• Granderson Agrees To $60 Million Deal With The Mets

    Posted by on December 6th, 2013 · Comments (20)

    The story.

    Going to be an interesting day on WFAN at 1 PM this afternoon.

    Comments on Granderson Agrees To $60 Million Deal With The Mets

    1. MJ Recanati
      December 6th, 2013 | 1:00 pm

      Decent signing for the Mets and it doesn’t cost them their top-10 draft pick either.

      Dunno how Granderson’s power will play in the much bigger Citi Field but it’s a step up from the nobodies the Mets have been running out there in their OF the past several years.

    2. December 6th, 2013 | 2:00 pm

      Granderson played in Comerica, he’s used to parks like this…his HRs will go down, but his triples will go up.

      Who holds the Mets single season whiff record? Grandy Man is gunning for you!

    3. MJ Recanati
      December 6th, 2013 | 2:14 pm

      Steve L. wrote:

      Granderson played in Comerica, he’s used to parks like this…his HRs will go down, but his triples will go up.

      Different story now that we’re talking about a player four years older. HR’s may go down but triples may not go up if he isn’t quite as fast as he was in 2007-2008. More doubles though, potentially.

    4. Evan3457
      December 6th, 2013 | 7:07 pm

      So, another team thought Granderson was worth what the Yankees paid for him for 2013. And for four years, too. Apparently, someone else, besides Brian Cashman, thinks he’s a valuable player.

    5. Corey
      December 6th, 2013 | 7:34 pm

      Would have preferred this deal to Ellsbury’s.

    6. Kamieniecki
      December 6th, 2013 | 8:00 pm

      Evan3457 wrote:

      And for four years, too.

      The Metropolitans did not want to go beyond three years with Kurtis Granderson, but really did not have a choice in this market. How many other teams offered K-Gran a contract?

      Evan3457 wrote:

      Apparently, someone else, besides Brian Cashman, thinks he’s a valuable player.

      The same Brian Cashman that passed on K-Gran to offer $169 million over 8 years to an outfielder that has reached double-digits in homeruns only once in his career? That Brian Cashman? He did mean well.

    7. Evan3457
      December 6th, 2013 | 9:21 pm

      Kamieniecki wrote:

      Evan3457 wrote:
      And for four years, too.
      The Metropolitans did not want to go beyond three years with Kurtis Granderson, but really did not have a choice in this market. How many other teams offered K-Gran a contract?
      Evan3457 wrote:
      Apparently, someone else, besides Brian Cashman, thinks he’s a valuable player.
      The same Brian Cashman that passed on K-Gran to offer $169 million over 8 years to an outfielder that has reached double-digits in homeruns only once in his career? That Brian Cashman? He did mean well.

      Wow, you’re really a stitch. You don’t really understand “market value”, do you?

      1) If there was no market for Granderson, why were the Mets FORCED to give him 4 years? And what if he only got a 3-year deal from the Mets, and I had written “and for 3 years, too”? What would’ve been your brilliant regjoinder to that? The relevant issue here is that after two straight bad years, and at the age of 32 (33 by Opening Day). It doesn’t matter that you think Granderson worthless. It doesn’t matter if he turns out to actually BE worthless. A major league team regarded him as worth %15 million a year, matching his best salary, and for four years.

      2) That player’s own team was reportedly willing to offer a 6-year $120-million deal to an outfielder that reached double-digit HRs once in his career. Yankees topped that offer by 1 year (with an option year) and about $2 million a year to get him to leave Boston. That difference of 1 year and $2 million a year makes the Red Sox geniuses and the Yankees idiots?

      That’s LOL funny. Especially in light of what Seattle had to give Cano to get him to leave the Yanks.

    8. Kamieniecki
      December 6th, 2013 | 9:34 pm

      Evan3457 wrote:

      1) If there was no market for Granderson, why were the Mets FORCED to give him 4 years?

      Because the team owed it to its fanbase to spend some money in 2014, and Kurtis Granderson is a very good fit under the circumstances. However, the team did not want to go four years for K-Gran.

      Evan3457 wrote:

      2) That player’s own team was reportedly willing to offer a 6-year $120-million deal to an outfielder that reached double-digit HRs once in his career.

      False. The report that Boston was willing to offer a “6-year $120-million deal” to Ellsbury has been denied by sources within the organization.

      The Jiminy Ellsbury contract is one of the worst contracts in the history of this franchise – $153-169 million for a player at the age of 31 that has only been selected to one All-Star team, has hit more than nine home runs only once, etc.

      Evan3457 wrote:

      Especially in light of what Seattle had to give Cano to get him to leave the Yanks.

      Ridiculous.

    9. McMillan
      December 6th, 2013 | 9:52 pm

      Evan3457 wrote:

      … what Seattle had to give Cano to get him to leave the Yanks.

      Exactly – to get him to leave the Yanks.

      Seattle was not going to convince the best second baseman, and one of the best overall players, in the game to leave the New York Yankees, or not sign with a team such as Texas or Washington, for much less money. They wanted Cano, and they got him. He’s a dog, but he’s still one of the best players in the game.

    10. Sweet Lou
      December 7th, 2013 | 8:10 pm

      Evan3457 wrote:

      So, another team thought Granderson was worth what the Yankees paid for him for 2013. And for four years, too. Apparently, someone else, besides Brian Cashman, thinks he’s a valuable player.

      Alderson did not want to give Granderson a fourth year, or 800th strikeout – ownership (J. Wilpon) interceded and overruled Alderson, resulting in a four-year deal (without a no-trade clause).

    11. McMillan
      December 7th, 2013 | 9:30 pm

      Evan3457 wrote:

      Apparently, someone else, besides Brian Cashman, thinks [Granderson's] a valuable player.

      Yeah… Jeff Wilpon.

    12. Evan3457
      December 8th, 2013 | 2:19 pm

      McMillan wrote:

      Evan3457 wrote:
      Apparently, someone else, besides Brian Cashman, thinks [Granderson's] a valuable player.
      Yeah… Jeff Wilpon.

      No, Alderson wanted him, but didn’t want to go to 4 years. Wilpon made him go the extra year.

    13. Evan3457
      December 8th, 2013 | 2:34 pm

      Kamieniecki wrote:

      Evan3457 wrote:
      1) If there was no market for Granderson, why were the Mets FORCED to give him 4 years?
      Because the team owed it to its fanbase to spend some money in 2014, and Kurtis Granderson is a very good fit under the circumstances. However, the team did not want to go four years for K-Gran.
      Evan3457 wrote:
      2) That player’s own team was reportedly willing to offer a 6-year $120-million deal to an outfielder that reached double-digit HRs once in his career.
      False. The report that Boston was willing to offer a “6-year $120-million deal” to Ellsbury has been denied by sources within the organization.
      The Jiminy Ellsbury contract is one of the worst contracts in the history of this franchise – $153-169 million for a player at the age of 31 that has only been selected to one All-Star team, has hit more than nine home runs only once, etc.

      Even Cafardo’s organizational propaganda piece says they were willing to go to 5 years, $100 million (quote; “The Red Sox were never comfortable crossing the five-year, $100 million mark, though we still don’t know details of their final offer.”). So, giving it the best spin you can, it’s an extra 2 years, and 2 million a year.
      Even last year, hitting only 9 home runs, Ellsbury was a 5-6 WAR player, and the marginal value of that is $25-30 million (and rising, given the way salaries are going in the face of increased team revenues). And he’s 30 next year, not 31.

      Is Ellsbury’s contract. a bad contract? Yeah, it’s going to be a bad contract. There were lots of bad contracts given out. Most free agent contracts for the big money are bad contracts, for two reasons: 1) The team is usually buying a player at an age as he’s leaving his prime, or soon to leave his prime. 2) The team is usually buying a player coming off a season which is at least above average for him, if not a career year, so normal forces of competitive balance usually drag the play back to his normal level. Some players find it very hard to live up to a big deal in the first season, and have usually bad seasons in the first season.

      Evan3457 wrote:
      Especially in light of what Seattle had to give Cano to get him to leave the Yanks.
      Ridiculous.

      Ridiculous? Most of your reply.
      The Mariners had to bid 3 more years at an additional $86 million to get him to leave the Yankees. No one else was bidding. Yes, Cano is an elite player. Yes, he’s likelier to keep hitting at a top level longer. But his contract is just as bad as the Ellsbury deal, if not worse. From a Sherman article, quoting an “NL official”:

      The contract is ridiculous and a desperate move from a desperate front office that seriously borders on moral hazard. Cano is not [Albert] Pujols or [Alex Rodriguez], he hasn’t done what they did, and he doesn’t deserve to be in the same contract range. I realize there is more money in the game and inflation, but it is a bad contract already and will handicap the franchise long term.

    14. Evan3457
      December 8th, 2013 | 2:35 pm

      Sweet Lou wrote:

      Evan3457 wrote:
      So, another team thought Granderson was worth what the Yankees paid for him for 2013. And for four years, too. Apparently, someone else, besides Brian Cashman, thinks he’s a valuable player.
      Alderson did not want to give Granderson a fourth year, or 800th strikeout – ownership (J. Wilpon) interceded and overruled Alderson, resulting in a four-year deal (without a no-trade clause).

      Oh, so he was willing to give him 3 years and 600 strikeouts. Because 3 years of a worthless (your opinion) player at $15 million a year is acceptable, but 4 years isn’t. Tasty logic there, Sybil.

    15. Kamieniecki
      December 8th, 2013 | 8:11 pm

      Evan3457 wrote:

      Even Cafardo’s organizational propaganda piece says they were willing to go to 5 years, $100 million (quote; “The Red Sox were never comfortable crossing the five-year, $100 million mark, though we still don’t know details of their final offer.”). So, giving it the best spin you can, it’s an extra 2 years, and 2 million a year.

      Even last year, hitting only 9 home runs, Ellsbury was a 5-6 WAR player, and the marginal value of that is $25-30 million (and rising, given the way salaries are going in the face of increased team revenues). And he’s 30 next year, not 31.

      B.S. The Boston Red Sox offered Ellsbury $100 million for 5 years, and the most incompetent front office in M.L.B. gave him $158-69 million for 7-8 years – a 31-year old outfielder who has hit more than 10 home runs only once. Enough said.

      Evan3457 wrote:

      The Mariners had to bid 3 more years at an additional $86 million to get him to leave the Yankees.

      False.

      Evan3457 wrote:

      Yes, Cano is an elite player. Yes, he’s likelier to keep hitting at a top level longer.

      True.

      Evan3457 wrote:

      But his contract is just as bad as the Ellsbury deal, if not worse.

      In the end, I think the Ellsbury contract might very well turn out to be worse…

    16. McMillan
      December 8th, 2013 | 8:38 pm

      Evan3457 wrote:

      No, Alderson wanted him, but didn’t want to go to 4 years.

      Only Wallace Matthews reported an interest in Kurtis Granderson by Sandy Alderson, and Alderson certainly did not want to go four years.

      The Kurtis Granderson Era in The Bronx has mercifully come to an end after four long and fruitless years; I’m certainly grateful Cashman sent Kennedy to Detroit for Granderson, and not to Arizona for Scherzer, and to have had an opportunity to watch Kurtis strikeout 1.076 times per game in that time.

    17. Sweet Lou
      December 8th, 2013 | 9:48 pm

      Evan3457 wrote:

      Oh, so he was willing to give him 3 years and 600 strikeouts. Because 3 years of a worthless (your opinion) player at $15 million a year is acceptable, but 4 years isn’t. Tasty logic there, Sybil.

      Sandy Alderson was willing to give him 3 years, and 600 strikeouts, because the free agent market isn’t that great, he doesn’t have alot of money to spend, and his fanbase is clamoring for something more than a Chris Young.

    18. Evan3457
      December 9th, 2013 | 12:52 am

      Kamieniecki wrote:

      in the face of increased team revenues). And he’s 30 next year, not 31.
      B.S. The Boston Red Sox offered Ellsbury $100 million for 5 years, and the most incompetent front office in M.L.B. gave him $158-69 million for 7-8 years – a 31-year old outfielder who has hit more than 10 home runs only once. Enough said.

      False. Cot’s Basball Contracts says $153 million for 7 years, with an option for the 8th. Have yet to see what makes the option year vest. So it’s 2 more years, and $2 million more a year, until we do. The extra 2 years is the driver for the the “extra $58-69 million. Sox were willing to pay him $20 million a year until his age 34 season.

      Evan3457 wrote:
      The Mariners had to bid 3 more years at an additional $86 million to get him to leave the Yankees.

      False.

      Last reported offer was $161 million for 7 years. He signed with the Mariners for $240 million. So it was $79 million for the 3 additional years. 3 more years, 1 million more a year. More or less just like the Ellsbury deal.
      Yanks

      Evan3457 wrote:
      But his contract is just as bad as the Ellsbury deal, if not worse.

      In the end, I think the Ellsbury contract might very well turn out to be worse…

      It’s possible. But it’ll be over 3 years earlier (or 2 years). Cano’s contract is full no-trade/no opt out. Ellsbury’s is described as “no-trade protection”, which probably means not a full no-trade.

    19. Evan3457
      December 9th, 2013 | 12:59 am

      Sweet Lou wrote:

      Evan3457 wrote:
      Oh, so he was willing to give him 3 years and 600 strikeouts. Because 3 years of a worthless (your opinion) player at $15 million a year is acceptable, but 4 years isn’t. Tasty logic there, Sybil.
      Sandy Alderson was willing to give him 3 years, and 600 strikeouts, because the free agent market isn’t that great, he doesn’t have alot of money to spend, and his fanbase is clamoring for something more than a Chris Young.

      If a player has no value, he has no value. It’s not the GM’s job to sign someone without value. He didn’t want to commit to the 4th year, but Alderson clearly does think Granderson has value. That’s all.

    20. Kamieniecki
      December 9th, 2013 | 8:22 pm

      @ Evan3457:
      Evan3457 wrote:

      False. Cot’s Basball Contracts says $153 million for 7 years, with an option for the 8th. Have yet to see what makes the option year vest.

      $148 mil. plus a $5 mil. buyout or $21 mil. in year 8 – or $153-69 mil. (compared to Boston’s offer of 5 years at $100 mil.); my mistake.

      Evan3457 wrote:

      Last reported offer was $161 million for 7 years.

      For Cano? No it wasn’t: it was for 7 years, and $170-75 mil.; Cano received approx. $65 mil. more from Seattle ($240-175), plus approx. $20 mil. in personal income tax savings from 2014-2023.

      The Ellsbury contract is terrible.

      I could live with a $200-35 mil. contract for a player that would have, in all likelihood, gone into the H.O.F. as a lifetime Yankee. People have good reason to not like Cano – he doesn’t give 100%, but he also plays in 160 games each year. And he’s been with the organization since 2001, so the front office should have known what kind of person he was, or was not, and what the Yankees’ history and tradition did mean, or did not mean, to him…

      So, you either: 1. trade him; or 2. lock him up long-term prior to 2013 – you don’t let him go to Seattle, and then sign Jiminy Ellsbury for approx. the same money for the first seven years of the contract ($235/10) = $23.5 mil. per year. You had to know someone was going to give Cano a deal of more than 7 years at $200 million… even if he doesn’t run out ground balls – he’s still one of the best players in the game.

      Pujols had PED use written all over him; Cano didn’t. I wouldn’t surprise me to see Cano more productive in years 7-10 than Pujols will be.

      Evan3457 wrote:

      If a player has no value…

      No one said Kurtis Granderson has no value, Sybil…

    Leave a reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.