Carlos Correa to the Twins - 3 Years, $105 Million

So Correa has a .413/.443/.762 slash line in his career at the Twins ballpark. Against the rest of the AL Central (not including MIN) he hit .289/.404/.544 last season. The AL Central is trash and the Twins aren't good so he'll hypothetically get to face a lower quality of relievers overall throughout the season given they will be down more often in games and once again the division is trash.

He's trying to get paid LOL all that talk about building something in Minnesota is laughable.

 

It's about the opt outs above all else, folks. How the hell is a contending team supposed to to outline their budget and fill needs accordingly when your starting SS can test free agency every year for the next three years? How do you know what you can offer to extend Yordan or Tucker? How do you know what is available to spend after Yuli and Brantley become free agents? Trying to do all that plus do the same free agency song and dance with Correa possibly THREE more times is a big ask. The Astros front office wants to know what they have, they made what they believe was a good offer and moved forward. I'm ok with it.

 

Interesting you start with Morton (clearly the biggest mistake this regime has made) and JV instead of mentioning, or at least including, Keuchel (he was the first one we decided to let walk), Marwin (clearly the right decision), Cole (looking like it was the right decision to let him walk), or Springer (likely going to be the right decision)...

Not to mention making the correct decision by resigning Yuli after his down season. This leadership group has more than earned the right to not be second guessed at this point...not sure why so many people seemingly fail to see that the past couple weeks.

 

The risk is offset by the reward with a commitment to the team if he has good years. Just look at the other side of the equation. Looking only at risk, you would be correct and even understating it with a total higher $ risk. That is why the opt out completely changes the risk/reward analysis.

If you don't see that, then it's back to Apples/Oranges basic economics.

 

See.... you and I can agree on stuff.

 

The mindset the Astros have, in regards to no long deals, is to optimize championship windows... and spend close to the tax during those windows... but have flexibility for other times where the window may be less open.

Them signing Verlander for this year indicated the mindset of the window still being open. The CBT raising to $230 most certainly opened up more flexibility for spending without penalty. Absolutely nobody thought a 1-3 year deal would ever be possible with Correa at the start of free agency and all the arguments were about how 10 years was foolish... and even 5 years potentially too risky.

Of course this would end up being the deal that would give Correa a better chance to make more money overall in the long run... but it was also unique from the Astros standpoint that they're looking to win championships now with a current core that isn't under contract 2-3 years down the road. Household names also continue to help attendance/merchandise sales and cultivate generational fans... 2-3 more years of that goes a long way.

That being said, they likely just don't think the loss of Correa is going to impact them as much (especially if Pena is great), and there is reason to believe they don't want to spend as much this year given some of the already dead money they've forked over, with more to possibly come (JV last 2 years, LMJ this year, Bregman last 2 years).

 

Yeah. On baseball. I'll try to keep it there.

 

It's a three year risk and 1 year reward deal. Without the opt outs, I think the Astros would love it.

 

yeah, but where this reasoning fails is that the Astros made a 5 year offer. The opt outs in the 3 year deal create “uncertainty”, but it’s easily addressed by treating the deal as a 3 year deal with no opt outs and planning accordingly.

whats the potential pitfall? I guess one could argue that assuming a 3 year deal with no opt outs could create a scenario where Crane and Click “fail” to have options at SS in the event that Correa opts out. But that theoretical scenario is BS - we have Peña. And even if we deal Peña, so what. Go to the market and buy a solution with the money available due to correas opt out.

So it comes down to the potential explanation of Correa’s contract blocking an extension of Yordan and or Tucker? First, those issues are not temporally urgent. You have plenty of time. Spending on Yuli and Brantley replacements? How does that compare to having Correa for a title run this year.

the whole thing is idiotic. And I am the biggest fan of Crane has built. This one hurts because it was inexplicable and dumb.

 

I'm selling you a car. You're paying for it to be excellent. But if it breaks down, you're stuck for three years and if it does what you pay for, it goes away in one year. That's as simple as I can make it.

I just thought of a better one. Your wife wants a no limit credit card after telling you she wants a divorce. Do you give her one hoping she stays?

 

His slash line will go down now that he will not be facing Twins pitchers.

 

It depends on how hot she and how replaceable she is. If she is the hottest woman on the planet and there is not chance I can get someone nearly as awesome, then yes I go for it. I've been married 25 years, and we almost never argue about money because I would rather be broke with her, than be broke(because of the divorce) without her.

 

Exactly. Whenever they post stats about how an opposing player has done at a certain ballpark, its basically criticizing the new team’s pitching more than anything else.

That being said, Barry Bonds would have tripled his overall numbers had he played his entire career at Minute Maid park.

 

I'm conflicted. As an Astros fan it's hard for me to root for him in Minnesota. What will be even harder is, if after his 1 season there he goes to the Yankees or Dodgers, I think I'd actually be physically sick.

 

Thanks for the memories and I wish we could have kept on a somewhat team friendly deal but he wanted to be one of the highest paid players. With his opt outs over the next several seasons, seems clear he is still determined to get a fat, long term deal.

 

LOL!

 

True Love!

 

Let me get this straight - your argument is that potentially getting the incredible opportunity of paying him an AAV second only to Mike Trout (and it's not far apart FYI) for all position players in all of baseball is a "reward" that offsets the very real RISK of paying him an AAV, that once again as a reminder, is second only to Mike Trout...while he is injured and/or unexpectedly putting up subpar numbers? And if by chance he has an absolute monster season he gets to bounce? On top of all of that, he has a no trade clause too?

Where the hell did you go to college and/or take economics courses? You should ask them for a refund because they clearly didn't do a good job teaching you "basic economics".

Very high level - the only way he opts in is if he doesnt meet the expectations that salary demands and/or he gets injured. Conversely, if he outperforms the deal, he will opt out and therefore the team literally has ZERO chance of Correa being on their team next season in a situation where the contract looks like a relative bargain. I don't understand how people aren't grasping this.

 

It may have already been posted here, but I think the truth of what happened is in between what’s been reported (I.e, Correa’s camp saying HOU ghosted them and other reports to the contrary). I’m choosing to believe that Crane was in communications with Boras, not Correa (because Boras would not let that happen), and Boras did not relay those communications or adjusted offers to CC. I will die on this hill. I don’t buy that the Astros “ghosted” CC’s camp…I think Boras did not love Astros offers and thought it was in his clients best interest to move on.