Wednesday Banterings: More Signings, Not by the Jays

by Tom Dakers on Jan 6, 2010 12:28 PM EST in Toronto Blue Jays News

Everyone's favorite former Jay Eric Hinske signed with the Braves yesterday, so I guess the Braves will be printing those World Series tickets any moment know. Hinske has played in the World Series the last 3 years with 3 different teams. I'd imagine that hasn't happened before.

The Cardinals signed Matt Holliday for 7 years plus a vesting option for an 8th year. The vesting option is strange, he gets $17 million for 2017 if he is in the top ten in the MVP voting in 2016, with a $1 million buy out. He gets $17 million a year from 2110 to 2116, plus at least that $1 million buy out so he is guaranteed $120 million. He will be 36 in 2016.

I don't know how much month the Cardinals have left to sign Albert Pujols, you'd have to think the Cards wouldn't pay this much for Holliday if it meant they wouldn't have enough money for Pujols.

So Bay is getting $66 million for 4 year ($16.5 million a year) plus a vesting option, Bay is 31 now. Holliday is getting $17 million for 7 plus a vesting option, Holliday will be 31 in 9 days. Which contract do you think will work out best for their team?

Poll

Which signing will work out better for their team?

Matt Holliday

106 votes

Jason Bay

113 votes

219 votes | Poll has closed

Tweet Comment 13 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I voted Bay only because it’s a (relatively) shorter contract.

I predict that both signings will be ugly by 2013, which will make Bay’s look that much better.

by siggian on Jan 6, 2010 12:37 PM EST reply actions

I as well voted for Bay

Not that I think it is a good contract, it is just less worse.
The money these “good” players is rediculous. If Holliday is with $120M, what is ~~Poo-holes~~ Pujols worth? A Billion?

That's me on the beachside combing the sand, metal meter in my hand, sporting a pocket full of change
That's me on the street with a violin under my chin, Playing with a grin, singing gibberish

by craig in calgary on Jan 6, 2010 12:41 PM EST reply actions

The money these "good" players is rediculous.

All value is relative though. Is any baseball player worth millions to play? Objectively, assuming that money is a way of measuring worth, not at all. However, if it comes down to their value against the revenue they generate, sure. The only thing I don’t begrudge about the Yankees and their payroll is the players getting the money. Feckless and destructive to compition, sure. But I have no problem with a Jeter getting a fat chunk of the estimated $1.5 billion dollars a year that the Yankees generate in revenue. He’s the one providing the means to achieve that revenue, therefore he deserves a sizable percentage of it.

Which is why I’m against salery caps.

by dexfarkin on Jan 6, 2010 12:58 PM EST up reply actions

Except that their revenue is the product of a league-enforced regional monopoly.

They're not just hitting home runs. They're doing the little things, like hitting doubles.

by Torgen on Jan 6, 2010 8:50 PM EST up reply actions

Which is entirely outside of the player’s control, and thus, I support them getting an even larger share of the pie instead of the owners. A salery cap isn’t about to change the control over territory by the owners and their ability to block teams from encrouchment. Sadly, the Continental League never happened, and the US Congress isn’t likely to revisit baseball’s bizarre anti-trust exception…

by dexfarkin on Jan 6, 2010 9:51 PM EST up reply actions

I'm believe in a salary cap for players

and a revenue cap for the owners. I’d like to see a ceiling for team revenue, over which, monies must be donated to non-profit charities. Obviously, this would never happen, but that doesn’t mean I wouldn’t prefer it. Even outside of the parity issue, the problem with saying that a salary cap just makes owners richer is that not having a salary cap also makes the richest owners richer (the more money the Yankees can spend, the more money they seem to make).

And you’re right about the Continental League.

"Look at me! I'm Tomokazu Ohka of the Montreal Expos!"

by jessef on Jan 6, 2010 11:17 PM EST up reply actions

the NFL does revenue sharing

which is how the Continental League was designed to be set up. It’s interesting.

"Let us go forth awhile, and get better air in our lungs. Let us leave our closed rooms... The game of ball is glorious." - Walt Whitman

by hugo on Jan 7, 2010 10:12 AM EST up reply actions

it's

also enforced by the United States Government

"Let us go forth awhile, and get better air in our lungs. Let us leave our closed rooms... The game of ball is glorious." - Walt Whitman

by hugo on Jan 7, 2010 10:11 AM EST up reply actions

I like how

the CBA forbids you from vesting options or incentives based on performance, but you can base them on MVP, Cy Young, GG voting, admitting unequivocally that those things are not based on performance

"Let us go forth awhile, and get better air in our lungs. Let us leave our closed rooms... The game of ball is glorious." - Walt Whitman

by hugo on Jan 6, 2010 1:07 PM EST reply actions

I thought the rules were amended in 2007 specifically to remove incentives based on voted awards, after Schilling made some kind of offhand joke about buying a writer a car in exchange for receiving a Cy Young vote that activated a bonus in his contract. I think incentives now are limited to service elements; IP, AB, that kind of thing.

by dexfarkin on Jan 6, 2010 1:14 PM EST up reply actions

is that true?

I remember the BBWAA saying that starting in 2014 or something, they wouldn’t vote for any awards where the player stood to gain a financial incentive based on his contract, but I hadn’t realized it was written into the CBA or that it had started already. Obviously, based on what we’re hearing about the Holiday deal, you can still vest an option year on MVP performance, which doesn’t seem particularly different to me.

"Let us go forth awhile, and get better air in our lungs. Let us leave our closed rooms... The game of ball is glorious." - Walt Whitman

by hugo on Jan 6, 2010 1:27 PM EST up reply actions

I could be wrong. I clearly remember several articles speaking to the changes as if they were implemented, but I haven’t been able to dig up anything official online to substantiate that.

by dexfarkin on Jan 6, 2010 1:31 PM EST up reply actions

I vote for Holliday

Only Adam Dunn can hit HRs in that park, as witnessed by his monster 460ft drive into right center. Bay probably won’t put up as good numbers from his previous two years, and his defense won’t play as well in that huge LF, forcing Beltran to shift a little more to cover up.

HEADING STRAIGHT FOR THEM, I PRESS DOWN MAH GUNS!

by BenjiDoc on Jan 6, 2010 1:14 PM EST via mobile reply actions