[image title="alex-rodriguez-arms-up" size="full" id="15745" align="center" linkto="full" ]
This is a question I raised on Twitter earlier this week, and I thought it might be fun to address it in a longer format: if you could have cut Alex Rodriguez at the start of this offseason (obviously theoretical, as there is no “cutting” in baseball), with the knowledge that he would sign with another club after doing so, would you have done it? While on the face of it, the suggestion seems ridiculous, I think there are plenty of reasons it would make sense. Let’s look at the pros and cons of such a move:
Pros: The most obvious reason that the Yankees would cut A-Rod is financial. Here are the terms of his contract, courtesy of Cot’s:
08:$27M, 09:$32M, 10:$32M, 11:$31M, 12:$29M, 13:$28M, 14:$25M, 15:$21M, 16:$20M, 17:$20M
$30M marketing agreement based on home run milestones ($6M each for reaching 660, 714, 755 and tying and breaking major league HR record)
Alex has 8 years and 186M dollars left on his deal, plus another 30M available in bonuses that he has a solid chance of reaching. After he resigned prior to the 2008 season, Dan Szymborski ran a Zips projection for the balance of the contract, and found the following:
[image title="Picture 1" size="full" id="15742" align="center" linkto="full" ]
The dollars and production start to be incongruent around 2013, and this projection was produced prior to Alex having major surgery and missing a month of the 2009 season. A similar projection run today would be even more frightening. As such, the last few years of Alex’s deal have a decent chance of being a disaster. If the Yankees were to cut Alex, they could take that same money and invest it in replacing his production and improving in multiple areas around the diamond. For example, you could have used that money this offseason to bring in Matt Holliday and Adrian Beltre, and likely would have lost little production.
Another reason that some might want to cut Alex is that he is always surrounded by drama. While I have contended that this is often through no fault of his own, it is simply the nature of being the game’s most expensive player that people will turn everything you do into a story. While this is not something that bothers me and would certainly not be a reason for me to cut him, I could understand if some people believe that it should at least be considered when weighing all options.
Cons: Alex is one of the best players in the game at this moment. While you could likely take his money and upgrade at a number of positions, it usually makes sense to concentrate as much value as possible in one position. Put differently, replacing a 7 win player with a 4 win guy and a 3 win guy means a loss in value, because it cost you an extra roster spot to create the same amount of value.
Now, the argument may be that as Alex ages, his production will decline to the point where that argument no longer holds true. For most clubs, this would mean that cutting Alex and reinvesting in younger players would be the most sensible solution. However, the Yankees can afford to carry some dead salary in the latter years of the deal in order to benefit the club now. Furthermore, the front-loaded nature of the contract will likely make the salary to production ratio a bit more palatable than it would be if the contract was considered in AAV terms. Finally, the publicity sure to follow Alex as he approaches various home run records will likely bring plenty of revenue to the Yankees, mostly in terms of merchandising, thereby offsetting some of the loss in value caused by declining production.
Personally, I would not have cut Alex, as the Yankees financial power allows me to sacrifice some money later for greater value now. However, I think it is a much closer call than it first appears. How about you? What would you have done?
If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!
12 Responses to Discussion: Would You Cut A-Rod?
Leave a Reply
TIQ IQ
Also, I think you’re ignoring the possibility that A-Rod could significantly outperform those projections. I mean with the lineup around him and his new-found acceptance of the power of taking walks, he could really keep up a high level of play late into his 40′s. Even with a bad hip, he managed to hit the rate stats in the Zips projections and it wouldn’t shock me a bit to see him outperform those by quite a lot. I could very easily see him putting up a .310/.420/.580 type of year which would alter that curve quite significantly.
It think the answer really depends on your assessment of the economy. If the current economic climate persists, it may just be a good idea to cut him since player salaries will be down in general. If the economy turns around and mlb teams begin to make tons of money again, then the contract becomes more palatable. Though a backloaded contract would make the contract less expensive to the yankees, this frontloaded one will allow Arod to be paid each year commesurate with his expected declining skills. That money in the future gets discounted a decent amount in present value terms so by 2014+ it shouldn’t be too rediculous… hopefully
Considering the jump in attendance after he got here, and adding to that the possibility the Yanks don’t even get to the postseason without him I think the financial aspect isn’t nearly as cut and dried as not paying his salary. As The Boss would say, he puts fannies in the seats.
im mildly surprised that no one is factoring in the PED issue now once again rearing itsugly head (hgh investigaion) i admit i was willing to forgive him last year as he humbled himsef before the team. But when is enough enough? I myself am sick and tired of the drama. Move derek to third, sign heshevria and away we go..
That’s pretty short sighted. Really, this issue right now isn’t an A-Rod issue. Just because he got a prescription for drugs from a doctor doesn’t mean that this is a big deal. Even the media isn’t really making a big deal out of it. Unless somebody actually finds proof that A-Rod had more than a passing knowledge of this guy then it’ll all blow over by June. In fact, I’d be willing to bet that in 2 or 3 years, nobody will really care all that much that A-Rod used steroids ten years ago in the same way that they don’t really care Pettitte used.
Alex had better pile up the goodwill, because it discounts faster than money.
In 2017, a fella shouts from the third base side, “Hey, Arod…You know what the biggest shame is? This beer in my hand cost me $20. And you ain’t hitting your weight, old man.”
Before reading the article, I was thinking “Maybe after the 2013 season.” My gut feel seems in line with his potential declining offensive production at that point in his career, with a salary that’s still potentially high. So, today? No. In the future? ………
I’m one of the initial responders to Moshe’s Twitter question. I said that the Yankees paid far too much in money and, more importantly, years. 10 years was just fucking stupid. There’s no way around that. Hank bid against imaginary demons. Now, that being said, the projection system is a harsh one. We can start with the easy first response, which is of course that there are way too many variables that projecting someone’s stats ten years down the line is irresponsible.
Personally, I think A-Rod will still be a very solid hitter in his late 30s, maybe even his early 40s. He’s essentially a savant with the bat. If I were to choose three hitters in the majors that would be able to maintain very good production at a late stage it would be Manny (to whom I think he’ll be a close comparison to), Pujols and A-Rod.
Chipper Jones would be a solid guy to follow in terms of seeing how well he does as he really starts to advance in age.
Anyway, while his production will never meet the contract (and frankly, most guys don’t outperform their contracts), it figures to be a deal that may ultimately benefit the Yankees financially; his actual performance+money related to records + revenue from one or many WS rings, which A-Rod increases the likelihood of winning, all provide a good return.
Of course, he could have a major surgery soon, lose the mobility to field, and be a DH for the next 8 years. It’s impossible to make an accurate prediction that far out. Still, knowing what we know, I wouldn’t cut A-Rod.
After the union/ownership strife of 1994-1995, PEDs produced the “Mark & Sammy magical Summer of ’98.” (copyright, major league baseball) That is: PEDs saved/resurrected baseball.
The same media types who have recovered their indignation in the past 5 years didn’t know what was going on in the 90′s? You can sell that to the tourists.
Realistically, (spare me the “never tested positive” B.S.) how many MLB players probably used PEDs from 1988-2005? If you say less than 30%, you’re fooling yourself.
I think most people believe that number to be about 50%.
Assuming that there wouldn’t be another opportunity to “cut” A-Rod I would say yes.based solely on what I’ve read without visual confirmation, I suspect 3d base might be the best spot in the field for Montero. There is a long history of catchers making the transition to 3d base, including Torre and Bench and more recenty Pablo Sandoval.As suggested , a combination odf big bat in left( Holliday) and a short- term solution at 3rd( Beltre) would probably have done the trick in 2010, with significant $ left over for a mid-season acquisition if that became necessary.
Projections like Syzmborski’s are far from infallible and others Ive seen are somewhat less optimistic, including Nate Silver whose numbers showed A-Rod falling considerably short of the HR record(730).As for Manny and Chipper, they showed considerable slippage last year when they were both 37
25 per year average gets him there easy.. what formula did he use..