Singleton's extension

[gunnarthor]

http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/11021397/jon-singleton-signs-long-term-deal-houston-astros

[nicksaviking]

Will the Twins be so proactive?

 

Should they?

[Seth Stohs]

I like it... and it shows why worrying about Eddie Rosario is a little silly at this point.

[Brandon]

Nice Hedge. The contract likely will either be a Joe Mays contract or a real bargain.

[Mike Sixel]

The other side of the coin is that he is now set for life, removing all downside risk.

[tobi0040]

I like it... and it shows why worrying about Eddie Rosario is a little silly at this point.

 

The obvious candidate is Buxton, in my opinion. He is not going to lose his speed or arm over the next 7-8 years. So lets say the hit tool fails in the big leagues, which nobody is predicting. You have a CF that hits .260 with 8 HR, steals 30-40 bases and plays gold glove defense in center field. For $30M over 8 years or something like that. I am guessing it would cost more, but you get the point.

[Brock Beauchamp]

I don't know if I'm a fan of signing a guy before he reaches MLB or if I think it's premature.

 

Either way, an interesting study on how to handle prospect extensions. I'll enjoy watching how it plays out.

[Mike Sixel]

Singleton isn't a first rounder, that already has lots of money and pedigree and expectations all over him (though some expectations have been created on and off while he's been in the minors). Buxton, or any other highly ranked prospect, isn't doing this in a million years.

[blairpaul715]

Well if I am a prospect that was drafted high and received a big million dollar bonus to sign, I would be less likely to sign this kind of deal, especially if I believe in my own abilities and I am a fielder and not a pitcher.........Singleton as not a big bonus baby, and I , like him, couldn't turn down the chance for life changing money..........circumstances are different for each instance.

[blairpaul715]

Singleton isn't a first rounder, that already has lots of money and pedigree and expectations all over him (though some expectations have been created on and off while he's been in the minors). Buxton, or any other highly ranked prospect, isn't doing this in a million years.

 

well u beat me to basically saying the same thing

[tobi0040]

well u beat me to basically saying the same thing

 

Never in a million years? I raise you the following. Not all were top 5 picks, but some were and they all had huge expectations when they signed. The deals in the 5/30 range had 1 or 2 more years of service time than the Singleton deal when they were signed

 

Longoria - 9 years, $44M

Matt Moore - 5 years, $14M with opitions at 7M, 9M, and 10M

Chris Sale - 5 years $32M, two options at $13M a year

Madison Bumarter - 5 years, $35M, 12M option

Paul Goldschmidt - 5 years, $32M, 14M option

Andrew Mccutchen - 6 years, $51M, option at $14M

[JB_Iowa]

Calceterra did a pretty good job exploring a couple of different views of the deal:

 

http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/06/03/at-least-one-major-leaguer-is-not-pleased-with-the-jon-singleton-deal/

[blairpaul715]

Never in a million years? I raise you the following. Not all were top 5 picks, but some were and they all had huge expectations when they signed. The deals in the 5/30 range had 1 or 2 more years of service time than the Singleton deal when they were signed

 

 

Longoria - 9 years, $44M

Matt Moore - 5 years, $14M with opitions at 7M, 9M, and 10M

Chris Sale - 5 years $32M, two options at $13M a year

Madison Bumarter - 5 years, $35M, 12M option

Paul Goldschmidt - 5 years, $32M, 14M option

Andrew Mccutchen - 6 years, $51M, option at $14M

 

You are quoting the wrong person, I said it was dependent of each situation.

[tobi0040]

You are quoting the wrong person, I said it was dependent of each situation.

Mike said Buxton isn't doing it in a million years. You said "i was going to say the same thing"

[JB_Iowa]

While there aren't any guarantees, I would also doubt that Buxton would sign a long-term deal pre-callup.

 

He has already pocketed a $6 million signing bonus so many of the issues facing Singleton just aren't there.

 

Might the Twins be able to buy out some of his pre-arb and arbitration years? I think that could happen but I doubt if it happens before he plays a game at the major league level.

[tobi0040]

Calceterra did a pretty good job exploring a couple of different views of the deal:

 

http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/06/03/at-least-one-major-leaguer-is-not-pleased-with-the-jon-singleton-deal/

 

 

Yeah...just listen to the union and not your agent. That is a new one.

[tobi0040]

While there aren't any guarantees, I would also doubt that Buxton would sign a long-term deal pre-callup.

 

He has already pocketed a $6 million signing bonus so many of the issues facing Singleton just aren't there.

 

Might the Twins be able to buy out some of his pre-arb and arbitration years? I think that could happen but I doubt if it happens before he plays a game at the major league level.

 

I agree, I would think something could happen in his first year, maybe his second as the Twins tend to be conservative. I would think something in the Mccutchen range. A deal in in the 6/50 range that could be worth 7/65 or 8/80 with options, going to age 29 or 30.

[blairpaul715]

Mike said Buxton isn't doing it in a million years. You said "i was going to say the same thing"

 

If you read my quote, and apparently you didn't, basically agreeing that he doesn't have the money or pedigree.......but read what you want into it.

[blairpaul715]

I agree, I would think something could happen in his first year, maybe his second as the Twins tend to be conservative. I would think something in the Mccutchen range. A deal in in the 6/50 range that could be worth 7/65 or 8/80 with options, going to age 29 or 30.

 

Well if we wait till after year 2, and we hope that he is the next Mike Trout, and I know some people think he is......it will take the same or more of what Trout got 6yrs/$144.5 million

[JB_Iowa]

Rosenthal has some interesting perspective from other agents:

 

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/rockies-should-trade-carlos-gonzalez-troy-tulowitzki-not-winning-with-both-build-winner-060314

 

 

Skip past the Cargo stuff to the middle of the piece.

 

This could turn out to be a bad deal for Singleton. It could also turn out to be a bad deal for the Astros should he be injured, revert to bad habits (he now has money that might make those bad habits even more available) or not develop as thought.

 

It seems like there was risk on both sides of this deal. And that is usually what ultimately makes deals happen.

 

 

 

Edit and P.S.: Just as a matter of interest read further in Rosenthal's notes to the effect of shifts on Matt Joyce. Sound familiar???

[tobi0040]

If you read my quote, and apparently you didn't, basically agreeing that he doesn't have the money or pedigree.......but read what you want into it.

 

Here is the entire response and quote: You did not specify that your comment only pertained to 30% of what Mike said and what part. I did read your quote but I am not a mind reader.

 

Originally Posted by mike wants wins

Singleton isn't a first rounder, that already has lots of money and pedigree and expectations all over him (though some expectations have been created on and off while he's been in the minors). Buxton, or any other highly ranked prospect, isn't doing this in a million years.

 

You: well u beat me to basically saying the same thing

[tobi0040]

Well if we wait till after year 2, and we hope that he is the next Mike Trout, and I know some people think he is......it will take the same or more of what Trout got 6yrs/$144.5 million

 

The Trout deal made no sense for the Angels. They got no discount at all and gave him $24M a year.

[LimestoneBaggy]

The Trout deal made no sense for the Angels. They got no discount at all and gave him $24M a year.

 

I'm thinking the discount with Trout was not losing him to the Yankees, Dodgers, etc. when a bidding war took place. I suppose that is a calculated risk based upon his abilities

[tobi0040]

I'm thinking the discount with Trout was no losing him to the Yankees, Dodgers, etc. when a bidding war took place. I suppose that is a calculated risk based upon his abilities

 

I was just pointing out that they didn't get a discount on those arbitration years, or neccesarily in free agency. The last two years he will make $35M and $38M. Cabrera is the highest paid player in the league at $31M a year and it took over 7 years to increase that from $27M to $31M (A Rod in 2007 to now).

 

The other team friendly, longer term deals you saw some cheap buyouts. Chris Sale for example will make $13M a year for the first two years of free agency when pitchers like Felix and Verlander are making $27M a year.

[Brock Beauchamp]

The Trout deal made no sense for the Angels. They got no discount at all and gave him $24M a year.

 

Given the Angels' recent track record of only paying top dollar for decline phase years, I won't fault them for paying for seasons when a player might actually be, you know, productive.

 

The Angels over the past five years have been the very definition of "a fool and his money..."

[TheLeviathan]

Calceterra did a pretty good job exploring a couple of different views of the deal:

 

http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/06/03/at-least-one-major-leaguer-is-not-pleased-with-the-jon-singleton-deal/

 

This author really hit it out of the park. The union often whines about things it ultimately had a say in. No veteran player who has actively agreed to screwing over amateurs and minor leaguers should be denouncing this.

[JB_Iowa]

Interesting analysis of the probabilities re the contract:

 

http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/78425188/jon-singleton-astros-rookie-projection-10-million-contract#!VwKyj

 

 

The interesting thing though, is that while teams may minimize their risks by entering into more of these contracts, the player still has that interest in guaranteeing his long-term future (even if he could have gotten more without the contract).