Quote from Brian Connelly on October 18, 2020, 10:49 am

Randy, you make a good argument about Tatis' self-awareness, etc.

But we already have Tatis for 4 years.  There's just no incentive on the Padres part to "only" control him for 1 FA year.  What's gained by the team (+1 yr) is not worth what they give up (guarantee all the $; injury risk, etc).  But I do expect his agents to push for a shorter contract like maybe 6 yrs (2 FA).  Just think it's obviously in the Pads interest to go as long as possible, with 8 yrs very likely being the max, b/c Tatis wouldn't want to be "too old" prior hitting FA.

The 8 yrs Acuna deal is a good baseline, and it does sync exactly with Manny's deal too 🙂

Quote from Brian Connelly on October 23, 2020, 8:04 am

From UT mailbag:  He can sign a six- or seven-year deal at $120-150 million this winter and be in line for a massive contract when he is 27 or 28.

If 6/120 = 20 AAV or 7/150 = 21.4 AAV (logical, since adding years will be where the big $$ is) then extrapolating 8/180 = 22.5 AAV.

While it seems insane to us mortals to say "No" to 30-60 MM for 1-2 more years, over his career, Tatis might make much more hitting FA younger/earlier.   It's just another person's (Acee's) $ guesses; but have to agree 8/120 highly unlikely.

Padres will have to stand firm pushing for length & control (no player opt outs). Tatis/agents push for 6 years max, Pads push for 8, compromise at 7?  I could "live" with that.

 

Quote from fenn68 on October 23, 2020, 9:34 am

The Padres and Tatis’ agent understand to rules of engagement on any extension and any guarantee of the control (arbitration) years.

Padres are not going to pay Tatis for the next four control years at FA prices and take all the risk with a guarantee contract ... and the agent can’t expect they will. I will stick to the thought that a guaranteed deal for the next four years is somewhere in the low to mid $30K ... similar to similar SS who did not get a guarantee.

The real issue is the “extension” part of the deal ... the buyout of FA years. AAV over those extension years ... which would be guaranteed ... probably fluctuates with the number of guaranteed years. Would argue that the longer the deal the lower the AAV since greater risk runs to the club that is on the hook no matter what happens.

Most think Tatis will be very successful but pricing that in 2025 and beyond based on less that one full year of ML (143 games) is the issue for both sides. As a FA in 2025, is he a $20MM or $40MM dollar player .... what do you reduce that for getting a guarantee 5 years in advance ... and what do you adjust that for multiple years of guarentee? How do the new CBA rules impact money going forward for clubs / players?

IF I am the agent and believe in my client’s earning power, I am seeing a Machado / Betts type contract if Tatis becomes a FA in 2025 ... why shouldn’t I start with an ask of $300MM/10 years for the FA years on top of $30MM for the first four control years ... $330MM/14 years guaranteed? (Not going to get that but a starting ask)

Unless Tatis is very, very attached to the Padres ... or the Padres are very, very generous and willing to take all the risk ... hard to see a long term deal beyond the control years ... so maybe one or two guaranteed years and a string of high pay club option years.

Side note: if the deal goes more than the four control and four extension ... Tatis would hit the 10/5 rule and could void any future trade ...

 

Quote from Randy Manese on October 23, 2020, 4:13 pm

You have to consider that Tatis, Jr. , after 4 more years, could go to a slew of teams - NY teams, Chicago teams, LA teams, St. Louis, etc. - and make a ton of money, meeting or exceeding what the Padres might offer him.  My thoughts are that he will agree to a shorter contract because he doesn't want to get stuck with a bad team, like Mike Trout, but really wants to play for a winner which means consistent playoffs and World Series appearances.   Will he get that in San Diego, especially if nothing is done to make up for the potential losses of Hosmer and Myers' production?  We could turn into a more pitching oriented team, more like the Washington Nationals, but what bats might be around him in 4 or 5 years provided that Abrams and Campusano work out?  Will Hassell provide the power of a Myers?  We don't have a legitimate 1b prospect in our system.

For this reason, my modest proposed 5 year deal, which was under 60M, is something I think he wants (or close to it) in order to see what the Padres organization is really going to do.  As much as he likes San Diego, I don't think any player likes to play for a losing team for his entire career, which is our history over many years, even if he is one of the highest paid players in baseball.  I think Trout was given the assurances that the Angels will be much better than we've seen, but they haven't made the investments in pitching that they should have.  So my guess is that he won't agree to more 6 years max and be willing to take a wait and see attitude on the Padres organization.  He can get his money almost anywhere but where can the Padres get another Tatis, Jr.?

Quote from fenn68 on October 24, 2020, 9:29 am

Never really can tell what will be going through the minds of Tatis, his father, his agent, and his mentor Machado (who has the same agent I believe). I expect this will be a decision based on the input from them all.

Machado and his agent didn't go for an extension (probably low ball) from Baltimore ... didn't go for the historically successfully teams (assuming there were offers) ... and took the biggest contract from a team that had not had a winning season for years and coming off a 90+ loss season with minimal national exposure.

So think MONEY will be the primary driver .... probably a lot more money that the Padres would be comfortable with in order to get a long term deal. Machado - Harper - Betts - Lindor - Story - Baez - Correa have all bet on themselves rather than signing long extensions early ... Trout extended (but at real big money) and Betts did in his last control year (for real big money). Long-term / big dollar contract expansions early in the control period are just not the norm.

I can see a deal being worked early but only covering the 4 control years and maybe buying out 1 FA year and carrying a team option (at a high price) for the 2nd FA year. Tatis becomes a FA in his mid-20s and set-up for the big deal while having guaranteed money up until then.

At some point during that contract ... Padres can come in an offer to lock-in the option year and make that big money extension offer (if Tatis is worth it then).

 

Quote from Brian Connelly on October 24, 2020, 10:57 am

 AAV over those extension years  ... probably fluctuates with the number of guaranteed years. Would argue that the longer the deal the lower the AAV since greater risk runs to the club that is on the hook no matter what happens.

I can see a deal being worked early but only covering the 4 control years and maybe buying out 1 FA year and carrying a team option (at a high price) for the 2nd FA year. Tatis becomes a FA in his mid-20s and set-up for the big deal while having guaranteed money up until then.    At some point during that contract ... Padres can come in an offer to lock-in the option year and make that big money extension offer (if Tatis is worth it then).

Fenn, the ony part of this that makes ANY sense is that Tatis & his agent likely want the extension to be as short as possible.

Everything else is dead wrong:  1)  In Tatis' situation where he still has 4 yrs until FA, every year added to the contract will raise, not lower AAV, b/c you're adding the expensive FA buyout years to the deal.  Pretty obvious going to have to pony up in the later years to push the contract length out.

2)  Your deal is the absolute bare minimum acceptable deal; obviously it takes 2 to tango, but your proposal is "old Padres" trying to be safe, worrying about "risk" on a Gyorko type deal vs. being "BOLD Padres" & realizing what we have in Tatis is unique.  Two years ago, I was one of a very few that had Gore ahead (essentially tied, but still) of Tatis as #1 prospect in our system; my (very wrong) argument was his hype had hit insane levels.   Two years later, I don't know what additional evidence you/ Mr P/ Randy/ others "would like to see" from Tatis to recognize him as a generational superstar?!?!  The cost of extending Tatis has risen by 10's of millions of $ now vs a year ago (I admit I thought we should wait), but now if we wait another year it will rise by 10's of millions $ more.

3)  WHY would Tatis be willing to do an "extension at some point during the contract" years from now when he's closer to FA --and has already become an 8-figure multimillionaire-- if he won't do so now?  Offering the 6th year as a club option implies to me the team is saying to Tatis, "we're not sure if you'll be worth it then (like Myers' last contract year)".... at AGE 27?!?!

There is risk in EVERY long term contract.  The main risks are injury (far less career threatening likelihood with a position player), and that the player regresses.   Tatis is not a "perfect" player; but there's a good chance that he is the best position player to come up through our system that we will see for the rest of our lives.  He DRAMATICALLY improved his defense and plate discipline in just his second year.  He recognizes that he needs to keep improving, and at his age, THAT is more likely than regression.  The Padres have the rarest of opportunities to extend for as long as possible one of the most exciting & talented young marquee stars in all of MLB  An opportunity so rare it literally may not happen again with a "homegrown" player.

A "5/80 with a 5 MM buyout" deal is weak & misguided for a player of this caliber.  If Tatis' agents push back to something like this, then no choice, but not the place to start.

 

 

 

 

 

Quote from Randy Manese on October 24, 2020, 11:39 am

Brian,

I think we are saying the same thing and I have said that he is a generational type player.  For this reason, knowing his own value now and in the future, I predicted that he would agree to a shorter contract extension, probably 5 to 6 years, to not only see what the market is but also what the Padres organization has done as a team.  My hope is that we can get an extension for as long as we can and, realistically, I don't see that happening beyond 6 years max.  Certainly, if he wants a 10 year extension, then let's do it.  As I said earlier, Tatis Jr. can get his worth in dollars virtually anywhere after 4 more years but the Padres are not going to find another Tatis Jr. for a long long time to be the face of the franchise and one of the most exciting complete players in major league baseball.  I don't see it as a risk but as an investment.

Quote from LynchMob on October 24, 2020, 11:59 am

I think Tatis carries significant injury risk ... he certainly and clearly has HOF talent ... but I have doubts he'll get enough playing time ...

Quote from fenn68 on October 24, 2020, 12:12 pm

I was referring to a longer deal with a lower AAV specifically for the buyout of FA years .... was not including the first four control years.

There has to be an agent / ownership reason that we have seen very few long term / big money deals with players this early in the careers. Longoria? Trout's first "extension" was after 3 full seasons (> 3X the games as Tatis) ... had been a 3X All-Star, finished 2nd, 2nd, 1st in the MVP vote ... and that was $144MM / 6 years (3 control / 3 FA). Then with two years remaining on that deal ... they tore it up and went for the Ultra Mega deal.

Just don't see any precedent of long term / big money extensions for non-FA.