• Changing RCF's index page, please click on "Forums" to access the forums.

Indians Ownership Discussion

Do Not Sell My Personal Information
Derek said:
Based on the numbers from baseball reference, Lindor will end up making about $120 million from 2017-2023 (the same time period that would have been covered by the $125-150 million extension we offered).

When taking into account that Lindor had to stay healthy and play well in order to even reach $120 million over that span, I think it’s safe to say he was hell bent on getting to the open market as soon as possible and inking a 10+ year mega deal.
Click to expand...
Cool, I hadn't thought of it that way. You seem to have a solid understanding on how these things work, so lemme ask you, had we come to an agreement on a pre-arb extension before the 2017 season, would the new deal essentially rip up his current outstanding contract, or would it not kick in until a year or two down the line? I'm not that well versed on how things work in the MLB, but as a non-baseball example, the giant Myles Garrett extension didn't kick in the year he signed it, right?

Also, I'm not quite following your logic when you conclude that Frankie was hell bent on hitting the open market. Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but to me, the fact that he had to stay healthy and continue to produce at a high level in order to cash in on the open market would be a reason for him to lock in what pre-arb deal was on the table so he could already capitalize on what he showed leading up to 2017.
 
sportscoach said:
Most of their extensions have been positive... I think Outside of Kipnis's last couple years and Pronks contract, majority of the time it's been positive.
Click to expand...
Yeah, sure seems like it. Is this a product of the competency of our FO specifically, or is this a general trend across the league?
 
bs80 said:
Yeah, sure seems like it. Is this a product of the competency of our FO specifically, or is this a general trend across the league?
Click to expand...

Indians and Rays have been the teams to utilize this strategy the most. Most of the time the early extension does work out since players are generally signed in the 25-30 age years which are usually a players most productive years. Not always does it work out, aka injuries, but normally it does. ( I always do with my nucleus players if I am playing OOTP on the computer and running a small market franchise)
 
bs80 said:
Cool, I hadn't thought of it that way. You seem to have a solid understanding on how these things work, so lemme ask you, had we come to an agreement on a pre-arb extension before the 2017 season, would the new deal essentially rip up his current outstanding contract, or would it not kick in until a year or two down the line? I'm not that well versed on how things work in the MLB, but as a non-baseball example, the giant Myles Garrett extension didn't kick in the year he signed it, right?

Also, I'm not quite following your logic when you conclude that Frankie was hell bent on hitting the open market. Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but to me, the fact that he had to stay healthy and continue to produce at a high level in order to cash in on the open market would be a reason for him to lock in what pre-arb deal was on the table so he could already capitalize on what he showed leading up to 2017.
Click to expand...
Extensions can begin right away in baseball.

As far as Frankie wanting to hit the open market. What other reason would he have for turning down more money over the same amount of time?

He had two options:
1) Hit the open market after the 2021 season with $52 million in his pocket (if he stays healthy and productive)
2) Hit the open market after the 2023 season with $150 million in his pocket.


Now, to be fair, maybe it was over 8 years instead of 7, which would take it to 2024. Still, that would be an extra $100 million over 3 years.

Think about that. He essentially turned down a 3 year $100 million contract from us, or possibly 2 years $100 million.
 
Last edited:
Derek said:
We’ve moved on to the intricacies of pre-arbitration contracts while also trying to comprehend why @sportscoach won’t love me.
Click to expand...
Can he love anyone?

Can he?

How can he love you if he can't love himself!?!?

Do you know what love is, @sportscoach?

I want you to show me!
 
Derek said:
As far as Frankie wanting to hit the open market. What other reason would he have for turning down more money over the same amount of time?

He had two options:
1) Hit the open market after the 2021 season with $52 million in his pocket (if he stays healthy and productive)
2) Hit the open market after the 2023 season with $150 million in his pocket.


Now, to be fair, maybe it was over 8 years instead of 7, which would take it to 2024. Still, that would be an extra $100 million over 3 years.

Think about that. He essentially turned down a 3 year $100 million contract from us, or possibly 2 years $100 million.
Click to expand...
Gotcha. So you're saying that it should have made all the sense in the world for him to take a 7yr/$150mm extension back in 2017 if it really were on the table, and the fact that he didn't indicates that he was dead set on hitting the open market? Makes sense to me, thanks.
 
sportscoach said:
Indians and Rays have been the teams to utilize this strategy the most. Most of the time the early extension does work out since players are generally signed in the 25-30 age years which are usually a players most productive years. Not always does it work out, aka injuries, but normally it does. ( I always do with my nucleus players if I am playing OOTP on the computer and running a small market franchise)
Click to expand...
Definitely makes a ton of sense to me. I don't understand why this isn't standard practice throughout the league, especially in a sport that has embraced analytics for such a long period of time. Maybe the Tatis Jr. contract signals a new direction in how pre-arbitration is handled, but up until recently, it seems like pre-arb agreements typically mean a club gets to lock up a player for his more productive years at a lower AAV than he would get on the open market after he is no longer under team control. Inevitably, some players will fail to meet the expectations the club had for him, but that is where a FO's ability to evaluate their own young talent comes into play. Not to mention, a player locked up pre-arbitration still has all the incentive in the world to perform well to earn another his subsequent lucrative contract. Is it not quite that simple, or am I just preaching to the choir?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Video

Episode 3-14: "Time for Playoff Vengeance on Mickey"

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Spotify

Episode 3:14: " Time for Playoff Vengeance on Mickey."
Top