Ed Zurga - Getty Images
Welcome to the Gordon-palooza, in which we avoid the Gordon-pocalypse.
According to Dutton, the two sides are a) working on a one-year deal for 2012 to avoid arbitration and b) setting up a longer contract. Here's the money quote:
The Royals are believed to have offered an overall four-year package for about $30 million, which would mirror the deal reached last year with designated hitter Billy Butler.
The Royals and Gordon can do the one-year dance for 2012 and 2013, but they presumably wouldn't want to do so, unless one of the parties truly wants out. It's tough to talk about a deal that hasn't been struck yet, but a 4/30 deal could be fair for both sides.
0 recs | 69 comments
World ends in December anyways,
One year deal is all we need.
splitty - February 7, 2012
With mutual options
A. B. Aird - February 7, 2012
IN HELL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
philofthenorth - February 7, 2012
Is it time for pitchers and catchers yet?
This offseason seems to be moving in slow motion.
A. B. Aird - February 7, 2012
Strangely
the Royals’ home page doesn’t seem to have a “time until pitchers & catchers” countdown clock, which I’m sure they had in previous off-seasons. (Followed by a “time until first spring training game” countdown, followed by a “time until Opening Day” countdown.) Considering that there’s probably more anticipation and optimism for the Royals for this season than there has been in a very long time, it’s odd it’t not there this year.
Maybe the people who normally put it there were needed for All-Star Game prep.
cmkeller - February 7, 2012
maybe we're trying to keep it on the down low.
look at the chiefs and their fiasco. I rather not have another spying/bugging crisis
Chiefshero - February 7, 2012
what does a countdown clock have to do with spying?
billybeingbilly - February 7, 2012
less attention to oneself
Chiefshero - February 7, 2012
huh?
you think the chiefs are trying to avoid getting attention? b/c the chiefs are run like shit? that makes absolutely no sense. this is the perfect time for the royals to grab all of the attention they can b/c the chiefs suck and are run by sketchy dudes.
billybeingbilly - February 7, 2012
oops...should be royals in first sentence
billybeingbilly - February 7, 2012
X
Sweep_the_Leg - February 7, 2012
x
averagegatsby - February 7, 2012
Yodazilla - February 8, 2012
i think having a chiefs related screen name makes people less intelligent...
i dont think this can be refuted
billybeingbilly - February 7, 2012
There does seem to be a much higher likelihood of bread helmets being worn
Sweep_the_Leg - February 7, 2012
Billybeingbilly
the most offended man on the interwebs
MVP-Gordon - February 8, 2012
Don't even get him started on David DeJesus
averagegatsby - February 8, 2012
please dont
billybeingbilly - February 8, 2012
im not easily offended...but its a fucking epidemic
billybeingbilly - February 8, 2012
Yeah, they have to talk about the one-year deal because they must be getting close to his hearing date
And if they haven’t agreed to the long-term deal by the hearing date, probably both sides will want to have an agreement in place for a 2012 one-year deal so they can avoid the hearing.
But of course that one-year deal does not preclude a long-term deal to tack onto it or replace it, which they could agree to at any time.
Scott McKinney - February 7, 2012
Feb 16 IIRC
RoyalsRetro - February 7, 2012
That IIRCs Me
philofthenorth - February 7, 2012
Gordon will likely sign for ~$5 million this year (roughly halfway between each side's arb offer)
So a 4 year, $30 million extension would be $5 million for this year and then an average of $8.3 million over the next three years (last year of arbitration and two years of free agency). Barring serious injury or other disaster, Gordon would be lock to make $7-8 million next year in arbitration. Getting his first two free agent years for essentially the same amount would be a very good deal for the Royals. From Gordon’s perspective, Butler is not a great comp since Butler signed his extension when he was only in his first year of arbitration and had three years of club control remaining.
Gopherballs - February 7, 2012
And because Butler is highly unlikely to leave the dugout wearing a glove more than 10 or so times a year during his deal.
Sweep_the_Leg - February 7, 2012
and butler is much less likely to miss a ton of time due to injury
billybeingbilly - February 7, 2012
Also true, but I would be willing to bet that Gordon would put up more WAR than Butler would over the lifespan of their deals
And Gordon might end up putting the competition out of Butler’s reach within the first two years of his deal.
Sweep_the_Leg - February 7, 2012
probably...but you have to take into account risk of gordon providing next to nothing....
there’s very little risk of butler getting hurt/stopping hitting…
billybeingbilly - February 7, 2012
Only cause you can't pull fat
RoyalsRetro - February 7, 2012
Tits Are Mostly
Fat, and I’ve pulled plenty of them.
philofthenorth - February 7, 2012
boob yanker
Bronzillo - February 7, 2012
Gently.
philofthenorth - February 7, 2012
Fantastic work Phil
mitchfreakingmaier! - February 7, 2012 via iPhone app
I Work Hard
Literallyphilofthenorth - February 7, 2012
One of those times I actually lol'd
Warden11 - February 8, 2012
and Butler is much more reliable than Gordon
If going just by ’11, Gordon is a much better player than Butler. If going by the previous 4 yrs, Butler is the more valuable player.
Bronzillo - February 7, 2012
actually, if it is an extension,
than the 4 yr deal wouldn’t start until 2013 as it would be extending it onto the end of the current contract. If it were 4/30 mil, that would be the equivalent of 5/35 counting this season.
That seems a bit too good to be true.
I do think that by signing Gordon to a 1 yr deal and then working out a long term deal, it could turn out better as you gain the equivalent of an extra year at 5 mil.
Bronzillo - February 7, 2012
the first year would take effect this year....
thats how these always work
billybeingbilly - February 7, 2012
Not always
Ryan Howard’s “extension” hasn’t even started yet and he signed it over a year ago.
Extension means it is added onto the end of an existing contract. What your saying is they would be completely reworking a new contract and wiping out the 1 yr deal. By definition, that is not what an extension is.
Bronzillo - February 7, 2012
but thats how it generally works in baseball....
there are numerous examples of this every year…but if you’re really into the semantics of the word….yeah….
going by what is done in baseball, you’re wrong. when the news comes out that they’ve signed a 4 or 5 year extension, it’ll take the place of this year’s contract
billybeingbilly - February 7, 2012
Anything beyond a one-year deal for any player currently subject to arbitration
would necessarily be classified as an “extension”. Arb contracts are only one-year deals. Even though a team may have the ability to tender any arb-eligible player, as soon as the player signs the “extension” he is necessarily giving the team more than one year of control.
Sweep_the_Leg - February 7, 2012
btw do you guys see the tip of gordon's bat?
could it be?
the force is strong with this one
Chiefshero - February 7, 2012
Gordon has all his bats circumsized
To decrease wind drag.
Bronzillo - February 7, 2012
4/40 Would Be
Fine with me.
philofthenorth - February 7, 2012
Nate Bukaty tweets
Reports are Royals are offering 4/30, Gordon is asking for 6/80
RoyalsRetro - February 7, 2012
middle ground....you guessed it
5/55
billybeingbilly - February 7, 2012
6/80 seems rich.
BeauJackson - February 7, 2012
Laughably so
If that is Close’s hard bargain, than I don’t want to hear anybody accuse Glass or Moore of lowballing Gordon on this one.
That would be completely irresponsible and unprecedented for a player with his track record of injuries and crappiness.
Bronzillo - February 7, 2012
although,
it would still be much better than Fielder’s new contract.
Bronzillo - February 7, 2012
how about if its structured so that the last two years are team options at say, 15 and 17 million...
that puts us at 4/48…that seems sorta fair to me. mitigates some of the royals risk, but rewards gordon handsomely if he performs and therefore misses out on his chance at a major FA deal
billybeingbilly - February 7, 2012
Do you mean
4/48 + 15 +17 club options = $48 guaranteed, but up to $80 mill? I think that sounds good. Probably depends on the buyout, maybe a few million?
RoyalsRetro - February 7, 2012
4/43 + 15 +17
With a 2 Million buy out the first season and a 3 million buyout the second.
Guarentees 4/48, with the possibility of reaching $75.
RoyalPug - February 7, 2012
yeah that would be tolerable if the buyout was reasonable.
still a bit too high I think. Maybe 4/38 with the same 2 options.
Mike Sweeney had a much better track record than Gordon before he inked his deal .That contract killed KC for years (many other contributing factors of course).
Bronzillo - February 7, 2012
he also had no position
versus being gold glove caliber in the OF
billybeingbilly - February 7, 2012
Also there has been salary inflation since then
5/55 ain’t what it used to be
RoyalsRetro - February 7, 2012
contracts have plateaued more than you think since then
Arod’s 1st 10/250 deal and Manny’s 8/200 deal were both signed before sweeney’s contract.
Bronzillo - February 7, 2012
He was also a much, much better hitter going entering the contract.
Bronzillo - February 7, 2012
.324/.396/.535
the 4 seasons leading up to his contract with less than half the K’s and more walks.
Bronzillo - February 7, 2012
Eh, I'll buy gold glove caliber when we see it for another year or two.
Warden11 - February 8, 2012
very good?
the eye test, the gg voters and the advanced metrics all agree
billybeingbilly - February 8, 2012
Correct me if I'm reading fangraphs wrong but it looks like almost all of his fielding value came from his arm.
That’s something I don’t expect to continue long term because teams will wisen up. Does his defense outside of his arm hold up? The metrics aren’t as clear on that, not to mention it’s still too small to tell one way or the other.
Warden11 - February 8, 2012
most of his value is from his arm....
however, while throwing guys out has value, so does stopping those guys from even trying to advance…its just less quantifiable
billybeingbilly - February 8, 2012
But nowhere near as valuable as getting actual outs because they're still on base.
Warden11 - February 8, 2012
The situation is tricky.
It is great that Gordon had a career year, but now his agent wants him to be paid as if that will be the norm going forward. I guess that contract would be fair, but it had better work out for the Royals sake.
BeauJackson - February 7, 2012
What Better Gamble
Can this franchise take?
philofthenorth - February 7, 2012
He seems like a good bet.
I just get nervous whenever this team gives out big money. Thoughts of Jose Guillen haunt me.
BeauJackson - February 7, 2012
No Comparison, Really
philofthenorth - February 7, 2012
I thought the Royals would essentially offer Gordon the Butler contract
And go from there, but I wasn’t sure what Gordon’s counter would be. I never thought about a 6th year, just guessed it would be 4 years with a club option. Two option years would be nice.
Wasn’t there another thread where someone calculated the sweet spot for a Gordon extension in terms of money and WAR?
thelaundry - February 7, 2012
whoa huge difference
Freneau - February 7, 2012 via iPhone app
I wouldn't want to guarantee Gordon more than four years as the Royals GM
I like the club option idea for years five and six, but for the total deal to be 6/$80 really handcuffs the team in 2016 and 2017 when they may be looking to extend Hosmer, Moustakas et al.
I would rather do 4/$60m then guarantee him 6/$80m. But I would much more prefer 4/$52m+$15m+$17m club options for years five and six. Total contract comes out to $82m but big picture I don’t think the Royals financially can pick up year six (and maybe not even year five) without hindering themselves in other re-signings.
JKWard - February 8, 2012
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Royals Review to post a comment.