The basics of the deal:
- Old deal torn up so that Cain can have no-trade protection for the 2012 season as well as the rest of the contract, but he still gets "only" the $15M for 2012.
- He gets 5 additional years at $20M per season extension, signing him to his 32 YO season.
- He gets $5M signing bonus (which basically makes his 2012 salary $20M, probably not by coincidence).
- There is an option 6th year (or 7th if you count the current contract) for 2018 (33 YO season) that is a team option at $21M. However, the option year vests into a player option at $21M if he meets 2017 IP target that basically means that he is healthy at that point of the contract. He gets a $7.5M buyout from the Giants if they decline the team option. If he earns the option year via vesting, he gets a $7.5M buyout if he declines the player option (in other words, he gets at least $7.5M :^).
Giants Thoughts
Various ways to say how big this contract is, but he basically gets another 5 years at $20M plus a $5M signing bonus and a $7.5M buyout. Average of $22.5M for a total of $112.5M guaranteed additional money, total $127.5M if you count the $15M contract (that's cheating, I think, as he already had that), and $141M if you count the $21M option as well, which works out to an average annual value of a little over $20M per season. The agents will definitely go with the higher numbers so that they have some firsts that they can claim (and market to future players who they recruit for clients).
This is a basically what everyone thought he would get, around $20M per season, plus the bonus and buyout on top of that, plus an option year. I'm happy with the deal, the D-ger sale put some upward pressure on the deal, but it is close enough that it is pretty much a push regarding average annual value with the high end of what I would be willing to pay ($20M per season). I view this as a win-win for both sides.
The Giants had to do this, and it is like I've been saying all along, big contract negotiations just always takes the whole time up to the deadline. Basically, as a negotiator, particularly the agent for the pitcher, any earlier and it will feel like you left something on the table. That is why almost all the big money draft signings take until the last days before the deadline to get signed: the agents will haggle up to the last moment, to get that last dollar, but makes sure that his player can sign in time to beat the deadline, because you don't want to risk losing out on the big money.
Only Boras is willing to play chicken and hold out the longest, and risk his player not signing, as most agents realize that the financial liability of a player missing on a signing and then, for some reason, is unable to play or perform at that level anymore can be large: misrepresentation, fiduciary responsibility, even incompetence accusations, it would not be pretty at all. That's why Cain would most probably sign, as long as the Giants were offering, as he's been asking for, a fair deal.
Ultimately, the Giants did, because all the talk before was just part of the dance of negotiations, a process that both sides have to go through in order to feel assured that they did not get 'ripped off' in any way. 5 years is what the market was bearing for most players so I view it as a win that Cain got only 5 years and not the 6 years that some were advocating. It is risky enough given that he is a pitcher, and he has had elbow issues in the past. That is a lot of risk for the team to take given that he could be injured in 2012 and the Giants would still owe him $107.5M still.
And $20M per season is about what the top young pitchers were getting, and with the D-ger big money owners sitting on the sidelines with their money bags waiting to be paid out, the Giants had to push to there to get Cain. I think that is why the Giants were rumored to be sitting at $90M for 5 years previously.
Now the Giants need to work on long term deals for Tim Lincecum, Buster Posey, and Madison Bumgarner. :^)
Press conference with Cain to be broadcast on KNBR at 3:30PM.
Go Giants!
All good in the hood OGC. I am very happy and very relieved. One thing someone noted in that Fangraphs article comments is Cain has the best possible playoff experience. Now it wasn't against the Yankees like Cliff Lee, so it didn't get quite the hype, but if you compare it to CJ Wilson for example... It is a very small sample, but the whole point of having top of the rotation aces is they take you to the postseason and then they win in the postseason. THAT IS THE STRATEGY. And people who don't want to give that to Sabean are just weak. Its obvious that is his strategy.
ReplyDeleteLooking forward to the season starting, and the bumps and bruises and drama that goes with it. Good day to be a Giants fan. For the record, I think this is a very good deal for both sides. And I think Cain has a good chance to beat the WAR crowd as well, not that that should be the first or only consideration in this case. Fan goodwill, locking up your core, key players who will come up big in the drive to success. This is the stuff that's fun to talk about and debate. Not the 25th man on the roster. Good stuff.
Yeah, it should be, but I see the Sabean Naysayers raging on about one thing or another. I like how they round up the wagons when I try to insert my opinion on Twitter, reminded me of Lil' Rascal's He-man Woman-haters club. :^)
DeleteI am very happy and relieved too. Even though I felt in my soul that it would get done, and so I tried to explain it to the Naysayers out there, it was nice to see it finally happen. Kind of like watching grass grows, people get antsy.
This kind of reminded me of the time period 2007-2009, where I felt that the Giants were going to do well but nobody was buying it, so until there was "proof" (i.e. reality), all I could really do was make my points and let time pass.
About Cain in the playoffs, I know it is small samples and all that, but really, 21 IP of SHUTOUT baseball, if people didn't really understand the stout heart and balls of steel that Cain has, that run of starts was a great example of what we Giants fans have been privileged to observe.
And yes, that is the strategy. As the Phillies showed last season, it is not foolproof or preordained, but as I expect to see play over and over again for the Giants in the 2010's, that is the best and most efficient/effective way of doing well in the playoffs.
If people don't buy the BP's regression analysis or THT's not as rigorous exercise, then my study of how strong pitching performances dominates in the playoffs should, tied with the records of pitchers over the past ten or so years, should. Clearly, the best pitchers have great DOM% each and every year, consistently, and in the playoffs, if you throw them out start after start, like the Giants can, eventually you will get the Grand Canyon.
I'm still seeing people spouting off about how Sabean and the Giants were lucky in 2010, and like above, I'm willing to watch and let reality play out. Barring unforseen injuries, the Giants should do well, now that we got Cain locked up.
Thinking ahead now, Lincecum is the next domino. I'm thinking that if the Giants can win the World Series again in his two year window, Lincecum will be torn between "fair pay" and the greatness of being on a team that dominates in a decade. What do you think?
DeleteHe clearly has a chip on his shoulder. I think the Giants are prepared to pay him top money to stay, probably next off-season, similar to Cain, though I'm hoping that they are working with his reps this season to continue the conversations they had previously.
I like your comment elsewhere about offering Lincecum 3 years at $30M (though more as a high end offer; I would stagger $25, 27.5, 30). That fits in with the thought that DrB had about paying more to get less years. I liked that move that the D-gers did with Furcal, and hope the Giants duplicate it with Lincecum.
I think Lincecum does have issues with long term deals, though I'm not sure why exactly. He gave a lame reason about not being sure what he wants in 2 years, let alone 5 years.
I agree with your comment elsewhere that he made a mistake taking a two year now, because his next contract will be mostly into his late 30's if he really wants an 8-year deal. I wonder if his reps was pushing for 8 but he wanted 2.
Maybe it is an offense thing, which a lot of people threw out as a reason why Cain wouldn't sign. I didn't see that with Cain, but Lincecum sure. He, unlike Cain, appears to get bothered by the poor offense, I recall that he blew up at some point last season but it didn't get much media play.
Two years should be enough time for our young offensive players to come up and prove themselves, so if that is an issue with him, then we should be set by then.
Frankly, if Belt can develop as I hope he can (and think he can), with our pitching and that offense, 95-100 win seasons should not be out of the question regularly. Add in Brown and/or Panik, and 100+ would not surprise me.
I personally Lincecum wants to test free agency. The 8-year thing can only have been a smokescreen - he/his advisors knew that there is no way the Giants or anyone else would offer that to a pitcher, so it's hard to read it as anything other than a convenient way of blocking any discussion of a deal that would go into free agency years.
DeleteI personally don't really buy his stuff about never wanting a long-term deal either, or that the weak offense thing is really a factor - I guess we will see when he next signs a contract, but I'd expect it will be for 4 or 5 years, whoever it's with.
Maybe he wants to move home to Seattle, maybe he wants to play for the Yankees, maybe he wants to see how the Giants are positioned in two years before deciding, maybe he wants to ring every last penny out of baseball that he can get, maybe he just genuinely doesn't know what he wants or is just happy where he is now and doesn't want to think about the future too much.
It's really hard to say, he's hard to read. It always seemed pretty much certain that Cain would sign with the Giants eventually, but Lincecum is tough. I still think there's a chance that he ends up with the Giants long term, but if I were a betting man I wouldn't be putting much money on him being in San Francisco in 2014. That would be sad, but knowing we will have Cain and Bumgarner sure takes the edge off.
Thanks for sharing, DiggingForFire.
DeleteYeah, I agree, that 8 year thing must be a smokescreen, because it was so outlandish then (maybe not so much after Votto's 10 year...), so it is an easy way to stop discussion into free agency years.
Yeah, hard to say, hard to read, all we can do is list out things he has said or done. He does seem to love being with the Giants. But he also mentioned that he wouldn't mind going to the Mariners at some point in his career, if things turn out that way.
Yeah, Cain, while not a sure thing, was as close as there ever could be to one, that's why I found it funny (and disconcerting) that fans all over were so worried about losing him. Lincecum, you hit the nail: can't really read too well.
The way I read it now is that historically, he wants what he thinks is fair. He wanted $1M from the Indians, which they didn't give. He got $200K above slot from the Giants, which was the bonus the #10 got the season before. Though, that might not be what he wanted, he reportedly had a pre-draft deal (just read recently) where Tampa was going to draft him but then Longoria fell to them, would have to think that was a lot more. They did ask for moon in the first arb, but it worked out, just one season later. And it has to be good that the Giants and his agents were pretty close for their latest contract.
He also mentioned liking being with the Giants when all those rumors of the Rios trade offer came public, wanting to be with the guys he knew, so that is also positive for him wanting to stay.
But Seattle, home/father, money, all will play a part in his decision, probably, in some way.
YES!!! Like we've been saying 5/100 or around there. Now the question becomes how much does Timmy want/earn over these next two years. This is hopefully just the first dominoe in what is going to become big business with this team as we're going to have teams/agents coming after our players if they all perform and we're winning. My question is how much is it ultimately going to cost to keep LinceCainBumgarner and the good bats? Do we stop after Panda, Posey and Belt? Or is/will there be enough money for Brown an Panik too should they develop? Worries for another day as this is a day of celebration! Don't forget that par of "The Strategy" is having a high K bullpen and closer too, so for all the excitement of the starters we've got a kinda old BP. Gonna have to replace these guys soon too.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the comment.
DeleteThe unfortunate fact is that, as the Dave Cameron post on Fangraphs noted, players do flame out.
His solution, however, was asinine, you can't just replace a Cain or Lincecum with some scrub who never did anything before, and more importantly, he advocated signing an offensive player, and as Shankbone emphasized above, great pitching is the strategy.
At that point, you sign on the dotted line (as long as the player is only asking for a fair contract), and hope for the best.
Well, there are two scenarios I see happening. One is that the monster TV deals continue and CSN is forced by the Giants to redo the deal they currently have, so that they get the same big pot of money that other big market teams are getting. The other is that the deals don't continue and/or the Giants can't get their deal redone, and the way I see it, the Yankees could have blasted out salaries but never did, so I don't see the Dodgers or Angels doing that either, they will pay more but not outrageously more than market, so salaries won't rise that much higher.
Still, the Giants don't have an endless supply of money. I'm still hoping that the A's will end up paying the Giants upward of $100M for the right to move to the South Bay. They never paid for the right to invade the Giants territory in the first place, so that would right a historical wrong. $100M will go a long way towards keeping most of our young players to 2020.
I think the Giants can afford the six you listed, but by the time the Giants need to pony up for Brown and Panik, now we get back to what I started this comment on, unfortunately, to expect all six of them to make it to the end of the decade as a useful player is wishful thinking. To have six players play great, all on the same team at roughly the same time, I don't know the stats on that, but I'm pretty sure if there ever was one, it was one of the Yankee's teams.
Players get injured and some suddenly loses it and are never the same. It happened to Willie when he was in his mid-30's. Will Clark got injured early and was never the same again. Schmidt happens. Not everyone can be like Barry Bonds and be great for his whole career.
So by the time Brown/Panik are free agent ready, some money might be freed up by then. And if not, hopefully the Giants are earning those big $100-150M per year local TV deals, as that would help pay for them as well.
The good news regarding the bullpen is that great relievers are easier to find than great starters and position players. Sabean has always tried to make the bullpen a strength of the team, and Bochy has always somehow put together a great bullpen, whether here or SD. I have to think that is his key to having a great record in 1-run games.
DeleteAnd look at the bullpen now: only two guys from our farm system, Wilson and Romo. And we already got two guys who look like they could conceivably replace them in a year or two in Hembree and Otero, respectively, if need be, but would be great complements as well.
This is actually an area where the Giants can just pull some scrub (as suggested by Cameron) who they had been eyeing and doing well, like picking up Eyre off the waiver wire. Or Sabean could pick up in trade with some of our failed prospects who still look like they have some potential.
I love Wilson, but I don't see the Giants signing him long-term nor would I want them too. I would rather spend the money keeping our starting pitchers and good position players. While it is not easy to replace a closer, somehow many teams do it anyhow each season. But we probably need him for a couple more years, so I don't know how the Giants are going to deal with him.
In baseball terms I'm sure everyone would agree that resigning Wilson would probably be a very bad idea, but I just wonder how much stock the organisation might put in his 'intangibles' - I'm not talking sales of fake beards, but it is a fact that he's become probably the Giants most recognisable player on a national level, and the profile he beings to the ballclub through that does have value, not to mention the excitement that having a genuine star closer brings to ballgames and the ticket sales he probably does help generate. Whether that stuff would justify the $10m+ a year contract he will command is doubtful, but if he pitches well and stays healthy until then, who knows what the front office might get into their heads...
DeleteGood point. I think it completely depends on his velocity and his health. Despite his hijinx and the antics, Wilson has been overall a very good pitcher. I wouldn't want the Giants throwing a Papelbon sized contract at him, but I wouldn't mind a cautious 2 year deal at all. They have Hembree in waiting, which is great, and they can ease him in the way they eased Wilson in.
DeleteSabermetrics folks like to pound on relievers as fungible and replaceable, but I'm not sure I buy that one. The Giants spent a lot of time in the wasteland after Nen got hurt. The best way to deal with the reliever situation is to have somebody from your farm ready to go. But I do believe you have to have a certain mindset in addition to great velocity and stuff to close.
I have very few complaints about Bochy in the pitching department, especially after Baker and Alou were so rough on arms. Bochy takes care of his pitchers.
It's a wider discussion, but one of the things that bothers me about a pure numbers approach is that it usually ignores what you might call 'interdependencies' - what I mean is, does having a rock solid, rock star closer anchoring and leading your bullpen improve the pitching of those who come before? Kind of in a similar way a strong batter at 4 protects the number 3 guy. Maybe there's psychological things on your setup guys, giving them confidence, and maybe there's things on the batters, in terms of added pressure to get runs in the 7th and 8th because they know they're getting shut down in the 9th.
DeleteOf course, you could analyse all that, but I've not seen it done - it's easier to just look at individual players' performances. But certainly the players themselves do talk about the benefits that having WIlson pitching well brings to them, so maybe there's something in it.
Anyway personally like you I kind of hope Wilson is kept, at least for a couple more years. Yes there's a good chance it wouldn't be a great baseball decision, but I like having him on the team anyway, he's fun and exciting in a cheesy kind of way, and like I say there's a lot of intangible stuff that he brings too.
The saber rubric that relievers are fungible, including closers, I think Giants fans would not believe that after years in the desert after Nen went down.
DeleteThat's the problem with the saber movement today, they have reduced every player to a set of numbers, like those old baseball games pre-computers, Strat-o-matic and I forgot the other one, starts with A.
They forget that these are people, as well as players. Some people do better in pressure situations (Wilson). Some people freeze up in those situations.
That's why you can't just throw anybody in there as a closer, but that's also why the sabers think they are fungible, because most people can go in there and do OK for a while, for as we all know, there's pressure - any old game - and there's the last out of the World Series type of pressure. That's where it pays off to have that pitcher who can handle situations like that.
So yeah, love Wilson for that. Hopefully the coaches and scouts do a good job of IDing guys whose personalities can handle situations like this.
That said, he is an all effort guy, and as we saw last season, pushed a little too far and the Giants had to shut him down or he wouldn't be able to help himself. As Shankbone noted, 2 years, OK, long-term, not so much.
Again to the Furcal deal, I would prefer bigger to get shorter, we still have budget space the next few years, but once Posey moves into arb (and that could be next year) and Belt in 3 years, then we'll be needing the money for the guys we want to keep long-term.
So as much as I love Wilson, we also need to plan for when we might want to transition from him to, say, Hembree, if necessary. Still, as DiggingForFire (nice handle, FYI) notes, Wilson is great to have on the team, for the reasons noted.
But the psychology is very important, and hopefully the Giants are considering this while evaluating Hembree, Otero, Bochy, whoever else they are using as closers.
The problem with interdepencies is that it is hard to develop a large enough database where you can compare what happens when the closer is not there vs. him being there, unless, say, he was injured or traded mid-season. Though there is a lot of great work being done on evaluating catchers, so maybe at some point it can extend to situations like this.
In any case, still not a lot of datapoints, so that, to me, is where people come in as scouts, coaches, etc, to evaluate that still, until the analysis tools get better.
Yes, Wilson I would place up there among players who understand that this is entertainment as well as sports. He clearly is looking beyond his time as player and looking down the line. He's always been out there as a personality, he was like that as a prospect, from what I recall from an interview he gave before he reached the majors.
I have to think part of that comes from being named Brian Wilson and getting all sorts of ribbing about the Beach Boys. I think part of my differentness come from guys coming up to me, calling me "Grasshoppa" and asking me to snatch the stone from them. I also was asked if my cousin was Bruce. Luckily Bruce Lee did not win the role of Caine in the series, else I would have gotten even more crap.
I would also note that it's good we have Bochy around.
DeleteYou need to have guts of steel to make the hard decisions necessary to win a game, to win a division title, to win a World Series. Sitting down Rowand and leaving Zito off the playoff rosters are up there, but I've noted the in-game decisions too. You need to understand the need to massage egos in-season, but know when to go for the throat.
Kind of like that old game, Diplomacy, where you have to make alliances in order to win, but you also have to know when to break the alliances in order to win. Knowing the key time to do that is a skill.
He's already managed/developed three great closers in Hoffman, Bell, Wilson. I would have to research, but has there been another manager associated with so many great relievers? OK, LaRussa seems to do a great job there (or maybe Duncan), but are there others?
I have to think that both qualities above contribute to him having such a good record in one-run games in his managerial career.
Good stuff, agree with it all. As for the deeper reasons why Wilson is so downright strange (in a good way, mainly), I wouldn't want to speculate!
DeleteAnd thank you, I love me some Pixies :)
Just wanted to note that Hank Schulman made a good observation, that he was surprised that the deal happened as early as it did, he thought maybe 3 days later (I probably goofed above with the link, that's probably Shea; here is Hank's thoughts on the deal: http://blog.sfgate.com/giants/2012/04/02/henry-schulman-my-thoughts-on-the-matt-cain-deal/ )
ReplyDeleteLots of good info in there, I hope Hank does more of these going forward, he brings a lot of insight and inside knowledge.
There is also a nice interview with Sabean there too. Again, it took so long because it is a process, negotiations take a long time. It also got to another point I had been pointing out when commenting, that when both sides want to get a deal done, a deal is going to get done. As Sabean noted, it was never contentious, they found common ground, and a key comment was that as the negotiations wore on, you are not as hardline later as you were before, as long as the team's parameters are still being met. He also noted that Bobby Evans ran the negotiations, with him and others in the background.
I was staring at this title when it hit me: http://www.csnbayarea.com/baseball-san-francisco-giants/giants-talk/Sabean-We-love-Matt-and-he-loves-us?blockID=681764&feedID=2796
ReplyDeleteHow often do you see a GM saying how management loves Matt Cain and he loves us? Sure, maybe one or the other, but both? Seems kind of special.
And to think, there were so many Giants fans who wanted to trade away Cain for offense.
Well, that has definitely been buried. Don't mention that aspect of it. Smoak for Posey either. Or Heyward for MadBum.
DeleteSabean gets knocked for his plainspoken ways, but I have to admit there are times when I really like it. His "We buried the bones of the 62, the 89 and the 02 teams" right after the World Series was from the heart and awesome. I do think its special what he said about Cain. And I think he feels the same way about Timmy that he does Cain, so I think one aspect people aren't looking at is Sabean is just crazy enough to sign them both! Look out on that one.
Not sure what to think about Timmy, from up above. I enjoy watching him pitch too much to ever bad mouth him. Contracts are tricky things. I think he takes a lot of competitiveness to the mound, and thrives off that. I think he's much more effected by the 1-0 losses, particularly to Kershaw, than he's letting on. And so what the Giants do in the next 2 years could have a lot to say about what happens with him. The go home to Seattle bit makes no sense though - they don't have enough money, they have a worse offense and better competitors in that division. No way he goes to Seattle.
I guess I just wouldn't discount completely that Timmy might have meant exactly what he said: he doesn't want to lock up and have the expectations. I think he's a sensitive guy, he's seen Zito fold under the pressure of it all. I wouldn't discount those facts.
I go back and forth about Sabean signing both. He noted way back in his "I'm not an idiot" days that he traded Williams because there was too much salary tied up on two players. Don't have the numbers but I would guess around 20-25%, maybe 30%.
DeleteCain and Lincecum could be $45-50M, which at $130M payroll is 30-40% of the payroll. Will the Giants do that? Honestly, I hope so, as scared as I am about having deadweight contracts of that size, I'm more scared about losing them. Still, from the business perspective, it would be incredibly risky to devote that much payroll to two players, even at a $130M payroll. Not as risky to trade Lincecum away after the 2012 season. I'm glad I don't have to make that decision.
Yeah, I would never badmouth Timmy.
I would agree that he's more upset than he's letting on. I think even though he's older than Cain, he has looked to Cain as a mentor early on and liked his stoicness about losses.
In the corporate world, studies have shown that employees who are incented by salary to think and act like a team outperform those where they were more individualized rewards.
In the baseball world, there is no way to do that except by the manager. No players that I'm aware of get any substantial bonus for team wins. That's where managers can shine.
I think Bochy at least appears to be doing it. How he could string Rowand along that long after taking away the starting job from him, I have no idea. It is easier with Zito because you can just slot him down lower in the rotation and Zito is at least still starting, but still, Zito has a World Series ring but probably don't even wear it since it didn't play one second in the playoffs. Yet you saw him battling to get back on the field last season.
Seattle, you make a lot of good points. Maybe he goes back like O.J. returning to SF, a former shell of what he was before, just to wear the uni.
Good last paragraph. Now that you mention it, I do recall Lincecum noting the pressure of all that money from a contract hanging over him, and observing Zito firsthand. Very good point to note. And, of course, he talked about wanting the shorter deals. It could be as commented above about the 8-year deal being smoke screen to kill any pursuit of that discussion from the Giants and keep everything short-term, 2 years.
Heck, maybe he likes the hunger to earn his next contract, I think another example he saw firsthand was Aaron Rowand. Not that Rowand stopped trying, but as far as I'm concerned, riding a mountain bike to improve your fitness is lame and the same as not trying. If he was hungry and trying to earn his next contract, you can bet your bottom dollar that he wouldn't have been riding a bike, heck, he did that as recreation before, so it was not a huge difference for him, other than maybe more fun.
Heck, we're basically paying him right now to ride his bike (my manager once told all of us at a meeting that she learned that it's OK to pee on company time - yes, really - so for a while there, everytime I went to tinkle, I'm thinking, "they're paying me to ..." :^). If he rode 60 miles for each day that the Giants have and are paying him, and he's not on our team, he would circumnavigate the globe and more. Or better, he would be 20,000+ miles out in space. :^)
Good point about Lincecum re: Zito. I think Timmy is smart, and he knows that "overpaid" and "Zito" appear together in 99% of anything written. If nobody had any knowledge of Zito's contract, he probably would be much beloved in SF - his personality is certainly a fit. And he'd sleep better at night.
ReplyDeleteMaybe Timmy is just not very money-hungry, and, if he stays healthy and effective, of course a succession of short deals will net him more anyway. And he can walk away from the game at any time without the albatross that Zito has to deal with.
I sound like a redneck I know, but I figure Lincecum easily makes $200M in his career at this point - perhaps he wants to wait and see if that extra $100M on top of that is worth the aggravation.