More on the Johnson situation
By Michael Jong
This time from Joe Capozzi over at the Palm Beach post.
"“Josh obviously wanted to do something to stay long-term with the Marlins, but it doesn’t look that way now,’ his agent, Matt Sosnick, said today.Johnson, 25, is entering his second winter of arbitration but was hoping to sign a four-year contract worth at least $40 million.The Marlins were believed to be willing to go no longer than three years for about $22 million."
The above offer isn’t very good. Take a look at Zack Greinke’s four-year extension, worth $39M. Greinke was in a similar situation as Johnson, having come back from a year out due to ailments (his of a different kind that Johnson, who was returning from Tommy John surgery) and pitched excellently for a season and a half. Greinke got extended through his last two arbitration years and his first two free agent years. Johnson, who by all accounts is probably a tier below Greinke in terms of talent, could presumably have gotten the same amount for an extension. His agent, Matt Sosnick, was looking for something a bit more than the Greinke extension, but anything like four years and $40-46M would be mostly reasonable.
I can’t imagine the Marlins being unable to go higher on the money than the offer shown above. The fourth year is admittedly understandable; pitchers are more vulnerable to injury, so longer contracts are much more risky then with hitters. If Johnson were a position player of similar caliber, I don’t believe the Marlins would have flinched at adding an extra season. But the money provided in this deal is not reasonable. For the number of years listed, the breakdown could look something like:
2010: $4M
2011: $8M
2012: $10M
Compare that to Greinke’s offer, as per Cot’s Contracts.
2009: $3.75M
2010: $7.25M
2011: $13.5M
2012: $13.5M
Here, the Marlins may be offering more up front and taking out a lot on the back when Johnson’s free agent arrives. I would not blame Johnson or his agent for rejecting a deal like that on precedence; it isn’t as if the Marlins are signing him through his rookie contract years like other teams have been doing lately.
That being said, would Johnson be wrong to take this deal?
2010: $5M
2011: $9M
2012: $14M
That comes out to three years and $28M, paying him close to what he could expect in the market in his first free agent year and giving him around what he would earn in arbitration, as a guarantee. I think in this case, Johnson and his agent should take a deal around this area, and there would be little reason not to. Johnson would still be entering free agency in a peak year. He would be earning more for his free agency year than Greinke would be. The only thing he does not get is the extra year, but this might actually work to his benefit.
We’ll have to see how this soap opera turns out. Oh, by the way, look at this little nugget from Sosnick, courtesy of Juan C. Rodriguez over at his blog.
"So why close the door on a long-term deal when [Josh] Johnson is under team control for two more seasons? Sosnick said next offseason it would take a seven-year commitment well north of the $100 million mark to retain Johnson."
Agents are so ridiculous sometimes. Why would it require a seven-year commitment one season from now? How does that even make sense? If Sosnick really believes his client is as good as advertised, he should have no problems with another four-year deal and getting his client to free agency at age 30 or 31, ready for another solid five-year market deal.