Lol. Mets Owner Steve Cohen Gets Petty on Twitter about Carlos Correa

2 hours ago, mikelink45 said:

Are the people with SF and NY stupid?  Are their medical staffs incompetent.  Yes sign Correa, but stop the multiple years.

I definitely don't think they are stupid.  I'm sure they are very competent.  I'd be ecstatic to sign Carlos for only a one year contract.  I just don't see a 1 year offer cutting it.  He would have signed already if a 1 year offer was his best option.  Just my opinion...but I believe multiple years no matter who he signs with.

4 hours ago, se7799 said:

Actually year 5 would be and 8 million buyout of a 16 million dollar salary.  So total would have been 100 or 108.  So not to far off.  Guess our memories are both fading.

Actually, the 92 million guaranteed included the buyout. That is why the contract was reported that way, and that is the key word in my frivolous aside point of interest that really doesn’t matter anyway. There were also a bunch of comparatively small incentives but that matters even less. 

10 hours ago, h2oface said:

Are the Twins the only team that looks past all the red flags instead of seeing them for what they are?

I nominate this for post of the day.  If thats not a thing it should be.

11 hours ago, roger said:

I continue to be concerned with what the dollars will mean when we need to extend Miranda, Royce, Lee, AK, Larnach and Rodriguez beginning in four or five years.  For that reason I am fine waiting for Lewis to be our shortstop sometime this summer.

On the other hand, it isn’t smart of Mr. Cohen to disrespect a young Latin man.  Certainly not if he really wants him playing for the Mets.

Great point!  Extending what you have is a FAR more effective practice than signing free agents.  Obviously, those deals have varied returns just like free agents, but the return has been far greater per dollar spent and the extensions generally are not taking players to age 40.  Therefore, they are not only more productive early, but they also don't have the huge downside at the end of the deal.  Correa is a great way to be better this season but there will definitely be a long-term cost, especially in the last half of the contract. 

There have only been 10 of these 8+ year deals with position players.  The list below shows the average WAR for the last half of all previous 8+ year contracts.  Not the last couple years but the last half.  The only one of these deals that worked out was Derek Jeter and he was 35 at the end of the contract.  Eight of the ten averaged less than 1 WAR/year for the last half of the contract.  

If you are a team that can sign 5 contracts like Correa and have the twins budget left over, you can afford to make these deals.  It's entirely another matter for a team with a $150M (roughly) ceiling to sign a deal that very likely prohibits them from signing extensions, especially given the number of candidates 

While it is easy to point fingers at the Mets for so quickly signing a contract when the Giants had issues with Correa’s medicals. It should be noted that Boras indicated that Correa’s doctors did not agree with the Giant’s opinion. For me, Boras loses credibility on this as he as an agent depends on building relationships with team front offices.  For long term success these contracts have to be wins for both the players and owners. 

If Correa signed at 10 yr $350M deal with the twins and had an op out every year. Whats the worst thing that could happen? He stays here for 10 years and becomes a HOF. The kid is a winner and can DH half of the year in year 8,9,10 on one leg. 

14 hours ago, mnfireman said:

Go with the original 10/$285, but no opt-outs/player options. After 5 years, vesting/team options and/or performance based incentives could increase contract value, something along the lines of Buxton's.

Almost there, this time it would be perfect for Correa and Boras to take a little of their own medicine. The Twins demand an opt out after 3 years and can opt out again after every year.

It would never happen but it would be poetic justice for sure.

47 minutes ago, Fatbat said:

If Correa signed at 10 yr $350M deal with the twins and had an op out every year. Whats the worst thing that could happen? He stays here for 10 years and becomes a HOF. The kid is a winner and can DH half of the year in year 8,9,10 on one leg. 

Correa wouldn't opt out he would just demand a trade after his first good year.

How about $60M for 2 years?  That is what the Twins would have been on the hook for had Correa not opted out right?  I think Correa's camp has completely screwed themselves.  

Is it just me, or does anyone else think Carlos made a huge mistake in opting out? Had he not, he would be guaranteed at least another $35 M and getting ready for spring training instead of all this drama.

The whole saga is pretty amusing. I'd love to know what exactly SF & NY are seeing in the medicals that is making them try to get a discount/restructure after initially agreeing to terms and makes them think that they have have enough leverage to get it done against the most powerful agent in baseball. Or is some of this tied to the rumors early on that many teams in MLB didn't rate Correa as highly and both the Giants & Mets have second-guessed themselves?

For me, I would still take the risk were I running the Twins. Correa is an elite player and it's worth taking a risk on an elite guy. This isn't hoping someone comes back after a major injury, this isn't hoping a great player still has something left in the tank. This is a great player in his prime. Maybe the leg injury (that doesn't seem to have caused him to miss a game in MLB yet?) will force him off SS sooner than we'd like. Still not sure why this is an issue with the Mets, who were going to play him at 3B anyways. Maybe they think he won't hit any longer?

I take the risk if I'm the Twins. Correa raises the ceiling on this team right now in a big way. If SF & NY have doctors who are saying he's going to be hurt and not playing much in the next 2-3 years I'd be stunned. If the risk is in years 8-12...I take it. We experienced several years of a diminished Joe Mauer, but his contract wasn't what was stopping us from winning; what stopped us from winning was young players not developing and making bad signings to fill in. the 2016 Twins stunk because Nolasco, Milone, Gibson, Duffey, and Berrios stunk as starters, not because Mauer's contract was an albatross. They stunk because they started a bunch of hitters who couldn't hit (yet) in Buxton, Kepler, and Escobar and relied on veterans like Plouffe & Suzuki who couldn't hit either.

I still don't think it's going to happen, but I'd sign him if we could. Take the risk.

1 hour ago, darin617 said:

Correa wouldn't opt out he would just demand a trade after his first good year.

Which might be a great play for a starting pitcher and a prospect.

Walk away. The Twins will still be here in 10 years with whole new players probably. Let Correa go some where else.

4 hours ago, Major League Ready said:

If you are a team that can sign 5 contracts like Correa and have the twins budget left over, you can afford to make these deals.  It's entirely another matter for a team with a $150M (roughly) ceiling to sign a deal that very likely prohibits them from signing extensions, especially given the number of candidates 

You make a good point but I would argue that the Twins ceiling could easily be $175M. Given their current roster I would make trades which actually brings the cost down. Large long terms contracts will always need a long term evaluation. Signing Correa without any other moves doesn't push the team far enough to justify the cost. Hopefully there are other ideas or moves to come in the near future. 

I also agree with what you argue about the value of the back half of large contracts. However, don't teams sign these contracts with this expectation because the front half balances out the deals in the teams' favor? The Hosmer and Hayward deals were totally panned immediately and who knew the mess of a situation that Cano would fall into. All of the other deals, like Mauer's, were a plus for the teams. I am generally opposed to large long term contracts because of all of the points you have argued in other posts. There is a time though and one deal I would have gambled on this winter is making an attempt on Carlos Rodon. I'm still quite ambivalent about Correa.

1 hour ago, nicksaviking said:

Most outlets suggest the Twins salary goal could or should be about 160M this year even if only to pump up their upcoming broadcast rights negotiations. 10 years from now, the payroll should be closer to 200M, than it is to 150M. Whether it works out or not, whatever deal Correa signs now, will be yawned at by 2028.

Heck, 10 years from now, payroll might be well north of 200M because revenue sharing and salary caps/floors are likely the only way the league will survive. The sport's going to be dead if there continues to be a 1000% difference between the top spending club and the bottom spending club.

$150M or $200M would do little to resolve the root problem.  The Twins have half the revenue of the top team's and that disparity is still going to exist even if baseball revenues continue to grow.   Those top team's will continue to have the same relative ability to absorb these contracts.  

We also have 5 years before there will be an opportunity to change the system.  Therefore, there is absolutely no chance the current system is changed for the first half of a deal with Correa.  Then, we should recognize that we already had great disparity and the league gave into player demands to increase that disparity in the last CBA.  Based on what we witnessed this past year in terms of the CBA, what would make you think the players would accept a salary cap or enhanced revenue sharing.  I see no way that happens without a prolonged strike.  

On 1/7/2023 at 3:48 PM, JDubs said:

It would be just about the most Minnesota thing ever to get the best free agent in franchise history largely because everyone else decided they don't want him.

Could a Bauer signing be on the horizon?

9 hours ago, Major League Ready said:

Great point!  Extending what you have is a FAR more effective practice than signing free agents.  Obviously, those deals have varied returns just like free agents, but the return has been far greater per dollar spent and the extensions generally are not taking players to age 40.  Therefore, they are not only more productive early, but they also don't have the huge downside at the end of the deal.  Correa is a great way to be better this season but there will definitely be a long-term cost, especially in the last half of the contract. 

There have only been 10 of these 8+ year deals with position players.  The list below shows the average WAR for the last half of all previous 8+ year contracts.  Not the last couple years but the last half.  The only one of these deals that worked out was Derek Jeter and he was 35 at the end of the contract.  Eight of the ten averaged less than 1 WAR/year for the last half of the contract.  

If you are a team that can sign 5 contracts like Correa and have the twins budget left over, you can afford to make these deals.  It's entirely another matter for a team with a $150M (roughly) ceiling to sign a deal that very likely prohibits them from signing extensions, especially given the number of candidates 

			Ending
	fWAR	bWAR	Age
Derek Jeter	4.42	4.16	36
Dave Winfield	1.98	2.22	38
Joey Votto	0.82	0.92	39
Alex Rodriguez	0.77	0.64	40
Robinson Cano	0.18	0.22	41
Albert Pujlos	0.15	0.21	42
Jason Hayward	-0.05	0.30	33
Miguel Cabrera	0.33	-0.27	40
Prince Fileder	-0.18	-0.18	36
Eric Hosmer	0.03	0.00	37
Average	0.84	0.82	38.20

And I believe exactly zero of them won a World Series after signing these contracts. 

2 hours ago, Slap Nuts said:

Why do we continue to let Boras to use us as a bargaining chip?

I dont think SF or NYM need Carlos, he would just be an asset they can trade away as soon as he has a great year and or win the WS. They probably have buyer remorse because the market is topped out for this year and they are using long term health as a way out if they can’t renegotiate terms. 

On 1/7/2023 at 7:03 PM, roger said:

I continue to be concerned with what the dollars will mean when we need to extend Miranda, Royce, Lee, AK, Larnach and Rodriguez beginning in four or five years.  For that reason I am fine waiting for Lewis to be our shortstop sometime this summer.

On the other hand, it isn’t smart of Mr. Cohen to disrespect a young Latin man.  Certainly not if he really wants him playing for the Mets.

That's like worrying about how you will pay the taxes if you hit the Powerball. 

On 1/7/2023 at 5:37 PM, mikelink45 said:

News flash - Boras says - I have another team that will spend more. 

Cohen says, go to them, bring their best offer, we will tweak it and you will have your contract.

The Twins tried, but come in second again.

Fool me once , shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

4 hours ago, Reptevia said:

Could a Bauer signing be on the horizon?

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo  !

Sorry I'm late to this conversation as it took me a long time to figure out how to log in again but I have been wanting to say this for a while.

Steve Cohen was never going to spend $315m on Correa after the Giants deal fell through.  Initially, I was on board with the thinking that he over committed over cocktails but the more I think about it from the business side Cohen is either an amazing negotiator or an amazing *******, but probably both.

There is nothing a $20b hedge fund manager likes more than a distressed asset, especially if they see value add opportunities.  Its real estate investing 101 and it applies here as well.  If you are a hedge fund manager that has already paid almost $2 billion in fines for insider trading its also not a stretch to work to further distress that asset to improve the price.  He and Boras could have agreed on any number and it would not have mattered, I'm convinced he was going this route from the beginning.  Now that we can see the terms and poison pills the Mets were laying out Cohen was obviously not planning on paying more luxury tax and was more than happy to get the player on ridiculously favorable terms if Correa felt he was stuck.  Frankly, good on Boras for getting him out of that situation.  Another agent might not have been able to save it for his client. 

I have no issue being the third choice on this deal, the Twins nailed the market value of the player from the jump and they should be credited for that.  At one point I was concerned that Correa would sign with the Mets for roughly what the Twins had offered which would have left a very sour taste in my mouth.  We would have all justifiably felt like it was all lip service.  It would also be the most Minnesota way to lose a player.  However, when I think about it in these terms I'm completely comfortable with the way it played out.  The Giants situation seems fairly straightforward and for 65m I couldn't be mad at him leaving.  The Mets and Cohen shouldn't affect our thinking as it was not a normal baseball transaction.  Normal in the hedge fund business maybe but we haven't seen a lot of negotiations like this in sports.  Boras is obviously pissed but can't say a whole lot publicly.

It will also be fascinating watching Boras and Cohen in the coming years.  Remember a similar situation with Kumar Rocker?  Boras client as well.  Cohen may be winning in the short term but when agents realize what they are dealing with Mets offers won't even help to drive up negotiations.  I've thought from the beginning of the Correa era in Minnesota that this pattern could repeat and be a solid road map for small market teams.  Go after superstar talent in a one year prove it situation and try to sign long term if you like them.  Win win on both sides and with a guy like Boras driving the change it has a chance to happen again even without a lockout factor.