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

That's already baked into the cake. The Astros have offered a significantly higher AAV to Correa than what Semien received. But Semien's $25M AAV is not a good comparable for Correa's contract demands.

 

Assume Correa was to also sign a 7 year contract. In 4 years, he will be 31 (Semien's age now). Correa would be projected to be better in those first 4 years and certainly better in the final 3.

How does that not make Correa's value significantly more?

 

That semien contract is going to look terrible

 

It’s amazing how bad so much of our fan base is at understanding age, aging curves etc. but Pujols got 10! And he was bad! Yeah- dude- he signed at 31. Carlos is 27 and will be 36 at the end of his deal. you have 2 chances for a 10/300 to work out:
1) he’s so good in the next 3-5 years he piles up the total value of the deal in that time and everything else is icing ((Astros win a WS or 2 and he puts up 7-9 WAR over the next 3 years as an MVP type player and then has an all star season or two)
2) he’s still a productive major league player like almost every single HOF player is at that age.

So, basically how you should feel about this deal is- do I think Correa is going to help us win a WS in the next couple years or do I think he’s a HOF. I think both could happen and I want two bites at that apple. but, this has nothing to do with Pujols, and the Semien deal tells me if CC doesn’t get 10/300 it would be weird and the Rangers are even dumber than I thought.

 

Per Mark Feinstein, Correa isn't looking to sign before Wednesday.

Seager and Baez could be done today.

 

Delete

 

There have only been 4 contracts 10 years or longer that average 30 million or more a year, so I don’t think it would be weird if Correa doesn’t get that.

Baseball isn’t an open market, so what Correa should be worth compared to player X doesn’t mean there will be a team who will pay him that. What teams are out there who could pay him that? The Rangers have money and said they want to spend big. They could probably have had Correa for 10/300, but seem to have gone another way.

The Yankees, Dodgers, Tigers could use a short stop and have money. The Yankees and Tigers have indicated they aren’t that interested in that part of the market (might not be true, but at least a signal they aren’t interested in bidding against themselves). The Dodgers would presumably prioritize Seager over Correa. There are also other good shortstops on the market that maybe aren’t as good as Correa/Seager, but can be had for a lot lot less than 10/300M.

It wouldn’t shock me if Correa gets a 10/300M contract (and you can certainly argue he deserves one), but I don’t think it’s obvious there is a market out their to pay him that right now. I do think there is an offer out there better than what the Astros will give him though.

 

Totally agree. A lot will depend if Mad Max signs with the Mets. Dodgers will put their focus on Seager. I think Detroit will pursue Correa hard if they can not sign Baez. They are high on Baez. But if Mad Max signs with the Dodgers, this puts pressure on the Mets to sign Baez.

Yankees seem to be focusing on making moves after the lockout. They also want to make trades.

I think today we will get a better idea where players will go and how the market fairs out for Correa.

 

Over the past 4 years Correa has missed 163 games...practically an entire season of games due to injury. Semien has missed 10 games over those 4 years.

 

Which essentially means nothing over the next 7 years. Bregman was durable, till he wasn't. Springer only played 78 games this year.

Semien will be durable, till he isn't... just like Correa was injury prone till he wasn't over the last 2+ years.

In the end, if you're paying Semien for his past performance or past health, that's probably not the best business strategy over a 7 year contract when he's already 30 years old, for a team that is at least 3 years away from competing.

 

I was pretty shocked at 7 years.

 

I wouldn’t label Bregman as not durable yet. Springer has always been an injury risk like Correa.

I don’t really agree with the point about past durability meaning nothing.

 

Past durability doesn't mean nothing, but it is a lot closer to nothing for most position players than fans make it out to be. Long term, I worry about back issues, and knee issues for guys that are heavy. Short term, anything with hands and wrists can short out power, but doesn't have much affect long term. Labrum and Tommy John can affect throwing so they affect pitchers mostly, but guys that depend on arm like short stops, CFs, and RFs have some risk if they depend too much on arm or have little to spare.

 

Depends on the type of injury. Ones requiring surgery with high chances of aggravation/re-injury at an older age are troublesome. Or chronic/degenerative conditions that will always be an issue.

Bregman had a hamstring and wrist injury this year... had lower extremity issues throughout 2020. Throughout that time, Correa was healthy. These things can flip on a year to year basis and you have to risk assess accordingly.

 

Weird might not be quite right- but odd think g is probably a better way to put it. If very very very few teams would bat an eye at 8/240 for correa (at just turned 27) then I can’t understand why 10/300 is some bridge too far to cross so let’s just go give Story a deal that runs through almost the same age for 70 or 80% of the money. That’s what I meant by weird.

 

$60M is quite a bit of money.

 

There is still a long way from 7/175 to 8/240. 10/300 is 25% longer and more expensive than 8/240. That’s not trivial and adds even more on the risk side as those extra years are the riskiest.

I think a lot of teams would bat an eye at 8/240 and most of the teams that would consider 8/240 would be much much more cautious at 10/300.

I don’t know how Correa values length/total value vs AAV, but he may not get exactly what he wants on both sides. If he values AAV and thinks he can do well enough with a second contract the Astros might have a shot. If he values the longest contract and then just trying to get as much as he can for 10 years then I don’t think it will be with the Astros. I believe the market right now would probably favor a shorter higher AAV contract if he really wants to maximize his career earnings (teams seem to be willing to pay a larger premium to keep contracts shorter), but obviously there is more risk with that approach.

 

Not for Verlander, it isn't.

 

That contract ends when he's 38 and he's already 31 I think

 

Pitching has been a priority for teams this year and the market has been reacting accordingly. To put Verlander’s contract in perspective, there are talks of Mad Max getting 120 million over three years.