Extension Updates for Cain/Bum

[SFGRTB]

Not really an update, but Baggs was on KNBR this morning and said that they still aren't particularly close to an extension with Cain. He did however say that Cain does in fact (according to baggs) like it here and the Giants do want him signed long term. He also said that Cain is reportedly lo oking for market value and he'll stay.

Market value would put him right around 5 years $90-$100 million.

 

[gp956]

Not really an update, but Baggs was on KNBR this morning and said that they still aren't particularly close to an extension with Cain. He did however say that Cain does in fact (according to baggs) like it here and the Giants do want him signed long term. He also said that Cain is reportedly lo oking for market value and he'll stay.

Steel yourselves.......

 

[filosofy29]

Steel yourselves.......

lol, I hate you.

 

[tzill]

Market value would put him right around 5 years $90-$100 million.

Oh, market value is a bit more than that. Probably 6/120

 

[Stokes1931]

Steel yourselves.......

Love ya, GP, but that picture is ban worthy. [shudder]

 

[filosofy29]

Steel yourselves.......

If this happens, I will do this to the Giants FO:

 

[SFGRTB]

Oh, market value is a bit more than that. Probably 6/120

Lets look at some guys who compare to Cain:

Jared Weaver signed for 5 years, $85 million (which was considered very team friendly) (2011).

Justin Verlander signed for 5 years, $80 million (coming off a season where he finished 3rd in Cy Young voting) (2010).

CJ Wilson got 5 years, $75 million on the open market this offseason.

Also consider, if Cain signed for +$100 million, he'd be only the SECOND right hander to get that much money. Ever

 

[gp956]

5 years $95M +/- 5 sounds about right, right now. Currently Cain and the Giants are negotiating as bilateral monopolists, but in a year it will be Cain in the sole monopolist position (assuming no team collusion). Either way, I would never use the term "market value" to describe the price of Cain. Difficult to predict what a single team's maximum willingness to pay will be a year from now (what you might call their reservation price), but 6/120 would not surprise me. For instance, I can see the Dodgers new owners trying to make a big signing next year.

If I were Cain, I'd take 5/95 +/- with a player triggered opt-out clause after year 3. That way, I get the assurance of obtaining multi-generational wealth, and a reasonable chance of doubling that wealth, or more, should baseball economic conditions improve substantially over the next few years. In 3 years he'd be 30 years old with a good chance of getting another 5-6 year contract while still being at/near his peak performance years.

 

[tzill]

Lets look at some guys who compare to Cain:

Jared Weaver signed for 5 years, $85 million (which was considered very team friendly) (2011).

Justin Verlander signed for 5 years, $80 million (coming off a season where he finished 3rd in Cy Young voting) (2010).

CJ Wilson got 5 years, $75 million on the open market this offseason.

Also consider, if Cain signed for +$100 million, he'd be only the SECOND right hander to get that much money. Ever

Unfortunately, all of these pitchers/contracts are distinguishable from Cain:

1. Weaver, as you say, signed a team friendly deal, which Cain has already said that he WON'T do. This is particularly unfortunate b/c of all pitchers, Weaver is probably the closest to Cain in terms of production. Lifetime 128 ERA+ (Cain 125), 5.7 years as a starter (Cain 6.2), 2 ASG. However, Wilson's was the rare case where the player said "how much money do you really need?." He took a LOT of shit from the MLBPA for that. Cain won't do the same thing.
2. Verlander signed a deal that bought out his last two years of arb; Cain will be a FA. If you look at Verlanders FA years, they're 3/60. So, it's tough to figure what the FMV of Verlanders FA years is b/c they're subsidized to an extent by the pay he gets in non-FA years, and the security of a 5 year deal with two years left in arb. Cain never got that.
3. Wilson is the least comparable pitcher of all. The first five years of his career, he was essentially a reliever. So you have to throw out those stats for comparison since Cain's always been a starter. CJ has had a very nice two years as a starter in 2010 and 11, he was 30 when he signed the 5 year deal with the Angels, and signed for a LOT less than Matt will get. A LOT less. Matt will be a FA at 27, and coming off a season where he made $15MM. Wilson STARTS at $11MM this year.

The floor for Matt's contract has to be 5/100 and I won't be shocked, given his age and durability, if he gets 6/120 from the Giants. The Yanks, Red Sox, Angels, doyers, Chubbs, and Philth would all give him that much.

 

[gp956]

Unfortunately, all of these pitchers/contracts are distinguishable from Cain:

1. Weaver, as you say, signed a team friendly deal, which Cain has already said that he WON'T do. This is particularly unfortunate b/c of all pitchers, Weaver is probably the closest to Cain in terms of production. Lifetime 128 ERA+ (Cain 125), 5.7 years as a starter (Cain 6.2), 2 ASG. However, Wilson's was the rare case where the player said "how much money do you really need?." He took a LOT of shit from the MLBPA for that. Cain won't do the same thing.

Nevertheless Weaver's contract puts an absolute floor on what Cain will take. Everyone agrees on that.

2. Verlander signed a deal that bought out his last two years of arb; Cain will be a FA. If you look at Verlanders FA years, they're 3/60. So, it's tough to figure what the FMV of Verlanders FA years is b/c they're subsidized to an extent by the pay he gets in non-FA years, and the security of a 5 year deal with two years left in arb. Cain never got that.

Looking at the details of that contract, I don't see any subsidy from his arb years.

3. Wilson is the least comparable pitcher of all. The first five years of his career, he was essentially a reliever. So you have to throw out those stats for comparison since Cain's always been a starter.

Uh.... no. Recent performance counts much more heavily than more distant performances. Over the last two years Wilson has an ERA+ of 142, while Cain's last three years is at 132+. Bottom line, they're comparable.

CJ has had a very nice two years as a starter in 2010 and 11, he was 30 when he signed the 5 year deal with the Angels, and signed for a LOT less than Matt will get.

Is this a non sequitur? I can't really be sure, because it's not apparent that you actually intended for the last clause to be connected to the preceding structures.

Matt will be a FA at 27, and coming off a season where he made $15MM. Wilson STARTS at $11MM this year.

By your own logic for Verlander, we could assert that Matt's first two years in this current contract have subsidized the 15MM in the last year. Nevertheless the ONLY thing that counts is the total value of the contract (appropriately discounted, of course). Why CJ is only getting 11M in the first year is most likely due to some preference on the the part of CJ or the team.

However, [Weaver's] was the rare case where the player said "how much money do you really need?." He took a LOT of shit from the MLBPA for that. Cain won't do the same thing.

Yet we know that CJ Wilson walked away from a 6 year 99M offer from Miami. Thus, we have Wilson, Weaver, and Verlander (if we accept your premise that Verlander is underpaid) all taking less than market value, why then are you so sure that Cain "won't do that"?


If I'm the Giants I would not offer more than 18M annual value right now (with a full no-trade clause). If I'm going to have to pay substantially more than that, I let Cain test the market next year. And, for myself, I look to see if Cain's market value money is better spent on a hitter.

 

[nateistheshi]

Cain's market value is going to be incredibly unpredictable. Here are the starters that are going to be FAs next offseason. I excluded anybody with a club option, anybody that's good but old (like Ryan Dempster or R.A. Dickey,) and anybody who is youngish, but sucks. Any of these guys are capable of getting a multi-year deal through FA with a strong 2012 season:

Matt Cain (28)
Zack Greinke (28)
Cole Hamels (29)
Edwin Jackson (29)
Colby Lewis (33)
Francisco Liriano (29)
Shaun Marcum (31)
Brandon McCarthy (29)
Anibal Sanchez (29)
Jonathan Sanchez (30)

This FA class looks like it's pretty stacked, so $85/5 can be regarded as a possible floor for Cain if all of these guys hit FA. The problem lies in the fact that it's entirely possible that his 3 biggest competitors, Zack Greinke, Cole Hamels, and Anibal Sanchez, could all sign extensions with their current team (or if their team is out of contention, they could be traded at the deadline and sign an extension.) Should that happen, Cain would be the best pitcher on the FA market by far, and the only ace or ace-like pitcher on the market. I'd assume that since the FA market is pretty crazy, it'd be better to compare him to guys that signed a deal in a year where they were considered the only ace or ace-like pitcher available on the FA market, or through an international signing.

C.C. Sabathia (2008) $161/7 years at age 28
Cliff Lee (2011) $120M/5 years at age 31

I can't find anymore examples of a pitcher hitting the market where there isn't another pitcher on the same level as them, and you could argue these guys are more accomplished than Cain. For Cain to get a contract like Sabathia's, he'd have to have those other 3 guys (Greinke, Hamels, and Anibal Sanchez) sign extensions and he'd have to win some hardware in 2012. That's pretty unlikely, but since he's several years younger than Cliff Lee, a contract along the lines of Lee's is entirely possible.

Bottom line, Cain's been sending signals that he's determined to test the FA market, and we don't know anything about what kind of contract he'll receive until we know what's going on with the other guys on the market. I have to say though, that with Rowand's contract coming off the books, I am confident that if the Giants wanted him, they could retain Cain on a market such as this. Lincecum has some decent FA competition in his walk year as well (no other aces, but a ton of #2/#3 guys about the same age,) and the Huff/Zito contracts will come off the books that year. If the Giants don't retain both of Lincecum and Cain, it's because somebody else overpaid massively or because they just didn't try very hard to keep them.

 

[tzill]

Nevertheless Weaver's contract puts an absolute floor on what Cain will take. Everyone agrees on that.




Looking at the details of that contract, I don't see any subsidy from his arb years.

Looking at Verlander's contract, he took 6.75 in Arb3 and 12.75 in Arb4, before three FA years of 20. He was asking 9.5 and the Tigers were offering 6.9. I'm going to make an assumption (and I could be wrong) that the true value was close to the midpoint, or 8.2. In Arb3, the consensus discount is about 60% of FMV. 8.2 is 60% of about 13.7. 80% (Arb4 consensus discount) would be about 11. He got (adding in signing bonus) about 7 and 13. That means he was overpaid, relative to expectation, by about 2MM in his arb4 year. That's a 2 million subsidization if my math is right.

Uh.... no. Recent performance counts much more heavily than more distant performances. Over the last two years Wilson has an ERA+ of 142, while Cain's last three years is at 132+. Bottom line, they're comparable.

Well, any two human beings who throw a baseball are "comparable." If you are simply going to look at Wilson's last two years, then there is an argument that Cain isn't comparable b/c Wilson, by the metrics, has been much better. BTW, I caught what you did there, going back a third year on Cain to include his amazing 2009. If you compare apples to apples (i.e. 2010 and 2011 only) Cain's ERA+ is 123.5; not so "comparable" at all.

Is this a non sequitur? I can't really be sure, because it's not apparent that you actually intended for the last clause to be connected to the preceding structures.

I don't think I was very clear on my point. Let me rephrase: CJ was 30 when he signed his deal; Cain will be 27. CJ had two very good years as a starter prior to the contract; Matt has had five. CJ was worth less at the time of signing than Matt is worth now, and his contract reflects that.

By your own logic for Verlander, we could assert that Matt's first two years in this current contract have subsidized the 15MM in the last year. Nevertheless the ONLY thing that counts is the total value of the contract (appropriately discounted, of course). Why CJ is only getting 11M in the first year is most likely due to some preference on the the part of CJ or the team.

Well, let's look at Cain's contract. 4.25 (arb2), 7 (arb3), 15 (arb4). Add in the signing bonus and it's close to 5, 7, 15. If (this is an assumption) his market value is about 20MM/yr, then his final three years of arb should have been 8, 12, 16. So there was no overpayment and no subsidy. If anything, Matt took less than would be expected, and thus why it was reported that he gave a "home town discount."

Yet we know that CJ Wilson walked away from a 6 year 99M offer from Miami. Thus, we have Wilson, Weaver, and Verlander (if we accept your premise that Verlander is underpaid) all taking less than market value, why then are you so sure that Cain "won't do that"?

I'm not advancing the argument that Wilson or Verlander are underpaid. Weaver, yes. Cain's camp has said they won't give another hometown discount (they feel they gave one last time around). That's why I'm pretty sure that Cain is going to get 5-6 years at 20+.

If I'm the Giants I would not offer more than 18M annual value right now (with a full no-trade clause). If I'm going to have to pay substantially more than that, I let Cain test the market next year. And, for myself, I look to see if Cain's market value money is better spent on a hitter.

That makes sound fiscal sense. It also likely loses Cain to the Yankees (or doyers). I hope the Giants don't do that.

 

[Mays-Fan]

That makes sound fiscal sense. It also likely loses Cain to the Yankees (or doyers). I hope the Giants don't do that.

Unprovable speculation on my part (my favorite kind of post!), but if we lose Cain, it would seem that would put us at a disadvantage when negotiating with Timmy. Losing Cain would be bad, but losing both Cain and Timmy would be horrific, particularly given not-so-strong state of our minor-league SP. So paying a smidge more for Cain may save us when it comes time to re-do Timmy.

And frankly, given the choice of one LT contract vs the other, I would vote for Cain. IMO, Timmy likely can't mechanically pitch like this for too many more years. Cain is a bigger, more fluid workhorse.

 

[tzill]

Cain's market value is going to be incredibly unpredictable. Here are the starters that are going to be FAs next offseason. I excluded anybody with a club option, anybody that's good but old (like Ryan Dempster or R.A. Dickey,) and anybody who is youngish, but sucks. Any of these guys are capable of getting a multi-year deal through FA with a strong 2012 season:

Matt Cain (28)
Zack Greinke (28)
Cole Hamels (29)
Edwin Jackson (29)
Colby Lewis (33)
Francisco Liriano (29)
Shaun Marcum (31)
Brandon McCarthy (29)
Anibal Sanchez (29)
Jonathan Sanchez (30)

This FA class looks like it's pretty stacked, so $85/5 can be regarded as a possible floor for Cain if all of these guys hit FA. The problem lies in the fact that it's entirely possible that his 3 biggest competitors, Zack Greinke, Cole Hamels, and Anibal Sanchez, could all sign extensions with their current team (or if their team is out of contention, they could be traded at the deadline and sign an extension.) Should that happen, Cain would be the best pitcher on the FA market by far, and the only ace or ace-like pitcher on the market. I'd assume that since the FA market is pretty crazy, it'd be better to compare him to guys that signed a deal in a year where they were considered the only ace or ace-like pitcher available on the FA market, or through an international signing.

C.C. Sabathia (2008) $161/7 years at age 28
Cliff Lee (2011) $120M/5 years at age 31

I can't find anymore examples of a pitcher hitting the market where there isn't another pitcher on the same level as them, and you could argue these guys are more accomplished than Cain. For Cain to get a contract like Sabathia's, he'd have to have those other 3 guys (Greinke, Hamels, and Anibal Sanchez) sign extensions and he'd have to win some hardware in 2012. That's pretty unlikely, but since he's several years younger than Cliff Lee, a contract along the lines of Lee's is entirely possible.

Bottom line, Cain's been sending signals that he's determined to test the FA market, and we don't know anything about what kind of contract he'll receive until we know what's going on with the other guys on the market. I have to say though, that with Rowand's contract coming off the books, I am confident that if the Giants wanted him, they could retain Cain on a market such as this. Lincecum has some decent FA competition in his walk year as well (no other aces, but a ton of #2/#3 guys about the same age,) and the Huff/Zito contracts will come off the books that year. If the Giants don't retain both of Lincecum and Cain, it's because somebody else overpaid massively or because they just didn't try very hard to keep them.

Good post and I agree. One correction: Huff's contract is done this year, unless you're counting the $2MM buyout for 2013. If you are counting buyout years, then Zito has three, not two, years to run ($7MM buyout in 2014).

 

[gp956]

Well, any two human beings who throw a baseball are "comparable." If you are simply going to look at Wilson's last two years, then there is an argument that Cain isn't comparable b/c Wilson, by the metrics, has been much better. BTW, I caught what you did there, going back a third year on Cain to include his amazing 2009. If you compare apples to apples (i.e. 2010 and 2011 only) Cain's ERA+ is 123.5; not so "comparable" at all.

I included Cain's third year because otherwise Wilson would be head and shoulders above Cain. And yet, you are arguing that Cain is worth more, which is fine if your main point is solely based on age. Just trying to be fair to you by presenting Cain in the most favorable light.

 

[gp956]

Cain's market value is going to be incredibly unpredictable. Here are the starters that are going to be FAs next offseason. I excluded anybody with a club option, anybody that's good but old (like Ryan Dempster or R.A. Dickey,) and anybody who is youngish, but sucks. Any of these guys are capable of getting a multi-year deal through FA with a strong 2012 season:

Matt Cain (28)
Zack Greinke (28)
Cole Hamels (29)
Edwin Jackson (29)
Colby Lewis (33)
Francisco Liriano (29)
Shaun Marcum (31)
Brandon McCarthy (29)
Anibal Sanchez (29)
Jonathan Sanchez (30)

This FA class looks like it's pretty stacked, so $85/5 can be regarded as a possible floor for Cain if all of these guys hit FA. The problem lies in the fact that it's entirely possible that his 3 biggest competitors, Zack Greinke, Cole Hamels, and Anibal Sanchez, could all sign extensions with their current team (or if their team is out of contention, they could be traded at the deadline and sign an extension.) Should that happen, Cain would be the best pitcher on the FA market by far, and the only ace or ace-like pitcher on the market. I'd assume that since the FA market is pretty crazy, it'd be better to compare him to guys that signed a deal in a year where they were considered the only ace or ace-like pitcher available on the FA market, or through an international signing.

C.C. Sabathia (2008) $161/7 years at age 28
Cliff Lee (2011) $120M/5 years at age 31

I can't find anymore examples of a pitcher hitting the market where there isn't another pitcher on the same level as them, and you could argue these guys are more accomplished than Cain. For Cain to get a contract like Sabathia's, he'd have to have those other 3 guys (Greinke, Hamels, and Anibal Sanchez) sign extensions and he'd have to win some hardware in 2012. That's pretty unlikely, but since he's several years younger than Cliff Lee, a contract along the lines of Lee's is entirely possible.

Bottom line, Cain's been sending signals that he's determined to test the FA market, and we don't know anything about what kind of contract he'll receive until we know what's going on with the other guys on the market. I have to say though, that with Rowand's contract coming off the books, I am confident that if the Giants wanted him, they could retain Cain on a market such as this. Lincecum has some decent FA competition in his walk year as well (no other aces, but a ton of #2/#3 guys about the same age,) and the Huff/Zito contracts will come off the books that year. If the Giants don't retain both of Lincecum and Cain, it's because somebody else overpaid massively or because they just didn't try very hard to keep them.

Good points. But I think we need to emphasize that both Lee and Sabathia were/are pretty clearly better than Cain at the time they were exposed to the open market. And Sabathia playing for the black hats while he had the opt-out clause led to them bidding against themselves. Not sure that really set the market anymore than Zito's 7 year 127M contract set the market for #4 pitchers. But your overall points stand.

 

[tzill]

I included Cain's third year because otherwise Wilson would be head and shoulders above Cain. And yet, you are arguing that Cain is worth more, which is fine if your main point is solely based on age. Just trying to be fair to you by presenting Cain in the most favorable light.

I understand, but my point is that Wilson isn't comparable. As you point out, if you look at just the last two years, then Cain's ceiling would be 5/77.5.

I think we can both agree how ridiculous a position THAT is. The unavoidable conclusion: Wilson isn't comparable.

 

[gp956]

I understand, but my point is that Wilson isn't comparable. As you point out, if you look at just the last two years, then Cain's ceiling would be 5/77.5.

I think we can both agree how ridiculous a position THAT is. The unavoidable conclusion: Wilson isn't comparable.

Depends on what you're comparing. Wilson is certainly comparable as a player. We know Wilson walked away from 6/99. So it appears that Wilson highly values playing near his home. And that's where Cain and Wilson may not be comparable, i.e. their marginal rate of substitution of money vs. playing for a particular team. Had you made that point originally, I'd have agreed.

 

[gp956]

BTW, in all my comments WRT to Cain's contract, I was assuming the Giants tear up the current contract. So the new contract starts now, rather than being tacked on to the end of the current one.

 

[SF11704]

Since Cain keeps referring to 'market value' that seems to be the metric he's using. The question is 'What does HE mean by market value?' If I'm Matt Cain I look at Timmy's current offer from the club and settle in on the 2nd year. 21.5M. Do I think he's as good as Timmy? Not quite there but awful damn close. In the long run he may prove more valuable and durable as well. I have to think that Cain feels he is worth the investment. I think he'd take 4/82M or 5/100-110M ... I think he's using Timmy contract as his metric