Contract options—whether they are vesting options or player/team options—present a headache to baseball managers who would rather play the best nine men each day without having to worry about the business side of the game.
Ah, but it matters. In fact, it matters a lot.
For example, there are two vesting options in the AL Central alone worth watching.
The Detroit Tigers, if they're smart, will not repeat the mistake they made in 2009 when they allowed Magglio Ordonez's 2010 option to vest by a mere 61 plate appearances.
Because of this decision, the Tigers will be paying Ordonez $18 million this season. And they claim that trading Curtis Granderson was not financially motivated?
The fact is that Ordonez is declining and the wise thing to do if he continues to struggle would be to limit him to less than the 540 plate appearances which will guarantee a $15 million salary for 2011.
CHONE projects Ordonez to be worth two wins this season and his defense is very poor. Meanwhile, they do have that long-term extension to pay out to Justin Verlander, you know.
And over in Cleveland, Kerry Wood is making far too much money to close for a non-contending team. Simply put, the Tribe should do everything within their power to avoid his $11 million dollar option from vesting if he finishes 55 games this year.
Of course, they could trade Wood, as the Twins and even the Cubs, his former club, are in dire need of relief help. But to do that they would need to use him early on to show these clubs that he is healthy and productive and that could have a detrimental effect down the road if a trade doesn't materialize.
And, let's face it, they would likely have to eat some of that contract for a trade to happen.
Wood turns 33 this season and is averaging 1 WAR per season over the last three years. He will not be worth that option.
I'm not suggesting that teams make their attempts to manipulate contract options obvious. They certainly need to be careful so that the mighty players union can't present a case against the team.
But it just makes good business sense, especially for teams not named Red Sox or Yankees. Heck, it even makes sense for those high spending teams as well.
Back to the managers for a moment. Most will tell you they are better off not knowing about these options but I guarantee you that they do, especially in this age of Tweeting.
It is patently unfair to managers but it's the price you pay to have a competitive team in future years. Managers are part of the front office, like it or not, and they need to play the game both on and off the field.
But hey, option years can be friendly to a team as well.
Consider Albert Pujols and the $16 million dollar option for 2011. On the open market, Albert may be worth as much as $25 million or more, so that one is a no-brainer.
Likewise, the Cliff Lee $9 million dollar option for 2010 was equally agreeable. It didn't prevent him from being traded, but both teams have benefited from such a sweet deal.
Not that I agree with the trade, but the Phillies were able to move Lee, in part, because his new team understood they would have his services for at least this year at a discount.
Almost no one expects Adrian Beltre to accept his $5 million dollar player option for 2011, but it's there to protect him in case he gets hurt or has a bad year. Meanwhile, the Sox benefit because they have a one year window in which to gain his services without breaking the bank.
Speaking of the Sox, it was a no-brainer for them to pick up Josh Beckett's option this season. If nothing else, it buys them time to work out a long-term extension.
These option years are often an afterthought when new deals are announced, especially long-term contracts. But they turn out to be of vital importance to a team's future.
It will be interesting to see what Detroit and Cleveland "opt" to do.
Read more MLB news on BleacherReport.com
- Login to post comments