There is an optimal time to do such a deal from both sides points of view. Deals for buy outs can only happen when the perceived timing of both sides overlap. It doesn't take a lot of conversation to determine if that is the case. If the timing is not right, insisting on a discussion just tends to needlessly create animosity.
A problem I see with this is that currently Tucker only counts against the AAV for a bit over 6M. If he was given an Alvarez type extension, his AAV automatically jumps to 19M+. This is a reason we don’t give Franco like deals. It’s a risk they walk earlier than we would like, but it’s a huge benefit to own them cheaply for 4-5 years.
Players are fickle about risk injury and the value of security. Alvarez came off knee surgery and chose security. Correa, even with an injury history, would not give any discount in either AAV or years for a contract only covering FA years. Tucker turned down an extension last year, but it's not known whether it was on principle or merely below his expectation. Pena is ahead of the curve for an extension offer, so who knows. Several pitchers are also due for extension discussions. It could be an important year, even if we don't make a FA splash.
It's a preliminary discussion to determine whether it's worth pursuing. No harm - no foul as long as neither is stalking the other.
If an extension into FA years cannot be done, usually there will be discussion about resolving arbitration years, whether one or all because it necessarily leads to hard feelings by it's nature and process. But averaging the tax over several years for CORE players you want into FA years is beneficial in the long view.
That explains it. It was a personal best OAA and an overall pick for best 3B in the AL. He did not rank highest on MLB 3B OAA. But it does indicate the BR dWAR is wrong.
It would be like a GM asking about Alvarez lol Alvarez has shown more so far but also has less defensive value and costs more.
I agree in theory, although when you have a large amount of core players, you have to choose, and that choice is often which players will settle. IMO, the choice has already been made (Alvarez v Tucker) and I would be surprised to see another offer to Tucker until next offseason when the arb will go up substantially.
They can ask. I am a firm believer that even the best player in Baseball can have too high a price in either $ or players or both.
I suspect Tucker and the Astros will agree to a Contract before it goes to arbitration, even if it is just for 1 year. Only a small percentage make it all the way to Arbitration, though a fair number make it to the submission stage before settling.
Bregman is great at third and should stay there. If there is a trade-off, I'd rather have less range and more length at first where inches can make a difference.
Lol, actually it is. They locked up Altuve early, they have locked up Yordan. They have tried to lock up Tucker but he hasn’t bit on it Not many teams wouldn’t want Hayes on that deal, hell there probably isn’t one Which is exactly why it’s such a stupid idea, Pitt is more likely to move Reynolds than Hayes
And we know his range is outstanding so it's not like his replacement would be better in that regard. Anybody?
Pena is in his first year. It's not the same as locking up players that's getting on the back half of their team control. Very different situation. Love Pena to death but I would not be comfortable signing him until he's proven more. He doesn't have the pedigree of a Rodriguez who was a no doubt can't miss prospect. Very different situation again.
Hayes is a superior defender when compared to Bregman (who is still a good defender). The infield defense would be better but offensively it would be a step down. The Astros are better just keeping Bregman at 3rd and getting a first baseman that can hit and is at least average with the glove there. The prospect cost for Hayes would be high as well.
I agree that Pena needs to wait but not because I am not comfortable with what he has/hasn't proven. I think he has done all he needs to. However it's all about economics. When a player signs an extension the payroll for CBT is factored based on AAV. For now it's $0.75M but an extension would change that. For example Ke'Bryan Hayes' 8 yr $70M contract counts as $8.75M when he would be $0.75M. For a team like Houston who has a roster of above average and veteran players that $8M makes a huge difference. The team must juggle contracts and decide who they can keep and when is best to try and extend them.
Due to his contract and potential, Hayes cost would be insane. I don't think Pittsburgh would take Houston's top 5 prospects for him.
We need to sign Bregman long term. The dude just has winner written all over him, is a great teammate, great in the clubhouse. Comes up big in the playoffs. Plus defender. Altuve would be nice but not at a substantial cost. Unless it's a short contract of less than 5 years. 4 years 80 million.
