Gallardo deal is worth $30.1 million over five years
Deal extends through 2014, with a $13 million club option for 2015.
about 2 years ago
Kyle Lobner
129 comments
5 recs |
Email
PrintComments
also worth celebrating
The Brewers are in first place! Magic number down to 160!
For one thing...
… Gallardo isn’t significantly older than his listed age. Higuera almost certainly was.
What begins in fear usually ends in folly.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Apr 8, 2010 3:16 PM CDT up reply actions
I love it.
Too close for missiles, I’m switching to Ueck.
just for comparison
apologies on formatting:
player……….2010……..2011….2012……2013…..2014…….2015
braun……….$1.0M……..4.0……..6.0……….8.5……..10.0…….12.0
gallardo……..0.5………..3.2……..5.5……….7.8……..11.2…….13.0 (or 0.6 buyout)
did braun qualify as a super two? if so, cot’s says “may earn additional $6M if Braun qualifies as a Super 2 after 2009 season (increasing salaries to: 10:$3.5M, 11:$5.5M, 12:$7.5M, 13:$9M)”
this should give yovani enough cash to start a new line of shirts…
by Capt Science on Apr 8, 2010 1:13 PM CDT reply actions 6 recs
Bruan did not get Super 2 status
IIRC, he was 12 days short of service time.
by Brew Believer on Apr 8, 2010 1:20 PM CDT up reply actions
The thing I like about this
is that it reminds me how ridiculously cheap Braun is signed for.
Shruggity
Rec’d because it makes me so happy to see these numbers
by Oakland Brewer Fan on Apr 8, 2010 1:32 PM CDT up reply actions
Wow, that seems really club friendly
Especially as Gallardo is young and should get better in 2011-2012…
captainbok: What do you like the most about milwaukee
Jeff Suppan: Captain Bok, that is a great question. Does "Bok" mean Book of Knowledge? My favorite thing about Milwaukee are the Brewers.
I agree
not that we want to use this as a benchmark, but just compare it to the Suppan contract that was signed years ago for an older an inferior player.
by keephopealive on Apr 8, 2010 10:08 PM CDT up reply actions
Big difference
between Free Agency and someone who you have on your ball club for the next 3 years and the only uncertainty is cost.
Tracking Poll
Somebody asked earlier when the next tracking poll comes out regarding the decision to put Suppan in the rotation. I guess this will turn it into a referendum on whether we like Gallardo more than we hate Suppan.
Steve
http://nohuddleoffense.blogspot.com
huh?
why’s that? I both like Gallardo and hate Suppan. Signing Gallardo has nothing to do with Soup.
What about our Branyan's?
Can’t we slot one of them in the rotation?
Brewers Baseball and other assorted nonsense (mostly the assorted nonsense) at my blog, What's a Tararrel?
Club option is Voidable.
If Gallardo gets 6 “points” over the next 5 years: 5 pts for CY, 3 pts for 2nd Place, 1 pt for 3rd
Shruggity
question
So with this done…what effect, if any, does this have on a possible Fielder extension?
Blow Cubs Blow! Blow Cubs Blow! Hey Milwaukee, what do you say? The Cubs are going to lose today.
Well, for starters, we know how much money we will have locked up on our stars for the next 5 years.
http://www.mlbsoup.com
Exactly
So if it has any effect at all, it would be to make a Fielder extension more likely, because they have numbers to plan around. How much more likely is the question, and my gut would tell me not very much. But I could see this being part of the groundwork for it, and I also could see it being similar to the Cardinals signing Holliday to prove to Pujols they’re committed to winning; perhaps signing Gallardo will help show Prince the Brewers are committed to winning, and make him more willing to sign. Then again, maybe that’s not as much of a hang-up for him, and he’s just holding out for the Benjamins.
Brewers Baseball and other assorted nonsense (mostly the assorted nonsense) at my blog, What's a Tararrel?
Well, I wouldn't read too much into it that way.
Really, if they were budgeting for a Fielder extension, they were using expected salaries through arbitration, which probably weren’t terribly different from these numbers. I doubt that this contract extension does much for that angle aside from showing Fielder that the team is committed to keeping the young core together.
http://www.mlbsoup.com
Sure, which is why my gut tells me it doesn't make much difference
But if it does at all, it would probably be in the positive direction.
Brewers Baseball and other assorted nonsense (mostly the assorted nonsense) at my blog, What's a Tararrel?
Exactly
If Fielder goes through ‘14, and he’s making, say, $20MM that year, you’re looking at $41.2MM of an approximately $80MM payroll for three players. That’s irresponsible, and could handcuff the team, in my opinion.
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Apr 8, 2010 5:56 PM CDT up reply actions
ouch
that is rough.
Q: Did you ever scout Corey Hart? What seems to be holding him back from being a good hitter for AVG?
A: The slider away. And that facial hair.
-Keith Law ESPN chat 2/11/10
it is
but even with that, they’re still able to field a team that should be pretty decent
by 2014 if Yovani, Braun, and Fielder are the guys making the most money, the rest of the team should be otherwise comprised of guys like Brett Lawrie, Lorenzo Cain, Eric Arnett, and Craig Counsell, so it should still be doable.
By 2014 he'll be player-managing!
Applying Simpsons and Star Wars quotes to Brewers discussions since 2009.
I still think they are an 81-84 win team
And $25MM =/= $$41.2MM.
It was nice having you, Prince. Good luck taking David Ortiz’s spot.
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Apr 8, 2010 8:51 PM CDT up reply actions
Pujols
Pujols will be taking David Ortiz’s spot
by Saberilliterate on Apr 9, 2010 9:53 AM CDT up reply actions
I agree it's a reach to put $40M on 3 players
but $40M with production is better than $25M with no production whatsoever. That, of course, is assuming that Prince, Braun, and Gallardo continue to produce.
Look at it like this. This year we’re paying about $40M for Prince, Braun, Gallardo, and the 3 bums. If that doesn’t go up (and is actually lower between now and 2014) it might be workable. Maybe. Possibly.
by placidity on Apr 9, 2010 12:21 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
you think we'll manage to not make a dumbass bill hallesque contract at any point in the next 5 years?
I’m not as optimistic – The Bill Hall contract didn’t look awful the moment it was signed. It looked bad in hindsight.
I think they've already shown that they are going to be more patient with players
before signing them to extensions. See Corey Hart. When he made the all-star team, people wouldn’t stop talking about locking him up long term. My, how things have changed.
http://www.mlbsoup.com
But they didn't decide not to sign Hart to a long term deal...
… Hart turned them down. I’m sure they pulled any offer they had for an extension during last season (at the latest), but prior to that they were trying to get it done, but he wouldn’t sign.
What begins in fear usually ends in folly.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Apr 10, 2010 8:14 PM CDT up reply actions
We're decreasing our payroll by $10M over the next 4 years?
I understand that there is a cap as to how much a small market team can spend, but the Brewers payroll is $90M, why would it drop to $80M in 4 years? 4 years ago their payroll was $57M. They are obviously not going to get the same increase, but I don’t see this as a ceiling. $41.2 out of a $110-120M payroll is certainly not bad, especially for players of Fielder, Yo, and Braun’s quality.
by LosinCatmansLove on Apr 8, 2010 9:39 PM CDT up reply actions
The Brewers
payroll is about 84 Million now not 90 Million as I understand it. Furthermore the Brewers payroll at 84 Million is within 5 or 6 million of the maximum supportable payroll currently. The Brewers would need to significantly raise prices or find some other way to dramatically increase revenue to be able to afford a 110 Million dollar payroll. Fact of the matter is that if the Brewers jump to 110 Million they will be losing nearly 20 Million dollars a year and that’s not sustainable for Mark A most likely.
I know in 2008 with a payroll of what 90 Million at the end of the year they made a tad bit of money thanks to the playoffs. There were worries last year they would end up in the red but IDK if those numbers were ever brought up. Anyone know how much they made / lost last year? Either way I am pretty sure there isn’t much room for expansion.
Teams don't release specifics on gains/losses
But you’re right.
Being that Milwaukee is the smallest market in all of baseball, there isn’t much they can do about increasing television contracts. There is only so much revenue to be generated by advertising and profits on concessions.
I would think Mark Attanasio would prefer to keep the payroll in the $70-$80MM range at the top end. He’s shown he’ll go above that if it yields a return (read: playoffs), but to just wantonly run payroll up to $120MM? I think I’d plunk down a huge sum of money in Vegas against that.
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Apr 9, 2010 12:47 AM CDT up reply actions
Agreed that it is more (slightly) likely
The Twins took much the same approach prior to signing Mauer to his big deal. They locked up a number of there young core players to longer term deals which helped budget for the future and showed a commitment to winning for there star. While the Prince situation isn’t the same, it has its similarities.
Fuck tOSU
Only Braun and Gallardo
I think those are the only ones who have contracts through the next 5 years.
Under contract, yes.
But the team has Alcides Escobar under control through 2015, Casey McGehee through 2014, Carlos Gomez through 2013 (I think), plus the collection of Gamel, Lucroy, Salome, etc, whose arb clocks are all at or near zero.
Now that's great tasting chicken!
Gamel currently has 122 days of service time.
I E-mailed TH and that is what he said, my calculations came to 123 days If he on the DL for only a month he will be at 152 days. He only needs 172 days to have a year of service time. Any call up at all would put him at a year pretty quickly. Makes that time he spent on the bench even more aggravating.
Gomez was a Super 2 this year so I think you are right about him.
Give him an offspeed pitch down and in. He will swing and miss.
Alright!
Now when are they going to extend GooooMez?
Goooooo-mez!
by Drew C on Apr 8, 2010 1:54 PM CDT via mobile reply actions
CF
Is that position generally considered a “defense-first” position like SS? Looking at the starting CFs across the league, there seems to be a mix of power hitters (Sizemore, Ankiel, Beltran, Cameron and Werth) and speedy defensive guys with only a little pop (Bourn, Crisp and Upton).
Yeah, I think it's one or the other.
Gomez is more in the latter pack, obviously (and also not on that level yet, of course)
Shruggity
Escobar and Gomez are apples and oranges.
Escobar is absolutely cost guaranteed through 2012, when he’ll have three years of service time.
Gomez was already arb-eligible once as a super 2. So his cost is much less certain.
Now that's great tasting chicken!
Yup
Even though he was arb eligible early, he’s not free agent eligible until he completes four full seasons. So he’ll get an extra arb year.
Now that's great tasting chicken!
What happens if he gets sent down this year?
Does he get arby next year as well even if he doesn’t acquire enough service time to have 3 years in?
Give him an offspeed pitch down and in. He will swing and miss.
You are only a Super 2 if you have 86+ days of service time in the season
I believe he needs only a month on the roster to reach 3 years.
Failure is just success rounded down.
Wait, so technically if a player misses a complete season..
..he doesn’t acquire service time for that year, even though his clock already started? So if Gomez went down now, for the rest of the year, he wouldn’t go through arby next year?
http://www.mlbsoup.com
If he is optioned to the minors, that time is not major league service time
Regardless of how long he has been in the majors. The only exceptions are if he spends fewer than 20 days in the minors or if he is on a rehab assignment, then all the time counts as ML service.
If he did not reach 3 years of service in 2010, he would not qualify for arbitration and the team could reduce his salary up to 20%, or to $920k.
Failure is just success rounded down.
I doubt he goes down
I just thought it was an interesting scenario and was unsure what would happen. I knew about the 86 days in the previous season.
Give him an offspeed pitch down and in. He will swing and miss.
And there was much rejoicing
My goodness.
by BrewHaHeather on Apr 8, 2010 1:55 PM CDT reply actions 8 recs
Monty Python
always gets a rec
dickie_thon: Third baseman Bill Hall / Watches the third strike go by / Gamel grabs his glove
I read the article linked
I can answer my own question. One or two years, if we use the option.
by KittenMittons on Apr 8, 2010 2:00 PM CDT up reply actions
I guess we know why his contract had to be renewed in spring
Too busy talking about the future.
Failure is just success rounded down.
I imagine
he’s preparing a scathing retort for the umpire who had the audacity to say that Red Sox vs. Yankees games take too long.
The umpires should take those salaries, paid in large part by the success of the Yankees
and spend it on a nicer watch.
http://www.mlbsoup.com
He's thinking
“Gee, Mark, quit whining about signing Fielder when you’re trying to handcuff your payroll with other players”
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Apr 8, 2010 5:59 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Good terms for the Brewers
The length is what I would be afraid of.
6 years to any pitcher is pretty risky. He projects to have solid years throughout with maybe an all star appearance here or there.
Its a huge commitment to be making if only to shore up the books to make an impossible run at Fielder.
It's only 5 years with an option
And that’s including this current year, so it’s really only a 4 year + 1 yr. option extension
Brewers Baseball and other assorted nonsense (mostly the assorted nonsense) at my blog, What's a Tararrel?
why wouldn't you include this year? he's getting a raise and a signing bonus this year.
And it’s not like the year’s half way over or anything.
http://www.mlbsoup.com
Sure, but
In terms of risk, this year makes no difference. If he got hurt this year, we’d be paying for it anyway, so we aren’t at a greater risk of paying for an injury this year; we’re at a greater risk of paying for it in the 4 years in the future.
Brewers Baseball and other assorted nonsense (mostly the assorted nonsense) at my blog, What's a Tararrel?
We wouldn't be paying as much
if he got hurt this year under his old deal, I think was the point.
Shruggity
I don't think this contract has anything to do with "shoring up the books for Fielder"
Get a ife broseph
Probably not
But why do the deal now then? And not wait to see how he does this year? I dont think the asking price would have been much higher if they had waited until year end, and at worst, you just turn 2015 into a no option year and make is assured.
I think its a great deal for the team, but as I mention in the original post, its a long commitment to a pitcher, very risky.
It just kind of seems like the DM MO to do this for posturing sake for “shoring up the books” to prepare for a Fielder deal.
I think the point is a little bit cost certainty
And a little bit “pay more now and hopefully less later..”
I think the hope is that he’ll greatly increase in value this season, and this will be a deal we’ll look at like Braun’s – buying low and getting a long-term bargain in exchange for a little risk.
Now that's great tasting chicken!
by Kyle Lobner on Apr 8, 2010 3:03 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Tims arby numbers
Probably scared Doug and Mark into pulling the trigger and gambling a bit. They obviously see Yo as a future all star and want to keep the money down assuming his numbers go up.
It's gambling.
They’re locking up a potential future ace early, taking on a little extra risk (signing him now versus end of the year) in return for a larger possible reward (difference in contracts now vs if he has a monster year)
Shruggity
by Mykenk on Apr 8, 2010 3:07 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
It's only a $50,000 difference
Not including the signing bonus
Brewers Baseball and other assorted nonsense (mostly the assorted nonsense) at my blog, What's a Tararrel?
I think they're just copying the Twins
in other words, trying to lock up the quality young players to longer-term contracts. It wasn’t just Mauer that picked up the loot, they extended Span and Blackburn this year and Morneau and Cuddyer last year. Brewers did that with Braun last year and Gallardo this year. If Fielder doesn’t sign, I expect them to try to nail something down with Escobar in 2012 if he pans out. It’s just a logical thing for a small-market team to do to establish a commitment to winning and quality teams.
I know multi-year deals are risky but seriously
is there any team right now that WOULDN’T take this deal in an instant??
captainbok: What do you like the most about milwaukee
Jeff Suppan: Captain Bok, that is a great question. Does "Bok" mean Book of Knowledge? My favorite thing about Milwaukee are the Brewers.
the nationals?
Too close for missiles, I’m switching to Ueck.
if you've got it, flaunt it
Too close for missiles, I’m switching to Ueck.
Great deal!
I think this contract is in the same league as Braun’s in terms of value, if only because it is so much harder to buy pitching wins at market value through free agency (or trade).
Ryan Braun: He loves it.
Actually, on second thought
Braun’s contract is still much better. Still good to have Gallardo locked in though!
Ryan Braun: He loves it.
by SRB on Apr 8, 2010 3:27 PM CDT up reply actions
In all honesty
Its been nice having Prince in Milwaukee. Good luck with the Red Sox.
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
Unless they go the Adrian Gonzalez route
Brewers Baseball and other assorted nonsense (mostly the assorted nonsense) at my blog, What's a Tararrel?
Which is what?
Dangle him to everyone, and then not sign him?
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Apr 9, 2010 12:49 AM CDT up reply actions
This deal is basically the same as the Red Sox gave to Lester
It is fair deal for both sides but it does give the Crew good cost certainty for the next 4/5 years. The fact that there is alot of good pitchers in NL makes the CY Young points thing actually quite hard for Gallardo to achieve.
This is apparently the biggest deal ever given to a pitcher with 2+ years of Major league time which does kind of go against the grain of the “small market” Brewers and the fact that they cannot afford to keep their best players.
I think that this is the way to go for teams like the Brewers by signing the better players through the first year or two of their free agency so that they play for the team for longer but still allowing the player to enter free agency whilst still at the peak of their career. Only in rare cases where the very best players are involved and they are will to give the team a “home town discount” will you see a team like the Brewers keep a perennial all-star player for a long time once they reach free agency (see Mauer J.)
What this means I think is that the best bet to keep Fielder around is to go for a shorter say 3 year deal (last year of arbritration plus 1st 2 years of FA). This would allow the Brewers to pay him the going rate whilst the value of the Braun and Gallardo deals are lower but also would allow Fielder still the option of free agency whilst still in his prime. It would also mean that he would be a free agent when the 1st baseman options are not quite as plentiful as they are likely to be in 2011. I doubt however that Boras would go for this preferring I’m sure a deal somewhere closer to 6-8 years.
Personally I think a 2 year deal
for Fielder would make sense. It would buy out the last year of Arbitration and then the second year on the deal would allow for Fielder to hit a less saturated 1st baseman market. If I was Fielder I would much rather hit the open market a year after 2011 rather than in 2011. The availability of 1st basemen in 2011 plus the Yankees and Red Sox potentially already having 1st basemen locked up could well keep his total contract lower than he would like. Signing a 2 year extension could help him drive his costs back up.
That assumes of course that the 1st basemen due to hit the market don’t sign extensions before F/A.
They'll still be signed, though
The issue isn’t how many people hit free agency together, so much as how much demand there is. Fielder can’t be converted to anything other than a DH and his earnings potential is much lower as a DH, anyway. Some big name teams are already out
Yankees will be sticking with Teixera
Red Sox will stick with Youkilis for the foreseeable future
Angels will be dealing with Morales
Phillies will be looking to keep Howard
But even with that, the Orioles, Mets, Cubs and White Sox will be willing to open their pocketbooks for an MVP-calibre first baseman. The Dodgers will almost certainly be out of their divorce owner hell by then, too. There are other teams, too, I’m sure, so even hitting the market with 2 or 3 other MVP candidates won’t dampen demand.
FWIW
I think the Brewers are now trying to sign Rickie Weeks to a long-term deal as well.
"I will agree that the attitude [at BCB] is ridiculous and they have done so much to instigate animosity and then block us from responding. Real mature!"
Reading between the lines....
… Weeks name came up in a Haudricourt article recently as an aside when Fielder’s extension talks were mentioned. Something similar happened friday night during the broadcast of the first Cardinals game. Neither report said that talks were ongoing, but it made me think talks were happening as well.
What begins in fear usually ends in folly.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Apr 11, 2010 11:46 PM CDT up reply actions
Interesting, I hadn't heard either of those.
It makes some sense. Now’s probably the best time to do it from a cost standpoint. He’s coming off of a big injury, so Weeks is probably looking for some cost certainty, seeing as his value is probably pretty low. However, that could really screw with Lawrie, since he’s a cheaper option on his way up. I wonder if they’ve decided he doesn’t have a future at 2B.
http://www.mlbsoup.com
A decent/lowish contract on Weeks extending through a couple of FA years...
could also make him prime trade bait in case Lawrie turns out as well as everyone hopes. I don’t think there’s necessarily a problem there.
So...Lawrie to RF? Or 1B?
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Apr 11, 2010 6:12 PM CDT up reply actions
Gamel to 1st, Lawrie to RF?
What begins in fear usually ends in folly.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Apr 11, 2010 11:48 PM CDT up reply actions
gamel to be traded for spare parts
Lawrie to be traded for hot prospects. Or converted back to C.
by PagsBrewCrew on Apr 12, 2010 8:53 AM CDT up reply actions
I don't see either of those happening with Lawrie.
Why trade a hot prospect for hot prospects? Why move him back to C when Melvin is so high on Lucroy.
http://www.mlbsoup.com
So you're one of the people that suddenly think Mat Gamel is a piece of shit, huh?
I don’t really get it. I guarantee you he ends up having a better MLB career than Casey McGehee.
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Apr 14, 2010 11:41 AM CDT up reply actions
Also, Fielder won't be in a Brewers uni for 2011, IMO
So they need to start planning for his replacement. I don’t really think Joe Koshansky is the answer.
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Apr 14, 2010 11:41 AM CDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Brew Crew Ball
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
NL Central Standings
| W | L | PCT | GB | STRK | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Cincinnati
|
25 | 20 | .555 | 0 | Lost 1 |
|
St. Louis
|
25 | 21 | .543 | 0.5 | Lost 2 |
|
Houston
|
22 | 23 | .488 | 3 | Won 4 |
|
Pittsburgh
|
21 | 24 | .466 | 4 | Won 1 |
|
Milwaukee
|
19 | 26 | .422 | 6 | Won 2 |
|
Chicago
|
15 | 30 | .333 | 10 | Lost 10 |
(updated 5.26.2012 at 11:59 AM CDT)
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recent FanShots
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
- Giancarlo Stanton misses cutoff man, and Logan Morrison is thankful he did (Video)
- Snoop Dogg delivers memorable first pitch at U.S. Cellular Field
