Mark Berman: Astros offering Carlos Correa a 5 year/160 million dollar contract

Source for Correa's comment? Or was it something you read on Facebook?

 

His age is an excuse when the age wasn't an issue in those other 10 year deals. Arod wasn't 36 when the rangers tried to unload him. Sure, the tigers paid Cabrera... but he's finishing out his deal.

Just say you should get 10 years because that's the market. Don't give me garbage about how your 10 years is different than Pujols when you're the guy out for 2 months from a message...

He's comparing himself to players who got 10 year deals and saying his will work while theirs doesn't because he's younger ignoring those other guys were nore proven and less injury prone.

It's rumored no team is going more than 7 because of his back.... you didn't get that with other guys getting 10 yeard...

It's not the product, it's how he's selling it...

 

My source is Carlos Correa... his own words...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/sports.yahoo.com/amphtml/cubs-seek-7-deal-carlos-182750599.html

 

They didn't even get Seager's contract terms right in that article... that's the contract that reset the market and expectations for Correa. Freaking Rangers gonna Ranger.

 

Thanks. The funny thing is, with the exception of Pujols, the mega deals since 2000 have gone to guys in their 20s, not their 30s.

Also, the Astros signed Cedeno to a 10 year deal in 1978. Not in the article.

 

So what do you expect him to say?

"I know that the trend is for shorter contracts and it takes a special player with a perfect situation to get a 10 year contract now. I am a large shortstop and most large shortstops like Cal Ripken and ARod have had to move off of shortstop as they age making them less valuable. I also know I have had back injuries and there are questions about my health. But damn it you really should give me 10 years."

He's saying the only things he can- and the same things we would say if we were committed to getting what he wants.

 

You seem be complaining about him saying his situation is different than other 10 yr contracts by pointing out ways his situation is different from other 10 yr contracts...

 

Uh, how about Seager got 10 years so i think i should because that's the market now...

The age thing isn't really a valid point since most of those deals were done at roughly his age and he's comparing healthy players to himself as if he's the better bet.

How long did the Marlins keep Stanton after he signed?

He wasn't 30 when they unloaded him for nothing just to dump his deal...

 

Except that his situation isn't different. The vast majority of the 10+ year deals have been with players under 30 years old.

 

True - but the ones that people use as examples of why not to do 10 year deals - Pujols, Cano - were over 30.

 

And when Correa says this “But when you look at most of the 10-year contracts they’ve been giving out, the long-term deals, they’re players that are 31, 30, 32.", he should be corrected.

 

His situation is different, his career has been plagued by inconsistency and injury. Other 10 year contrafcts were to better, more consistent players with a less extensive history of injury.

It's the reason he REALLY wants the 10 years. He knows that he's not going to be more consistent and less injury prone as he ages. If he took a 6 year deal, his next contract would be a tiny one....if he got one at all.

By far the most important thing to him is locking in the most years possible.

 

Hot take: Correa is worth a 10-year contract at age 27 and will get one.

 

He will get one I bet. He doesn't deserve one because no one deserves anything ever; only what they can negotiate. Has ther ever been an positive experience with 10 year contract for the team?

 

Only 10 year contract I can think of that could be considered a non failure would probably be Jeter. I don’t think his play alone merited that kind of deal/money but he was reliable for the most part

 

A-Rod
Votto
Jeter

Stanton & Trout are working out pretty well so far but still many years to go. People say Stanton was a bad contract, but Miami had zero problems trading him and the Yankees wanted him at the signed price.

Everyone focuses on the two real failures - Pujols and Cano - but forget the ones that did fine. The rest of them - Betts, Tatis, Machado, Harper, etc - are still way early but no one seems to have major regrets.

 

I dont think Machado has been "worth it" so Far.

 

Seager Money?

 

How was that a positive experience?

The 10 year deal he signed with the Rangers led to him forcing his way out......and the Rangers were still paying him to not play for them 18 years after signing the deal.

As for the Yankees, he signed a 10 year deal with them in 2007, he got progressively worse every season after that for the first 4 seasons, then he became seriously injury prone, then he was suspended an entire season, he came back and had one final decent season before being terrible the season after that, then he was so terrible they agreed to pay him to go away.

Neither of his 10 year deals was a positive experience for the team he signed it with.....and he was a MUCH better player than Correa.

 

I'm not sure what San Diego was expecting, but his 3 seasons in San Diego have been right in line with what he was doing when they signed him. According to FanGraphs, he's produced 10.2 WAR in 2 seasons + the shortened 2020. At the generally used $8MM/WAR price, that's $81.6MM in value for about $72MM in pay. Not great since we know he's overpaid on the tail end and you hope to get more value on the front end, but I doubt San Diego has any regrets.

But ignoring that, if the problem with Machado is in his first 3 seasons, then that has little to do with giving him a 10 year deal - they shouldn't have even signed him to a 3 or 5 year deal.