Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry
Heyward is a player that I would throw in a player opt clause after year 4. I would take my chances to get his best 4 WAR years and let somebody else pay for the latter years.
|
Opt out clauses are for when things go poorly.
All an opt-out clause is take away the only advantage that team gains in a long-term contract - the possibility of getting a player below market in exchange for long-term security.
When you guarantee a player the best of both words; both the long-term security of getting paid even if you suck or get hurt AND the ability to opt out early and remove the long-term advantages to the team, then you've pretty much taken all benefit to the team out of the deal.
If Heyward hits 30 and his speed/defense decline (extremely likely given standard player aging curves), he's going to still be hitting like a 2bman and he's going to have probably $26 million/yr ahead of him. The Cards, meanwhile, are stuck with a declining player.
Unless the Cardinals are paying him above market, he'll opt out. If they're paying him above market, he'll stick with the deal. Either way, the Cards aren't going to benefit.
Ask the Dodgers if they were happy to see Greinke opt out. Or the Rangers if they're excited that Andrus is unlikely to exercise his opt out. They're nothing but downside.