The Carlos Correa SS free agency/injury saga finally may be over as he is reported to accept a deal back with the Twins for 6 yr/$200 M with vesting options for $70 M more. I am good with this deal. I believe the Giants "dodged a bullet" so to speak when the 13 yr/$350 M deal fell apart due to newfound injury concerns. The Giants concerns were validated when the Mets deal fell through too and validated again with the Twins deal being significantly smaller than their original offer. Most importantly, whatever happens in this deal going forward, it's in a division far, far away. My wife is a Twins fan so I sincerely hope it works out for both Correa and the Twins.
Assigning winners and losers for this deal seems to be the trend so here's mine:
Loser: Giants fans who were set up to expect a superstar signing and had the rug pulled out from them..... twice!
Winner: Giants medical staff. A very smart doc(s) saw something others did not and was validated in the end(although it admittedly may take years to know whether he/she truly did the Giants a favor).
Winner: Brandon Crawford who went from being humiliated by being replace while still under contract to having an opportunity to close out his career as the greatest shortstop in Giants history.
Winner: The Giants organization which appears to have dodged a bullet.
Loser: Scott Boras who proved once again he is untrustworthy. It came back to bite him this time(Although I am sure he will continue to be one of the highest rollers among MLB agents).
Winner: Twins Fans who get a legitimate superstar to anchor their team, hopefully for them for the next 6 years.
Losers: Steve Cohen, Mets and their fans who had a very expensive but underwhelming Hot Stove League season.(Replace DeGrom with another aging pitcher(Scherzer-Verlander) who doesn't win in the postseason. Did not really upgrade anywhere else).
Winner: Carlos Correa who is very fortunate to get a contract that makes him very wealthy for the rest of his life.
I think that's enough.
If Manny Machado exercises his option for FA, should the Giants be interested in him @ 32 yo (in 2024) at some $35M or more but less than a very long contract?
ReplyDeleteYes they should be interested in Machado . He's an all star SS/3rd baseman who's averaged 30 hrs 100 rbis in his 4 seasons with the Padres. He carried the Padres offensively last year. Since they didn't spend $350 mil on Correa they're in good position to make a splash signing next year. Other factors to consider, we don't know if David Villar will show that he can handle 3rd base full time in 2023. What about 3rd basman Casey Schmidt, can he continue to progress offensively in 2023. If so,he might force a callup because reports say his defense is already gold glove caliber already. Haven't seen him play in person, but there is you tube videos of him making sparking defense plays at 4rf base and SS. I have a feeling they shouldn't sign someone that would block Schmidt from reaching the majors.
DeleteIf he opts out he'll be looking for something better than what he has which is 5 years @ $32M per year. Since his birthday is July 6th, do you say 32-36 or 31-35? First year would start @ 31, but 5 year ends with him 36 for 3-4 months...
DeleteUnlike Correa, Machado has played a "full" season every year but one since his rookie season when he was 19-20. He's become more a 3B than a SS, but that might play if Luciano can play @ SS, but with potentially Villar and 3B and possibly Luciano sliding there, too, will that work?
If they can sign Machado in 2024 if he opts out, they can do that and figure out what to do with Villar and Luciano later. There are scouting reports that project Luciano moving off of shortstop to the outfield.
DeleteTotal football. Total basketball. Total baseball.
ReplyDeleteHere, total baseball means to look at every possible area that may impact winning. (I believe Total Football is when all players are interchangeable, or players are required to be comfortable in multiple positions, i.e. 'versatile,' dynamically, not 'versatile' statically or less dynamically, like in baseball),
It would seem that one area to check out is former top picks/prospects. Maybe our coaches/analytics staff can do something (mechanical, mental, etc) for them. Of course, we can also look at totally under-rated prospects (like Yastremski - I don't recall if he was a high pick or was highly rated previously).
Another pool is formerly great or elite players who were recently injured and are trying to come back. Every off season, there are, seemingly, not a few of them. Here, a good medical team can be very useful in separating the wheat from the chaff.
I'm going to guess that the Twins, and their fans, will be cursing this deal in about 2-3 seasons.
ReplyDeleteYes, but then they will only have to endure 3 cursed seasons instead of 10.
DeleteI feel like a winner. I went all the way back to 1960 to evaluate old short-stops. There have been something like 20 short-stops to make it past 35. Some were only short-stops when they were young and went over 2B later in their career, like Scutaro. Very few played reasonably well and most of them were no better than a low-tier FA that'd pull in about $3-to-$4 million a year.
ReplyDeleteAnd yes I understand the economics and theory of these contracts. But it's nothing more than short-term win-now rationalizations because the GM's job is on the line every year. So it's burn the future for today. But I'm a fan of the CLUB (and the players come second, I've watched a lot of greats come-and-go - Mays, McCovey, Spier (the previous best Giants SS in history) and many more) and watching my team suck for a decade because they've burned all the money on poor players just doesn't work for me.
Also there was Rich Aurilia and Al Dark, plus HOF Frankie Frisch who played a little SS but was mostly 2B.
DeleteDark was better overall than Craw, too, but in different eras.
Dark was very much better in career bWAR, most likely not as good a fielding SS.
Dark made 3 World Series. Personally, I don't remember 1948 but Dark was incomparable in 1951 and 1954 - both of which I do remember, especially the 1954 sweep of the 111-43 Cleveland Indians.