Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Devils Beat Rangers, Head To Stanley Cup Finals

Albert Pujols, C.J. Wilson Would Have Received More From Marlins

Earlier today, Albert Pujols signed a mammoth ten year, $254 million deal with the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim to take over their first base position forever and ever and ever. Almost immediately after that, it was confirmed that C.J. Wilson would also join the Angels by signing a five-year, $78 million deal. This officially eliminated two targets that the Marlins were working on feverishly.

Of course, there are always people that speculate that the Fish were never all that serious with these players. But according to Bob Nigthengale of USA Today says that the Marlins made offers that bested those of the Angels for both players.

Pujols rejected the Miami Marlins' offer of 10 years, $275 milllion a day earlier, according to two people familar with the offer but not authorized to discuss it due to the sensitive nature of the negotations.

With incentives and no state tax in Florida, the actual value of the deal could have been worth nearly $300 million.

Indeed, C.J. Wilson mentioned himself that "if it was about the money, I'd be a Marlin," which matches what was heard by Ken Rosenthal of Fox Sports regarding the Marlins' offer. Supposedly the Marlins offered six years and "at least $100 million."

Don't confuse the Marlins for a lack of effort in this case. If these figures are right (and I have a hard time believing they are completely correct, but they could easily be in the ballpark), then the front office did their due diligence to sign these players, and no Marlins fan should be disappointed with the staff that they did not come out ahead in these sweepstakes.

Indeed, based on evaluation by Dan Szymborski, founder of the ZiPS projection system, a ten-year deal for Albert Pujols could be in line for this sort of projection.

ZiPS has Pujols' WAR as 7, 6.2, 5.8, 4.9, 4.2, 3.5, 2.7, 2.0, 1.3, 0.7 over next 10 years, or 203 mil assuming 4.7+3%
Dec 07 via Silver BirdFavoriteRetweetReply

At his assumptions, Pujols would have been worth $203 million in those 10 years. At our assumptions that we have been using here at Fish Stripes, it would have been about the same. Either way you look at it, if the Marlins offered Pujols $275 million with the added money he would earn from not having state income tax, it was appealing enough to snag him. The fact that he did not should relieve Marlins fans rather than disappoint them, as this may have turned into a horrible deal according to ZiPS.

Star-divide

For the Wilson contract, it was completely different. The money that he signed for was actually highly reasonable, as I pointed earlier this offseason. If C.J. Wilson wanted to sign a five-year deal worth somewhere close to $80 million, the Marlins would have been all over it. But the team gave six years and supposedly over $100 million to Wilson, and he found it more attractive to go home to California rather than down to south Florida. Hell, even Logan Morrison sang for him via Twitter.

@str8edgeracer I want to sing u a song. I'm so excited, I just can't hide it and I know, i know, I know I want u I want u #nohomojustlomo
Dec 08 via TwitterrificFavoriteRetweetReply

The truth, if the information on the Marlins' offer was correct, was that the Fish would have had to offer above market value for Wilson to pass on a hometown discount from Los Angeles. I obviously like C.J. Wilson and think he should be very good starter for the next three seasons at least, but even with the Marlins' supposedly newfound cash flows, there is no way the Fish should overpay just because they want to acquire. Fiscal spending needs to remain intelligent.

And in the end, even though the Marlins missed out on two free agent targets, they came out of the Winter Meetings as relatively successful. Marlins fans should not fret for the team's more immediate lack of signings or their inability to pry away talent from the Angels' hands. The Fish signed three players in the last week, and two of the deals were solid acquisitions with decent chances to pay off and which will sorely help the team in the next two or three seasons. Sure, one other deal was a likely mistake, but it still is likely to improve the team in 2012, and the Marlins are throwing caution to the wind in order to improve in 2012 and prove to the fan base that they deserve to be watched at the new stadium.

We may not have landed the best pitcher and the best hitter available, but there is still time and even if the offseason shopping spree ended today, the Marlins came out pretty decently despite their uproar and the seemingly unending tide of hate from outside of the organization. Marlins fans should be happy with the moves made so far.

Comment 64 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

I'm working under the assumption that those deals were technically off the table once the Marlins signed Buehrle

We’re still using modified Elias rules from the old CBA, so I’d guess the fact that there were less than 68 compensatory free agents still limited teams to signing three. This would go a long way to explaining why those two jumped all over the Angels offer as soon as the Marlins were forced out of the running by the rulebook.

by Stephen Schmidt on Dec 8, 2011 3:36 PM EST reply actions  

I'm not following

Which rules regarding limitations on free agent signings are you referring to?

by Michael Jong on Dec 8, 2011 3:45 PM EST up reply actions  

Under the Elias system, teams were limited in how many type A and B guys they could sign

Feel free to read this if you’d like, but I’ll blockquote the relevant info.

If there are 14 or fewer Type A or Type B free agents available, no team can sign more than one type A or B player. If there are between 15-38, no team can sign more than two. If there are between 39 and 62, there’s a limit of three. However, teams can sign as many Type A or B free agents as they’ve lost, regardless of the limits above.

There were less than 68 total compensatory free agents this year, so the most any team could sign was 3 unless they lost four or more.

by Stephen Schmidt on Dec 8, 2011 3:52 PM EST up reply actions  

Hmm, I've never seen that before, thanks

I don’t think that played in, given the continued presence of rumors regarding the Marlins signing more players. Something must have changed to prevent this from being a barrier.

by Michael Jong on Dec 8, 2011 3:56 PM EST up reply actions  

It almost has to have played a part

It’s still part of the rules package that we’re using this offseason. Next season this rule will no longer be in effect, but this is a part of the Elias compensation system which was still in place this offseason so it had to have been in play. The MSM just hasn’t picked up on it yet, but it took them a while to in 2008 as well. It’s a pretty obscure rule, this is only the second time a team has ever hit the cap of compensatory guys they could sign. The Marlins can still feel free to sign Darvish, but I wouldn’t expect to see another compensatory guy signed.

by Stephen Schmidt on Dec 8, 2011 4:08 PM EST up reply actions  

Huh, very intriguing

That’s a major point to make, and it would have severe complications if it were to be installed. I’ll take a look into the new CBA rules for this season only. Thanks again!

by Michael Jong on Dec 8, 2011 5:19 PM EST up reply actions  

No problem

I just don’t see any reason why that particular rule would have been scrapped this winter in the negotiations. The players clearly got a select few players compensation removed this season as well as part of the swap for the draft changes, but I doubt they ever had any reason to ask for this rule to be scrapped this winter. I’d assume it just kind of went untouched because it’s generally not a factor anyway, most teams wanted the rule originally as it stops the Yankees from signing everyone.

by Stephen Schmidt on Dec 8, 2011 5:31 PM EST up reply actions  

It's funny

I run into this same sort of thing over on the soccer side all the time as well. I’ve written this same article (more or less) about the same player three times since he signed at Chelsea. The MSM publishes rumors about a move, the next week realizes that the rules in place prevent it, and forget said rule again in a month. It’s amazing how few writers that make a living covering a specific sport actually know all of the rules associated with player movement.

by Stephen Schmidt on Dec 8, 2011 5:39 PM EST up reply actions  

We should sign Pudge

This may seem crazy but I’m actually surprised it hasn’t been mentioned before. Pudge can back up Buck and still do what the front office wants, and that’s attract a few more fans. Sure he’s no where near the player he was 8 years ago, but it could get some fans back. Especially with him being close to some milestones. Just a thought, especially after not signing CJ or Albert.

by OraNge DusTT on Dec 8, 2011 3:49 PM EST reply actions  

I like it!

It has an Andre Dawson, Tim Raines feel to it.

by Jigokusabre on Dec 8, 2011 4:37 PM EST up reply actions  

What are the chances we go after Darvish or Cespedes?

If we were still in on Wilson after all our signings, would we try to spend that money on one of these guys, or save it for extensions?

by cpmustangs13 on Dec 8, 2011 3:53 PM EST reply actions  

I'd like to save it for extensions for

JJ and Stanton, and a possible mid-season acquisition.

Recently converted Marlins Fan

Follow me @Terrence_Hunley

by Terrence Hunley on Dec 8, 2011 3:54 PM EST up reply actions  

yeah, woulldn't mind competing with this team & "saving" $$ for now

if JJ, hanley, reyes all healthy mid-july we’ll be in contention.
lots of free agents to be gotten

by byoung on Dec 8, 2011 4:18 PM EST up reply actions  

But as far as this season goes

How about Carlos Beltran on a one or two year deal?

Recently converted Marlins Fan

Follow me @Terrence_Hunley

by Terrence Hunley on Dec 8, 2011 4:33 PM EST up reply actions  

Type A

Even though he can’t be offered arb he’d still put them at 4 type A/B free agents, which is one more than any club is allowed this year.

by Stephen Schmidt on Dec 8, 2011 4:56 PM EST up reply actions  

Cespedes is still in the cards, if he doesn't cost major money

But unfortunately he may. The Marlins are not in on Darvish, and rightfully so given the significant risk.

by Michael Jong on Dec 8, 2011 3:57 PM EST up reply actions  

And the limited money the team likely has at this point

Darvish would cost a lot when considering the posting fee.

by Michael Jong on Dec 8, 2011 3:57 PM EST up reply actions  

out of any current FA

you gotta figure that Cespedes would provide the closest thing to that Latin-American Superstar the marlins so deeply want.

relative to what is available right now he is very much worth the risk.

http://baseballperiod.blogspot.com/

by bronzeagle on Dec 8, 2011 4:14 PM EST up reply actions  

it's weird to me

that they were willing to pay pujols insane money but won’t even consider going around $60m for cespedes. he has the potential to bring the same marketing value (or something close) and the deal would be about as risky as the one for pujols.

i’d like to see them make a run at him. if they sign him, that opens up the opportunity for gaby to be traded for a SP.

by rayrayrayrayrayrayrayray on Dec 8, 2011 4:23 PM EST up reply actions  

exactly my thinking

and heck, Cespedes could turn out to be bargain at that 60m.

http://baseballperiod.blogspot.com/

by bronzeagle on Dec 8, 2011 4:27 PM EST up reply actions  

I think as soon as Cespedes becomes an eligible FA

the Marlins brass will go after him like they went after Reyes. They’ll be down in the DR with a Cespedes Marlins jersey and they’ll woo him over.

by Marlinfan on Dec 8, 2011 5:16 PM EST up reply actions  

that's a stretch

-the dodgers are already supposed to get 150-200mill/yr in a new tv contract without pujols/fielder/wilson/reyes
-angels were negotiating for around 80 mill. you think they can squeeze an extra 20-50 mill/yr out of that contract now with pujols?
not sure cespedes could add value close to that after a reyes/bell/buehrle signings & new park

by byoung on Dec 8, 2011 4:41 PM EST up reply actions  

Carlos Beltran?

Recently converted Marlins Fan

Follow me @Terrence_Hunley

by Terrence Hunley on Dec 8, 2011 4:33 PM EST up reply actions  

No one is in on Cepedas right now

He has not earned residency in the Dominican, so teams cannot comment on their intentions towards him.

Beltran is not a CF anymore, so that would require moving Lomo or Gaby.

by Jigokusabre on Dec 8, 2011 4:40 PM EST up reply actions  

Edwin Jackson

We can take some of the money we would have given CJ, and give it to Edwin Jackson or Roy Oswalt.

From there, maybe we could trade Gavy Sanchez to the Cubs for Marlon Byrd?

by Jigokusabre on Dec 8, 2011 4:44 PM EST reply actions  

Once again, Jackson would be a 4th Type A/B guy

Any of the type A or B guys on this list are now ineligible to sign with the Marlins until after opening day as they have already signed three in Bell, Reyes, and Buehrle.

by Stephen Schmidt on Dec 8, 2011 4:59 PM EST up reply actions  

Ah, that changed everything

Recently converted Marlins Fan

Follow me @Terrence_Hunley

by Terrence Hunley on Dec 8, 2011 5:01 PM EST up reply actions  

Buehrle didn't agree with the Marlins until last night

I’d guess that was a big factor in Wilson’s decision coming out this morning. The fact that most of the MSM missed an obscure rule doesn’t make it any less relevant. Until Buehrle officially signs there’s a chance they could back out and sign someone else, but once he puts pen to paper they can’t land another type A/B. I’d guess you still hear rumors though, some writers are bound to miss it.

by Stephen Schmidt on Dec 8, 2011 5:17 PM EST reply actions  

Is that actually a rule?

I know I’ve seen you post about it like 10 times, but I haven’t seen anyone else anywhere ever mention it.

http://baseballperiod.blogspot.com/

by bronzeagle on Dec 8, 2011 5:18 PM EST up reply actions  

It's part of the last CBA

The only modifications that were announced for this offseason was to allow a few select free agents to have the signing team keep their draft pick and MLB award a compensatory pick 1 slot earlier (as was the case with Bell). Other than that tweak, all of the old rankings and rule regarding the free agent system were still in place this winter, with the new system taking effect next year. The Yankees are the only team to ever be affected by the limit in 2008, but they had to withdraw several offers after they signed Tex.

by Stephen Schmidt on Dec 8, 2011 5:25 PM EST up reply actions  

From what I saw (googled just a minute ago)

it sounds like there is only a limit if less than 62 FAs (type A/B and non-ranked) actually file for Free Agency.
And according to the MLBTR free agent list there were 187 Free Agents.

or at least that is what I have come to understand

http://www.examiner.com/mlb-in-national/major-league-baseball-free-agency-explained
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2010/03/2012-mlb-free-agents.html

http://baseballperiod.blogspot.com/

by bronzeagle on Dec 8, 2011 5:42 PM EST up reply actions  

that would explain why no one is talking about a limit

because it isn’t applicable this offseason

http://baseballperiod.blogspot.com/

by bronzeagle on Dec 8, 2011 5:49 PM EST up reply actions  

We've got two sources saying 2 different things

I may mail Maury Brown, he’d know the answer for sure

by Michael Jong on Dec 8, 2011 5:54 PM EST up reply actions  

I will tweet

Kevin Goldstein.
Because he responds to tweets, and I want an excuse to tweet him and make my first tweet

http://baseballperiod.blogspot.com/

by bronzeagle on Dec 8, 2011 5:59 PM EST up reply actions  

You're right that the Yankees did run into this limit in 2008

And MLB agreed to lift the limit to 8 comp players that offseason.

by Michael Jong on Dec 8, 2011 5:55 PM EST up reply actions  

didn’t they sign 5 that year?

http://baseballperiod.blogspot.com/

by bronzeagle on Dec 8, 2011 5:58 PM EST up reply actions  

They did indeed

2 were their own, which may or may not have been the reason why that was OK.

by Michael Jong on Dec 8, 2011 6:00 PM EST up reply actions  

It seems like the 38-62 isn't talking about

Type A and B Free Agents.

But every player that filed for Free Agency

http://baseballperiod.blogspot.com/

by bronzeagle on Dec 8, 2011 5:54 PM EST up reply actions  

Cant believe Albert signed with the Angels

im stunned. I was sure he was going back to the cards.

GO:Gators, Dolphins, Heat, and Marlins
he who fears losing, has already lost
FLORIDA Marlins Forever!

by Gatorfan4life on Dec 8, 2011 6:06 PM EST reply actions  

errbody was.

but…
LA vs STL
west coast vs midwest
DH 10-30 games/yr vs lots of days off

by byoung on Dec 8, 2011 6:08 PM EST up reply actions  

Have our signings made us a contender in the NL East or are we still middle of the pack?

We signed Reyes, which fills a hole at 3rd with Hanley. Hanley being Hanley, can he have a good season at 3rd base (and not be a headcase) or will he be Hanley of last season?

We still have the same line up as last years disaster of a season except we now have Reyes. Is Reyes going to be that much of an improvement to get us some W’s?

We have the same rotation so far, except we dropped Vazquez for Beurhle. Have we upgraded there? We still have Anibal, Nolasco & Volstad. Josh Johnson IF he can stay healthy. We signed Heath Bell for saves, but he isn’t exactly going to WIN us any games (impact type player).

We have signed one guy for offense & a pitcher that replaces Vazquez. Did we do enough to be competitive or did we spend a boat load of money to be a little better than the team we were last season? I don’t see a whole lot of change over last years team yet.

by Rick561 on Dec 8, 2011 6:51 PM EST reply actions  

OK, I figured out the compensation system limit issue

From my reading of the old CBA, it looks as though it counts total free agents. The 2008 change that occurred was due to an abundance of total free agents, causing MLB to increase the limit on Type A/B free agents allowed to be signed, as prior to that nobody had signed so many of them. Otherwise, they likely would not have made an announcement on the limit of those types of free agents signed.

Here’s the working as it is on the CBA, “Section B” refers players who filed for free agency under the “Free Agency” rules (thanks to Maury Brown of Biz of Baseball):

(5) Quota

(a) Clubs shall be limited in the number of Type A and B Players, as defined below, they may subsequently sign to contracts. The number of signings permitted shall be related to the number of Players electing free agency under this Section B. If there are 14 or less
such Players, no Club may sign more than one Type A or B Player. If there are from 15 to 38 such Players, no Club may sign more than two Type A or B Players. If there are from 39 to 62 such Players, no Club may sign more than three Type A or B Players. If there are
more than 62 such Players, the Club quotas shall be increased accordingly. There shall be no restrictions on the number of unranked Players that a Club may sign to contracts.

(b) Irrespective of the provisions of subparagraph (a) above, a Club shall be eligible to sign at least as many Type A and B Players as it may have lost through Players having become free agents under this Section at the close of the season just concluded.

by Michael Jong on Dec 8, 2011 6:56 PM EST reply actions  

Nope, we're OK to sign people

MLB would simply state the limit and it would be certainly higher than 3, simply because there are so many more free agents (187) than this clause discusses.

by Michael Jong on Dec 8, 2011 7:23 PM EST up reply actions  

ok good

I’m just worried that we haven’t yet distinguished ourselves from the Braves.
and it appears that we still have some money to toss around and do just that.

http://baseballperiod.blogspot.com/

by bronzeagle on Dec 8, 2011 9:37 PM EST up reply actions  

I'm still fuzzy on this whole FA thing...

What exactly makes a player a Type A or a Type B (or even a Type Z if it goes that far in the alphabet)? Can we do an article on free agency? Or did I miss it?

Marlins in the off-season. Get some... Free agents, that is.

by marlinsfan315 on Dec 9, 2011 11:55 AM EST up reply actions  

I wouldn't worry about it

Under the new CBA, there will be no such thing as Type A/B compensation any longer. There will still be draft pick compensation for signings if players are offered “arbtiration,” but it won’t be determined via the old Elias rankings system, which was archaic anyway.

by Michael Jong on Dec 9, 2011 12:44 PM EST up reply actions  

Yeah, but...

I thought that didn’t take effect until next off-season. Basically what prompted my question was Prince Fielder. Now, I could care less one way or the other if we were to get him. It was pointed out above that we reached our “quota” of Type A/B free agents, yet it was suggested we still had a chance at Prince if we wanted to. Logically, that should mean that Prince is not Type A or B and I was just curious as to why.

Marlins in the off-season. Get some... Free agents, that is.

by marlinsfan315 on Dec 9, 2011 3:52 PM EST up reply actions  

It turns out that the cap on Type A/B free agent signings

would have kicked in had there only been 62 free agents that filed in total, including unranked free agents. That isn’t the case this season. Fielder is a Type A free agent, and under the special rules in place this offseason for the purposes of leading into the next CBA, certain Type A free agents like Fielder would still cost a draft pick for the Marlins, though it could not be a first-rounder as the team’s first round pick is protected.

by Michael Jong on Dec 10, 2011 12:05 AM EST up reply actions  

Rather just buckle down,

sign a CF like Coco Crisp, sign some vet grits off the bench, and move forward.

Go Nevada Wolf Pack!

by BacksThePack on Dec 8, 2011 9:59 PM EST reply actions  

everyone should remember

that there are offseasons and baseball seasons after the ones coming up

by rayrayrayrayrayrayrayray on Dec 8, 2011 11:56 PM EST reply actions  

I disagree

http://baseballperiod.blogspot.com/

by bronzeagle on Dec 9, 2011 12:11 AM EST up reply actions  

I'm with you...

There is no tomorrow because the world is ending in just over a year. Lol

Marlins in the off-season. Get some... Free agents, that is.

by marlinsfan315 on Dec 9, 2011 11:56 AM EST reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about the Miami Marlins.
Yahoo_full_count

Managers

Doranthumbnail_small Michael Jong

Authors

P5080019_-_copy_small tedhill

Fnf_small FishNFinz

Marlins_small scootertum

Img_0065_small Eric Ely

Jose_reyes__8__small Terrence Hunley

Winstonchurchill_small EricW

330px-marlinsballparkrendring2010_small Brian Mati

Small SamEvans

Headshot_small Zach James