1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

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

Discussion in 'Houston Astros' started by DaBeard, Nov 6, 2021.

  1. TheresTheDagger

    Joined:
    May 20, 2010
    Messages:
    10,099
    Likes Received:
    7,741
    I'm not arguing against 10 year contracts. I'm just stating there's more to think about than the contract and that player. If you pull the trigger on deals like that it effects your payroll for your entire team and limits other opportunities.
     
    mikol13 and Major like this.
  2. rockbox

    rockbox Around before clutchcity.com

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2000
    Messages:
    21,571
    Likes Received:
    10,436
    The rangers not fielding a good team had nothing to do with ARod's contract being 5 year or 10 years. They traded him to the Yankee pretty much at beginning of the contract and he was good enough for the Yankees to offer him another 10 year deal after he opted out.

    Without Correa this last season we would have not made it to the World Series. We still might have made the playoffs, but definitely not made it to the world series.
     
    everyday eddie likes this.
  3. Bobbythegreat

    Bobbythegreat Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2013
    Messages:
    63,182
    Likes Received:
    25,831
    He was not "awesome" for most of ANY 10 year deal he signed with any team ....at least not for the team he signed it with. It was a bad deal for EVERY team he signed a 10 year deal for.

    With the Rangers, he gave them about 3 good seasons before forcing his way out.....and the Rangers had to keep paying him for almost another 20 years.

    For the Yankees, he signed his 10 year deal there heading into the 2008 season where he rewarded them with .965 OPS....down from 1.067. Then down to .933 the next year, then down to .847 the next year, then .823, then .783, then a partial season of .771....then he missed an entire season due to suspension, then a bounce back season of .842, then he was complete trash after that and they agreed to pay him to go away.

    That means after he signed that deal, he had a grand total of 2 seasons where he hit better than his career average OPS.

    They gave him that deal at 31 and it was a complete disaster for them.

    The Rangers gave him the deal at 24 and he gave them 3 years before forcing his way out.

    How can anyone argue EITHER of those deals worked out for the team that gave them to him?
     
  4. Major

    Major Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 1999
    Messages:
    41,383
    Likes Received:
    15,808
    Cabrera was definitely a disaster, but there's lots of 3, 5, 7, 8 year deals that fail. That contract failed early and had little to do with being so long.

    A-Rod #2: not great, but was it really an albatross or disaster? A-Rod was an All-Star or got MVP votes in 5 of the 8 years he played; they won a World Series (their only one in the last 25 years); they didn't have to pay 1 of the years. And it likely didn't really stop the Yankees from making any other major moves. They knew when signing it that they end of the contract when he was 40+ would be dicey but they also structured the contract so those would be lower-paid years. Plus they had one of baseball's biggest stars in NY and whatever value that provides. It wasn't great value, but if they could do it all over again and either have him at that price or not have him at all, I suspect they'd at least consider it.

    Votto: I don't know how to qualify this as anything other than a success. $22MM/yr. He's produced 3 top-10 MVP finishes, another couple of all-star type seasons, and produced 30 WAR so far in 7 years. At the $8MM/WAR rate, he's already more than paid off his contract with 3 years to go.
     
    everyday eddie and rockbox like this.
  5. SamCassell

    SamCassell Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 1999
    Messages:
    8,843
    Likes Received:
    1,254
    Seems like moving the needle to argue against A Rod's value. He far, far more than lived up to that first contract with the Rangers. He was an annual MVP in his prime and the team they'd built around him was garbage. Moving him made sense, in the same way that almost every team moves on from good players when the team needs to rebuild. His second contract with the Yankees wasn't as productive (which was definitely going to happen with an older star) but you can't just compare him to his prior seasons and say he sucked - .965 in 2008 was an amazingly productive season, even though he dropped from 1st to 8th in MVP voting! You criticize his .933 the next year without noting that the Yankees won a ring that year that they absolutely don't win without his dominant playoff performance. His OPS was 1.5000, 1.519, and .973 in those three playoff series. That was the last World Series that NYY has won. The Yankees turn a big profit every year. You think Steinbrenner really regrets signing A Rod to that contract? A Rod had one of the most spectacular baseball careers ever (steroid asterisk). If that career on the field is considered a disappointment, I don't think anyone could produce enough for your standards.
     
    everyday eddie, Wulaw Horn and Major like this.
  6. sealclubber1016

    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    19,000
    Likes Received:
    27,537
    You will never, ever convince me that a 3 WAR player is worth 24 million dollars. If we give a guy 300 million and we get 37 WAR out of him that is bad value. Votto had 3 overly worthy seasons, and the last 7 overall are looking like meh. I won't say the Votto deal was terrible, but if we're playing Correa 30 million dollars to be a 2-3 WAR player for 7 years, really hard to classify that as a great contract unless we win a title.

    Which bring up the A-Rod deal, they won a title so it was worth it, everything becomes worth it when that happens. It wasn't an albatross because they're the Yankees, but for a franchise like us it absolutely would have been an albatross for what he gave them over those last 6 years.
     
  7. Bobbythegreat

    Bobbythegreat Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2013
    Messages:
    63,182
    Likes Received:
    25,831
    Not for the Rangers he didn't....they just got to pay him for 18 years to play for 3.

    Also, for the Yankees he gave them 3 or 4 total productive seasons after he signed that ridiculous contract.

    The point is that neither team that signed him to those 10 year deals got what they paid for....and they both would have been better off if they had instead given out a more sane, shorter contract.

    Teams almost always get screwed when they give out 10 year deals, almost no player in the history of the league is worth one.....and certainly not a guy about to be 28 who already has an extensive injury history and a history of wildly inconsistent performance. ARod is one of the greatest players ever and his deals completely screwed the teams who signed them, so why would anyone gamble on handing one out to lesser players?
     
  8. Major

    Major Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 1999
    Messages:
    41,383
    Likes Received:
    15,808
    But Votto hasn't been a 3 WAR player. During this contract (7 years so far), he has 28.6 WAR (I did some bad math apparently in my last post). Accounting for the Covid-shortened season, he's averaged 4.5 WAR per year. That's better than Springer averaged over his time with Houston and better than what we're Altuve is doing since his $30MM/yr contract extension. And Votto is only making $22.5MM/yr. Obviously the last few years may suck, but thus far, it's been a great contract in my opinion.
     
  9. Major

    Major Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 1999
    Messages:
    41,383
    Likes Received:
    15,808
    This was actually the most important part of this. For the most part, all those previous deals were given to 30+ year olds - and it was the last few years that sucked in the case of Cano (5 all-star seasons) and A-Rod. So if you shift those deals 3 years earlier, they look pretty good too. All the newer deals are being given to younger players and no one is giving 30+ year olds those types of deals anymore. That suggests that many teams independently have figured out the 30+ yr olds are bad investments, but are still determining these younger players are more worth these deals.
     
  10. jjsmooth

    jjsmooth Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2018
    Messages:
    335
    Likes Received:
    331
    Yeah, but steroids aren't allowed anymore
     
    Zen Tabak and Astrofan59 like this.
  11. Wulaw Horn

    Wulaw Horn Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2018
    Messages:
    4,426
    Likes Received:
    4,495
    He was the best player in the league while a ranger and then they moved off the deal and got back one of the top rated prospects in all of baseball. his 10 year production, which was the term of his contract, from age 24-33 was spectacular and one of the greatest 10 year runs anyone in baseball has ever had. This is a terrible take by you. It really doesn’t matter **** all that the Rangers sucked while he was there. It wasn’t his fault. I already said the ARod extension wasn’t good.
     
    SamCassell likes this.
  12. Wulaw Horn

    Wulaw Horn Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2018
    Messages:
    4,426
    Likes Received:
    4,495
    Sure. But ARods first 10 year contract was from age 24-33. It was awesome. And it probably wasn’t because of steroids at that point (not they he didn’t use- but that’s still prime to late prime).
    If Correa gets a 10 year deal he should have 3 or 4 absolute prime years, 3 or 4 late prime years and then 2-4 years at the tail end of his career. mid he goes something like. 25 War, 15 War, 5 War during that time that’s worth $360 million during that time. So- what’s that mean?
    He has to be MVP caliber (like top 10 type in voting) while 27-30, good players/fringe all Star in the next phase and then major league regular quality at 35 and 36. that doesn’t seem at all inconceivable. Also, if we see any inflation during that time period it becomes even less required to make the contract make sense.
    Or, you know, win a World Series while he’s here. And he makes that more likely than not having him.
     
    Milos and rockbox like this.
  13. Bobbythegreat

    Bobbythegreat Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2013
    Messages:
    63,182
    Likes Received:
    25,831
    No matter how you spin it, paying a player for 18 years to get 3 years out of them before they force their way out is a disaster.
     
  14. IdStrosfan

    IdStrosfan Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2021
    Messages:
    5,272
    Likes Received:
    5,902
    The bottom line is that most if not all 10 year contracts produce more value early.

    Also, the AAV is less because of the length.

    I would say any big cobtract is a bad one if the team does not win a World Series, although if the player is popular enough he could still increase the owners wealth.

    WAR is far from perfect but it is useful for these analysis and debates.

    A couple of years ago, I read that Fangraphs estimated that it takes about $8 mil per WAR to buy a FA but 1 WAR is worth about $4 mil because of all the young players making less than they produce.

    This is 1000 WAR total in all MLB divided by about 4 billion teams pay in payroll.

    Lets make the math easy and say Carlos signs for $320 mil /10 years.

    The team expects 40 WAR from him as a FA signing. If he hits that level and the team wins at least one World Series then its a good contract.

    Incidently that is more likely to be higher WAR totals early and lesser WAR totals later. Thats OK because the team is comparing the entire 10 yr cost vs entire 10 year production.

    If the team does not win a World Series then it makes sense that Correa would need to produce 80 WAR for the contract to not be considered a bad one. Although playoff revenue in one or more seasons could reduce that in the eyes of the owner.

    FYI Correa has made just under $29 mil salary in his MLB career. And has 34.1bWAR, and 25.1 fWAR.

    at the MLB avg of $4 mil per WAR he has been worth $100 million or $136 mil to the Astros so far in his career.

    He could, theoretically, underperform that contract quite a bit and still have made Jim Crane lots of money and profit over the course of his career.

    And he has already brought one Wotld Series to the team which even increases his value over the entire career.
     
    Wulaw Horn likes this.
  15. Nick

    Nick Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 1999
    Messages:
    47,917
    Likes Received:
    14,157
    All that should matter for the Astros right now is winning championships. I don’t care about a rebuild in 10 years.

    Spending money at all times guarantees nothing (see the Yankees). Having an amazing scouting department, player development system, and analytics for days guarantees nothing (see the Rays, A’s).

    The Astros (and the Dodgers) have been blessed to have a perfect combination of both. They spend, they scout, they trade, they go for it. They both have championships. Yes, the Dodgers could outspend everybody but even they have a limit (hence losing Seager). The Astros have their own limits, although for a team with an awful media deal (in comparison to their popularity), they’re willing to spend a f-ton over the next 5-6 years to ensure the prime years of Bregman/Altuve/Tucker/Alvarez are not wasted.
     
  16. Joe Joe

    Joe Joe Go Stros!
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 1999
    Messages:
    23,839
    Likes Received:
    13,895
    I've seen the Angels be the team with the most concentrated WAR many times over the past decade of full seasons. Though their win total over that time almost matches perfectly with their total WAR + replacement wins for a decade's worth of full seasons. If Trout in his great seasons and Ohtani last year weren't good enough to break the linear relation of WAR to win, it probably isn't going to be broken at the high end. I get not wanting to pay for WAR linearly at close to zero, but by 3-WAR, the linear relation with wins is pretty solid such that the $/WAR should work very well.
     
    Wulaw Horn likes this.
  17. Wulaw Horn

    Wulaw Horn Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2018
    Messages:
    4,426
    Likes Received:
    4,495
    Yep. the thing the angels have really failed at is development. You just have to develop those 1, 2 and 3 War guys. Which the Astros have been awesome at doing. You could say- you have to develop those 6 WAR guys but those are unicorns and I think it’s luck in a lot of ways more than anything. A good and systematic scouting and development program should be able to identify and create 1-3 WAR players. Those are your solid utility guys who can step in for a couple weeks or a month when the regular goes down and not create a huge problem to your slightly above average regulars.
    Diaz, McCormick, Meyers, Straw, Toro, Colin Moran, guys like that. If the Angels would have done that with their stats, instead of the scrubs they had, then Trout wouldn’t have been wasting his time there. Brantly is 2.2 WAR for $16 million. Perfect compensation in the FA market for his contract. He’s probably also the worst value proposition contract on our team which is why I’d love to move him, but one of those guys isn’t going to be a problem but if you have to spend 100 million for 5 if this’d tiles because you can’t ever create a Chaz McCormick that’s a real issue.
     
  18. Joe Joe

    Joe Joe Go Stros!
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 1999
    Messages:
    23,839
    Likes Received:
    13,895
    Development is one problem, but overall their development/trade/free agency/draft strategy has been about obtaining great players at the cost of everything else including obtaining the most wins. They draft shiny tools that may turn into great players, but likely become nothing. They sign big time free agents. They aren't cost efficient, and they don't spend more than other teams to make up for it.

    They act like 2-3 WAR players grow on trees and that it is easy to obtain them without resources. They got very lucky Ohtani choose them.
     
    #1198 Joe Joe, Jan 1, 2022
    Last edited: Jan 3, 2022
  19. homewight

    homewight Contributing Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2005
    Messages:
    463
    Likes Received:
    445
    Yawn. Thanks.
     
  20. awc713

    awc713 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2012
    Messages:
    6,394
    Likes Received:
    5,991

Share This Page

  • About ClutchFans

    Since 1996, ClutchFans has been loud and proud covering the Houston Rockets, helping set an industry standard for team fan sites. The forums have been a home for Houston sports fans as well as basketball fanatics around the globe.

  • Support ClutchFans!

    If you find that ClutchFans is a valuable resource for you, please consider becoming a Supporting Member. Supporting Members can upload photos and attachments directly to their posts, customize their user title and more. Gold Supporters see zero ads!


    Upgrade Now