The hot button for today is Tim Lincecum's arbitration. Sabes says it's probably headed to a hearing, which some people think is tantamount to pissing on Lincecum's doormat and setting it on fire. Of all the reportage in the last 24 hours, Andy Baggarly (no surprise) rings in with the smartest take on the situation.
My take: Lincecum's agent no doubt sees the King Felix Hernandez and Justin Verlander contracts (both about 5 years, $80 M) and wants the same or more for his client. But with Lincecum set to make at least $8 M and more likely $13 M in 2010, the Giants can wait a year, knowing their ace will have a record-breaking contract in his back pocket, no matter what. There's no rush to work out an extension, no matter how loud Lincecum's agent bangs the drum for one.
I agree ... Even if Timmy is pissed now, a 5-yr, $85-95 mil. deal a year from now goes a long way in soothing bruised egos. Besides, it's basically the agent doing all the talking, so it's a lot of hot air regardless.
I think Timmy would agree to $11 million and most certainly $12 million for this year if it was tied to the same contracts Felix and Verlander got. Would you be up for that - $12, $16 X 4 = $76 mil for 5 years? Basically you save a million or two this year to lock him up for 5 years or do you wait, probably pay the $13 mil and see how this year goes (which could cost you more in the future). Imagine if he won another CY Award (Hallady may have something to say about that)and how much that would cost to sign him to 4 or 5 years.
I think giving any pitcher a 5-yr contract when you don't need to is a frightening thing. BigO -- what do your sources say about the alleged hurt feelings that Urban wrote about? My guess is dodgerhater is right, it's mostly his agent blowing smoke to move negotiations forward.
Nada from up North. My source thinks it's just a bunch of Agent speak BS too. He understands too that it doesn't make sense to sign him to a deal when we don't have to. Also Timmy's Dad hasn't said anything and he usually is pretty vocal when he hears something juicy from Tim (which really isn't that often anymore, even though he was at Tim's court appearance with him in Vancouver, WA).
Great post!
Lincecum would not be happy "settling" for what Felix or Verlander got, he would want more like $90M.
Also, both Felix and Felix have been in the league longer, why is it OK for both of their teams to wait until their 5th year or so to sign them up for a long term extention, but not good for the Giants to wait (Lincecum only has 3 seasons under his belt) until Lincecum shows that his arm is here for the long-term with a couple more seasons of production.
This is particularly because his velocity went down at the end of last season plus his arm was in such bad shape that he was held out of a start, doesn't that worry anyone?
And if the Giants signed Lincecum to a $76M contract for five years and he Fopperts in spring training and never throws a pitch for us again, would you be OK with that?
I didn't think so.
Felix nor anyone else in the history of baseball have won two cy youngs in their first two years of baseball either...
Is it just me, or was this the most careless thing Baggarly has ever written? His extremely reductive and narrow premise (Lincecum gets $10.5M in 2010 = A's in San Jose; Lincecum gets $9.5M in 2010 = no A's in San Jose) has no sources, not even anonymous ones. It works as an interesting theory to ponder, as he casually introduces a "seemingly unrelated factor", but before long he's worked himself up to "say whatever you want about Magowan, but he wouldn’t have allowed his fellow owners or the commissioner’s office to influence his actions one bit" and that this has "everything to do with Bill Neukom, Bud Selig and holding the line" without a shred of ambiguity. There's a lot here about Magowan ticking off owners in the nineties, but nothing here to indicate that Neukom is Selig's lapdog other than the fact that he doesn't want the A's in San Jose. (Needless to say, Magowan didn't want the A's in San Jose either, and I don't recall our territorial rights being revoked the day after the Zito signing.) Maybe this wild theory is true by happy accident, or some owner whispered it in Baggs' ear on deep background, but without sources or examples of Neukom putting Selig's needs over his own or his team's, I find Baggarly's certitude to be puzzling.
Pantalones, that's why it's called a blog, Baggerly's taking a stab at what he thinks is going on, it's an opinion, not necessarily to be taken as the cold hard facts ... As for the Zito signing not resulting in the owner's revoking their territorial rights to SJ, let me just say that Zito's contract, while ridiculous, was not a record-setting deal, so why would the owners even cry about it? There were plenty of bad contracts handed our around that time anyway, and not just by the Giants. Was it a dumb deal? Without question, it was extremely dumb ... but it wasn't a record setting contract in terms of dollars. what Baggs seems to be saying is that the Giants are perfectly happy holding off anything longterm with Timmy until the issue with the A's is resolved. I don't think Baggs is necessarily saying Bowtie Man is Selig's lapdog either, just that the Giants are treading VERY cautiously right now.
Right on, h8r; I just think that such a narrow theory could have used a lot more "I wonder if" or "another factor might be" and a little less "this has everything to do with". Maybe it's just semantics, and/or the high standards I've come to expect from Baggarly.
Devil's advocate: wouldn't signing a good-but-far-from-dominant pitcher to the largest contract for a pitcher in history have more ramifications than a record-breaking one-year deal for a Super Two player with an unprecedented resume? Every year a free agent pitcher's agent can compare his client to Zito, but how often will someone bring two Cy Young awards to their Super Two hearing? Maybe the owners are more concerned with arbitration values than free agent values, but that doesn't jibe with Baggs' Bonds/Magowan/Reinsdorf anecdote.
Wasnt the Zito deal actually a record-setter for a pitcher when it was struck?????
Baggarly could not have been more dead on, there was nothing irresponsible about it. Big arb cases like Lincecum are about establishing precedent. All of baseball will be watching, ownership and players. Ownership undoubtedly feels it's the Giants' "duty" to lowball Lincecum to avoid resetting the bar. And if you think MLB ownership is above holding the Giants' feet to the fire with the A's/San Jose thing, you're fooling yourself, and you haven't been paying attention to baseball's labor disputes over the past few decades.
The Giants are going to lose the San Jose dispute eventually. There is no justifiable reason to keep the A's from moving to SJ if they want to, and SJ wants them to.
I think regardless of the agent's words, the whole Selig/SJ twist or any other factor, it absolutely made no sense for the Giants not to offer Lincecum $10 mill.
They at least could have argued they had a chance to win that # in arbitration and that would have set a better precedent. What precedent is set low-balling a two-time cy young winner in his first two years and he wins his arb case easily for $13 mill anyway???
It was a foolish move by Sabean and ownershp. Also, Sabean after the 2008 season never went to Tim and his agent to offer something in Ryan Zimmerman's range, $45 mill 5 years I believe. At least it would have been a good faith offer and who knows how Tim and his agent would have responded. They may very well have said thanks but no thanks, but Sabean would have at least shown a willingness to put a long-term deal on the table.
In terms of the San Jose move, I agree with UVHaight, ther eis no way at the end of the day that teh Giants will be able to stop the move. It just comes down to money. 5 years for $100 million to the giants to give up arbitration rights will perfectly match what Lincecum will likely be making as a free agent.
So the Giants lose San Jose, but then pick up the extra dollars to keep Timmy in the fold long-term...
You never know what the kid could be thinking but who knows, $45 mil for 5 years after winning a cy young in his first full year may have been insulting. I also think that They G's offered $8 mil because they were hoping it would be easier to just meet in the middle and that would be $10.5. Remember the speculation was all over the place with some guesstimating that Timmy's camp could submit $10 mil. I think a bigger question is what does the Cy Young's mean? I'm not going to look up Felix and Verlander's numbers but I know Verlander had 19 wins and maybe more strike outs. ERA? Anyway, the argument that Timmy deserves more because of the Cy Young awards doesn't add up to me. Even if he was the best in the NL shouldn't the numbers be compared to the best pitchers in baseball even if they are in the AL and they didn't win a Cy Young? Seems to me they are kind of setting the rate at $80 mil right now.
Pantalones, all fine points ... I can see your argument on signing a mediocre pitcher to a megadeal being far more damaging than Timmy's arb. number.
PeterVA, I get what you're saying ... $126 mil for Zito seems record-setting, but wasn't the Brown contract with LA the one that was a record-setter? Not sure ...
Per wikipedia, Brown was the first pitcher to break $100M: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_sports_contracts
Brown got $105M in 1999, Hampton got $121M in 2001, Zito got $126M in 2007, Santana got $137.5M in 2008, and Sabathia got $161M in 2009.
Just a little preview of when Lincecum is unrestricted someday. Yikes. (Santana wasn't even unrestricted.)
I stand corrected Pantalones ... good research. I think we can both agree that Zito's deal will go down as one of the worst in Giants history
Ffs!! Give timmy his money he deserves it!!
Hes the face of the franchise!!
and a question for you guys.
Who would you perfer to start a game felix hernandez or tim lincecum?
when? May or Sept/Oct?