Source: Adrian Gonzalez would accept deferred money from #Padres in a long-term deal as long as it was market value.
5 months ago
jbox
43 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
Didn't Hoyer say on the radio last week
that the Padres are totally against deferred money?
So Adrian tells the media that he’ll accept something he knows will never happen, ostensibly to make himself look reasonable and the Padres look cheap for refusing.
I don’t like this side of Adrian.
"I aim to misbehave." - Mal Reynolds
by Zach (maestro876) on Mar 18, 2010 7:42 PM PDT reply actions
The smart move is to avoid deferred money
The only reason you would do that is if you are in a win now mode or you are deferring money that you will have to pay anyway.
I assume the subject was broached with Adrian because Todd Helton recently renegotiated his contract to include deferred money. However, that works for the Rockies because they are currently competitive and (this is important) they were going to have to pay Helton at ton of money in 2011. A ton. Like roster crippling money. Instead they deferred it because it was probably the only way to get out from under that impending gigantic load. They are sacrificing flexibility in years down the road so that they don’t have to blow up their competitive team in 2011.
That is not the situation the Padres are in.
No, I don't think you're an idiot. Please don't go trying to prove me wrong.
Bolts from the Blue - General Manager: It is what it isn't
by Wonko on Mar 18, 2010 8:05 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Exactly.
I agree 100%.
"I aim to misbehave." - Mal Reynolds
by Zach (maestro876) on Mar 18, 2010 8:13 PM PDT up reply actions
Which is why I'm kind of peeved at Adrian.
People think he’s this “aww-shucks” nice guy local who doesn’t care about fame or fortune, but he clearly is.
"I aim to misbehave." - Mal Reynolds
by Zach (maestro876) on Mar 18, 2010 8:14 PM PDT up reply actions
He cleary DOES.
Not “is”.
"I aim to misbehave." - Mal Reynolds
by Zach (maestro876) on Mar 18, 2010 8:16 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
We've been inflexible having Adrian
the past couple years. F*ck it, let’s keep him and continue to be inflexible.
Isn't it enough to know that I ruined a pony making a gift for you? ◔ヮ◔
Uncommon Sportsman :: Absurdity in play
I understand the sentiment
But, I would advise waiting one more year to see if the young guys can make up a competitive team with him. If they can’t then you’re just wasting your money and the team should figure out a way to trade Adrian that gets them closer to a championship. If you can be competitive then you take the risk and hopefully the good years with him will fill the coffers to afford him.
No, I don't think you're an idiot. Please don't go trying to prove me wrong.
Bolts from the Blue - General Manager: It is what it isn't
I think you and I are more in agreement than it seems.
I just there there is such a small chance that they’ll win anything with or without Adrian the next couple years that they should trade him now while his value is higher.
"I aim to misbehave." - Mal Reynolds
by Zach (maestro876) on Mar 19, 2010 8:47 AM PDT up reply actions
"I just THINK there is..."
"I aim to misbehave." - Mal Reynolds
by Zach (maestro876) on Mar 19, 2010 8:48 AM PDT up reply actions
No deferred money and no backloaded contract.
They have the choice of letting it play out. At the end of his contract they can put their best offer on the table and place the ball in Adrian’s court. He may decide that the extra money is not worth being away from his family for six months out of the year. If he does choose to leave, so be it. Collect the draft picks and move on..
True stars are hard to come by.
I prefer keeping them for the full six years, as opposed to getting rid of them after four, because they might break up with you later.
I'd prefer to trade him than let his contract expire...
but I hear what you’re saying. If we just let AG’s contract expire… we’ll likely end up with two first round picks as compensation (whatever team that signs him’s 1st rounder, and a 1st round sandwich pick).
So really if you look at the two “packages” side-by-side, they’re not THAT far apart in value:
- 4 – 4 1/2 seasons of Adrian Gonzalez plus 4-5 prospects
- 6 seasons of Adrian Gonzalez plus two 1st round draft picks
I mean, are we really losing THAT much if we don’t trade him?
by theodore donald kerabatsos on Mar 19, 2010 10:59 AM PDT up reply actions
Yes.
When you trade for prospects, you’re getting guys who have track records in the minors and (possibly) majors. You have at least some idea, sometimes a pretty good idea, of what kind of players they are and will be.
Draft picks, you have no idea whatsoever.
"I aim to misbehave." - Mal Reynolds
by Zach (maestro876) on Mar 19, 2010 11:11 AM PDT up reply actions
Doesn't the Peavy trade sort of tell you that doesn't always hold true?
We were supposed to be getting a haul of prospects for Jake. Porreda was supposed to be the centerpiece of the trade.
And you can’t say that draft picks “you have no idea whatsoever” because then you’d be saying that there’s no difference between a first rounder and a 40th rounder. You definitely have an idea of what you’re getting… but, yeah, you have a better idea when the guy’s spent some time in the minors.
I’m just playing devil’s advocate here, because I do this we’re better off trading him than letting his contract play out, but think about it this way…
We’re getting AG for about $10-12 mil under his market value over the next two seasons. It’s like having a $20-25 million discount on the next two years’ payroll. When we trade him, we lose all that value. So, in a way, you’re paying $20-25 million and losing 1 1/2 – 2 years of AG’s services in order to get 2-3 extra prospects with better scouting reports.
by theodore donald kerabatsos on Mar 19, 2010 12:05 PM PDT up reply actions
I'm still waiting for this post to get "Wonked"
Maybe he’s still recovering from Purdue’s near death experience.
by theodore donald kerabatsos on Mar 19, 2010 2:05 PM PDT up reply actions
meh
I think we need to wait until the end of this season (maybe ST next year), before we can evaluate that trade.
"Over? Did you say "over"? Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no!"
remember
even the trade that brought Agon here took two full years before we really understood what we got.
"Over? Did you say "over"? Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no!"
But wasn't that
more because of how Eaton, Sledge, and Otsuka fell off the table?
I seem to remember Adrian winning first base out of his first camp coming as a surprise.
Isn't it enough to know that I ruined a pony making a gift for you? ◔ヮ◔
Uncommon Sportsman :: Absurdity in play
I used to be firmly in the trade now camp. but
The more I think about it, the more I don’t want be an organization that: Brings guys up, nutures them two years, gets one or two years or production, then trades them for prospects. I do not believe it is a valid model.
I believe the valid model is to bring them up, identify the core players, sign them through at least their arbitriation years and prefearabley an extra two years. Then collect all the production you can, before they move on.
I'm kinda cool with the deferred-money contract idea
as the payroll increases, so would the contract. Adrian’s salary wouldn’t have much of a crippling effect down the road because it could be structured so that it’s almost proportional to what we’re paying him now.
I'm not sure you understand what deferred money means
It means you continue to pay the player after he is no longer a part of the team.
No, I don't think you're an idiot. Please don't go trying to prove me wrong.
Bolts from the Blue - General Manager: It is what it isn't
ohhh
I was thinking it was a back-ended contract, like what we did with Peavy.
recognizes his own idiocy
deferred money
sounds exactly like something that Jed+Jeff would not be into.
Hello Friars
2 weeks and no news what can we expect ??
by Lone Padre Fan QCA on Mar 18, 2010 11:48 PM PDT reply actions
quotes that don't get reported
cus they don’t stir up shit ..
“I think our focus shouldn’t be on ourselves; it should be on the team and the city,” Gonzalez said last month. "Hopefully we’ll bring a championship to San Diego soon. I’m 100 percent committed to the organization. “I’m preparing as a Padre. Up until the day, which hopefully won’t happen, but until the day I get traded, I’ll prepare as a Padre. Until that point, it’s not on my mind. I’m not going to put any pressure on them. It’s their decision 100 percent, and I’ll deal with it either way.”
552
by wrveres on Mar 19, 2010 12:04 AM PDT reply actions 2 recs
BUT I WANT TO BE ANGRY!!!
rec’d for being rational.
by theodore donald kerabatsos on Mar 19, 2010 7:27 AM PDT up reply actions
What day is it?
Is he playing for the organization or the guys in the clubhouse, as he previously stated?
Isn't it enough to know that I ruined a pony making a gift for you? ◔ヮ◔
Uncommon Sportsman :: Absurdity in play
I think the Mets are stil paying Bobby Bonilla until 2012 and he retired several yrs ago.
AG must be getting peppered with this crap every day. I feel for him.
If I pick it, I flick it
by Duke Street Kings on Mar 19, 2010 5:57 AM PDT reply actions
and Mo Vaughn
Who Jeff Moorad actually represented.
you can't bullshit a bullshitter
that’s why Moorad plays hardball. He was one of them and he knows the games agents play. Bad news for fans that like a career one-teamer.
Oh internet, what a wicked web you weave.
by Mad_Villain on Mar 19, 2010 10:56 AM PDT up reply actions
Career one-teamer?
Do those exist anymore?
by theodore donald kerabatsos on Mar 19, 2010 11:00 AM PDT up reply actions
It's mostly possible with
guys of Adrian’s caliber. Pujols, Fielder, and Howard are more likely to stay with one team than are guys that are career trade bait. The opposite can be said with someone like Texiera or A-Rod. But I blame the big market for that.
Oh internet, what a wicked web you weave.
DAMMIT
reply to my own comment’s reply
Oh internet, what a wicked web you weave.
by Mad_Villain on Mar 19, 2010 11:25 AM PDT up reply actions
I'd be surprised if any of the three guys you mentioned spend their whole career with their current teams.
I’m not really trying to prove any kind of point or anything… just making an obvious observation that there are almost no (good) players that end up spending their whole career with a single team anymore.
I’m trying to think of who I think will be career one-teamers amongst current players… Jeter, Mariano… uhhh…
by theodore donald kerabatsos on Mar 19, 2010 11:57 AM PDT up reply actions
I agree
But I would think the bigger the star you are the more likely a team is to pay you the money to stay and be the face of an organization.
Oh internet, what a wicked web you weave.
by Mad_Villain on Mar 19, 2010 12:07 PM PDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- The Juice: Swisher ends Orioles sweep dreams with timely homer
- Create-a-Caption: Dusty Baker wants YOU to buy playoff tickets
- Padres' Heath Bell wistful about Trevor Hoffman's 600th save
- Want your first career home run? Face a pitcher from Chicago
- Slumpbot .200: Phil Hughes runs into New York's Joba Rules
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
