Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account
  • What Does a Carlos Correa Extension Look Like for the Twins?


    Ted Schwerzler

    This offseason the Minnesota Twins shocked the baseball world when an early-morning deal was reached with superstar Carlos Correa. The three-year contract features an opt-out, but both sides could be amenable to a longer term situation. What would that look like?

    Image courtesy of Mark J. Rebilas-USA TODAY Sports

    Twins Video

     

    Carlos Correa’s current contract is a three-year deal for $105.3 million. The deal is noteworthy for a couple of reasons. First, the opt-out comes after year one, in which Correa could look for another payday on the open market with a different group of shortstop competition. The other level of intrigue comes from the $35.1 annual amount, which checks in $100,000 more than Anthony Rendon’s deal. That $100,000 put him above the other Scott Boras client and made Correa the highest-paid infielder in Major League history.

    Of course, the expectation has always been that Correa would opt out with Minnesota and look for a bigger payday. He did indicate there was interest in a long-term deal with the Twins though, and the second ACL tear for Royce Lewis could clear the way for a stable need at shortstop. Assuming both sides are interested in finding a workable future, the one-up of this contract may also come into play.

    Rendon’s deal was signed with the third basemen at the age of 30. He was paid $245 million for seven years. It’s been a colossal disaster in that he’s played just 155 games over his first three seasons with the Angels. Correa will be just 28 years old next season, a notably younger age than that of Rendon. It would hardly be shocking if the desire was for any extension to be something in the neighborhood of 10 years.

    Minnesota has not previously gone long term with pitchers under this regime, but they have shown an inclination to spend. Getting the Twins to hand out a ten-year deal to Correa seems unlikely from both a term and financial perspective. Knowing that a deal of that size would be something like $350 million probably takes it off the table. If Correa was open to a seven-year pact, however, this front office may find value in paying a superstar at an integral position something like $250 million.

    If Correa was open to a $35.5 million annual number, he’d be at $248.5 million over the life of the deal. Maybe that’s not enough of a step up from what Rendon got given the two years of age to his credit, but that’s probably a ballpark worth hypothesizing about.

    No matter what the eventual number winds up being, it’s hard to wrap your mind around the Twins being the team to dole out that cash. On the flip side, this is a player they will have gotten to know for a full season, and has been lauded for his leadership and ability throughout the organization. With no surefire answer at the shortstop position for 2023, the alternative is likely a much lesser stopgap option.

    This core of Twins talent is exciting and seems to mesh well together. Putting Lewis and Correa on the same side of the infield for the next handful of years is something everyone in Twins Territory could get behind. Like Buxton before him, Correa would be in a place providing Minnesota sole negotiating opportunity. They aren’t going to get the discount afforded them by their other superstar, but this one stays on the field and should be worth every penny as well.

    Some deadline additions and a postseason run could continue to help Minnesota make its case as a compelling suitor for Correa. So far they've put the right feet forward. The next one will be to present the bag.

     

    MORE FROM TWINS DAILY
    — Latest Twins coverage from our writers
    — Recent Twins discussion in our forums
    — Follow Twins Daily via Twitter, Facebook or email
    — Become a Twins Daily Caretaker

     Share


    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    Featured Comments

    11 hours ago, Original_JB said:

    Offer him $10M to buy out this year's opt out.

    This. And to add to it:

    Most of the comments suggest the FO won’t and/or should not go to 7-10 years at $35M-ish per year. So why not offer raising his near term salary by buying out both his options for $20-30M?  This gives CC an average salary of 45-50 over the next 2 years and then he is a 30 YO free agent and can go for the 7-10 year contract.  

    If he opts out now and signs a 10 year contract at $35/ he makes $385M over 11 years.  If he signs for $50M for next two years and then signs a 7 year contract with another team (@ age 30) for $35M he makes $380M over 10 years…several variations are of course possible on this…thoughts?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    7 minutes ago, Tiantwindup said:

    This. And to add to it:

    Most of the comments suggest the FO won’t and/or should not go to 7-10 years at $35M-ish per year. So why not offer raising his near term salary by buying out both his options for $20-30M?  This gives CC an average salary of 45-50 over the next 2 years and then he is a 30 YO free agent and can go for the 7-10 year contract.  

    If he opts out now and signs a 10 year contract at $35/ he makes $385M over 11 years.  If he signs for $50M for next two years and then signs a 7 year contract with another team (@ age 30) for $35M he makes $380M over 10 years…several variations are of course possible on this…thoughts?

    $50M or thereabouts would be enough to land Willson Contreras and Joe Musgrove or Jamison Taillon which would project to produce about 2X the WAR of Correa.  Plus, he couldn't convince anyone to give anyone to give him a 10 year contract at age 27 so the idea he would get one at 30 is really farfetched.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    8 minutes ago, Major League Ready said:

    $50M or thereabouts would be enough to land Willson Contreras and Joe Musgrove or Jamison Taillon which would project to produce about 2X the WAR of Correa.  Plus, he couldn't convince anyone to give anyone to give him a 10 year contract at age 27 so the idea he would get one at 30 is really farfetched.

    1. Who plays short?

    2. We already have Correa; The pitchers you mention will be available to anyone. And why would they take one year deals? You're talking committing to probably 5 years each, with escalating yearly salaries. You see the Twins doing that? My idea commits (god I hate to say 'only' but) only a one-time $10M payout to get you to next year which buys time to see how Lewis heals and if Gordon improves.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    17 hours ago, Major League Ready said:

    40% of revenue is associated with people attending games.  The associated revenue is more likely to decrease than increase.  TV contracts are 20+ years so the existing contracts are not going up.  Inflation is not going to result in higher player contracts.  Any increases in revenue would likely be new revenue streams.

    BTW ... Raising prices because people are not buying your product kind of flies in that old theory about supply and demand.

    It leads to "we need more luxury suites".

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I like Correa.  A Lot.  Great leader, good clubhouse guy, in the field and at the plate.  He is a solid player---as long as he is on the field.  

    I will just say that long term contracts are not in the best interest of the club---any club.  I know what the trends are, but 7+ year deals just do not work out for the team----that being the Twins and Fans, not the FO.  If the FO can work out a great $ amt per year for 5 years---not a problem, overpay.  5 years is long enough for a player to have security and short enough that he can never stop working for his next paycheck/contract and his legacy.  Overpay short term instead of stretching the $'s long term. 

    Donaldson contract was a bad deal and took a lot of effort to squeeze out of because there are only a few teams who can pay for big $ contracts on trade.  There were even times during the Mauer concussion issues that there was a lot of reservation about his deal (although I don't think Joe ever sandbagged a day!).  A good contract should be beneficial for both sides---7-10 year deals are much more player slanted---and its not just the back end years, but early years when there's not a lot of urgency for the player to come back from injury quickly.  There should be pressure on both sides 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    2 hours ago, GeorgiaBaller said:

    I like Correa.  A Lot.  Great leader, good clubhouse guy, in the field and at the plate.  He is a solid player---as long as he is on the field.  

    I will just say that long term contracts are not in the best interest of the club---any club.  I know what the trends are, but 7+ year deals just do not work out for the team----that being the Twins and Fans, not the FO.  If the FO can work out a great $ amt per year for 5 years---not a problem, overpay.  5 years is long enough for a player to have security and short enough that he can never stop working for his next paycheck/contract and his legacy.  Overpay short term instead of stretching the $'s long term. 

    Donaldson contract was a bad deal and took a lot of effort to squeeze out of because there are only a few teams who can pay for big $ contracts on trade.  There were even times during the Mauer concussion issues that there was a lot of reservation about his deal (although I don't think Joe ever sandbagged a day!).  A good contract should be beneficial for both sides---7-10 year deals are much more player slanted---and its not just the back end years, but early years when there's not a lot of urgency for the player to come back from injury quickly.  There should be pressure on both sides 

    I like him a lot too, and I am willing to pay him.  Unfortunately for him, and me, I don't have the money to pay him :( , so I have to ask Big Jim to pay him and I don't like my chances (sigh). 

     

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    If they can extend him, great.  It'd be nice to have him another 5-7 years.  I would caution the FO to map these years/costs against our young talent (Kirilloff, Miranda, Lewis, etc.) as they work through their ARB years to FA.  I.e. we should not sign CC to a contract that forces us to lose our young talent down the road.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites




    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

    Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...