Article: Who Says No? Trevor Plouffe Edition

[jay]

Extending contracts so that a big portion of the contract value is during the age 32-33 seasons is going to make them very difficult to trade. Teams signing free agents don't have a choice. They have to pay for the decline. The Twins don't need to pay for the decline of players under team control through the typical peak.

 

I don't see how that first statement makes sense.  Teams sign these extensions because they get those seasons, likely on options, at below free agent market values.  That's very tradeable.

 

Players entering the decline phase doesn't mean they can't be valuable MLB contributors.  The line of reasoning here seems to suggest there is rarely value in having an MLB player that has entered the typical, age-induced decline.  Teams need to be aware of it, but not necessarily completely avoid it -- particularly if they can get their players extended on team options that give them the flexibility to either retain the player if there is still excess value or let them become a free agent if not.

[jay]

From MLBTR last night,

 

The Twins had yet to discuss a multiyear contract with Trevor Plouffe up to Tuesday’s tender deadline, Mike Berardino of the St. Paul Pioneer Press tweets.  Plouffe is arbitration-eligible for the second time this winter and is projected to receive a $4.3MM salary in 2015 by MLBTR’s Matt Swartz.  Since Plouffe is a Super Two player with two more arb years left beyond this one, it makes sense that the Twins will eventually explore obtaining some cost certainty, though it might not be this winter given that Plouffe fractured his forearm in September.

[jorgenswest]

I don't see how that first statement makes sense.  Teams sign these extensions because they get those seasons, likely on options, at below free agent market values.  That's very tradeable.

 

Players entering the decline phase doesn't mean they can't be valuable MLB contributors.  The line of reasoning here seems to suggest there is rarely value in having an MLB player that has entered the typical, age-induced decline.  Teams need to be aware of it, but not necessarily completely avoid it -- particularly if they can get their players extended on team options that give them the flexibility to either retain the player if there is still excess value or let them become a free agent if not.

I wrote this elsewhere...

 

Extending a very good player like Donaldon or Carpenter through 33 makes sense because they have room for decline with their career OPS+ of 125. They are likely to still be a valuable player. Plouffe has a career OPS+ of 99 at a similar spot in his career. It is much less likely that he will be a valuable player. He has little room for decline.

[jay]

Plouffe has a career OPS+ of 99 at a similar spot in his career. It is much less likely that he will be a valuable player.

I think the potential for an extension with Plouffe would have far more to do with the market for decent 3Bs and his 2014 season than his career OPS+.

[tobi0040]

I think the potential for an extension with Plouffe would have far more to do with the market for decent 3Bs and his 2014 season than his career OPS+.

 

I don't think you give a guy 4-35 or 5-48 when it is unclear where he plays as early as this June.  Especially since we don't have to make that decision before we have a much clearer picture.

[Kirby_waved_at_me]

oh hey did everyone forget that Plouffe broke his arm at the end of the year?

 

I realize that he had successful surgery on it already and is expected to be ready to go for spring training, But I noticed that no one mentioned that his season ended with a broken forearm - it's possible that this will have a lasting effect on his hitting. 

 

I remain in the camp that the Twins should not look to extend him this offseason, the broken arm was just one more reason that I had forgotten about.