Should the twins trade Mauer?

[TheNamelessPoet]

Okay, I think you're overrating Mauer a bit here.

I didnt say the greatest ever for a reason... Maybe I should have said top 5 all time at Catcher... that may have been a better idea. This is of course assuming he could keep up these crazy #'s

[haveacigar]

The contract is more valuable to the player front loaded, rather than back loaded.

[gRYFYN1]

If he gets a front loaded contract, doubt there will be an early opt out clause....he would almost certainly do it so long as he is still a viable ball player.

teams rarely if ever give front loaded deals for a couple of reason

1- Teams based it on the same economics of all of industrial society on the basis of exponential growth meaning the pay can grow over the year because everything else will.

2- by back loading it, you get the benefit now at the expense of later monetary issues (another economic staple); along with the possibility of having a way out if later.

[Jeffy25]

teams rarely if ever give front loaded deals for a couple of reason

1- Teams based it on the same economics of all of industrial society on the basis of exponential growth meaning the pay can grow over the year because everything else will.

2- by back loading it, you get the benefit now at the expense of later monetary issues (another economic staple); along with the possibility of having a way out if later.

oh I fully agree. I was saying why Mauer would want a front loaded deal, not necessarily the Twins.

[dickay]

teams rarely if ever give front loaded deals for a couple of reason

1- Teams based it on the same economics of all of industrial society on the basis of exponential growth meaning the pay can grow over the year because everything else will.

2- by back loading it, you get the benefit now at the expense of later monetary issues (another economic staple); along with the possibility of having a way out if later.

perfectly said. i just don't know why so many are talking of frontloading like it happens so frequently.

The contract is more valuable to the player front loaded, rather than back loaded.

Yeah...i gotta say I agree with this.

[HoustonGM]

just curious, how many of these long term large dollar contracts have been front loaded???? Not Manny, not Jeter, not AROD1, not Zito? AROD2 is front loaded but its still a rediculous 20 mil per the last 3 or 4 seasons lol. Even the lesser contracts are backloaded, most notably Bays newest one. Hollidays recent deal is neutral and not front or backloaded. In fact, MOST of these large contracts i've looked at are backloaded.

You're right.

And?

while i agree your 8yr 165 probably isn't far off, i don't know why he'd front load it like this personally.

The contract is more valuable to the player front loaded, rather than back loaded.

something sadly I fear many are doing seeing he's coming off a monster career year. Great player prior....but even you will admit i think that you can't value him off of this last year alone.

Of course you can't value based off last year alone. However, he is undoubtedly the best catcher in the game, and easily one of the top 5 players in the game, even though he's unlikely to repeat his 2009.

I didnt say the greatest ever for a reason... Maybe I should have said top 5 all time at Catcher... that may have been a better idea. This is of course assuming he could keep up these crazy #'s

You actually DID say the greatest ever:

You CANT take a bunch of unknows for the greatest player in the history of baseball at Catcher.

perfectly said. i just don't know why so many are talking of frontloading like it happens so frequently.

I don't know anybody who is.

[haveacigar]

oh I fully agree. I was saying why Mauer would want a front loaded deal, not necessarily the Twins.

Cause front loading is better for the player.

The reason hardly any contracts are front loaded is because franchises usually don't want to front load.

[TheNamelessPoet]

hgm

figures I slipped lol

[JamesMogul]

he will come back. i guarantee

[kenny1234]

The financial structure of the deal is almost irrelevant - teams structure those in all kinds of different ways - including front-loaded contracts (which is not very different from a signing bonus) and contracts that defer salary to 20 years in the future. Those details depend on the specific interests of Mauer and the Twins. It is reasonable for people debate the value of signing Mauer for 5 or 8 years, or the total value of the contract - it makes no sense to debate the optimal structure of that contract because we have none of the relevant information.

[HoustonGM]

The financial structure of the deal is almost irrelevant - teams structure those in all kinds of different ways - including front-loaded contracts (which is not very different from a signing bonus) and contracts that defer salary to 20 years in the future. Those details depend on the specific interests of Mauer and the Twins. It is reasonable for people debate the value of signing Mauer for 5 or 8 years, or the total value of the contract - it makes no sense to debate the optimal structure of that contract because we have none of the relevant information.

Honestly, the only reason I was talking about front-loading it was because Dickay was stuck on tying up a third of the payroll in Mauer's mid-30's to him when hes not likely to be worth that anymore.

[dickay]

The financial structure of the deal is almost irrelevant - teams structure those in all kinds of different ways - including front-loaded contracts (which is not very different from a signing bonus) and contracts that defer salary to 20 years in the future. Those details depend on the specific interests of Mauer and the Twins. It is reasonable for people debate the value of signing Mauer for 5 or 8 years, or the total value of the contract - it makes no sense to debate the optimal structure of that contract because we have none of the relevant information.

agreed.

Honestly, the only reason I was talking about front-loading it was because Dickay was stuck on tying up a third of the payroll in Mauer's mid-30's to him when hes not likely to be worth that anymore.

and what i was "stuck" on is far more relevant to the conversation. We do know that a good estimate puts his average salary at around a quarter or more of their average payroll. Thats assuming they raise their average payroll by 15 million from 65 (where its been the past 5-7 years) to 80 and keep it there. Thats a big assumption, but with them getting a new stadium its a fair one. Two others they have locked up to contracts already put them with three players at over 50% of that higher assumed average payroll. I don't see why those aren't relevant talking points and concerns or how bringing something you apparently agree is irrelevant to the table helps improve the discussion.

[HoustonGM]

and what i was "stuck" on is far more relevant to the conversation. We do know that a good estimate puts his average salary at around a quarter or more of their average payroll. Thats assuming they raise their average payroll by 15 million from 65 (where its been the past 5-7 years) to 80 and keep it there. Thats a big assumption, but with them getting a new stadium its a fair one. Two others they have locked up to contracts already put them with three players at over 50% of that higher assumed average payroll. I don't see why those aren't relevant talking points and concerns or how bringing something you apparently agree is irrelevant to the table helps improve the discussion.

I never said that the percentage of the payroll he takes up is irrelevant. You kept bringing up how it's going to really hurt them towards the back end of the deal, and the "front-loading" was brought up as a way to alleviate that concern if you're that concerned about it.

Morneau's the expendable guy, not Mauer. If they can't afford both, they should keep Mauer and trade Morneau. But, my guess is that they can afford both.

[boomboom]

Dickay, the twins are not a small market franchise, I doubt it will hurt them regardless of what they sign him for, they might lose more revenue by not signing him, as what Kenny said, it doesn't matter the structure of the deal.

[kenny1234]

I think that Dickay is half-right with regard to the issue of tying up payroll. First, the Twins are not a really small-market team - but they aren't in a huge market either. That said, it is a risky strategy to tie up resources in one particular player, but any team other than the Yankees, Red Sox and Mets, that wants to win the World Series (this year or in the future) is going to take some risks.

I guess it comes down to two choices for small-mid market teams. Try and collect a large group of prospects and then hope they all come together at the same time (Rays), or spend a lot of money on a few key players, surround them with a mediocre supporting cast and then hope they don't get hurt.. Both are risky, and I can't see either strategy as wrong. My personal belief is that if you think you can make the playoffs, you don't trade away anything that would prevent that - because if you can get into the playoffs, you have a decent shot at winning the World Series.