Quote:
Originally Posted by alnorth
I think it was the 8 years that jumped out at me more than anything.
If this was, say a 3-year deal for $25M per, with option years I'd have fewer problems with it. This has the potential of working for a few years, and then crippling the organization for the remaining years. I'd be more inclined to lock up a superstar for 4-ish years, and gamble that his value may rise.
The risk of having to "settle" for a merely good player after a standard contract expires is outweighed by the risk of spending 1/4 of your payroll on nothing because of injury. The Twins already got screwed by Joe Nathan, the next two years they will be flushing around $20M down the toilet, I'm amazed they didn't learn from that. If by some amazing catastrophe Mauer suffers a career ending injury this year, the Twins would be screwed for years and years.
It has been done before, but if he stays healthy and can continue to catch for 8 years (rather than have to move to 1B) it will be a minor miracle. Not to mention that the last four years will be in his 30's, when he'll probably be on the decline. What is so valuable about a 33-34 year old 7-8 years from now right after he had his one and only terrific year of his career?
|
As always, you make good points, but I'll offer these:
1. He's had phenomenal years in '06, '08, and '09.
2. We always talk about power being the last attribute to develop, and this may well be the case here, which further changes our perception of an already HOF-level player.
3. As Royals fans, I think we've been far too conditioned to worry about player salary. Given revenue sharing, this should not be a contract that cripples any franchise. That said, we know this will be the excuse from ownership if the deal turns to shit.