Extensions?

[mattmitchl44]

And if they crash & burn, then your payroll is screwed.

Not at $6, $7 million a year. That's next to nothing for the team.

Plus no agent worth two cents is letting his client sign a "team-friendly" deal, that's wish casting on your part matt.

They do all the time.

If you offer Burleson like 4 yrs./$24 million ($6 million AAV) with a team option year at $10 million, that kind of guaranteed money is potentially huge for him - that's potentially "generational wealth" with no risk - but negligible risk for the team.

NO EXTENSIONS until they've earned it

Waiting for them to "earn it" is how you end up paying a lot more for past production rather than future production.

If you feel they're only worth $6M-$7M (WAY TOO LOW A GUESS IMO), then why not just go through ARB giving you payroll insurance in case 1) they've already peaked and have no more upside and 2) injuries?

And agents do NOT sign lowball extensions like you mention for quality players "all the time".

The players you mention are average players, not all-stars and likely never going to be.

The ONLY player I'd even consider an early extension for is JJW and only IF he's everything we hope he'll be.

Finally, I'd rather wait till these average players EARN IT than hand them terrible extensions that could blow up BDWJr's SMALL ALREADY PAYROLL.

Your assuming these players are all going to have an upward trajection, a risky move that could mess up payroll for years.

Again, none of the players you mention are ready for extensions, perhaps in a year or two IF they continue to improve.

Again, for small AAV extensions, Burleson, Herrera, etc. don't need to be on upward trajectories. If they are just solid, average 2+ fWAR players for 4 or 5 years at $6, 7 million a year, that is a win for the team.

If the player is not interested in doing a long term extension at a price point like that, fine, but if the team projects them as a solid 2+ fWAR player they should make the offer and let them say no.

We've been down this road before matt (re: the Braves), I'm never going to be a fan of giving extensions to players w/one-two-three years of MLB experience unless they've proved to be well above average, actually closer to being all-star players.

For every A. Pujols great extension you can find players who've flopped, and even the great Pujols didn't get his extension until after his THIRD SEASON!

And all Albert had done for those three years was slash .334 .412 .613 1.025, hit 114 HR's, drive in 381 runs while winning ROY, two silver sluggers, two all star appearances and two MVP runner-up seasons plus a fourth place finish to boot!

NOW that's a player you easily hand an extension too.

Not Winn, Burleson, Libby type players.

(And I still think you've thrown out really low extension figures to support your argument that aren't realistic)

JMO

You should take any potential win you can get - whether it's a big potential win with a Pujols or Acuna, or smaller potential wins with a Winn, Burleson, Herrera, etc. If you are reasonably confident in your evaluation, take your shot. Solid, average players on cheap contracts help too.

Again if the player doesn't want to take $6 or so million for 4-5 years because it's "too low" that is fine. That's their choice. But, IMO, that is the price point you would want to be at for it to make risk/reward sense for the team.

[rockondlouie]

And if they crash & burn, then your payroll is screwed.

Not at $6, $7 million a year. That's next to nothing for the team.

Plus no agent worth two cents is letting his client sign a "team-friendly" deal, that's wish casting on your part matt.

They do all the time.

If you offer Burleson like 4 yrs./$24 million ($6 million AAV) with a team option year at $10 million, that kind of guaranteed money is potentially huge for him - that's potentially "generational wealth" with no risk - but negligible risk for the team.

NO EXTENSIONS until they've earned it

Waiting for them to "earn it" is how you end up paying a lot more for past production rather than future production.

If you feel they're only worth $6M-$7M (WAY TOO LOW A GUESS IMO), then why not just go through ARB giving you payroll insurance in case 1) they've already peaked and have no more upside and 2) injuries?

And agents do NOT sign lowball extensions like you mention for quality players "all the time".

The players you mention are average players, not all-stars and likely never going to be.

The ONLY player I'd even consider an early extension for is JJW and only IF he's everything we hope he'll be.

Finally, I'd rather wait till these average players EARN IT than hand them terrible extensions that could blow up BDWJr's SMALL ALREADY PAYROLL.

Your assuming these players are all going to have an upward trajection, a risky move that could mess up payroll for years.

Again, none of the players you mention are ready for extensions, perhaps in a year or two IF they continue to improve.

Again, for small AAV extensions, Burleson, Herrera, etc. don't need to be on upward trajectories. If they are just solid, average 2+ fWAR players for 4 or 5 years at $6, 7 million a year, that is a win for the team.

If the player is not interested in doing a long term extension at a price point like that, fine, but if the team projects them as a solid 2+ fWAR player they should make the offer and let them say no.

We've been down this road before matt (re: the Braves), I'm never going to be a fan of giving extensions to players w/one-two-three years of MLB experience unless they've proved to be well above average, actually closer to being all-star players.

For every A. Pujols great extension you can find players who've flopped, and even the great Pujols didn't get his extension until after his THIRD SEASON!

And all Albert had done for those three years was slash .334 .412 .613 1.025, hit 114 HR's, drive in 381 runs while winning ROY, two silver sluggers, two all star appearances and two MVP runner-up seasons plus a fourth place finish to boot!

NOW that's a player you easily hand an extension too.

Not Winn, Burleson, Libby type players.

(And I still think you've thrown out really low extension figures to support your argument that aren't realistic)

JMO

You should take any potential win you can get - whether it's a big potential win with a Pujols or Acuna, or smaller potential wins with a Winn, Burleson, Herrera, etc. If you are reasonably confident in your evaluation, take your shot. Solid, average players on cheap contracts help too.

Again if the player doesn't want to take $6 or so million for 4-5 years because it's "too low" that is fine. That's their choice. But, IMO, that is the price point you would want to be at for it to make risk/reward sense for the team.

Nope, not on board w/rushing into extensions for players who have just reached Arb 1 (Bumbles) and aren't even there yet (Winn, Hererra, etal).

IF they have solid-strong 2026 seasons, then after the new CBA is in place I'd re-visit but not before.

And just for prospective here are what some players are projected to get this year in ARB 2 per fangraphs:

Noot $5.7M
Donny $5.4M

If the player can get that now (2026/27), then it's going to be a whole lot higher when Winn, Hererra, etal reach that point in their career meaning your $6M would be a lowball offer.

You'd have to offer them no less than $8+M to even get their agents to present it to the player.

[mattmitchl44]

And if they crash & burn, then your payroll is screwed.

Not at $6, $7 million a year. That's next to nothing for the team.

Plus no agent worth two cents is letting his client sign a "team-friendly" deal, that's wish casting on your part matt.

They do all the time.

If you offer Burleson like 4 yrs./$24 million ($6 million AAV) with a team option year at $10 million, that kind of guaranteed money is potentially huge for him - that's potentially "generational wealth" with no risk - but negligible risk for the team.

NO EXTENSIONS until they've earned it

Waiting for them to "earn it" is how you end up paying a lot more for past production rather than future production.

If you feel they're only worth $6M-$7M (WAY TOO LOW A GUESS IMO), then why not just go through ARB giving you payroll insurance in case 1) they've already peaked and have no more upside and 2) injuries?

And agents do NOT sign lowball extensions like you mention for quality players "all the time".

The players you mention are average players, not all-stars and likely never going to be.

The ONLY player I'd even consider an early extension for is JJW and only IF he's everything we hope he'll be.

Finally, I'd rather wait till these average players EARN IT than hand them terrible extensions that could blow up BDWJr's SMALL ALREADY PAYROLL.

Your assuming these players are all going to have an upward trajection, a risky move that could mess up payroll for years.

Again, none of the players you mention are ready for extensions, perhaps in a year or two IF they continue to improve.

Again, for small AAV extensions, Burleson, Herrera, etc. don't need to be on upward trajectories. If they are just solid, average 2+ fWAR players for 4 or 5 years at $6, 7 million a year, that is a win for the team.

If the player is not interested in doing a long term extension at a price point like that, fine, but if the team projects them as a solid 2+ fWAR player they should make the offer and let them say no.

We've been down this road before matt (re: the Braves), I'm never going to be a fan of giving extensions to players w/one-two-three years of MLB experience unless they've proved to be well above average, actually closer to being all-star players.

For every A. Pujols great extension you can find players who've flopped, and even the great Pujols didn't get his extension until after his THIRD SEASON!

And all Albert had done for those three years was slash .334 .412 .613 1.025, hit 114 HR's, drive in 381 runs while winning ROY, two silver sluggers, two all star appearances and two MVP runner-up seasons plus a fourth place finish to boot!

NOW that's a player you easily hand an extension too.

Not Winn, Burleson, Libby type players.

(And I still think you've thrown out really low extension figures to support your argument that aren't realistic)

JMO

You should take any potential win you can get - whether it's a big potential win with a Pujols or Acuna, or smaller potential wins with a Winn, Burleson, Herrera, etc. If you are reasonably confident in your evaluation, take your shot. Solid, average players on cheap contracts help too.

Again if the player doesn't want to take $6 or so million for 4-5 years because it's "too low" that is fine. That's their choice. But, IMO, that is the price point you would want to be at for it to make risk/reward sense for the team.

Nope, not on board w/rushing into extensions for players who have just reached Arb 1 (Bumbles) and aren't even there yet (Winn, Hererra, etal).

IF they have solid-strong 2026 seasons, then after the new CBA is in place I'd re-visit but not before.

And just for prospective here are what some players are projected to get this year in ARB 2 per fangraphs:

Noot $5.7M
Donny $5.4M

If the player can get that now (2026/27), then it's going to be a whole lot higher when Winn, Hererra, etal reach that point in their career meaning your $6M would be a lowball offer.

You'd have to offer them no less than $8+M to even get their agents to present it to the player.

I never said offer Winn a $6 million AAV. I said Winn's would have to be $1x million AAV. So let's not confuse Winn with Burleson or Herrera.

But to Herrera or Burleson $24-$30 million GUARANTEED over 4-5 years might sound really good. The first $25 million you can make is by far the most important.

If you think it seems low it's because it has to figure in the risk of them failing for whatever reason. Because that is not zero, they take less and the team pays less.

[renostl]

NO EXTENSIONS until they've earned it

Waiting for them to "earn it" is how you end up paying a lot more for past production rather than future production.

This right here is what I expected to be the crux of the discussion. And it is a very good discussion.

Well, you're not paying for 'past production.' You're paying the current market rate.

According to Google, Lars Nootbar might make 5.7mil in 2026. If he had a 4 WAR in 2025, he might make 12mil (or more) in 2026.

Now if, as some on here suggested, we sign Lars to like a 5 year/35mil deal, we would not only be paying MORE than what's he's worth, but we would be 'stuck' with him.

Lars aside and in general extensions I do not see a lot of upside on extensions.

Aren't contracts control?
As long as a player produces to the contract or outperforms the contract
a team is not stuck with a player.

The point with these early extensions is that when you develop a young player who is part of your "core" - and I'll define "core" as (1) a SP in your rotation, (2) a starting position player/DH, or (3) your closer - is that you generally want to keep them through their age 30 seasons (though their "prime"), and maybe have team options for their age 31 and age 32 seasons. Then you let them go (or trade them) and let some other team pay them into their mid-30s when they are expected to be in decline.

And if by signing those guys to extensions early you can get a somewhat lower AAV, that's a win for the team as well.

The concept behind the extensions is not new.
I just am not sure how well they work. The process is well known at both sides of the negotiation table.
Some players will not sit at that table.

It's a player win when the player fails for whatever reason. A team win when they get a year or two
more control. It is still not going to be some significant discount. Letting it play out really doesn't cripple
any team. Negotiations can still occur and IF those negotiations aren't going anywhere move on.
Very small group where there is much benefit.
In the Pujols contract after his third season at 24 y/o old. A score by ALL measure. They did offer the
man 9 years $200 million at his age 31. In those days they were ok with that offer. Had they allowed the arb years
to play out one or two more times they might have captured a couple more seasons for Cards fans.
It's an alternative reality that doesn't exist. Understood. But when a player and team grow together
and it's a positive relationship that team still has an advantage over the unknown.

The point being that these early extensions are seen as extending the control over letting
the player become a FA. That's a position that can't be proven since contract can be signed at
period, just like Vladdy signed before becoming a FA.

[ecleme22]

And if they crash & burn, then your payroll is screwed.

Not at $6, $7 million a year. That's next to nothing for the team.

Plus no agent worth two cents is letting his client sign a "team-friendly" deal, that's wish casting on your part matt.

They do all the time.

If you offer Burleson like 4 yrs./$24 million ($6 million AAV) with a team option year at $10 million, that kind of guaranteed money is potentially huge for him - that's potentially "generational wealth" with no risk - but negligible risk for the team.

NO EXTENSIONS until they've earned it

Waiting for them to "earn it" is how you end up paying a lot more for past production rather than future production.

If you feel they're only worth $6M-$7M (WAY TOO LOW A GUESS IMO), then why not just go through ARB giving you payroll insurance in case 1) they've already peaked and have no more upside and 2) injuries?

And agents do NOT sign lowball extensions like you mention for quality players "all the time".

The players you mention are average players, not all-stars and likely never going to be.

The ONLY player I'd even consider an early extension for is JJW and only IF he's everything we hope he'll be.

Finally, I'd rather wait till these average players EARN IT than hand them terrible extensions that could blow up BDWJr's SMALL ALREADY PAYROLL.

Your assuming these players are all going to have an upward trajection, a risky move that could mess up payroll for years.

Again, none of the players you mention are ready for extensions, perhaps in a year or two IF they continue to improve.

Again, for small AAV extensions, Burleson, Herrera, etc. don't need to be on upward trajectories. If they are just solid, average 2+ fWAR players for 4 or 5 years at $6, 7 million a year, that is a win for the team.

If the player is not interested in doing a long term extension at a price point like that, fine, but if the team projects them as a solid 2+ fWAR player they should make the offer and let them say no.

We've been down this road before matt (re: the Braves), I'm never going to be a fan of giving extensions to players w/one-two-three years of MLB experience unless they've proved to be well above average, actually closer to being all-star players.

For every A. Pujols great extension you can find players who've flopped, and even the great Pujols didn't get his extension until after his THIRD SEASON!

And all Albert had done for those three years was slash .334 .412 .613 1.025, hit 114 HR's, drive in 381 runs while winning ROY, two silver sluggers, two all star appearances and two MVP runner-up seasons plus a fourth place finish to boot!

NOW that's a player you easily hand an extension too.

Not Winn, Burleson, Libby type players.

(And I still think you've thrown out really low extension figures to support your argument that aren't realistic)

JMO

You should take any potential win you can get - whether it's a big potential win with a Pujols or Acuna, or smaller potential wins with a Winn, Burleson, Herrera, etc. If you are reasonably confident in your evaluation, take your shot. Solid, average players on cheap contracts help too.

Again if the player doesn't want to take $6 or so million for 4-5 years because it's "too low" that is fine. That's their choice. But, IMO, that is the price point you would want to be at for it to make risk/reward sense for the team.

Nope, not on board w/rushing into extensions for players who have just reached Arb 1 (Bumbles) and aren't even there yet (Winn, Hererra, etal).

IF they have solid-strong 2026 seasons, then after the new CBA is in place I'd re-visit but not before.

And just for prospective here are what some players are projected to get this year in ARB 2 per fangraphs:

Noot $5.7M
Donny $5.4M

If the player can get that now (2026/27), then it's going to be a whole lot higher when Winn, Hererra, etal reach that point in their career meaning your $6M would be a lowball offer.

You'd have to offer them no less than $8+M to even get their agents to present it to the player.

I never said offer Winn a $6 million AAV. I said Winn's would have to be $1x million AAV. So let's not confuse Winn with Burleson or Herrera.

But to Herrera or Burleson $24-$30 million GUARANTEED over 4-5 years might sound really good. The first $25 million you can make is by far the most important.

If you think it seems low it's because it has to figure in the risk of them failing for whatever reason. Because that is not zero, they take less and the team pays less.

Why does Burleson need to be locked up? We have him for 3 more years. Why do we need to have him for an extra year or two? Does Alec Burleson really need to be a Cardinal for 9 years?

[C-Unit]

In the Pujols contract after his third season at 24 y/o old. A score by ALL measure. They did offer the
man 9 years $200 million at his age 31. In those days they were ok with that offer. Had they allowed the arb years
to play out one or two more times they might have captured a couple more seasons for Cards fans.
It's an alternative reality that doesn't exist. Understood. But when a player and team grow together
and it's a positive relationship that team still has an advantage over the unknown.

The point being that these early extensions are seen as extending the control over letting
the player become a FA. That's a position that can't be proven since contract can be signed at
period, just like Vladdy signed before becoming a FA.

I think had the Cardinals waited a year or two more they would have had to pay a lot more for the extension, like Toronto had to with Vlad. Vlad is certainly a generational talent for the team and the league but that is a deal with little room for surplus value.

and even the great Pujols didn't get his extension until after his THIRD SEASON!

And I'll put this on there. Because the Pujols extension was very radical for it's time. I asked before on here was there another example before that of a player with 3 years or less service time receiving an extension 7 years in length. The answer is no. That was far from the norm.

This day in age, if you have a Pujols on your hands you aren't going to have the luxury of waiting around til year 3 to sign him to such a team-friendly deal. Price tag will be high, high, high if you can even sign him. I seem to remember the Orioles coming to Manny Machado about an extension after his first arb-year and he wouldn't negotiate because he was already looking toward free agency.

There's a reason why Tatis Jr, Julio Rodriguez, and Bobby Witt Jr were locked up so early and you might stub your toes on this but it's the same reason those players will continue to have surplus value over the length of those deals.

[rockondlouie]

And if they crash & burn, then your payroll is screwed.

Not at $6, $7 million a year. That's next to nothing for the team.

Plus no agent worth two cents is letting his client sign a "team-friendly" deal, that's wish casting on your part matt.

They do all the time.

If you offer Burleson like 4 yrs./$24 million ($6 million AAV) with a team option year at $10 million, that kind of guaranteed money is potentially huge for him - that's potentially "generational wealth" with no risk - but negligible risk for the team.

NO EXTENSIONS until they've earned it

Waiting for them to "earn it" is how you end up paying a lot more for past production rather than future production.

If you feel they're only worth $6M-$7M (WAY TOO LOW A GUESS IMO), then why not just go through ARB giving you payroll insurance in case 1) they've already peaked and have no more upside and 2) injuries?

And agents do NOT sign lowball extensions like you mention for quality players "all the time".

The players you mention are average players, not all-stars and likely never going to be.

The ONLY player I'd even consider an early extension for is JJW and only IF he's everything we hope he'll be.

Finally, I'd rather wait till these average players EARN IT than hand them terrible extensions that could blow up BDWJr's SMALL ALREADY PAYROLL.

Your assuming these players are all going to have an upward trajection, a risky move that could mess up payroll for years.

Again, none of the players you mention are ready for extensions, perhaps in a year or two IF they continue to improve.

Again, for small AAV extensions, Burleson, Herrera, etc. don't need to be on upward trajectories. If they are just solid, average 2+ fWAR players for 4 or 5 years at $6, 7 million a year, that is a win for the team.

If the player is not interested in doing a long term extension at a price point like that, fine, but if the team projects them as a solid 2+ fWAR player they should make the offer and let them say no.

We've been down this road before matt (re: the Braves), I'm never going to be a fan of giving extensions to players w/one-two-three years of MLB experience unless they've proved to be well above average, actually closer to being all-star players.

For every A. Pujols great extension you can find players who've flopped, and even the great Pujols didn't get his extension until after his THIRD SEASON!

And all Albert had done for those three years was slash .334 .412 .613 1.025, hit 114 HR's, drive in 381 runs while winning ROY, two silver sluggers, two all star appearances and two MVP runner-up seasons plus a fourth place finish to boot!

NOW that's a player you easily hand an extension too.

Not Winn, Burleson, Libby type players.

(And I still think you've thrown out really low extension figures to support your argument that aren't realistic)

JMO

You should take any potential win you can get - whether it's a big potential win with a Pujols or Acuna, or smaller potential wins with a Winn, Burleson, Herrera, etc. If you are reasonably confident in your evaluation, take your shot. Solid, average players on cheap contracts help too.

Again if the player doesn't want to take $6 or so million for 4-5 years because it's "too low" that is fine. That's their choice. But, IMO, that is the price point you would want to be at for it to make risk/reward sense for the team.

Nope, not on board w/rushing into extensions for players who have just reached Arb 1 (Bumbles) and aren't even there yet (Winn, Hererra, etal).

IF they have solid-strong 2026 seasons, then after the new CBA is in place I'd re-visit but not before.

And just for prospective here are what some players are projected to get this year in ARB 2 per fangraphs:

Noot $5.7M
Donny $5.4M

If the player can get that now (2026/27), then it's going to be a whole lot higher when Winn, Hererra, etal reach that point in their career meaning your $6M would be a lowball offer.

You'd have to offer them no less than $8+M to even get their agents to present it to the player.

I never said offer Winn a $6 million AAV. I said Winn's would have to be $1x million AAV. So let's not confuse Winn with Burleson or Herrera.

But to Herrera or Burleson $24-$30 million GUARANTEED over 4-5 years might sound really good. The first $25 million you can make is by far the most important.

If you think it seems low it's because it has to figure in the risk of them failing for whatever reason. Because that is not zero, they take less and the team pays less.

Pass

No extensions for average players (and I acknowledge Winn's GG but still not worth an early extension if he's never going to be an offensive contributor).

[mattmitchl44]

And if they crash & burn, then your payroll is screwed.

Not at $6, $7 million a year. That's next to nothing for the team.

Plus no agent worth two cents is letting his client sign a "team-friendly" deal, that's wish casting on your part matt.

They do all the time.

If you offer Burleson like 4 yrs./$24 million ($6 million AAV) with a team option year at $10 million, that kind of guaranteed money is potentially huge for him - that's potentially "generational wealth" with no risk - but negligible risk for the team.

NO EXTENSIONS until they've earned it

Waiting for them to "earn it" is how you end up paying a lot more for past production rather than future production.

If you feel they're only worth $6M-$7M (WAY TOO LOW A GUESS IMO), then why not just go through ARB giving you payroll insurance in case 1) they've already peaked and have no more upside and 2) injuries?

And agents do NOT sign lowball extensions like you mention for quality players "all the time".

The players you mention are average players, not all-stars and likely never going to be.

The ONLY player I'd even consider an early extension for is JJW and only IF he's everything we hope he'll be.

Finally, I'd rather wait till these average players EARN IT than hand them terrible extensions that could blow up BDWJr's SMALL ALREADY PAYROLL.

Your assuming these players are all going to have an upward trajection, a risky move that could mess up payroll for years.

Again, none of the players you mention are ready for extensions, perhaps in a year or two IF they continue to improve.

Again, for small AAV extensions, Burleson, Herrera, etc. don't need to be on upward trajectories. If they are just solid, average 2+ fWAR players for 4 or 5 years at $6, 7 million a year, that is a win for the team.

If the player is not interested in doing a long term extension at a price point like that, fine, but if the team projects them as a solid 2+ fWAR player they should make the offer and let them say no.

We've been down this road before matt (re: the Braves), I'm never going to be a fan of giving extensions to players w/one-two-three years of MLB experience unless they've proved to be well above average, actually closer to being all-star players.

For every A. Pujols great extension you can find players who've flopped, and even the great Pujols didn't get his extension until after his THIRD SEASON!

And all Albert had done for those three years was slash .334 .412 .613 1.025, hit 114 HR's, drive in 381 runs while winning ROY, two silver sluggers, two all star appearances and two MVP runner-up seasons plus a fourth place finish to boot!

NOW that's a player you easily hand an extension too.

Not Winn, Burleson, Libby type players.

(And I still think you've thrown out really low extension figures to support your argument that aren't realistic)

JMO

You should take any potential win you can get - whether it's a big potential win with a Pujols or Acuna, or smaller potential wins with a Winn, Burleson, Herrera, etc. If you are reasonably confident in your evaluation, take your shot. Solid, average players on cheap contracts help too.

Again if the player doesn't want to take $6 or so million for 4-5 years because it's "too low" that is fine. That's their choice. But, IMO, that is the price point you would want to be at for it to make risk/reward sense for the team.

Nope, not on board w/rushing into extensions for players who have just reached Arb 1 (Bumbles) and aren't even there yet (Winn, Hererra, etal).

IF they have solid-strong 2026 seasons, then after the new CBA is in place I'd re-visit but not before.

And just for prospective here are what some players are projected to get this year in ARB 2 per fangraphs:

Noot $5.7M
Donny $5.4M

If the player can get that now (2026/27), then it's going to be a whole lot higher when Winn, Hererra, etal reach that point in their career meaning your $6M would be a lowball offer.

You'd have to offer them no less than $8+M to even get their agents to present it to the player.

I never said offer Winn a $6 million AAV. I said Winn's would have to be $1x million AAV. So let's not confuse Winn with Burleson or Herrera.

But to Herrera or Burleson $24-$30 million GUARANTEED over 4-5 years might sound really good. The first $25 million you can make is by far the most important.

If you think it seems low it's because it has to figure in the risk of them failing for whatever reason. Because that is not zero, they take less and the team pays less.

Why does Burleson need to be locked up? We have him for 3 more years. Why do we need to have him for an extra year or two? Does Alec Burleson really need to be a Cardinal for 9 years?

Extending or not extending Burleson is not a hill I am going to die on. He's a marginal case of someone I think the team could try to extend cheaply, but if they don't I am not going to lose any sleep over it.

But for mid market and small market teams looking to gain any edge they can, I think focus on evaluating and extending guys like Burleson is an opportunity to look into.

[renostl]

In the Pujols contract after his third season at 24 y/o old. A score by ALL measure. They did offer the
man 9 years $200 million at his age 31. In those days they were ok with that offer. Had they allowed the arb years
to play out one or two more times they might have captured a couple more seasons for Cards fans.
It's an alternative reality that doesn't exist. Understood. But when a player and team grow together
and it's a positive relationship that team still has an advantage over the unknown.

The point being that these early extensions are seen as extending the control over letting
the player become a FA. That's a position that can't be proven since contract can be signed at
period, just like Vladdy signed before becoming a FA.

I think had the Cardinals waited a year or two more they would have had to pay a lot more for the extension, like Toronto had to with Vlad. Vlad is certainly a generational talent for the team and the league but that is a deal with little room for surplus value.

and even the great Pujols didn't get his extension until after his THIRD SEASON!

And I'll put this on there. Because the Pujols extension was very radical for it's time. I asked before on here was there another example before that of a player with 3 years or less service time receiving an extension 7 years in length. The answer is no. That was far from the norm.

This day in age, if you have a Pujols on your hands you aren't going to have the luxury of waiting around til year 3 to sign him to such a team-friendly deal. Price tag will be high, high, high if you can even sign him. I seem to remember the Orioles coming to Manny Machado about an extension after his first arb-year and he wouldn't negotiate because he was already looking toward free agency.

There's a reason why Tatis Jr, Julio Rodriguez, and Bobby Witt Jr were locked up so early and you might stub your toes on this but it's the same reason those players will continue to have surplus value over the length of those deals.

Exactly.
Players and their agents aren't in the habit of leaving money on the table.

The Cards with Albert may have paid a little more but for the fans the production is what we want.
I would have addressed that with those posters, but apparently, they don't like their POV's challenged.
I'll just say that it was still a possible deal as evidence by the later offer. So no Beltran?

Witt ramps up to $30+M in short order, Did they really save during his arb years or after? They acquired term
which may or may not have been available later and much like Toronto and perhaps St. Louis could have been with AP,
they are magnets for other FA. Tatis Jr the same except maybe SD wishes that they let it play out for a high TV.
Rodriquez, Seattle seems to have won that at $20M.

[rockondlouie]

Some workout, some other early extensions that didn't:

S. Basallo
Eight-year, $67 million extension

S. Kingery
Six-year, $24 million

E. Jimenez
Six-year, $43 million

E. White
Six year, three additional club option years $55.5 million

L. Robert
Six-year, $50 million extension

M. Harris III
eight-year, $72 million extension

[ecleme22]

And if they crash & burn, then your payroll is screwed.

Not at $6, $7 million a year. That's next to nothing for the team.

Plus no agent worth two cents is letting his client sign a "team-friendly" deal, that's wish casting on your part matt.

They do all the time.

If you offer Burleson like 4 yrs./$24 million ($6 million AAV) with a team option year at $10 million, that kind of guaranteed money is potentially huge for him - that's potentially "generational wealth" with no risk - but negligible risk for the team.

NO EXTENSIONS until they've earned it

Waiting for them to "earn it" is how you end up paying a lot more for past production rather than future production.

If you feel they're only worth $6M-$7M (WAY TOO LOW A GUESS IMO), then why not just go through ARB giving you payroll insurance in case 1) they've already peaked and have no more upside and 2) injuries?

And agents do NOT sign lowball extensions like you mention for quality players "all the time".

The players you mention are average players, not all-stars and likely never going to be.

The ONLY player I'd even consider an early extension for is JJW and only IF he's everything we hope he'll be.

Finally, I'd rather wait till these average players EARN IT than hand them terrible extensions that could blow up BDWJr's SMALL ALREADY PAYROLL.

Your assuming these players are all going to have an upward trajection, a risky move that could mess up payroll for years.

Again, none of the players you mention are ready for extensions, perhaps in a year or two IF they continue to improve.

Again, for small AAV extensions, Burleson, Herrera, etc. don't need to be on upward trajectories. If they are just solid, average 2+ fWAR players for 4 or 5 years at $6, 7 million a year, that is a win for the team.

If the player is not interested in doing a long term extension at a price point like that, fine, but if the team projects them as a solid 2+ fWAR player they should make the offer and let them say no.

We've been down this road before matt (re: the Braves), I'm never going to be a fan of giving extensions to players w/one-two-three years of MLB experience unless they've proved to be well above average, actually closer to being all-star players.

For every A. Pujols great extension you can find players who've flopped, and even the great Pujols didn't get his extension until after his THIRD SEASON!

And all Albert had done for those three years was slash .334 .412 .613 1.025, hit 114 HR's, drive in 381 runs while winning ROY, two silver sluggers, two all star appearances and two MVP runner-up seasons plus a fourth place finish to boot!

NOW that's a player you easily hand an extension too.

Not Winn, Burleson, Libby type players.

(And I still think you've thrown out really low extension figures to support your argument that aren't realistic)

JMO

You should take any potential win you can get - whether it's a big potential win with a Pujols or Acuna, or smaller potential wins with a Winn, Burleson, Herrera, etc. If you are reasonably confident in your evaluation, take your shot. Solid, average players on cheap contracts help too.

Again if the player doesn't want to take $6 or so million for 4-5 years because it's "too low" that is fine. That's their choice. But, IMO, that is the price point you would want to be at for it to make risk/reward sense for the team.

Nope, not on board w/rushing into extensions for players who have just reached Arb 1 (Bumbles) and aren't even there yet (Winn, Hererra, etal).

IF they have solid-strong 2026 seasons, then after the new CBA is in place I'd re-visit but not before.

And just for prospective here are what some players are projected to get this year in ARB 2 per fangraphs:

Noot $5.7M
Donny $5.4M

If the player can get that now (2026/27), then it's going to be a whole lot higher when Winn, Hererra, etal reach that point in their career meaning your $6M would be a lowball offer.

You'd have to offer them no less than $8+M to even get their agents to present it to the player.

I never said offer Winn a $6 million AAV. I said Winn's would have to be $1x million AAV. So let's not confuse Winn with Burleson or Herrera.

But to Herrera or Burleson $24-$30 million GUARANTEED over 4-5 years might sound really good. The first $25 million you can make is by far the most important.

If you think it seems low it's because it has to figure in the risk of them failing for whatever reason. Because that is not zero, they take less and the team pays less.

Why does Burleson need to be locked up? We have him for 3 more years. Why do we need to have him for an extra year or two? Does Alec Burleson really need to be a Cardinal for 9 years?

Extending or not extending Burleson is not a hill I am going to die on. He's a marginal case of someone I think the team could try to extend cheaply, but if they don't I am not going to lose any sleep over it.

But for mid market and small market teams looking to gain any edge they can, I think focus on evaluating and extending guys like Burleson is an opportunity to look into.

Good midmarket teams can also trade these players and cultivate their farm system so replacements can replace a Burleson when he’s coming up on FA.

And that goes for even Herrera. We have him for 4 more seasons.

[renostl]

And if they crash & burn, then your payroll is screwed.

Not at $6, $7 million a year. That's next to nothing for the team.

Plus no agent worth two cents is letting his client sign a "team-friendly" deal, that's wish casting on your part matt.

They do all the time.

If you offer Burleson like 4 yrs./$24 million ($6 million AAV) with a team option year at $10 million, that kind of guaranteed money is potentially huge for him - that's potentially "generational wealth" with no risk - but negligible risk for the team.

NO EXTENSIONS until they've earned it

Waiting for them to "earn it" is how you end up paying a lot more for past production rather than future production.

If you feel they're only worth $6M-$7M (WAY TOO LOW A GUESS IMO), then why not just go through ARB giving you payroll insurance in case 1) they've already peaked and have no more upside and 2) injuries?

And agents do NOT sign lowball extensions like you mention for quality players "all the time".

The players you mention are average players, not all-stars and likely never going to be.

The ONLY player I'd even consider an early extension for is JJW and only IF he's everything we hope he'll be.

Finally, I'd rather wait till these average players EARN IT than hand them terrible extensions that could blow up BDWJr's SMALL ALREADY PAYROLL.

Your assuming these players are all going to have an upward trajection, a risky move that could mess up payroll for years.

Again, none of the players you mention are ready for extensions, perhaps in a year or two IF they continue to improve.

Again, for small AAV extensions, Burleson, Herrera, etc. don't need to be on upward trajectories. If they are just solid, average 2+ fWAR players for 4 or 5 years at $6, 7 million a year, that is a win for the team.

If the player is not interested in doing a long term extension at a price point like that, fine, but if the team projects them as a solid 2+ fWAR player they should make the offer and let them say no.

We've been down this road before matt (re: the Braves), I'm never going to be a fan of giving extensions to players w/one-two-three years of MLB experience unless they've proved to be well above average, actually closer to being all-star players.

For every A. Pujols great extension you can find players who've flopped, and even the great Pujols didn't get his extension until after his THIRD SEASON!

And all Albert had done for those three years was slash .334 .412 .613 1.025, hit 114 HR's, drive in 381 runs while winning ROY, two silver sluggers, two all star appearances and two MVP runner-up seasons plus a fourth place finish to boot!

NOW that's a player you easily hand an extension too.

Not Winn, Burleson, Libby type players.

(And I still think you've thrown out really low extension figures to support your argument that aren't realistic)

JMO

You should take any potential win you can get - whether it's a big potential win with a Pujols or Acuna, or smaller potential wins with a Winn, Burleson, Herrera, etc. If you are reasonably confident in your evaluation, take your shot. Solid, average players on cheap contracts help too.

Again if the player doesn't want to take $6 or so million for 4-5 years because it's "too low" that is fine. That's their choice. But, IMO, that is the price point you would want to be at for it to make risk/reward sense for the team.

Nope, not on board w/rushing into extensions for players who have just reached Arb 1 (Bumbles) and aren't even there yet (Winn, Hererra, etal).

IF they have solid-strong 2026 seasons, then after the new CBA is in place I'd re-visit but not before.

And just for prospective here are what some players are projected to get this year in ARB 2 per fangraphs:

Noot $5.7M
Donny $5.4M

If the player can get that now (2026/27), then it's going to be a whole lot higher when Winn, Hererra, etal reach that point in their career meaning your $6M would be a lowball offer.

You'd have to offer them no less than $8+M to even get their agents to present it to the player.

I never said offer Winn a $6 million AAV. I said Winn's would have to be $1x million AAV. So let's not confuse Winn with Burleson or Herrera.

But to Herrera or Burleson $24-$30 million GUARANTEED over 4-5 years might sound really good. The first $25 million you can make is by far the most important.

If you think it seems low it's because it has to figure in the risk of them failing for whatever reason. Because that is not zero, they take less and the team pays less.

Why does Burleson need to be locked up? We have him for 3 more years. Why do we need to have him for an extra year or two? Does Alec Burleson really need to be a Cardinal for 9 years?

Extending or not extending Burleson is not a hill I am going to die on. He's a marginal case of someone I think the team could try to extend cheaply, but if they don't I am not going to lose any sleep over it.

But for mid market and small market teams looking to gain any edge they can, I think focus on evaluating and extending guys like Burleson is an opportunity to look into.

I'll sound like I'm talking out of both sides of my mouth here.

Donovan and Burleson might be where the value can be found. Those extensions
aren't large, wont cripple and can possibly be an attribute to trade having a season or two
more control to a team wanting them. Versus those large contract extensions.
Compare to Tatis Jr. who soon makes $25+M then $34+M how much did they save and do they wish he had less term?

AB & BD are also players that teams traditionally can save money on from within the organization.
The extension just can't crush the players value. 2 or 3 WAR players need 2 or 3 WAR checks.

[mattmitchl44]

And if they crash & burn, then your payroll is screwed.

Not at $6, $7 million a year. That's next to nothing for the team.

Plus no agent worth two cents is letting his client sign a "team-friendly" deal, that's wish casting on your part matt.

They do all the time.

If you offer Burleson like 4 yrs./$24 million ($6 million AAV) with a team option year at $10 million, that kind of guaranteed money is potentially huge for him - that's potentially "generational wealth" with no risk - but negligible risk for the team.

NO EXTENSIONS until they've earned it

Waiting for them to "earn it" is how you end up paying a lot more for past production rather than future production.

If you feel they're only worth $6M-$7M (WAY TOO LOW A GUESS IMO), then why not just go through ARB giving you payroll insurance in case 1) they've already peaked and have no more upside and 2) injuries?

And agents do NOT sign lowball extensions like you mention for quality players "all the time".

The players you mention are average players, not all-stars and likely never going to be.

The ONLY player I'd even consider an early extension for is JJW and only IF he's everything we hope he'll be.

Finally, I'd rather wait till these average players EARN IT than hand them terrible extensions that could blow up BDWJr's SMALL ALREADY PAYROLL.

Your assuming these players are all going to have an upward trajection, a risky move that could mess up payroll for years.

Again, none of the players you mention are ready for extensions, perhaps in a year or two IF they continue to improve.

Again, for small AAV extensions, Burleson, Herrera, etc. don't need to be on upward trajectories. If they are just solid, average 2+ fWAR players for 4 or 5 years at $6, 7 million a year, that is a win for the team.

If the player is not interested in doing a long term extension at a price point like that, fine, but if the team projects them as a solid 2+ fWAR player they should make the offer and let them say no.

We've been down this road before matt (re: the Braves), I'm never going to be a fan of giving extensions to players w/one-two-three years of MLB experience unless they've proved to be well above average, actually closer to being all-star players.

For every A. Pujols great extension you can find players who've flopped, and even the great Pujols didn't get his extension until after his THIRD SEASON!

And all Albert had done for those three years was slash .334 .412 .613 1.025, hit 114 HR's, drive in 381 runs while winning ROY, two silver sluggers, two all star appearances and two MVP runner-up seasons plus a fourth place finish to boot!

NOW that's a player you easily hand an extension too.

Not Winn, Burleson, Libby type players.

(And I still think you've thrown out really low extension figures to support your argument that aren't realistic)

JMO

You should take any potential win you can get - whether it's a big potential win with a Pujols or Acuna, or smaller potential wins with a Winn, Burleson, Herrera, etc. If you are reasonably confident in your evaluation, take your shot. Solid, average players on cheap contracts help too.

Again if the player doesn't want to take $6 or so million for 4-5 years because it's "too low" that is fine. That's their choice. But, IMO, that is the price point you would want to be at for it to make risk/reward sense for the team.

Nope, not on board w/rushing into extensions for players who have just reached Arb 1 (Bumbles) and aren't even there yet (Winn, Hererra, etal).

IF they have solid-strong 2026 seasons, then after the new CBA is in place I'd re-visit but not before.

And just for prospective here are what some players are projected to get this year in ARB 2 per fangraphs:

Noot $5.7M
Donny $5.4M

If the player can get that now (2026/27), then it's going to be a whole lot higher when Winn, Hererra, etal reach that point in their career meaning your $6M would be a lowball offer.

You'd have to offer them no less than $8+M to even get their agents to present it to the player.

I never said offer Winn a $6 million AAV. I said Winn's would have to be $1x million AAV. So let's not confuse Winn with Burleson or Herrera.

But to Herrera or Burleson $24-$30 million GUARANTEED over 4-5 years might sound really good. The first $25 million you can make is by far the most important.

If you think it seems low it's because it has to figure in the risk of them failing for whatever reason. Because that is not zero, they take less and the team pays less.

Why does Burleson need to be locked up? We have him for 3 more years. Why do we need to have him for an extra year or two? Does Alec Burleson really need to be a Cardinal for 9 years?

Extending or not extending Burleson is not a hill I am going to die on. He's a marginal case of someone I think the team could try to extend cheaply, but if they don't I am not going to lose any sleep over it.

But for mid market and small market teams looking to gain any edge they can, I think focus on evaluating and extending guys like Burleson is an opportunity to look into.

Good midmarket teams can also trade these players and cultivate their farm system so replacements can replace a Burleson when he’s coming up on FA.

And that goes for even Herrera. We have him for 4 more seasons.

Sure - and you could have them signed to an extension and trade them.

[mattmitchl44]

I'll sound like I'm talking out of both sides of my mouth here.

Donovan and Burleson might be where the value can be found. Those extensions
aren't large, wont cripple and can possibly be an attribute to trade having a season or two
more control to a team wanting them. Versus those large contract extensions.
Compare to Tatis Jr. who soon makes $25+M then $34+M how much did they save and do they wish he had less term?

AB & BD are also players that teams traditionally can save money on from within the organization.
The extension just can't crush the players value. 2 or 3 WAR players need 2 or 3 WAR checks.

They get $24-$30 million guaranteed, and if they play well, they get to be a FA at age 31 or age 32 and can go get another $30, $40 million contract from somebody else at that point.

[ecleme22]

And if they crash & burn, then your payroll is screwed.

Not at $6, $7 million a year. That's next to nothing for the team.

Plus no agent worth two cents is letting his client sign a "team-friendly" deal, that's wish casting on your part matt.

They do all the time.

If you offer Burleson like 4 yrs./$24 million ($6 million AAV) with a team option year at $10 million, that kind of guaranteed money is potentially huge for him - that's potentially "generational wealth" with no risk - but negligible risk for the team.

NO EXTENSIONS until they've earned it

Waiting for them to "earn it" is how you end up paying a lot more for past production rather than future production.

If you feel they're only worth $6M-$7M (WAY TOO LOW A GUESS IMO), then why not just go through ARB giving you payroll insurance in case 1) they've already peaked and have no more upside and 2) injuries?

And agents do NOT sign lowball extensions like you mention for quality players "all the time".

The players you mention are average players, not all-stars and likely never going to be.

The ONLY player I'd even consider an early extension for is JJW and only IF he's everything we hope he'll be.

Finally, I'd rather wait till these average players EARN IT than hand them terrible extensions that could blow up BDWJr's SMALL ALREADY PAYROLL.

Your assuming these players are all going to have an upward trajection, a risky move that could mess up payroll for years.

Again, none of the players you mention are ready for extensions, perhaps in a year or two IF they continue to improve.

Again, for small AAV extensions, Burleson, Herrera, etc. don't need to be on upward trajectories. If they are just solid, average 2+ fWAR players for 4 or 5 years at $6, 7 million a year, that is a win for the team.

If the player is not interested in doing a long term extension at a price point like that, fine, but if the team projects them as a solid 2+ fWAR player they should make the offer and let them say no.

We've been down this road before matt (re: the Braves), I'm never going to be a fan of giving extensions to players w/one-two-three years of MLB experience unless they've proved to be well above average, actually closer to being all-star players.

For every A. Pujols great extension you can find players who've flopped, and even the great Pujols didn't get his extension until after his THIRD SEASON!

And all Albert had done for those three years was slash .334 .412 .613 1.025, hit 114 HR's, drive in 381 runs while winning ROY, two silver sluggers, two all star appearances and two MVP runner-up seasons plus a fourth place finish to boot!

NOW that's a player you easily hand an extension too.

Not Winn, Burleson, Libby type players.

(And I still think you've thrown out really low extension figures to support your argument that aren't realistic)

JMO

You should take any potential win you can get - whether it's a big potential win with a Pujols or Acuna, or smaller potential wins with a Winn, Burleson, Herrera, etc. If you are reasonably confident in your evaluation, take your shot. Solid, average players on cheap contracts help too.

Again if the player doesn't want to take $6 or so million for 4-5 years because it's "too low" that is fine. That's their choice. But, IMO, that is the price point you would want to be at for it to make risk/reward sense for the team.

Nope, not on board w/rushing into extensions for players who have just reached Arb 1 (Bumbles) and aren't even there yet (Winn, Hererra, etal).

IF they have solid-strong 2026 seasons, then after the new CBA is in place I'd re-visit but not before.

And just for prospective here are what some players are projected to get this year in ARB 2 per fangraphs:

Noot $5.7M
Donny $5.4M

If the player can get that now (2026/27), then it's going to be a whole lot higher when Winn, Hererra, etal reach that point in their career meaning your $6M would be a lowball offer.

You'd have to offer them no less than $8+M to even get their agents to present it to the player.

I never said offer Winn a $6 million AAV. I said Winn's would have to be $1x million AAV. So let's not confuse Winn with Burleson or Herrera.

But to Herrera or Burleson $24-$30 million GUARANTEED over 4-5 years might sound really good. The first $25 million you can make is by far the most important.

If you think it seems low it's because it has to figure in the risk of them failing for whatever reason. Because that is not zero, they take less and the team pays less.

Why does Burleson need to be locked up? We have him for 3 more years. Why do we need to have him for an extra year or two? Does Alec Burleson really need to be a Cardinal for 9 years?

Extending or not extending Burleson is not a hill I am going to die on. He's a marginal case of someone I think the team could try to extend cheaply, but if they don't I am not going to lose any sleep over it.

But for mid market and small market teams looking to gain any edge they can, I think focus on evaluating and extending guys like Burleson is an opportunity to look into.

Good midmarket teams can also trade these players and cultivate their farm system so replacements can replace a Burleson when he’s coming up on FA.

And that goes for even Herrera. We have him for 4 more seasons.

Sure - and you could have them signed to an extension and trade them.

Sounds super easy until they turn into Piscotty or DeJong.

So why do it?

No reason to unless you're obsessed with maybe saving a little money.

You go ahead and believe in Burleson for another 4-5 years.

[mattmitchl44]

Sounds super easy until they turn into Piscotty or DeJong.

So why do it?

No reason to unless you're obsessed with maybe saving a little money.

You go ahead and believe in Burleson for another 4-5 years.

Yes, the whole point is for the team to save $5-$10 million a year on a 2+ fWAR player vs. what it would otherwise cost them if they had to go buy that guy on the FA market. It's OK to do that. If you then develop another prospect in a couple of years that could take his place, you have trade value (either the prospect or Burleson) that you can potentially use as part of a package trade for players who can fill holes on your roster rather than having to buy them as expensive FAs.

And, as I've already said, you have to do your homework and trust your evaluation of a player like Burleson. If you believe, based on what you know about how you've seen him develop that he'll likely be a 2+ fWAR player going forward and a consistent part of your starting lineup, you lean toward extending him. If you think his 2+ fWAR season in 2025 at age 26 as he enters his prime was a fluke and he's unlikely to repeat that level of production going forward, I'd lean toward trying to "trade high" on him right now.