or six--it may be offered to sweeten a package that still has multiple top names. For example, the Padres might be willing to take Corbin and some cash if we took back Myers (FA in the Fall) and Hosmer (whose lost power but is hitting his usual .270's and we will need a 1st baseman). Not proposing that, just illustrating that there can be a lot of moving parts on a trade this large.
I am not predicting this happens by August 2, but it has a feeling of inevitability unless the buying groups all say they would prefer to have a chance to sign Soto. To the folks on various sites who are saying it can't be done because the Nats have to scout prospects....doesn't apply here. The big names (4 or 5) coming to the Nats will all be well-known.
I'm not sure, @Stephen Grossman. I think the Nats have aManich
Caught "The Show" podcast the other night that featured Scott Boras as guest. Two points that he emphasized:
1. That the AAV of the contract offer put Soto in 20th or 21st place among current MLB contracts. Without using the word "insulting," Boras made a compelling case for why the offer was insulting; and
2. It makes no sense to Soto (or for Rizzo, according to Boras) for any decision to be made until the ownership issue is resolved.
I'll also note that after Boras left the show, the hosts compared Soto to--and even called him--Ted Williams.
None of this makes any sense to me. Why would the Lerners try to trade Soto now? I have read that the new ownership group should be in place by November or December. Why trade Soto now, when the new owners may want to keep him in 4 months? If they trade him now, then I think it is personal. Mark Lerner (or someone with the Nats) would have to be angry that Soto said no to an extension and want to get rid of him.
Also, why include Corbin. The Nats are going to suck for 3-5 years if they trade Soto. The payroll will be all under $100 million with nothing but AAA players on the roster. Corbin's salary isn't a big deal.
Finally, you don't trade Ted Williams. You don't trade Soto. He is 23 and likely to get even better with more power. It would rank as one of the all time dumbest moves ever in baseball imo.
Unfortunately the way that it makes sense is extremely depressing.
The economics of baseball make it so if you run a budget near the cap, you pretty much have to be in the playoff hunt constantly to support that. But if you field a very cheap team, you'll consistently generate a profit regardless of the team's performance. You can be competitive sometimes, and you'll make more if/when you do win, but the success of the team isn't crucial to the success of the business.
Now, I'm doubtful that strategy maximizes the team's longterm profit / value accretion in a large wealthy market like DC, but it's low risk and we've seen plenty of owners choose that path.
Everything this team has done since last summer can be explained by refiguring the team in that direction.
They elected to not send money to the Dodgers to offset Max's salary and improve the lesser prospects in that trade. Sure, LAD has a ton of cashflow and they aren't going to be super elastic to cash, but they were paying tax and the Nats were comfortably under it. Moving money with the deal would have created value and I don't believe the Dodgers would have pointblank refused to share it with us.
We then skipped picking up a FA shortstop, despite it being a position of need and there being a glut on the market.
And now they're saying Soto comes with Corbin. (Well, sources are saying, so who knows how settled it is.) That only makes sense if the budget is no longer about the cap, or about the cash flow during the future competitive window, but just simply trying to get payroll under the team's share of TV revenue.
The whole thing is fucking tragic.
@Anonymous 8:13
Of course, nothing we say here makes a lick of difference to the Nats, but still . . .
One of the points Boras made in his interview was what Soto's presence alone would make in attendance and merchandise sales. So there's that.
Boras also noted that he's always had a very good relationship with the Lerners (maybe a clever negotiating tactic, maybe not). As for trading Soto before new ownership, Boras observed that billionaires are smart, suggesting Soto wouldn't be traded--if at all--until after the team changes hands.
Please excuse me as I drone on here ...
A day before "The Show," I listened to a most interesting Blue Jay-centric podcast discussing possible Soto trades. In Toronto's case, they would need to surrender one of Bo Bichette, Vlad Guerrero Jr or possibly Alek Manoah and Toronto's top 4 prospects.
Here's the thing: Soto is younger than both Bichette and Manoah, and 5 months older than Guerrero. Their conclusion: that NO TEAM'S offer (let alone Toronto's) would ever be enough compensation for Soto.
And here's the kicker: the host called Juan Soto Ted Williams.
Post a Comment