Vernon Wells

Vernon Wells will have negative trade value until his contract expires at the end of the 2014 season. Wells' deal is considered one of the worst in the game. After all, the three-time Gold Glover has $98.5MM coming his way even though his defense has deteriorated rapidly and he hasn't topped 20 homers in any season since 2006. 

But Wells underwent successful wrist surgery last offseason, he's a year removed from the hamstring problems that sidelined him last spring and he has four home runs in his first six games. Ken Rosenthal of FOX Sports said this weekend that Wells would probably waive his no-trade clause. No team would take Wells on if it meant shouldering nearly $100MM, but GM Alex Anthopoulos could potentially find a team that would take on some of Wells' salary – it's a question of how much.

Last winter, the Cubs signed Marlon Byrd to a three-year $15MM deal after a career year in which he hit .283/.329/.479 with 20 homers. Byrd is 32, a year older than Wells, but there was still enough interest for him to sign a multi-year deal. 

But this doesn't mean Wells could find a $15MM offer on the open market; in fact, it's hard to imagine any club offering more than a few million. Wells has just a .317 on base percentage since signing his long-term deal and his defense has cost the Blue Jays in recent years, according to UZR (Byrd's defense has been closer to average).

Toronto's supporters can still hope, though. If Wells hits well this year and has healthy enough legs underneath him to impress scouts and turn around his defensive numbers, teams may be willing to trade for Wells and pick up some of the money he's owed. Jerry Hairston Jr., Mark Kotsay and Rick Ankiel lead the next crop of free agent center fielders, so teams aren't about to find elite solutions on the open market. The Blue Jays will not be able to trade Wells without paying the vast majority of his contract, but they can dream about a deal that allows them to shed $10-20MM. 

On December 15th, 2006, Blue Jays GM J.P. Ricciardi signed center fielder Vernon Wells to a seven-year, $126MM extension.  The heavily-backloaded contract included a full no-trade clause and an opt-out clause after the 2011 season.  At the time of the signing, Wells was a year away from free agency.

With five years and $105MM remaining, the Wells extension is now widely regarded as the worst contract in baseball.  I thought it'd be interesting to see what sportswriters were saying at the time of the signing.

Jerry Crasnick, ESPN: "Depending on your viewpoint, Wells' new deal with Toronto is either a heartwarming tale of loyalty or yet another sign that major league baseball owners never learn."

Keith Law, ESPN: "By deferring most of the payments due, Ricciardi keeps more payroll in the 2007-10 years available to pay other players, even if it means killing the team's financial flexibility in 2011 and beyond."

Peter Gammons, ESPN: "If you're going to give $18 million to somebody, you want them to be as diligent and as reliable as Vernon.  If he went out in the market next year, with Andruw Jones, and Ichiro, and Torii Hunter, I really believe that at his age he might be #1."

Jeff Blair, Globe and Mail: "The dollars involved in Wells's extension are an accurate reading of a system flush with cash because of new media riches, labour peace and solid attendance in big markets. Wells would have received $20-million a year as a free agent next year without breaking a sweat. His on-field production – a Gold Glove, .300 batting average, 30 home runs and 100 runs batted in – would not be replaced in time to compete this year in the hypercompetitive American League East."

Nate Silver, Baseball Prospectus: "Toronto did a good job of assessing Wells's value in the short term. As for the risks associated with a contract that stretches past the player's 35th birthday? Consider it a necessary evil for securing a premium player who likely would've fetched at least $150 million in next year's market."

J.C. Bradbury, Sabernomics:  "Wells needs to hurry up and sign the Blue Jays contract offer of $126 million over seven years. My most optimistic projection (assuming no decline in play from 2006) has him at $107 over seven years."

I didn't offer much opinion on the extension, but I did note that it was crazy that the $18MM salary was seen as a loyalty discount.  Click here to read the opinions of MLBTR commenters.