PDA

View Full Version : Chris Young, D-Backs agree to 6-year deal


pierzynski07
04-07-2008, 10:56 PM
http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20080407&content_id=2501142&vkey=news_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb

kittle42
04-07-2008, 11:13 PM
Does he get a bonus at 1000 Ks?

jabrch
04-07-2008, 11:33 PM
Good for Chris. No reason to gamble on your future through your first FA year if you can get a good enough deal.

ilsox7
04-07-2008, 11:34 PM
Good for Chris. No reason to gamble on your future through your first FA year if you can get a good enough deal.

Seriously. He just turned one year with lots of home runs into being set for life. Props to him!

Jjav829
04-07-2008, 11:53 PM
Young celebrated by hitting his 4th HR of the season tonight. He's also up to 8 walks on the season already. That OF combination of Upton and Young is really, really damn good.

Billy Ashley
04-08-2008, 12:20 AM
Young celebrated by hitting his 4th HR of the season tonight. He's also up to 8 walks on the season already. That OF combination of Upton and Young is really, really damn good.

I agree that that OF is very solid, I do feel that this was foolish of the d-backs though. Chris Young is an awesome talent. However he does have his issues. Why buy out his cheap arb years when plenty of players have shown a great deal of promise and lack of plate discipline in the past and never became the superstars we all believed they would become.

I don't doubt that there's a very good chance of Young being a fantastic CF for the years to come. I do wonder why they would do this though. From an economic point of view it looks like a mistake.

ilsox7
04-08-2008, 12:23 AM
I agree that that OF is very solid, I do feel that this was foolish of the d-backs though. Chris Young is an awesome talent. However he does have his issues. Why buy out his cheap arb years when plenty of players have shown a great deal of promise and lack of plate discipline in the past and never became the superstars we all believed they would become.

I don't doubt that there's a very good chance of Young being a fantastic CF for the years to come. I do wonder why they would do this though. From an economic point of view it looks like a mistake.

The question is: could they get this same exact deal one year from now? I think it's very likely they could. I don't see Young holding out, putting his entire career and future at stake at possibly losing one year of free agency. That's why I say, props to Young. He made his entire financial life off of one year in MLB.

Billy Ashley
04-08-2008, 12:26 AM
The question is: could they get this same exact deal one year from now? I think it's very likely they could. I don't see Young holding out, putting his entire career and future at stake at possibly losing one year of free agency. That's why I say, props to Young. He made his entire financial life off of one year in MLB.

Agreed. I like Young, mostly because it looks as if he really enjoys playing baseball from the little I've seen of him.

My issue with the deal has nothing to do with him but rather the judgment of Arizona's FO. That said, they look like the right type of people to run an org down there, good balance of scouting and stats.

ilsox7
04-08-2008, 12:27 AM
Agreed. I like Young, mostly because it looks as if he really enjoys playing baseball from the little I've seen of him.

My issue with the deal has nothing to do with him but rather the judgment of Arizona's FO. That said, they look like the right type of people to run an org down there, good balance of scouting and stats.

Yep. I am looking forward to seeing some Arizona games on my new fangled toy, Extra Innings.

Jjav829
04-08-2008, 12:32 AM
I agree that that OF is very solid, I do feel that this was foolish of the d-backs though. Chris Young is an awesome talent. However he does have his issues. Why buy out his cheap arb years when plenty of players have shown a great deal of promise and lack of plate discipline in the past and never became the superstars we all believed they would become.

I don't doubt that there's a very good chance of Young being a fantastic CF for the years to come. I do wonder why they would do this though. From an economic point of view it looks like a mistake.

It makes sense. The deal is 6 years and expected to be around the $30 million range. That buys out one year of free agency. It averages about $5 million a year. Obviously in the front end of the deal the D'backs will be paying more than they would have if they simply renewed Young's contract. However, it's the back end where the savings could really show. $5 million in that last year of the deal could be a tremendous bargain.

It's a risk, but it's a worthwhile one to take if you believe that the player will continue to improve. Right now, Young has shown great defense with legitimate power and speed. And his plate discipline should only improve. He walked 43 times all of last season. 7 games into this season, Young already has 8 walks.

Plus, there is something to be said for the goodwill between the player and the club, as well as the security of knowing that player's contract is set for 6 years.

Jjav829
04-08-2008, 12:36 AM
The question is: could they get this same exact deal one year from now? I think it's very likely they could. I don't see Young holding out, putting his entire career and future at stake at possibly losing one year of free agency. That's why I say, props to Young. He made his entire financial life off of one year in MLB.

How do you figure? You really think Young is going to give up two years of free agency when he is only one year away from arbitration?

Plus, a year from now who knows where his value is. As it stands 7 games into the season, Young has 4 HRs, 2 SBs, 8 BBs, an astronomically high OPS. He's on pace to have an even better second season. That doesn't mean a sophomore slump won't occur at some point, but he's certainly off to a great start.

I think it's highly unlikely the D'backs could get the same deal a year from now.

Mr. White Sox
04-08-2008, 12:47 AM
I don't have the contract specifics with me, but looking at a limited past history of another team (the Indians) signing high-upside, high-talent hitters to long-term deals that buy out arbitration + FA years, it almost always seemed to work out. Grady Sizemore, Victor Martinez, and Jhonny Peralta are three right off the top of my head, and I would be completely unsurprised to see Young join a tier just below Sizemore's in the OF.

Sizemore, by the way, struggled with strike zone discipline his first couple of years in the majors, striking out 132 and 153 times and posting OBPs of .348 to a major improvement of .375. His third year, he struck out 155 times and walked 101, giving him an OBP of .390. He's only 25. At 24, Young can become that almost-Sizemore-like player on offense with a lower batting average and OBP but similar to greater power and speed. I really like the guy.

ilsox7
04-08-2008, 12:53 AM
How do you figure? You really think Young is going to give up two years of free agency when he is only one year away from arbitration?

Plus, a year from now who knows where his value is. As it stands 7 games into the season, Young has 4 HRs, 2 SBs, 8 BBs, an astronomically high OPS. He's on pace to have an even better second season. That doesn't mean a sophomore slump won't occur at some point, but he's certainly off to a great start.

I think it's highly unlikely the D'backs could get the same deal a year from now.

At this time next year, he is still not arbitration eligible and is still years away from free agency. It would still be well worth his while to be financially set for life. Sure, it might cost Arizona an extra couple million per year, but I still think it's rather risky. If Young was willing to give up 2 years of free agency today, do you think he would take a completely opposite stance and not sign a long-term deal next year?

I get the feeling that both parties are being reasonable about the contract and the negotiations. Therefore, if I am Arizona, I wait to see what year two of Young brings.

Jjav829
04-08-2008, 12:58 AM
At this time next year, he is still not arbitration eligible and is still years away from free agency. It would still be well worth his while to be financially set for life. Sure, it might cost Arizona an extra couple million per year, but I still think it's rather risky. If Young was willing to give up 2 years of free agency today, do you think he would take a completely opposite stance and not sign a long-term deal next year?

I get the feeling that both parties are being reasonable about the contract and the negotiations. Therefore, if I am Arizona, I wait to see what year two of Young brings.

He gave up one year.

Sure, he'd probably still want to sign a long-term deal, but the point is that one year further down the line that price goes up. Young has two more renewal years. He has no say in his contract for those years. If you take away one of those years, and add on another year of free agency where he can determine his salary, his bargaining power only goes up. So what is 6-years, $30-million this year maybe becomes 6-year, $40 million next year. It's not a huge difference, but the closer Young gets to free agency (and even arbitration eligibility), the more he can demand. That's why teams lock up players at this stage.

ilsox7
04-08-2008, 01:00 AM
He gave up one year.

Sure, he'd probably still want to sign a one-year deal, but the point is that one year further down the line that price goes up. Young has two more renewal years. He has no say in his contract for those years. If you take away one of those years, and add on another year of free agency where he can determine his salary, his bargaining power only goes up. So what is 6-years, $30-million this year maybe becomes 6-year, $40 million next year. It's not a huge difference, but the closer Young gets to free agency (and even arbitration eligibility), the more he can demand. That's why teams lock up players at this stage.

He gave up a second year in the form of a club option. And I agree that if he has a superb year this year, the price may be 6/40 or 5/35. I just think the incremental increase in price to Arizona is worth waiting out this year to see how Young develops.

Billy Ashley
04-08-2008, 01:08 AM
He gave up one year.

Sure, he'd probably still want to sign a long-term deal, but the point is that one year further down the line that price goes up. Young has two more renewal years. He has no say in his contract for those years. If you take away one of those years, and add on another year of free agency where he can determine his salary, his bargaining power only goes up. So what is 6-years, $30-million this year maybe becomes 6-year, $40 million next year. It's not a huge difference, but the closer Young gets to free agency (and even arbitration eligibility), the more he can demand. That's why teams lock up players at this stage.

But you do see the great deal of risk associated with doing it after one year right?

This guy posted this line his rookie season and was DFA's before he reached 6 years service time:

25 yrs old: .287/.338/.451. 17 home runs, 21 steals as a short stop. His OPS+ was 101. He was likely the worst starter in baseball the next 3 seasons.

or this guy

25 years old: .316/.390/.526. 21 home runs, OPS+ of 136 at second base. He was non tendered in the winter of 2006

Sam Horn at 23 hit 14 home runs in a mere 158 at bats his first season. Tell me you wouldn't drool all over that.

I agree that its good to lock up core guys but sometimes you run the risk of locking up Marcus Giles or Angel Berrora

StepsInSC
04-08-2008, 11:55 AM
But you do see the great deal of risk associated with doing it after one year right?

I agree that its good to lock up core guys but sometimes you run the risk of locking up Marcus Giles or Angel Berrora

It's really just a differing opinion of how risky it is. Personally, I'd bet the farm that Chris B. Young will be a transcendent godly .270 hitting superstar within one or two years' time.

Jjav829
04-08-2008, 03:12 PM
But you do see the great deal of risk associated with doing it after one year right?

This guy posted this line his rookie season and was DFA's before he reached 6 years service time:

25 yrs old: .287/.338/.451. 17 home runs, 21 steals as a short stop. His OPS+ was 101. He was likely the worst starter in baseball the next 3 seasons.

or this guy

25 years old: .316/.390/.526. 21 home runs, OPS+ of 136 at second base. He was non tendered in the winter of 2006

Sam Horn at 23 hit 14 home runs in a mere 158 at bats his first season. Tell me you wouldn't drool all over that.

I agree that its good to lock up core guys but sometimes you run the risk of locking up Marcus Giles or Angel Berrora

It's certainly a risk, but any contract is a risk. And it's not a horrible deal at all. If the rumored numbers are correct, the contract with be worth approximately $30 million for 6 seasons. If we just assume a flat average, that's $5 million a year. Just for comparisons sake, Juan Uribe will make $4.5 million this season.

The D'backs know it is a risk. But, it's an acceptable risk. They are banking on Young developing into a consistently good player. You take the risk in the short term by paying Young $4.5 million more than you could have if you simply renewed his contract, hoping that in 4 years if he's one of the better outfielders in the league you have a bargain on your hands.