Last winter, we gave this a shot with A-Rod's next contract:

http://sonsofsamhorn.net/index.php?showtopic=24421&st=0

This season, what do you predict for C.C. Sabathia's next deal?

I voted for all of the options cause I could. [Jesus... is it really this hard to make a poll?]

I think the Yankees and Red Sox are both going to go HARD after his services. 8 years/200 million +. And he'll eventually sign with the Yankees.

6/130.

No idea why he would want to leave the NL to go to the toughest division in the MLB. Money talks, but is a few mil more a year worth the pain of pitching in the AL East?

He'll doubtless get his money but Mr. CC is quickly developing a track record of wilting in the playoffs. SSS disclaimer, etc. That said, I wouldn't be surprised if Milwaukee took a shot. But he will be a Yankee. CC has the timing-availability balance in his favor, like Damon did. NYY will go hard after him, IMO, as they don't seem to mind high paid playoff wilting players of late. I think Theo will play it for a while but will have no interest in a record setting deal for CC.

I can see the Red Sox making a play for him, but largely I think it will be a let's drive the price up play. I just can't see anyway the Red Sox would go 7 or more years, and 20 or more million per year.

They are a risk averse franchise when it comes to long term spending. And this is a contract situation that has significant potential to have 3-4 years of largely dead money

Not that I disagree with what you suggest, but if it gets that high/long I think that is a horribly risky contract.
How many big money FA pitching contracts have really worked out well? I think it is a very short list.


6/120 would be my guess.

If I were a GM, this would be about the limit. Longer than this just feels like taking on way too much risk.

Having said this, that's what I think. I'm almost certain that there's an MLB owner who would take a chance that he'll hold up and give him 7/145 or 8/170 or something in that ballpark.

And both such GM and owner exist in the same franchise. Where there are $2,500 box seats to sell.
Welcome to your new contract, Brian Cashman.
Yeah, it'll suck getting beat in the regular season by CC a few times a year. But those days will pass.
I predict 3 years of Mike Mussina followed by 4 years of Carl Pavano from the big guy's next contract. At 25 x 7. Cash gets to retire after the 3.

Normally, I think this is true. But the Sox have also shown to be aggressive with impact players too. I think having the chance of adding a pitcher of Sabathia's caliber to a Lester, Beckett, and Matsuzaka fronted rotation will prove to be extremely difficult to not get involved with.

I think that since the Sox have for the most part have been risk averse, they actually have some breathing room to make a mistake. Not saying that I think Sabathia will be a mistake, because I don't. I'm just saying that if he does get injured/becomes less effective/what have you, the Sox are in a position to take that kind of risk.

In the end though, I think it's going to come down to what Sabathia wants. If it's money, he's in New York. If it's comfort, probably one of the LA teams. If it's winning a ring, it could very well be Boston.

6 years, 21-22.9 million.

I don't think anyone is giving him 7 years, but someone will pull out 6 at the last second to pull him away from another team.

If it's for a team who seem to try to put their pitchers in an optimal position regarding their health, and therefore their performance it could well be Boston. Looking at it, the Red Sox careful usage of their pitchers has been just on a different level to anyone elses who would be potential suitors for Sabathia. They have shut down Buchholz due to him being a potential injury risk last season, by the common consensus apparent on here they have used the DL to get pitchers rest, and there is ongoing testing done so that potential injury problems are picked up and hopefully dealt with before they become problematical. He would also not have to be the man he may be required to be elsewhere if he ends up in Boston. That would also mean he would end up on a team where the temptation to use his arm to excess would be diluted.

If Sabathia was to sign for 6 years for someone, he would only be 34 by the time that contract ends. I'm not saying it will be the case, but it would be a pretty good idea for him and his agent to at least be looking at what sort of condition his arm would be in at the end of that contract.

I do not have any problem whatsoever giving CC 7 years. That contract will expire when he is 35. I would much rather tack on the extra year than settling for a 35 year old Derrick Lowe right now with at 3-4 year deal.

The decision is not CC or Lowe. The decision is CC for 7/8 years or no CC. Lowe doesn't even enter into the thinking until you have decided whether or not you want to give CC the contract, so he's a classic strawman here.

Looking at CC in isolation, the issue isn't how old he'll be at the end of the contract. It's whether you think CC can avoid a major injury over the entire span of the contract. Giving any starting pitcher a 7 or 8 year deal is extremely risky given the unpredictable nature of pitching injuries. Giving 7 or 8 years to someone with the wear and tear that CC has on his arm is like playing Russian Roulette.

To a certain extent, this is a semantic argument, since I agree with you that someone will sign him for 7 or 8 years if that's what it takes. I just think the odds are pretty good that that same someone will regret it by the end of the contract.

I voted for 7 years at 17-18.9mil/year...but I think that'll really be a 5 year with 2 options. Whoever picks him up, I hope the either learn to rest the guy down the stretch, or gotten a little cheaper on the deal(compared to the other options listed on the poll) because he's not yet proven he's anything special in the postseason.

Of course I am aware that there is an injury risk, as there is with all pitchers, but I think you need to consider whether 5 healthy years of CC at top form out of his 7 year contract (let's pretend he gets TJ and he is out for two years). Is it worth it to have ace stud for 5 healthy years? Well, I guess everyone can be their own judge, I think it is. Particularly if you are team, like the Yanks and Sox that can absorb the financial hit in those two years).

Also, maybe I don't think a 7 year deal for an ace pitcher is that bad an idea since I have seen it year in and year out work with Mike Mussina.

A lot of this is going to depend on whether the California teams show up to bidding. I've heard in a perfect world CC would love to be a Giant (Giants fan as a kid), and he's also interested in any Southern California team since he and his wife have a home in LA. Certainly the Giants and Dodgers are capable of bidding big, just whether they want to is the question. I think CC would take slightly less money to play in California, though not a significant discount.

If I knew I was going to get 5 years of peak performance out of CC and I had to pay for 7 years to get it, I make that deal right now. The risk that would keep me up at nights is that I'd get 2 or 3 years of peak performance, 2 years of missed time and 2 or 3 years of suck. (Think Pedro's contract with the Mets on steroids.)

As to your Mussina example, this may just be my ignorance but I'd be less worried about giving that kind of pitcher a 7 year deal for the following reasons:

1. Not considered an ace, so I'm not going to pay Sanatana-type money for him. (Soon to be called "Sabathia-type" money.)
2. He doesn't rely on a power game the way CC does, so the chance of traumatic injury is probably lower.

Of course, the risk with tha kind of pitcher is that you sign him after his one or two years of peak performance and end up with 7 years of suck on your hands. (See Zito, Barry.)

Back to CC. It's always a risk to lock in a starter for big money over a long-term contract. I (personally) would have a hard time doing it after watching him burn himself out two years in a row. But if present trends continue, I can see the Yankees, Angels and maybe the Cubs lined up to do just that.

Mussina was not considered an ace and didn't get ace money? He got 88.5 million. In 2001 that was the 2nd largest contract ever for a pitcher.

With his ability to hit I would think that he's hoping for an NL team to back up the Brinks truck.

Can you think of one that will? The Mets probably can't considering the mass of other needs they have and the contract they just gave to Johan. I guess the Dodgers could but I am not convinced they would be willing to shell out that kind of money for a pitcher when they already have the best ERA in the MLB.

My money's on either the Mets or the Cubs trying to make a get-over-the-hump signing and offering him 7/150 or so to try and secure him. Plus, you have to wonder if he'd want to remain in the NL after tearing it up for the Brewers.

Rotoworld:
Ryan Braun said Sunday that CC Sabathia has indicated that the Brewers have a good chance of re-signing him this offseason.
"I’m not going to tell you what he said specifically but I know he enjoyed it here," Braun said. "He likes the guys on the team. He recognizes that we’re going to be good for a while, too. I don’t think he’ll take a discount financially but he might take less years for the same amount of money, which makes it less risk, less commitment from the organization."

I voted 7/$21MM-$22.9MM.

Despite what some models say he "should" get, my gut says it will take a 7th year. IIRC, that would essentially be Johan Santana's deal with a 7th year guaranteed, rather than a team option. Maybe Sabathia's 7th year is a vesting option based on reasonable milestones.

Can the Mets even AFFORD him while still paying Santana and all? Jesus, Santana and Sabathia vs NL?

So as teams begin to bid for Sabathia, the final wisdom of...

SoSH: 6/$$19-$21MM AAV

BP readers: 6/$$24MM

Tangotiger's Blog readers: 6/~$23MM

We'll see.

Last February, after the Mets had signed Santana, I asked Omar if he would have gone as hard after Santana IF he had already dropped $100M on Matsuzaka the year before: "Absolutely!"

Now, part of that may be because posting fees are looked at MUCH differently than salary, but it still says something about how some teams are willing to pay for elite pitching.......

Pinstripes are slimming I'm afraid.

6Y/$145-150MM, slightly higher aav than Santana

gets it from the MFY

From Rosenthal via foxsports.com

"The Yankees also intend to make offers shortly to free-agent right-handers A.J. Burnett and Derek Lowe, sources say."

Good lord, this could get out of hand.

NY Daily News

The MFY have started the bidding at an impressive 6Y/$140M. They said they were willing to go above and beyond the competition, and I don't doubt it. I think he will sign with the MFY for 6Y/$150M.

This is going 7 years, the opening big is huge.

6/$160M ($25M Annually + $5M signing Bonus + team option/buyout for 2015 $20M or $5M)

6/150, from the MFY. The NL/West Coast talk is a ploy to get the MFY to overpay, and all signs are they're falling for it.

Sabathia has been exceptionally durable, and big pitchers age better than little guys (though not many comps have Sabathia's ... um, girth). Giving $150mm to any pitcher is reckless on some level, but I think this signing is not as risky than most SoSHers think.

I have a hard time seeing 6/150 as being much of an overpay for Sabathia compared to the deal for Santana. While there is more money involved, the extra money isn't close to the value of prospects lost in the Santana deal.

I think 7 years + is overpay territory. 6 years at the numbers being thrown around are closer to market for elite pitchers right now. At least based on Santana. Sadly.

Jesus, this is insane. I think CC's unique combination of quality pitching and stamina make him tough to comp, but this is looking like 6/25MM when the dust settles; is Sabathia THAT good? Obviously if you're the MFY and you need pitching, and you have their budget (or lack thereof) you probably do exactly what they will; overpay if necessary to make this happen. But he's going to be paid like the best pitcher in baseball, and I don't think he's that.

Which can lead us to the next poll: how many truly elite starters are there in MLB?

Not #1 starters, maybe not even 'aces', but ELITE starters. If you've got to qualify it in anyway (league, 'almost', most of the time, when healthy, etc.), it doesn't count.

We get a concensus on the number of elites, and it might be easier to discuss if CC is with $25M per for six years.......

I think its essential that the Brew Crew resign Sabathia especially with Sheets most likely gone. However I wouldn't be shocked to see a few mid tier guys like Penny wind up in MIL.

Maybe I hold guys to too high a standard but looking at MLB today I don't see an elite level starter. I see a bunch of clear-cut aces, and CC's in that group (Halladay, Beckett, Santana, maybe Zambrano, maybe Lincecum but it's early). Picture the 90s/early 00s without Pedro, Maddux, Unit, and Clemens...and I guess that's the problem. Without the elite guy teams like the MFY have to pay elite talent money for maybe less than elite talent. Scarcity and all that. And we'll probably see the same with hitters, as Teixeira and Manny get AAV deals for ARod money while lacking ARod talent.

It's a return to normalcy-- the 4 guys you describe are all arguably among the 10 best pitchers of the past 100 years. Perhaps that's an argument against paying market value for one of today's "elite" pitchers, but unless you think "elite" is synonymous with "all-time great," there are still a number of elite pitchers in today's game. And C.C. Sabathia is one of those elite pitchers.

I think the economy is going to have a more profound effect on the FA market than most people realize, which is why I described 6/150 for Sabathia as an overpay. If we were still looking at 8-10 percent annual increases in aggregate payroll for the foreseeable future, 6/150 would be just about right. I happen to think we're on the front edge of another market correction driven by macroeconomics, similar to what we saw in the 2001-02 and 2002-03 offseasons.