More on the Johnson situation
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.
Michael,
don’t you find it odd that the agent is coming out so publicly about this now, so soon after the season and many months before spring training even?
I find it kind of unprofessional.
November 20th, 2009 at 11:01 pmLane,
I think if anything, it’s a marketing/negotiation ploy. I think the attitude he displayed is definitely off-putting however. Such is the way of the agent, I suppose.
November 21st, 2009 at 12:51 amit wouldn’t surprise me if he already has a commitment from other teams that they made offers for JJ and will give him the $ extension he wants and he is trying to force the Marlins hand in trading him
November 21st, 2009 at 9:59 amLane,
I hope that isn’t the case. That’s some strong collusion action. But that stuff probably goes on behind closed doors all the time.
My guess is that he’s using the media to bring up the price. The Marlins are smart not to talk to the media, but the pressure is on. If the team ultimately decides not to extend Johnson (we’ll know for sure around February I guess, though it could be as early as the tendering deadline in December), the clock begins ticking. The longer they wait, the more Johnson’s value drops.
November 21st, 2009 at 2:32 pmI don’t think the Marlins feel that pressure; they are already known as the team that sells off high priced players, they already have the stadium deal, the players all know they won’t get paid by this regime, and they already have no fans coming to the games at Dolphins Stadium.. I doubt this makes their knees shake to acquiesce to a deal.
November 21st, 2009 at 2:55 pmLane,
I don’t think it’s so much “pressure to make a deal,” as if they will do it, they’ll do it, and if they don’t want to, then they definitely won’t. I think there will be pressure to make a trade in the face of a fan base that is disillusioned but still hopes for good fortune now that tax dollars are building a new stadium. This is countered by the notion that if they continue down the road and wait to trade Johnson, they might face a Johan Santana situation in which teams might not be so willing to deal for him with less team control years.
I don’t know. It will definitely be an intriguing off-season for the Marlins. Stay tuned to Marlin Maniac, that’s all I can say.
November 21st, 2009 at 3:01 pmCould you guys afford to give Johnson 14 Million though considering that you’re already giving Ramirez 15 million? Would your owner raise the payroll to a minimum 50 million?
Even he only got 10, then that would be an 18 Million Dollar Raise for those two guys. Would your owner raise the payroll to 45-47 million to keep both?
November 22nd, 2009 at 12:21 pmMatt P,
Since the contracts are backloaded, the Marlins would not have to worrk about that until 2012. There is uncertainty as to whether or not they would be willing at that point to pay the salaries of Ramirez and Johnson at that point, but the fan base assumes that with the new stadium being built, plans on increasing payroll will be in effect. In addition, the payroll for the team has gone into the $40-50M range during Loria’s tenure as Marlins owner, particularly after the team won the World Series in 2003.
Alas, it does not seem to be what will happen. All signs point to the Marlins moving forward with a year-to-year plan, which may ultimately be detrimental to the team.
November 22nd, 2009 at 4:39 pmjust heard David Samson on his show on 790 the ticket with Dan LeBatard, and he certainly didn’t make it sound like JJ was coming back (or at least extended). He basically insinuated that they were not going to tie up all their money in one or two players.
Of course, every word that comes out of his mouth sounds assholish, I wonder if they’ll put it online.
November 25th, 2009 at 6:42 pmLane,
The organization’s been mum on the whole issue, but I think that this silence probably means the Marlins are moving on with a year-to-year plan. And yeah, I don’t like Samson all that much (not at all, actually).
November 25th, 2009 at 9:05 pmMichael,
Keith Law just posted his Insider take on JJ, fwiw…
http://insider.espn.go.com/insider/features/rumors#3728
“The Marlins actually have a history of moving guys early, and in Johnson — under control for whoever gets him for two more years — they have a player who is worth a major package of prospects. Think: two ML-ready guys, plus two solid prospects at the Double-A level. In Johnson you have a difference-maker like Halladay, but you have that extra year of control. He doesn’t have Halladay’s history of durability, but few do.”
November 27th, 2009 at 1:56 pmLane,
Thanks for the link and the quote (for those of us like me who cannot access ESPN Insider). I absolutely agree with Law. If the team has no interest in resigning Johnson, the return package would be very good and the Marlins could easily get an excellent haul WITH major league talent.
November 27th, 2009 at 8:38 pmMichael,
Buster Olney’s insider had this: “5. The respected John Perotto twittered that the Marlins are willing to trade Josh Johnson. I made contact with a couple of executives of rival teams Thursday night, and both indicated that the Marlins had not yet told them this.”
and then Peter Gammons had this on Twitter:
@pgammo:
November 28th, 2009 at 12:06 pmTis the season when agents try to spin news. So here is reality:Josh Johnson isn’t going anywhere. 2010 @ $4M is good business for Phish
Lane,
Thanks for keeping the info flowing. Let’s see the type of offers the Marlins get, maybe it would be worth our while. If there isn’t something really strong, like what Law mentioned, we could go into the regular season with him and still get something at the deadline if we fall out of contention.
November 29th, 2009 at 2:18 pm