PDA

View Full Version : Sizemore signs big deal with Indians



Reds Fanatic
03-29-2006, 01:11 PM
Grady Sizemore has signed a huge deal with the Indians. It is the most guaranteed money ever for a player with less than 2 years Major League service.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2388456



CLEVELAND -- Popular center fielder Grady Sizemore signed a $23.45 million, six-year contract Wednesday with Cleveland Indians, the most guaranteed money in a deal for a player with less than two years of major league service.

The agreement includes an $8.5 million club option for 2012 with a $500,000 buyout. If the option is exercised, the deal would total $31.45 million over seven seasons, and the option price could increase to $10.5 million depending on whether Sizemore is an All-Star, Gold Glove or Silver Slugger or does well in MVP voting.

If traded, the option becomes Sizemore's decision and the buyout is forfeited if he declines the option.

Previously, the largest deal for a player with less than two years in the majors was the $15.5 million, five-year contract Cleveland gave to catcher Victor Martinez last April.

Sizemore has played only one full season in the majors, but the 23-year-old outfielder did enough to impress the Indians. He batted .289 with 22 homers and 81 RBI in 158 games last season. He also scored 111 runs, had 22 steals and became the second Indians player to record 20 doubles, 10 triples, 20 homers and 20 steals in the same season. He was the only player in the majors to reach those numbers last season.

"We are committed to building and sustaining a championship team and Grady -- as one of the most talented young players in the game today -- is the kind of player and person that can help lead us to that goal,'' general manager Mark Shapiro said.

The length of contract mirrors that of deals the Indians gave to shortstop Jhonny Peralta (five years, $13 million) and catcher Victor Martinez (five years, $15.5 million).

The Indians also are trying to sign Cliff Lee, who went 18-5 last season, to a long-term deal. Cleveland also has designated hitter Travis Hafner and left-hander C.C. Sabathia under contract through 2007 with club options for 2008.

The Indians acquired Sizemore in 2002 from Montreal in the deal that sent ace Bartolo Colon to the Expos.

Sizemore's hustle and humility have made him a favorite with teammates and fans. The Indians' female fan base has taken a particular liking to Sizemore. The team sold 200 "Mrs. Sizemore'' T-shirts on the first day they were made available at Jacobs Field.

Red Leader
03-29-2006, 01:13 PM
Even with the length of this contract, I think it's a good one. One I wish the Reds would have had the foresight to sign Adam Dunn to.

Red Leader
03-29-2006, 01:15 PM
As a side note, the Indians are looking like they're going to be a force for awhile. They now have Victor Martinez, Jhonny Peralta, and Sizemore signed to long term deals, and have Hafner and Cliff Lee signed through next year with an option year on both after that. Nice nucleus. Not to mention they have Garko, and Marte in the minors soon to come up and make an impact along with the tremendous bullpen depth they have coming up...along with some pieces like Jason Michaels and Kelly Shoppach that could be used in trades.

pedro
03-29-2006, 01:16 PM
It's a good risk.

schroomytunes
03-29-2006, 01:19 PM
Just more evidence on how to run a baseball org. Too bad O'briens vision was tunnel vision, he simply just didn't get it done, instead of progressing after Bowden we regressed.:cry:

remdog
03-29-2006, 01:27 PM
The Indians continue to build with a championship in mind and they started after the Reds 'rebuilding' began. I've long wished for an 'All-OHIO World Series'. Too bad the Reds aren't holding up their end.

Rem

Caveat Emperor
03-29-2006, 01:41 PM
Just more evidence on how to run a baseball org. Too bad O'briens vision was tunnel vision, he simply just didn't get it done, instead of progressing after Bowden we regressed.:cry:

On the plus side, if the Reds had done business like that, we'd be stuck with an additional dog contract in the form of Austin Kearns, who entered the bigs hot and had everyone penciling his name into All Star games for the next decade.

Every hot prospect/rising star is one fat LOOGY away from being a pile of could-have-been. Not saying I disagree with the Indians decisions, but these kinds of deals are the ones that can send a ballclub to financial hell if injuries start to mount.

RedsManRick
03-29-2006, 01:44 PM
I love this kind of a move. I think cost certainty is a term we're going to hear more and more as organizations mirror what the Indians are doing. Once a player has proven himself (more than one hot half-season), there's no real reason to subject yourself to the arbitration process other than risk aversion in the event of an injury. The Reds really missed the boat with Dunn, perhaps because of the low batting average in 2004 scaring them off.

However, if Lopez repeats and/or Kearns returns to 2003 form, they really need to lock these guys up to long term contracts and get this foundation in place.

Chip R
03-29-2006, 01:49 PM
However, if Lopez repeats and/or Kearns returns to 2003 form, they really need to lock these guys up to long term contracts and get this foundation in place.

Might be too late to get either of these guys at a good rate if they perform well this year. Sizemore's going to be making less than $4M a year on average over the life of the deal. If he performs like they think he will, it will be a bargain even though they would be overpaying him the next two and possibly three years. If Lopez has a year this year like he had last year, he's going to be wanting Adam Dunn money. The guy the Reds need to target for this kind of a deal if he has a good year is Ed Encarnacion.

Roy Tucker
03-29-2006, 01:58 PM
Looks like Cleveland is about to release v2.0 of the late '90's Indians.

Ohioballplayer
03-29-2006, 02:04 PM
I agree with Rem, Indians keep building, I hope the Reds start sometime soon.


Sizemore is a tough ball player, great glove and a good live bat, he will keep putting up impressive numbers, hopefully cut his K's down also.

KronoRed
03-29-2006, 02:18 PM
Looks like Cleveland is about to release v2.0 of the late '90's Indians.
While we're still in Beta from the late 90's.

:(

PuffyPig
03-29-2006, 05:38 PM
Even with the length of this contract, I think it's a good one. One I wish the Reds would have had the foresight to sign Adam Dunn to.

And I'm equally glad they didn't sign Austin Kearns too.

If the rookie player does real good, it's a bargain. If not, it can cost you big time.

Lots of people thought that Austin kearns would eventually turn out to be a better all around hitter than Dunn. it's a crap shoot. But I like the Sizemore signing. He seems like the type of player who will improve and be a bargain.

Doc. Scott
03-29-2006, 05:39 PM
Toronto signed Vernon Wells and Eric Hinske to contracts like this. Wells turned out decently (one great year, two okay ones) and they regret the Hinske (two mediocre years, one bad, moved off third base) move.

Eric Hinske (http://www.baseball-reference.com/h/hinsker01.shtml) inf
5 years/$14.75M (2003-07)

signed extension 3/03
$0.5M signing bonus
03:$0.5M, 04:$0.8M, 05:$3M, 06:$4.325M, 07:$5.626M
ML service: 4.000

Vernon Wells (http://www.baseball-reference.com/w/wellsve01.shtml) of
5 years/$14.7M (2003-07)

signed extension 3/03
$0.85M signing bonus,
03:$0.35M, 04:$0.7M, 05:$2.9M, 06:$4.3M, 07:$5.6M

ML service: 4.113

Chip R
03-29-2006, 05:55 PM
Another good thing about signing guys to the kind of deals Peralta, Sizemore and the players Doc mentioned is that if they do not play up to expectations, their salaries are not a drain on the payroll. They can also be traded easily if you want to fill another need or just want to get rid of them.

Doc. Scott
03-29-2006, 06:04 PM
Another good thing about signing guys to the kind of deals Peralta, Sizemore and the players Doc mentioned is that if they do not play up to expectations, their salaries are not a drain on the payroll. They can also be traded easily if you want to fill another need or just want to get rid of them.

The Blue Jays have tried in vain to deal Hinske and couldn't. He was even rumored to be coming to Cincinnati at one point before Edwin Encarnacion had his breakout.

It is true that they are less of a drain on the payroll than an expensive veteran that's paid multimillions from the get go, but Hinske would have been non-tendered after his 2004. They paid him only $800,000 for that dog of a season, but had three more years to pay him automatically-escalating millions.

Granted, this is a worst-case and won't happen most of the time. Peralta, Martinez, and Sizemore all have physical gifts and prospect cachets much greater than the surprise 2002 AL ROY (who was given away by Billy Beane in the Billy Koch trade of 12/01, and again before that in 3/01 by Chicago for Miguel F. Cairo) ever had. And as it turned out, Hinske has indeed been a one-year wonder.

RedsManRick
03-29-2006, 06:49 PM
You could agrue that they signed Hinske too early. I would want at least 1.5 years of success before doing such a deal. By that measure, the sizemore deal was a bit early as well. Though unlike Hinske, a lot of Sizemore's (and Wells') value as players are in their defense, which isn't as likely to be a fluke.

traderumor
03-29-2006, 07:07 PM
Looks like Cleveland is about to release v2.0 of the late '90's Indians.
Not even close yet. They are splitting 1b with Eduardo Perez and Broussard. Second base to compare with Alomar? And Peralta v. Vizquel? They have some good young talent in a few positions, I'll give you that, but no way are they even close to loading up the kind of offensive talent that juggernaut possessed.

KearnsyEars
03-30-2006, 08:39 AM
I love this kind of a move. I think cost certainty is a term we're going to hear more and more as organizations mirror what the Indians are doing. Once a player has proven himself (more than one hot half-season), there's no real reason to subject yourself to the arbitration process other than risk aversion in the event of an injury. The Reds really missed the boat with Dunn, perhaps because of the low batting average in 2004 scaring them off.

However, if Lopez repeats and/or Kearns returns to 2003 form, they really need to lock these guys up to long term contracts and get this foundation in place.


I agree with you and everyone else about the reds should have done this with Adam Dunn a long time ago. I've been crying this for years.

Also thought that I'd tpoint out Dunn didn't have a low batting average in 2004, it was his career high (.267). His avg of .215 came in 2003 when he ended the year on the DL.

KearnsyEars
03-30-2006, 08:42 AM
Not even close yet. They are splitting 1b with Eduardo Perez and Broussard. Second base to compare with Alomar? And Peralta v. Vizquel? They have some good young talent in a few positions, I'll give you that, but no way are they even close to loading up the kind of offensive talent that juggernaut possessed.

Ronny Belliard is no slouch. I expect .280, 25 HR and 90 RBI from him this season, numbers that rival Alomar's.

I also would like to mention that by June, Hafner will be playing the grunt of the time at first base, Broussard will be in the tank, and Eduardo will only go against lefties. While the tribe has not reached the level of the '95 tribe, this group is young, energetic, and going to make a serious run at a title in the near, near future. They're a big time pitcher away from not just a playoff run, but world series run.

REDREAD
03-30-2006, 09:33 AM
On the plus side, if the Reds had done business like that, we'd be stuck with an additional dog contract in the form of Austin Kearns, who entered the bigs hot and had everyone penciling his name into All Star games for the next decade.

Every hot prospect/rising star is one fat LOOGY away from being a pile of could-have-been. Not saying I disagree with the Indians decisions, but these kinds of deals are the ones that can send a ballclub to financial hell if injuries start to mount.

Sure, a few of those deals will like end up not working out.. But if we had signed both Kearns and Dunn longterm after their second year, we'd probably save on Dunn what we lost on Kearns.

Sizemore locked up for 6 years at an average of 4 million/year is a steal.
Look at it this way, we've been flushing 4 million/year on Wilson.. Ortiz made almost that much. Unless Sizemore has a career ending injury (not likely for an OF), absolutley worst case they have an overpaid backup OF, and those can be moved. In fact the Indians just moved one to Pittsburg last season for a reliever (the lefty reliever the Pirates got for Kendal).. I forget the name of both players.. but you see the point.

KearnsyEars
03-30-2006, 09:55 AM
Scott Sauerbeck

M2
03-30-2006, 11:09 AM
On the bright side, Krivsky did work out a deal with Adam Dunn as his first order of business.

PuffyPig
03-30-2006, 11:23 AM
Actually, I think the reliever that was moved was Arthur Rhoades.

You can always move a bad contract if you take on an equally bad one.

And don't be fooled by the $4M average over 6 years. Sizemore would have made peanuts during his next 2 years. It's not like he was a FA and could have gotten $10M tomorrow.

All in all a good deal for the Indians and Sizemore (who ensures his financial security regardless of his career). But it's not highway bank robbery.

KearnsyEars
03-30-2006, 11:46 AM
On the bright side, Krivsky did work out a deal with Adam Dunn as his first order of business.

I mean it was a plus, yes and no. Its a three year deal, but its really not the long term deal/solution we were looking for. Now, if they're using these three years to work out a longer term extension with our star, then yeah it was effective. But if they just let him walk after three years and don't do business with him after that, then it was really a wash.

M2
03-30-2006, 12:14 PM
I mean it was a plus, yes and no. Its a three year deal, but its really not the long term deal/solution we were looking for. Now, if they're using these three years to work out a longer term extension with our star, then yeah it was effective. But if they just let him walk after three years and don't do business with him after that, then it was really a wash.

Unfortunately the boat had already sailed on theteam-friendly five- or six-year deal he should have signed prior to 2004. Krivsky at least managed to step in and lock up the years from that theoretically earlier, though he had to pay a much higher premium to do it.

Roy Tucker
03-30-2006, 12:14 PM
I think the Reds got turned off to these kinds of deals with the signings of Casey and Graves in 2000.

KearnsyEars
03-30-2006, 12:20 PM
Unfortunately the boat had already sailed on theteam-friendly five- or six-year deal he should have signed prior to 2004. Krivsky at least managed to step in and lock up the years from that theoretically earlier, though he had to pay a much higher premium to do it.


I think the important question now becomes, can they use the three years to negotiate further into the future.

REDREAD
03-30-2006, 12:33 PM
Actually, I think the reliever that was moved was Arthur Rhoades.

You can always move a bad contract if you take on an equally bad one.

And don't be fooled by the $4M average over 6 years. Sizemore would have made peanuts during his next 2 years. It's not like he was a FA and could have gotten $10M tomorrow.

All in all a good deal for the Indians and Sizemore (who ensures his financial security regardless of his career). But it's not highway bank robbery.

Yeah, it was Rhodes.. And yes, Rhodes had a bad contract, but the Indians moved him to Philly this year.. So they dumped an OF (again, I forget who) and took on a relatively expensive reliever in Rhodes. But Rhodes did produce well for them. 33 hits, 12 BB in 43.1 IP with a 2.08 ERA.. Pretty good production for a bad contract. If I remember, the OF they shipped made around 7 million, so they took on Rhodes who made (I think) 3.7/year and then dumped the rest of Rhodes contract on Philly.

The thing about Sizemore's deal is that in 6 years, 10 million may be peanuts if Baseball's revenue continues to grow.. Who would've thought 7 years ago that an average pitcher on the FA market would be worth 7-8 million year? Heck, there's below average pitchers getting that much..

KronoRed
03-30-2006, 02:47 PM
I think the Reds got turned off to these kinds of deals with the signings of Casey and Graves in 2000.
And JR to a bigger extent, I doubt we see this team offer anyone more then a 3 year deal for a long while.

M2
03-30-2006, 04:37 PM
I think the Reds got turned off to these kinds of deals with the signings of Casey and Graves in 2000.

Though those were much different signings. The Indians have locked Sizemore up through his arbitration years and for a year or two beyond that. That's cost control on a player who has no options to leave.

The Reds let Casey and Graves wade into arbitration, drive up their price and then essentially beat the free agent market by a season in locking up the two of them. That's throwing money at guys to get them to stay.

I don't know that you'd ever want to go more than three years with a reliever, but the club could have locked up Casey to an extended deal after 1998 or 1999 seasons and saved a couple of million a year in the process.

REDREAD
04-01-2006, 09:36 AM
The Reds let Casey and Graves wade into arbitration, drive up their price and then essentially beat the free agent market by a season in locking up the two of them. That's throwing money at guys to get them to stay..

Yes, the Reds basically resigned Casey and Graves as free agents and bid against themselves.

Paying 6 million for Graves, with the intention of converting him to a starter after about 6 September starts was pure foolishness. I said at the time, it was a bad idea (to convert him). 6 million was the high end for a closer back then as well.

The Reds should've definitely taken the cash from those guys (and Haynes too) and gone shopping.. Although I always had the theory that it was a lot easier for Bowden to get Allen's approval to bring back current players, instead of saving payflex to acquire new talent (even if that talent was better). It always seemed to be the pattern.. Plus, you look at Washington, and so far Bowden isn't acting like that.