The contracts signed by Robinson Cano, Jacoby Ellsbury and Shin-Soo Choo have topped even some of the more aggressive projections from the onset of the offseason. Cano inked a ten-year, $240MM contract with the Mariners. Ellsbury became the latest mega-deal for the Yankees when he signed for $153MM over seven years. And though Choo reportedly turned down $140MM from the Yankees, he still found himself a seven-year, $130MM payday from the Rangers.
Each player comes with some concerns. Choo's defensive skills have slipped in recent years (though most still think he can be a solid defender at an outfield corner), and he struggles against left-handed pitching. Ellsbury's game is tied largely to his speed — an asset that may deteriorate with age. He has just one season of elite power numbers under his belt. Cano is one of the game's best all-around players, but as such, he commanded the third-largest deal in baseball history and required an additional three guaranteed years over Choo and Ellsbury at a higher annual salary.
Each of these contracts comes with an enormous amount of risk, but such is the case when pursuing free agents of this nature. Technically, Brian McCann's contract could hit $100MM if his sixth-year option vests, but I elected not to include him for this poll because he wasn't guaranteed a nine-figure payday. That being said…
Can you vote “none of the above”?
how can any of them be better than cano? he got 10 years and 240mm.
Because the others didn’t get 10 years and 240mm
How can any of these be good? Again, we’re talking about paying players significant money past their age of usefulness based on stats they put up for other teams. This tactic worked in the steroid era when players could put up big numbers into their 40s, but it has proven silly on multiple occasions since then.
exactly. he hit the jackpot. no one came close.
From a player perspective, Cano got the best deal. From a team, fan, and “good for the game” perspective… all three of these deals are horrible. The league needs to come up with some sort of solution that limits the amount of gauranteed money a player can get. The only thing that these deals are good for is forcing ticket prices to rise and all games being broadcast on subscription stations with ever-increasing rates. If these contracts continue to be handed out, it won’t be long before the only manner of watching a game will be to either pay $100 for the cheap-tier tickets (not to mention $20 for stale, warm beer and $15 for cold hot dogs) or to pay some network $9.99 to watch each individual game.
we aren’t communists. the market will dictate what tix cost. if they outprice the fans people won’t go. if there’s a market to pay them that much, then that’s what they should make.
from a fan perspective, i gotta think it’s pretty cool to get to watch him.
Baseball regulating itself is communism? Its a good thing I watch baseball and not communist football.
every organization regulates itself. that doesn’t mean you just limit what people can earn for the sake of limiting it. the market should dictate the pay.
I have no problem with players sharing in the wealth that baseball generates, but it’s ridiculous to think of baseball as a free market of any kind. It’s a legalized monopoly.
well that is true but the point remains the same. they wouldn’t be getting these contracts if the money wasn’t there.
I agree with that much. But as I pointed out above, the real driver of contracts of absurd lengths is the DL.
This doesn’t help the ticket price portion of the argument. Football is regulated in terms of spending. Baseball isn’t. In fact, Adrian Gonzalez, Zack Greinke, Carl Crawford, Matt Kemp, Josh Becket and Hanley Ramirez combined to make roughly $10 million more than the entire Washington Redskins team. Despite that, the average ticket to a Redskins game is $218 while the average cost to attend a Dodgers game is $22.37.
This is completely misleading and factually incorrect statement. Yes the Dodgers average ticket price for 2013 is $22.37. However you are way way off on NFL prices. The Redskins come in at an average of $94.80. Also you need to factor in the vastly different amount of home games in a season. So let’s do some basic math.
$22.37×81 home games= $1811.97 per seat a season
$94.80×8 home games = $758.40 per seat a season
Ok so NFL teams have larger stadiums so
$1811.97×56,000 seats= $101,470,320 possible regular season ticket income
$758.40×85,000 seats= $64,464,000 possible regular season ticket income
It’s hard to say that there is no relation between ticket prices and player incomes.
Also there are 162 baseball games compared to like 14 football games so there is a much higher demand since the supply of games are less.
At most, only slightly. The biggest source of team revenue is media, by far.
Ticket prices aren’t dictated by payroll. They never have been, and they never will be. The Cubs had the 14th highest payroll in 2013 but the 3rd highest ticket price. The Dodgers meanwhile had a $216 million payroll but an average ticket price of $22.37. Consider this, an average Cubs ticket cost twice as much and the average overall ticket price for an MLB game was $27.73. See – there’s zero correlation. Ticket prices are dictated by supply, demand and location.
You exclude the amount of cash the Cubs paid other teams in 2013 for former players. If you add that to the mix, the Cubs were amongst the top 10 teams in baseball in terms of payroll. They are also one of the cheapest teams to watch on TV, if you are in their broadcast market/region. Second, the Dodgers obtained a windfall broadcasting deal that has allowed the to splurge as they have in recent years. It’s also forced fans to pay nearly double what they had been in order to watch the games on TV, and the network that purchased those rights is indicating that they may put the games on a subscription station in the next couple of years. There’s a reason I put more in my statement than just ticket prices.
Eventually, a team has recoop the costs of these contracts. There are only a few means of which they can effectively do so. After the money from longterm broadcasting deals has been used… where will they turn? When the Dodgers outspend their new boost in revenue, where will the rest of the money come from? The raising of ticket and concession prices. Just as the Cubs are hoping to increase their revenue with advertising around Wrigley, a new hotel, and eventually a larger broadcast deal.
What former players are you talking about? Soriano was included in that figure as was Garza and Marmol … If you’re referring to Zambrano, his contract came off the books following the 2012 season. Other than that, the Cubs weren’t really paying anyone besides Edwin Jackson at $13 million. The next highest paid player on the payroll was Castro at $5.8 million.
As for the TV revenue portion of the argument, it’s irrelevant to the argument. You’re adding multiple factors into the mix at this point. Why not also include merch revenue, concessions revenue, parking revenue and sponsorship revenue as well? We can also throw in the costs of ballpark maintenance, potential ballpark rental fee, the front office staff, the coaching staff, the minor league development fees, and any other number of things the team pays for besides the players… The argument is still there – ticket prices do not determine payroll.
I’m sure AL fans aren’t going to want to hear this, but the real solution is to get rid of the DH. Note that none of these absurd deals (in terms of years) go to players signing with NL teams. Over the years, the pattern has become all too obvious: position players are signed to contracts that take them well beyond the age when they can reasonably be expected to play a position. All of these contracts come from AL teams. Get rid of the DH, and players like Cano can’t demand contracts that run until age 40 and beyond. At most they sign into their mid or late 30s, and then have to go year-to-year after that, as their health and ability to play a position justifies.
Does not work that way. The NBA does this with max contracts. Instead of limiting salaries, what happens is that every team “best player” asks for a max deal. A max contract does not act as a salary cap ceiling; it becomes a salary floor.
The main reason that food prices are expensive at stadiums are because it is a local monopoly at a stadium. It would be about the same if player were making minimum wage. The main reason why cable fees are high is that sports is one of the few things people prefer to watch live instead of DVR, thus putting up commercials. Player salaries have little to do with it.
Cable fees for live sports are high because the sports franchises and the cable companies are monopolies too.
That was my very first thought! “Best” implies that there was a good one…
No it doesn’t…”best” simply means of the ones listed, which was the best…”none of the above” cannot be a choice because they are asking for which ONE!!!! They may all have been bad, but one has to be the best, one second best, and one third best. It’s simple English
How about “all equally bad” then?
Interesting that Cano has played in 1374 games in about the same amount of time that Ellsbury and Choo combined have played in 1568 games. I take the longer contract with the guy that has proven he can play every day.
Yeah but are you getting value for dollar when his numbers will likely dip outside of Yankee Stadium as far as his HR production for example.
We are not talking about Miguel Cabrera here.
Cano has never won a batting title, MVP, Triple Crown and the Mariners are going to be paying him like he has for a long, long, long, long, long, long time. 🙂
This for a guy that has had one 30+ HR season playing in Yankee Stadium as a lefty hitter, in a lineup that season in and season out had some of the best lineups in MLB, does that not strike you as odd that his numbers are not more dominant for what he will now earn.
He is going to a weaker lineup, a pitchers park and you have to wonder is this guy going to be worth 240 million over 10 years. Hmmmm.
Guys who got paid like Cano in free agency were dominant players offensively that puts Cano’s numbers in a lower tier.
Alex Rodriguez in his prime, Pujols in his prime were above and beyond Robinson Cano’s production for any season.
Therein lies the main point about Cano’s contract at 10 years no less, in a lineup and balllpark like Seattle’s.
There are knocks on all these guys. Ellsbury relies on his legs, and those are typically the first thing to go for an athlete. Choo has always been good, but he’s never been an All-Star. And Cano’s contract is such that he could hit 50 home runs next year, and it would still be unmovable.
Going in i think the Mariners know they are overpaying, but if that deal goes south it will be a rough one for them.
I suppose its a risk they figured they had to take, but watching Pujols and Alex Rodriguez now you wonder about those deals. It is what scared the Yankees off.
When those contracts go bad it can get really bad. 🙂
But players like ellsbury also keep their body in good shape. Cano depends on great bat speed and being able to make contact. He doesn’t have good plate disciple, which will be important as he ages.
It doesn’t matter how good of shape you keep your body in. When it starts breaking down, there’s nothing you can do to reverse it, short of taking steroids. If you could simply work out and keep your body in supreme playing shape through your mid 30’s, then why can’t you do the same to keep your body in the same shape through your 40’s or 50’s? The unfortunate truth for all of us is that we can’t control the body’s breakdown. When it starts going it goes – and in the case of every player mentioned in this article, they have expensive contracts that will coincide with the average age of breakdown. The chance exists that they can buck the trend and be productive through the duration of their deals, but the same chance exists that they start breaking down in a year or two.
Someone that is in top shape all around is more likely to still be good as he ages. Cano is good, but what are the odds that he spends even half of his contract at 2B?
You’re aware that you’re defending the durability of a guy who played 18 games in 2010 and 74 games in 2012, right?
Was comparing the ability to produce over a long term trend, not durability.
Yes, but since Cano has played every day and Ellsbury and Choo are not, I would assume the two latter are full of more scar tissue and fibrosis… which is hard, than Cano. Hard things snap, soft things bend. If you’re breaking down in your 20’s you will have magnified troubles in your 30s.
as he gets older Cano will get even slower running to first on a ground out 😀
You’re right, but at the end of the day he plays a position where there aren’t too many stars.
I suppose the position aspect is the one differing criteria as a 2B,
I don’t see him hitting more than 25 HR’s in Seattle next season. I suppose his triples may go up, but he isn’t exactly known for busting it out the box. 🙂
Don’t get me wrong Cano is a terrific hitter, but its just that guys who got his kind of deal were transformative players to a lineup, such as Pujols and Alex Rodriguez.
For example, do folks see Cano winning an MVP with the Mariners, when he didn’t with the Yankees and their stacked lineups for many seasons.
And that is a big part of the problem. When you only have a couple good position players you shouldn’t be paying at one of the most offensively expensive positions.
Could have signed Choo, Beltran, and Granderson for $5M less than they paid Cano. Maybe not the best route, but states point, when most of your bats are pretty bad, Corner outfielders and corner infielders are much cheaper.
Cano is the Miguel Cabrera of second base.
But he isn’t anywhere near the bat that Cabrera is. And realistically how much more will Miggy acutally get.
Yeah but are you getting value for dollar when his numbers will likely
dip outside of Yankee Stadium as far as his HR production for example.
——————————————————————–
Have you checked Cano’s road/home splits? His numbers are almost identical outside of YS. His OPS is actually HIGHER away from Yankee Stadium.
Cano is an 7-8WAR player.
Ells is a 3-4 WAR player
Choo is 3-4 WAR player too.
For 2.3M more a year… I’ll take Cano.
Jacoby’s OPS is .090 lower away from Fenway park.
Take into account the lineup he will be in in Seattle, compared to the lineups he played with in New York which were very good for most of his seasons there, with the exception of last season.
You have to account for the fact that he played with very good offensive players in New York’s lineups, home and away, season after season. Players that are not in Seattle’s lineup next season.
Why “with the exception of last season”?? Is it because it proves that he can hit in a lineup with or without protection? His line this was .314/.388/.516 without Arod, Granderson, or Teixeira giving him protection. That’s like saying… Jacoby Ellsbury has never and will never hit more than 10 home runs in a season, with the exception of 2011.
That’s why he wrote “as far as his HR production”. Cano’s OPS is higher Away than at Home, but he hits more HR’s at Home than Away, as have most other Yankee players in their careers to of no surprise.
He plays 2nd base….not centerfield
And he is the best second baseman in the game, Ellsbury is not the best center fielder.
Who’s better?
Mike Trout can play CF.
Trout, McCutchen , Adam Jones, Carlos Gomez.
Obviously health will be the biggest factor in which signing was best and Cano has been the healthiest, but if all 3 stay healthy for the majority of their deals I’ll take Ellsbury. More talented than Choo and a shorter, cheaper deal than Cano.
So if health is the biggest factor AND Cano never misses any games and Ellsbury is an accident waiting to happen. Why is Ellsbury a better signing?
If Ellsbury continues to miss as much time as he has and Cano stays as healthy as he has been, Cano will be the better deal (still not a good deal). However, if Cano starts to break down (which is more likely as he ages) and Ellsbury stays a little more healthy (not likely, but possible) I’d rather have Ellsbury.
None of these deals are great, but at least we know the Yankees will spend money and do whatever they can to win. If the Mariners are done making major improvements, they’ll be lucky to finish higher than 4th in their own division.
I’m a Twins fan and I’ve seen what large contracts like Cano’s can do to teams with mid-level payrolls. An injury or two to players like Cano or King Felix and the Mariners are a 65-70 win team.
Robinson Cano, by far, was the best $100MM+ signing of the offseason….
He was the best player signed to the worst contract. It’s like buying a $300,000 car on a 20-year financing program. Sure, those first few years are going to be great … but somewhere in there, the car is going to start having problems. And then the car is going to break down completely. And you’re still going to have make huge payments on this car well past its expiration date.
Yeah and the Yankees instead of getting a Ferrari they got a Ford Focus for $250,000 on a 15 year financing program.
I wouldn’t go that far at all. Cano had a 6.0 WAR in 2013 under FanGraphs model. Ellsbury had a 5.8 WAR. A closer comparison would be that the Mariners paid $300,000 for a 2014 Ferrari while the Yankees paid $200,000 for a 2013 Ferrari. Both will be fun to drive for a while, but both will break down long before they’re paid off.
The problem is that most likely Ellsbury will break down along the way Cano will not. You can’t drive a car that is constantly in the shop.
Gotta go “Brewsters Millions” with None Of The Above
You know this vote is a little Yankee driven when Ellsbury beats out Robinson Cano. In terms of on-field talent and production, It’s Cano and it’s not even close.
To be fair, the money is pretty far apart too.
True but the article is essentially putting them on a level playing field by saying best 100M man – no qualifiers.
The question is literally “Which $100MM+ contract was the best signing?”. The contracts are part of the discussion and decision.
I don’t think anyone would disagree that Cano has been a much more valuable player than Ellsbury. If Cano got Ellsbury’s contract, it would have been a great bargain. If Ellsbury got Cano’s contract, it would have been an insane Mike Hampton-level overpay.
But they got the contracts they got. The fun part of the debate is: who would you want on the contract that they got?
It does not ask which is the better player of the three because we all know the answer to that. This is essentially value for contract driven.
It would have said, best value. It just says best signing. Cano was the best sign. He will have a much larger impact on his team and at his position. Choo and Ellsbury are both very replaceable players, Cano is not. Premium player, premium position. Cano wins.
We’re just waking up on the West Coast Sam. 🙂 The East Coast is almost ready for lunch.
A healthy ellsbury is as good if not better.
a “healthy Ellsbury” That’s an oxymoron.
Ellsbury LOL? The Yankees are paying $21 million/year for a slight upgrade over Gardner.. That’s IF he can stay healthy.
Actually, the best of these 3 lousy contracts is probably Choo, simply because the Cano and Ellsbury deals are both lousier.
Kind of a bad question when they’re all pretty awful signings.
I’d say 1) Choo, for health and lower contract amount 2) Jacoby, if healthy he’s almost as good as Cano 3) Cano, just b/c of the years and money. Seattle has a hard time getting sluggers, so I understand the reasoning. Talent wise, that list is backwards. There isn’t much talent coming in free agency so I don’t mind any of the contracts, Texas and NYY can afford it anyway. The Dodger’s bullpen upgrades/re-signings are up there too, because bullpens in the playoffs are incredibly important. I think when you see the Rays signing Loney for 3yrs/21mil you know that you have to spend to get anything worth while.
You sight health for Choo but not Cano?
Oh, yeah Cano is the best and most reliable player. It’s just those last three or so years that put him last. Second basemen don’t tend to last too long past 31 or so either. I think I read somewhere though that his comps did a good job of being healthy until like 37-38. He will garner the most WAR in the first seven years of his contract (compared to the other players), so I wasn’t trying to slight him. I’m going to miss the AL east having three of the five or so best second basemen in the league (Cano, the midget from Boston :), and Zobrist).
best value for the team? it would be nice if you could explain what “best” means. I see people below are reading this from the player/agent point of view. which I assume is not what you meant.
Can we add Tanaka to the list? Team to be named later.
I find it very hard to believe that Ellsbury, Choo, or Cano will live up to those contracts. Not saying that Tanaka will live up to everything he gets, but I think he’s got a better chance than the other three.
Choo??? Seriously, getting paid 7/130 instead of 5/85 or even 6/100 because of a career year is how franchises get decimated (i.e. Vernon Wells, Alfonso Soriano, Alex Rodriguez, Josh Hamilton). He plays corner outfield, the second least valuable defense position. You are paying for the .450 OBP AND 20/20 production of which the speed is about to go (turning 32 in July, caught career high 11 times last year). He will SOON be .280/.380/.440 without speed and then enter his age 34,35,36….brutal.
Ellsbury plays centerfield spectacularly. He steals 40-70 bases and hits 15-20 HRs while being 14 month younger. He has finished as high as 2nd in MVP voting and 15th last season.
Cano was the worst signing since Josh Hamilton. Nothing more need be said about that absurdity.
Ellsbury WAR last three season: 9.1, 1.8 (played 74 games), 5.8
Choo: 1.3 (played 85 games), 2.4, 5.2
You can’t really cite a likely decline in speed for Choo, then turn around and tout Ellsbury’s speed as a huge bonus. His is going to decline as well. As for Ellsbury being a “15 to 20 homer” bat, he has one season in which he’s homered more than nine times. Sure the Bronx will help, but Ellsbury isn’t someone that can just be penciled in for 20 homers.
pencils have erasers so it’s not permanent.
I almost spit out my water when I read 15-20 home runs like it was some kind of lock to happen every year
As Ellsbury ages he is going to steal less bases. Also, 15-20 HRs per season? He has hit HRs in the double digits once in his career. There is no way the Ellsbury signing can be justified as a “good” signing for the team.
Age deteriorates everything for everyone
No, not good at all, but has to be easily be the best of the three. He will steal more than 20 for many more years that Choo, play centerfield instead of corner, and hit almost as many HRs with a similar batting average while being 14 months younger. Ellsbury getting rid the Green Monster and getting the short porch will likely result in 15+ HRs, IMO.
You lost me when you included Soriano, Arod, and Hamilton as getting big contracts because of one single career year.
Coming off a career year upon getting their respective contracts…
Soriano went 40/40 then got paid and never hit 34 or stole 20 ever again…
Hamilton hit 43 HRs then got paid…never hit 33 in any other season and probably never will either as he has left the launching pad and growing old very fast… 2012: 636 ABs 43 HRs 203 636 ABs 21 HRs
Horrible logic
Brilliant reply
See, it’s that season that Ells played 74 games that would concern me. His propensity to injury is the reason I didn’t vote for him. Of course, injury can happen to anyone at anytime but it seems he is more prone.
I’d much rather have Choo than Cano on those contracts. He is different, but still very good. Cano is good, but not worth that contract, Choo and Ellsbury could if they are very good.
Cano is great and neither of those players are “worth” their contracts either.
Very good I would call Cano, don’t know about great.
Pujols in his prime, Arod in his juicing prime, Miguel Cabrera today are great.
Cano has a WAR of 25.4 and Miguel Carbera has one of 27.3 over the last 4 seasons. Cano has been a top 5 player in that span. Putting Choo and Cano in the category of “good” simply does not do Cano justice as there is a very clear difference between the two
War overrates cano’s defensive value at 2b.
I’ll argue that it underrates it
Choo… because it is the lowest $ amount and you didn’t allow “none of the above”.
Thing that worry me most of cano is that their are lots of reports of lalligagging around the base paths and walking out ground balls, imagine how he is gonna be now that he’s making 20+m a year.
LOL, its not reports its what he does.
Cano will hit a ball to the SS and trot to first base, then turn back to the dugout and blow a big bubble from the chewing gum, not like the short stop might throw the ball high or anything, so who needs hustle.
Its just part of his personality, he is no Pedroia, Ellsbury or David Eckstein used to be when it comes to hustle.
If things go bad in Seattle performance wise for the team he will be the most expensive loafer money can buy.
The only guy I know who can get away with not hustling and not be crtiicized for it is Miguel Cabrera and that is because of his dominance at the plate, multiple MVP’s, multiple Triple Crowns, multiple batting titles, multiple HR titles, multiple rbi titles. That is the guy you give 10 years and 240 million plus to.
Makes me wonder how much Cabrera will earn in his new deal. Yikes.
I hate to break it to you, but unfortunately those reports are accurate.
Where is the NONE option I couldn’t find it. When has the last huge contract ever turned out numbers wise for any team? They get worse today and eventually the average fans are going to suffer at a point that they can’t afford to watch the games let alone go. This big TV money has to come from somewhere and we all know eventually it is the consumer. Can’t wait for those MLB TV and internet games to start tripling in price as they are getting high now!
Manny. The only one.
Pujols’ 1st one if you consider it large enough (2005 to 2011 I believe he made “only” $125 million)
I think its a best of the 3 evils (like voting for a President) and you have to pick one, which is why none of the above is an option. None of them are really worth it. Choo will not hit well against lefties , Ellsbury is injury prone – I bet he will wind up on the DL several times during the contract, and Cano is just a greedy player that signed with a team desperate enough to spend that much. Cano will be traded well before his 10 year deal is up. He will get the Chone Figgins syndrome,..if anyone pitches to him that is.. Corey Hary hitting behind him ? Meh ..not exactly Beltre, Soriano or Cabrerra is he ?
I voted for Choo simply because his signing was the only one that a) addressed an actual need (contrary to Ellsbury) and b) actually seems like it will help the signing team compete for the division (unlike Cano, as things stand).
The Yankees did not need a starting outfielder? I guess there must be something wrong with Cashman since he signed two and offered a 140 million dollar contract to another one..
The Yankees didn’t need to pay that much for Ellsbury, who is a fancier version of Gardner.
The Yankees did not need an all-speed center fielder because they already had Gardner. Having a need is not the same as having the luxury to spend on small upgrades.
They needed an outfielder and Gardner is more valuable as a left fielder as that is his original position.It was not a luxury buy as they did not have 3 starting capable outfielders on the roster.
See, mine was the opposite. I rejected the use of logic for bias and optimism.
In other words, “Which signing was the least worst?” I’m gonna go with Shin-Soo Choo. The Jacoby Ellsbury signing looks like Carl Crawford II in pinstripes.
Robinson Cano’s was good for Cano. Mariners will not get their money’s worth. Especially after 6 years.
Jacoby Ellsbury’s was good for Ells. Big gamble for the Yanks, that could work itself to be the best deal up there.
Shin-Soo Choo I feel was the best deal for both parties. Proven player, good deal for him.
Brian McCann, no listed, technically under $100M, would have been the best deal for the Yankees. I’m surprised they didn’t have to add more years onto the deal.
The world’s still waiting on that Tanaka deal though. Lets see how that plays out before calling this poll complete… but then again, whatever he signs for… He’ll be unproven in the MLB.
Choo should be a platoon player, he is completely useless against lefties. Paying $20 million for Choo is a joke.
It’s 18 per not 20 and it still beats what Cano and Ellsbury at going to get paid in 5 years when their skills are way below Choo’s.
Ellsbury is much better than choo. Both with the bat and the glove.
Ellsbury is the better overall player, but I’ll take the guy that can stay on the field for most of a season.
A .347 OBP against lefties is far from “useless”.
Choo is at least closest to his actual value–the other two contracts were bigger overpays by a huge margin.
I’m surprised this is so close.
the Ellsbury contract loses by default. it’s the Yankees. the Yankees don’t HAVE TO spend this type of money to get an OF, especially when they already had enough OF before the signing.
IMO the Cano signing is the best. it makes the Mariners serious contenders. Seattle has to overpay to get a player like Cano. overpay or no Cano at all. it’s this type of signing that shows other players the Mariners are seriously trying to win now. a team like Seattle has to do this in order to interest other free agents.
the Choo signing is in the middle. it helps the Rangers by adding even more offense to their team, but it wasn’t a NEED to get Choo.
No one would call Ichiro at this stage and Wells for years now as credible starting outfield options.
The Yankees had both of them starting last season, we saw how that worked out.
Ellsbury and Beltran are leaps and bounds above the nonsense that was Ichiro and Wells last season.
Yankees outfield? They did not have enough outfielders (unless you think soriano, wells and ichero could man two of the corners and cover center if Gardner went down).
How about some long range thinking… Following the 2014season they didn’t have a single outfielder signed and the free agent pickings at that point are slim at best.
Very good point about after 2014 as well, Gardner will be a free agent, Soriano is a free agent, Ichiro is a free agent and will be gone, Wells will be gone before this Spring Training, when he is summarily released. 🙂
Yankees very much needed outfielders and as you mentioned next seasons position player pool is brutal.
it’s the New York Yankees. they could sign pretty much anyone by throwing around some money. almost any free agent OF would be willing to sign with the Yankees, they didn’t NEED to overpay for Ellsbury, who is overrated based on his 2011 season.
At least choose has the get on base. players that have good OBPs tend to play longer. Giambi, Jeter, Helton, Damon, Ellis etc. Ellisbury’s speed will go down hill and 10 years for Cabo is way over the top, but even if choo loses his glove, he can be used as DH to get on base.
I vote none of the above. Curtis Granderson was the only $100mm+ player not signed to an outrageous contract, but no one wants to talk about it because it was the Mets
There are 40 Million reasons why Granderson is not a choice, he signed for 4 years 60 million…..
and the fact that he isn’t a 100 million dollar player, even though NY will miss him as well as I do
None of these are good signings, but Shin Soo Choo’s is the best of a bad situation
I would’ve said Choo, but with the acquisition of Fielder they are now locked into the same 3,4, 5 hitters for a long time. And for a lot of money.
Agree, Chris. All 3 contracts are bad, but Choo at least should generate value close to his salary for most of the years of his deal.
Cano’s deal shouldn’t be in the same pole as the others. Choo and Ellsbury both have their flaws. We all know the player Ellsbury can be when healthy, but that’s a big IF sometimes. Choo gets on base, but struggles swinging against lefties. Still gets on base against them, but can’t hit them.
If “none” were an option it would have won going away.
They’re all overpriced, but Cano’s the best signing, because at least he’s an impact player.
Choo will be a platoon player by the 2nd half of that contract. Jacoby will be on the DL for half his contract. Obvious answer is Robinson Cano.
But Choo and Ellsbury both got only a little more than half as much money as Cano did….
Choo 18.5M/yr
Ells 21.7M/yr
Cano 24M/yr
Doesn’t look like half to me….
Cano 240 Mil
Ellsbury 153 Mil = 64% of Cano’s contract
Choo 130 Mil = 54% of Cano’s contract
looks a lot closer to half, those extra 3 years on Cano’s contract are really going to hurt!
But do you know what Ells and Choo will make those other 3 years, or are they out of baseball? These players aren’t paid their money upfront, it is paid over time.
All of these contracts will be bad by the final 3-5 years so its really a question of which team is helped best by the deal in the first years of the contract.
Cano’s contract was the largest and the Mariners are not well positioned to benefit from the first couple years on the contract. It was the worst of the 3!
The Yankees are well positioned to take advantage of the first couple years of Ellsbury’s contract. However, they already had a very similar and affordable player in Gardner. Ellsbury is better than Gardner but not so much better to justify giving their largest contract of the offseason to an OBP/speed/defense center fielder. It was the second worst.
Texas, like the Yankees, is well positioned to take advantage of the first couple years of Choo’s contract. Their offense was in need of boost and they needed a top of the order bat after trading Kinsler. Choo addressed both those needs. Choo’s contract was the best of the worst this offseason.
So having a lethal 1-2 or 9-1, 80+ combined SB potential in your line-up is a bad thing? Or how about a combined UZR of 35+ Gardner (26+ UZR as LF in 12′ and Ellsbury knotched 10 UZR in CF last season) protecting YSIII’s spacious RH power alley (385 gap).
The Yankees needed more power which was addressed by McCann, Beltran and a healthy Tex. Curtis left, but he was injured all last season so his departure is moot in terms of improvement over last seasons results.
I’m not saying Ells will certainly provide more WAR than Choo over the next couple of seasons, although its likely, but you shouldn’t trash the deal just because the Yanks already had Ellsbury-lite on the roster. Also, the post was in regards to the 100+ million contracts, not worst contracts of the off-season.
having a lethal 1-2 or 9-1, 80+ combined SB potential in your line-up ect. is not a bad thing but paying but paying 21 Mil AAV for 7 years to player on the wrong side of 30 is always going to end badly. The yanks did not need to pay that much to get SB/OBP/defense out of CF. Cano despite being more expensive would have fit NYY needs much better than Ells and the AAV is very similar.
I agree in terms of greater need and I think the Yankees knew Cano was more valuable, but for reasons unknown were uber-aggressive in signing Ells. But luckily, the Yankees either showed some sense or didn’t have the opportunity to match Cano’s ludicrous, but clearly attainable demands. The Yankees have front row seats to what it looks like paying a 40 yr old 24+ million dollars, can’t imagine they wanted to double their pleasure.
Plus Gardner is in a contract year, so I’m sure that was taken into consideration. If Gardner repeats, the Yanks likely let him leave and get the draft pick they lost on Ells back.
Im definitely in the minority here. But the cano signing was the right move for the mariners. Of course, it might end up a diaster for them like the beltre and figgins signings, but its what they need to reinvent their franchise. After all, when 240 million is involved, im sure their front office thought it over for quite some time and figured it was about time they start competing in the west. Not only that, they somehow managed to pry away the yankees best player, which in itself is a challenge. These long term contracts arent disappearing anytime soon so get used to them.
I remember when the Angels signed Pujols I was very happy despite admitting it was an overpay…. that was the last time I was happy with that signing.
That shouldn’t be the case. altho hes hasn’t been quite the same, he did manage to correct some stuff after that horrible start in 2012.. 2013 was just a lost cause. That foot injury was painful to watch as a fan, and also as a runner. No one should be putting that much force on their heels.. I hope he comes back next season with less weight and more balance. He’ll never play to his contract but that legacy he carries might make up for it if he can regain 70-80% of what he as.
they were all extremly overpaid
As all the top FA’s recently have been and will be for the foreseeable future.
Unfortunately, the poll didn’t offer the choice of “NONE OF THE ABOVE”. IMO, all three of those contracts are gross overpays which are likely to come back and bite the signing teams in their waning years. The McCann contract is not a $100 MM deal, since the option may not vest and McCann has an opt out clause if it does. Still, it too is an overpay, although not nearly as bad as the three in the poll.
Ironically, or on second thought maybe not so ironically, I think the contract not listed in the poll will be the one to pay the greatest dividends. Brian McCann is obviously in the top 5 catchers in the Major Leagues and will keep producing at that position especially in a strong Yankee lineup and a hitter’s ballpark.