11:42pm: The team hasn't yet reached out to Stanton about a potential contract extension, reports MLB.com's Peter Gammons (on Twitter).
8:13am: The Marlins have discussed the possibility of presenting Giancarlo Stanton with a "big, crooked" contract offer, according to ESPN.com's Buster Olney (on Twitter). Wasserman Media Group represents Stanton, who isn't yet arbitration eligible.
When MLBTR's Mike Axisa examined the possibility of an extension for Stanton earlier this offseason, he pointed out that Justin Upton ($50MM), Jay Bruce ($51MM) and Carlos Gonzalez ($80MM) signed recent long-term deals that could be relevant to Stanton's case. We can now add Andrew McCutchen ($51.5MM) to the list as well.
Gonzalez, Upton, Bruce and McCutchen had accumulated two or more years of service time by the time they signed long-term, but Stanton has just one year and 118 days of MLB service at this point. He won't be eligible for free agency until after the 2016 season.
Stanton's career power numbers and rate stats are comparable to the ones Gonzalez had when he signed a year ago, so Gonzalez's seven-year, $80MM contract could be a target for Stanton. If he signs long-term, his contract may include an escalator in case he qualifies for super two status following the 2012 season.
Mike Axisa contributed to this post.
Giancarlo? Can I still call him Mike?
He says people call him all sorts of names and he responds to them. He prefers giancarlo though on the baseball field. Personall I prefer Giancarlo, more unique and he no longer has the same name as the reliever.
He should just go all out. Giancarlo World Peace
or the Ochocinco route: Giancarlo Veintisiete
weak
I like Giancarlo, it removes the tiny possibility that I accidentally draft Mike Stanton the reliever in my fantasy league by accident.
I wonder if the Marlins would try to go for a longer deal, trying to get more years.
7 years $100 million just like Pujols.
This is a must for the Marlins, as his potential for Super Two status, as well as his player profile (lots of HRs, RBI, and games played) are the perfect recipe for high arb figures.
Sign him forever
It would be pretty interesting to see a guy sign a deal like Wakefield’s but with mutual options.
Something like:
2012 – $3MM
2013 – $5MM
2014 – $8MM
2015 – $11MM
2016 – $15MM
2017 – 2025 – Mutual Option @ $19MM
Mutual options are pretty unusual to be exercised unless you also attach a buyout to them. Rarely do you get a point where both team and player want the deal. The team wants to pay less usually. And the player usually wants more money and more security. This is why players sign long deals because he could get that sort of money on the open market with his career production line but why sign a mutual option for that money when you get the same amount of money for 6 years it reduces the risk for the player especially when the teams don’t offer short deals with much more money
Yeah I mean I understand the theory behind it.
I just find Wakefield’s recurring $5MM option pretty cool.
That was a recurring club option though, but I agree
Edit: But you already knew that, based on your original post
The only reason I said mutual is because it gives both sides some leverage.
I keep thinking how cool it would be if you had a guy like Pujols who, instead of signing a 10 year deal, kept signing 1 yer deals for $30MM.
I know it won’t happen, but it would be pretty awesome. Seeing them bounce around the league, possibly winning a bunch of WS.
the player would have to be a total b-a, who had (unjustified) faith in his ability to dominate year after year.
Yeah for sure. I don’t understand why a guy like CC wouldn’t do it. He’s made over $100MM in his career so why not go year to year now. Will you lose out on $10MM or so, maybe. But you would also get to pick where you play every year. Get courted every year. It’d be pretty cool.
Yeah I mean I understand the theory behind it.
I just find Wakefield’s recurring $5MM option pretty cool.
Start with the 1st year of free agency, and begin alternating them club-player-player-club-player-player with the salary escalating per year.
Essentially buying out the first free agent year, and then giving the team an option to lock him up to subsequent 3 year deals that he can opt out of each year.
Mutual options are pretty unusual to be exercised unless you also attach a buyout to them. Rarely do you get a point where both team and player want the deal. The team wants to pay less usually. And the player usually wants more money and more security. This is why players sign long deals because he could get that sort of money on the open market with his career production line but why sign a mutual option for that money when you get the same amount of money for 6 years it reduces the risk for the player especially when the teams don’t offer short deals with much more money
It would be pretty interesting to see a guy sign a deal like Wakefield’s but with mutual options.
Something like:
2012 – $3MM
2013 – $5MM
2014 – $8MM
2015 – $11MM
2016 – $15MM
2017 – 2025 – Mutual Option @ $19MM
Two Marlins players had name changes in the offseason, who’s next?
Good luck with that(fingers crossed he leaves)
Good luck with that(fingers crossed he leaves)
Remember Marlins, a long-term, team-friendly contract gives him much more trade value when you want to have another fire sale in a few years!
So clever, did you come up with that all by yourself?!
That sure is an odd reaction to my comment!
i wanna be a bear
Ok Milo
i’ll be bears with you
i wanna be a bear
Mike Stanton is gonna clear 50 bombs at least 5 seasons. This guy is a monster.