Dusting Pedroia vs. Robinson Cano

SouthernBoSox

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2005
10,829
I would like to bump this and talk briefly about just how amazing of a deal this was considering Cano just signed a 10 yar 240M deal.

What an absolute steal. Great job by the front office.
 

dbn

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 10, 2007
7,779
La Mancha.
According to Cot's, it was the first $100M contract for a 2B.  (Now it's not the only.)
 

SaveBooFerriss

twenty foreskins
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 9, 2001
6,179
Robin' it
jsinger121 said:
 
It also helps that Pedroia wants to play here and was a greedy player for every last dollar like Cano was.
 
Missing a "not" in the second half of the sentence, but I know it was just a typo.  
 

koufax37

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
2,463
<sarcasm>Pedroia is an idiot.  I know he might like playing in Boston, but doesn't he know winning gets old after a few rings?  And most importantly, there are all kinds of cool things you can't buy with only $100M that really are crucial to happiness.  Over the next 7+ years he is going to regret signing with the Sox when he sees all the cool bling Cano buys with his 239th and 240th million that Pedey flat out can't afford.</sarcasm>
 

JimD

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 29, 2001
6,704
It's pretty safe to assume that Pedroia is like Derek Jeter - his legacy matters to him.  $110 million is plenty enough to allow generations of Pedroia's to live comfortably, while Dustin likely gets to pursue championships most years, finish his career as a member of the Red Sox and cement his place in Boston sports lore. 
 

Jordu

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2003
6,477
Brookline
Doesn't he live near Fenway, too? I think Pedey's lovin life these days. He'll make do with only $100m.


He's building a new house in Brookline near Tom Brady's.
 

Sampo Gida

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 7, 2010
5,038
IIRCC, Cano actually asked the Yankees for an extension but was rebuffed. They forced him to go the free agent route.  There are pros and cons to going the extension route.   You have to leave money on the table otherwise there is no incentive for the team.  In return you lock up the dollars earlier in case you have a serious injury that ends or limits your career. Its a trade off between dollars and security.
 
The only difference between 100 million and 200 million for a player is the amount they leave behind for their kids to squander.
 
I don't think Pedroia could have got what Cano did given his H-A splits and he does not have Canos power. He would have been 1 yr older than Cano by the time he got to free agency at the end of 2015. I think he probably gets Ellsbury money, which is not chump change, so he might have left about 40 million on the table.
 

Pilgrim

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 24, 2006
2,019
Jamaica Plain
jsinger121 said:
 
It also helps that Pedroia wants to play here and was a greedy player for every last dollar like Cano was.
I feel like this is a bit unfair to Cano and actually undersells the Red Sox organization.

99% of players will take the highest offer, and there's nothing wrong with that.

however, players have routinely signed here for less over the last decade. At this point it's such a trend that you'd have to think that the Red Sox really know something about makeup. It would probably sound cheesy if I saw it written about another team, but intangibles have become incredibly tangible for this team.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
10,378
Somewhere
Value takes on many different forms. As a fan of the Red Sox, I'm glad Pedroia values his association with the team and the prospects of winning here. But I wouldn't blame him for taking the money, if he had gone that route.
 

JakeRae

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
6,403
New York, NY
JimD said:
It's pretty safe to assume that Pedroia is like Derek Jeter - his legacy matters to him.  $110 million is plenty enough to allow generations of Pedroia's to live comfortably, while Dustin likely gets to pursue championships most years, finish his career as a member of the Red Sox and cement his place in Boston sports lore. 
 
This comparison, vis-a-vis the subject of this thread, does Pedroia a massive disservice. They both may care equally about their legacies, but Jeter did so in ways that insisted on himself over his team whereas Pedroia has done the opposite. Jeter, to my knowledge, never took a discount to play with the Yankees. As of this point in time, there is exactly one player in the history of baseball to have made more money playing the game than Jeter has. Jeter never sacrificed for his team. In fact, he refused to discuss moving off of short when the team acquired a player who was a clearly superior defensive player at the position in A-Rod.
 
Pedroia has taken a massive discount to play in Boston. And, I don't think Cherrington gets most of the credit for this. This is a theme with Pedroia at this point and I think we can safely assume that he was aware, at the time of his signing, how much of a discount he was taken because one has to assume that his agent, at the very least, politely pointed it out to him. I also think that if you put Pedroia in Jeter's shoes with an A-Rod type scenario, Pedroia would be immediately calling his manager to let him know that he was sure that he was the best 2B in the world but that he could also be the best at any other position, so if the team would be better off with him as a 3B, or a LF, or a C, he's fine with that. 
 
Pedroia is every fans dream player. He plays the game at max effort every minute of every game. He prefers winning to money. He is a consummate team player. And, he is really good. The only one of these statements I feel anyone here can make with certainty about Jeter is the latter (with a tense change). Sure, he played his whole career with one team. But, that was because they paid him fair market value or above at every step of the way. This post is not a criticism of Jeter. This post is only intended to point out how truly exceptional Pedroia is. (Longoria is the only player I can think of who can aptly be compared to Pedroia in respect to systematically choosing legacy over money.)
 
Oct 17, 2013
451
Cleveland, OH
Legacy? I'm confused.
 
See, if I look at A-Rod's definition of legacy, it's one of cheating, bush league tactics, steroids, money hungriness and all out douchebaggery.
 
But Jeter & Pedroia make it seem like a legacy is something that is hustle, hard work, playing through injuries and loyalty to one team...
 
I like the second one better. Make mine Pedroia please!
 

InsideTheParker

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
25,984
Pioneer Valley
IIRCC, Cano actually asked the Yankees for an extension but was rebuffed. They forced him to go the free agent route.  There are pros and cons to going the extension route.   You have to leave money on the table otherwise there is no incentive for the team.  In return you lock up the dollars earlier in case you have a serious injury that ends or limits your career. Its a trade off between dollars and security.

.
Surely DP knows that his style of play exposes him to the risk of frequent injury. That's another reason to get paid sooner rather than later. Which doesn't eliminate the feel-good stuff about loyalty, etc.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,379
The wrong side of the bridge....
InsideTheParker said:
.
Surely DP knows that his style of play exposes him to the risk of frequent injury. That's another reason to get paid sooner rather than later. Which doesn't eliminate the feel-good stuff about loyalty, etc.
 
Yes, and also, Pedey's value is more defense-dependent than Cano's. Cano's offensive game and athletic type would play very well in left field when he can't hack 2B any more; Pedroia is probably not going to be a great fit anywhere but second.
 
Finally, there's the matter of his pronounced and (except for the injury-shortened 2010 season) consistent home/road splits, which would reduce his leverage as a free agent. He's not as valuable to any other team as he is to the Red Sox.
 
None of this means that it isn't an awesome deal; it just makes Pedroia look a bit less crazy for signing it.
 

glennhoffmania

but still failing
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 25, 2005
8,397,607
NY
 
This comparison, vis-a-vis the subject of this thread, does Pedroia a massive disservice. They both may care equally about their legacies, but Jeter did so in ways that insisted on himself over his team whereas Pedroia has done the opposite. Jeter, to my knowledge, never took a discount to play with the Yankees. As of this point in time, there is exactly one player in the history of baseball to have made more money playing the game than Jeter has. Jeter never sacrificed for his team. In fact, he refused to discuss moving off of short when the team acquired a player who was a clearly superior defensive player at the position in A-Rod.
 
Pedroia has taken a massive discount to play in Boston. And, I don't think Cherrington gets most of the credit for this. This is a theme with Pedroia at this point and I think we can safely assume that he was aware, at the time of his signing, how much of a discount he was taken because one has to assume that his agent, at the very least, politely pointed it out to him. I also think that if you put Pedroia in Jeter's shoes with an A-Rod type scenario, Pedroia would be immediately calling his manager to let him know that he was sure that he was the best 2B in the world but that he could also be the best at any other position, so if the team would be better off with him as a 3B, or a LF, or a C, he's fine with that. 
 
Pedroia is every fans dream player. He plays the game at max effort every minute of every game. He prefers winning to money. He is a consummate team player. And, he is really good. The only one of these statements I feel anyone here can make with certainty about Jeter is the latter (with a tense change). Sure, he played his whole career with one team. But, that was because they paid him fair market value or above at every step of the way. This post is not a criticism of Jeter. This post is only intended to point out how truly exceptional Pedroia is. (Longoria is the only player I can think of who can aptly be compared to Pedroia in respect to systematically choosing legacy over money.)


This is all very well said and I couldn't agree more.
 

Bob Montgomery's Helmet Hat

has big, douchey shoulders
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
JakeRae said:
 
Pedroia is every fans dream player. He plays the game at max effort every minute of every game. He prefers winning to money. He is a consummate team player. And, he is really good. The only one of these statements I feel anyone here can make with certainty about Jeter is the latter (with a tense change). Sure, he played his whole career with one team. But, that was because they paid him fair market value or above at every step of the way. This post is not a criticism of Jeter. This post is only intended to point out how truly exceptional Pedroia is. (Longoria is the only player I can think of who can aptly be compared to Pedroia in respect to systematically choosing legacy over money.)
I think David Wright is in that category as well.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper x Mr. Rogers
Staff member
Dope
Gold Supporter
The only difference between 100 million and 200 million for a player is the amount they leave behind for their kids to squander.


Or, you could give the $100mm difference to your favorite charity.

Pedroia took less money, but he also took a lot of risk off the table for himself. If he were in the same position as Cano and looking at a $70mm delta, where the only personal consideration was living/playing in Seattle instead of New York, I think he would've taken the money. Who wouldn't?
 

rembrat

Well-Known Member
Bronze Supporter
SoSH Member
May 26, 2006
36,074
Sampo Gida said:
IIRCC, Cano actually asked the Yankees for an extension but was rebuffed. 
 
The Yankees have a self-imposed No Extension policy. They simply do not do extensions. I have no fucking clue why.
 

RFDA2000

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Nov 16, 2005
351
I imagine it's due to the feeling that they would never get outbid for a player they wanted in FA, so why lock someone up long term before you have to when a someone else might come along who is better in the meantime.  I have to believe that "rule" will change if they are ever really serious about being under the luxury tax threshold with the new CBA, but it made sense in the old world order.
 

mauidano

Mai Tais for everyone!
SoSH Member
Aug 21, 2006
27,966
Maui
DP has more money than his great grandchildren can spend if they were meth addicts, plays a game at a high level that he is passionate about, TWO championship rings with the high potential for more before he calls it a day on a team that is committed to winning.   AND he plays in a city where he is beloved and loves equally.  He and his family have a great quality of life.  He "gets it".  Life is short.  What more do you really want or need?
 

HangingW/ScottCooper

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
1,950
Braintree, MA
rembrat said:
 
The Yankees have a self-imposed No Extension policy. They simply do not do extensions. I have no fucking clue why.
Isn't the Red Sox policy that all extensions on Arbitration and Pre-Arbitration players have to include a buyout of at least one year of Free Agency?
 

Dick Pole Upside

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 6, 2003
4,294
39.932N, -85.848W
RFDA2000 said:
I imagine it's due to the feeling that they would never get outbid for a player they wanted in FA, so why lock someone up long term before you have to when a someone else might come along who is better in the meantime.  I have to believe that "rule" will change if they are ever really serious about being under the luxury tax threshold with the new CBA, but it made sense in the old world order.
 
Additionally, if they used the Core 4 as examples to provide a rationale behind the "no extension" guideline, they won't have to worry about this for a while.  They have virtually no young/premium talent that look to be "eligible" for extensions now that Cano is gone.  Gardner doesn't really fit that profile, imo, and he's now trade bait.
 

Mike F

Mayor of Fort Myers
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 13, 2000
2,068
rembrat said:
 
The Yankees have a self-imposed No Extension policy. They simply do not do extensions. I have no fucking clue why.
It came out of the same pamphlet as "clean shaven."
 

JimBoSox9

will you be my friend?
SoSH Member
Nov 1, 2005
16,571
Mid-surburbia
HangingW/ScottCooper said:
Isn't the Red Sox policy that all extensions on Arbitration and Pre-Arbitration players have to include a buyout of at least one year of Free Agency?
 
If they don't buy out at least one FA year, the team is giving something to get nothing.  That's nonsensical.
 

pantsparty

Member
SoSH Member
May 2, 2011
368
Being willing to sign for less also requires trusting the ownership that they'll put that money back into better players instead of their pockets. There are a lot of teams where I would not trust them to do that.
 

Sampo Gida

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 7, 2010
5,038
rembrat said:
 
The Yankees have a self-imposed No Extension policy. They simply do not do extensions. I have no fucking clue why.
 
They actually gave Cano an extension in 2008 that ended up as team friendly 6/57    From 2008-2013 Cano produced 29.5 fWAR and cost under 2 million per WAR. They bought out 2 FA years in that deal and it cost them 29 million for 13.7 WAR.  Pretty good deal, no idea why they changed their policy.
 

rembrat

Well-Known Member
Bronze Supporter
SoSH Member
May 26, 2006
36,074
Technically, that wasn't an extension in their eyes. Their policy is refusing to sign a player to a new contract until their old one expires. Cano got his "extension" when he was still under team control and headed to arbitration. Every great Yankee has always hit free agency because of this. Prior to Cano, Jeter was the last one to go through this in 2010.

Edit: Or maybe Pettitte. Point is they don't extend players under contract.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper x Mr. Rogers
Staff member
Dope
Gold Supporter
A "no extensions" policy makes sense, so long as you can always afford to pay sticker price to attract and retain the players you want. I'm sure it's conducive to clubhouse harmony for management to take the position that players need to play, and that discussions about money will occur at the appropriate time.

That's out the window now. Cashman's willingness to give Cano 7 years at a higher AAV than he got from Seattle demonstrates that the MFY's unwillingness to match Seattle's offer had more to do with balance sheets than with baseball. The MFY don't have any obvious extension candidates in the pipeline, but when one emerges, I expect Cashman will quietly nix the "no extensions" policy and get a deal done.
 

ShaneTrot

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2002
5,179
Overland Park, KS
maufman said:
A "no extensions" policy makes sense, so long as you can always afford to pay sticker price to attract and retain the players you want. I'm sure it's conducive to clubhouse harmony for management to take the position that players need to play, and that discussions about money will occur at the appropriate time.

That's out the window now. Cashman's willingness to give Cano 7 years at a higher AAV than he got from Seattle demonstrates that the MFY's unwillingness to match Seattle's offer had more to do with balance sheets than with baseball. The MFY don't have any obvious extension candidates in the pipeline, but when one emerges, I expect Cashman will quietly nix the "no extensions" policy and get a deal done.
Also, if you rarely develop your own players, you don't need to do these types of extensions.Instead, you can spend more money in free agency to have teams like Cleveland, and Boston do it for you.