Colorado: The New Bull Market

Over the weekend, Ireland became the second Eurozone country to get a significant bailout from its neighbors in order to head off a large scale financial collapse. Yesterday, the President issued a two year wage freeze for all federal employees as a response to the continuing weakness in the economy. Unemployment has shown few signs of recovery, and the housing market continues to struggle. After some years of free spending, the world is now focused on deficits and debt reduction.

The Colorado Rockies, however, think everything is going to be just fine. That’s really the only conclusion you can draw from the decision to extend Troy Tulowitzki‘s contract through 2020. This contract isn’t really about the player, as much as it is a bet on significant inflation returning to baseball salaries.

The Rockies already had Tulowitzki signed for the next four years at a total cost of about $39 million, assuming that his 2014 option would have been exercised. This extension doesn’t alter those payments at all, so this was not a case of the Rockies adjusting Tulowitzki’s pay to reflect his strong performance. Instead, they simply guaranteed the option year and then added a six year extension to the end, totaling $119 million in new money.

$20 million a year for Tulowitzki’s age 30-35 seasons doesn’t sound too bad, given his broad base of skills and overall ability. Carl Crawford is going to get a similar contract this winter for approximately the same time frame of his career, and while they’re not the same player, they are both quality hitters who get a lot of their value from their defensive abilities. The difference, of course, is that we have far more information about what Crawford was at this age than we do about what Tulowitzki will be in four more years.

The Rockies have taken on a substantial amount of long term risk for the right to sign Tulowitzki to a deal that is close to current fair market value. The only way it makes sense to do that deal now is if we’re about to enter a four year period of significant inflation.

For instance, if we see 10 percent salary inflation over each of the next four winters, $20 million per year now would be equivalent to $29 million per year in 2015. Over a six year contract, this deal would be a $45 million savings over what they would have to pay Tulowitzki in that market, given that he had aged normally and was still perceived in exactly the same way.

10 percent yearly salary inflation is pretty aggressive, though – that is the kind of annual raise we saw during the dot com and housing bubbles, where spending exceeded rationality. If we lower than rate to 5 percent, then $20 million now is equivalent to $24 million in four years, and the Rockies would only be saving $24 million over a six year deal handed out when Tulowitzki became a free agent.

Given the timing of the contract, I have to think the Rockies are betting on annual inflation closer to 10 percent, because otherwise they’re simply inheriting a massive of risk without the necessary reward. Saving $4 or $5 million per season on a long term deal for Tulowitzki is nice, but it wouldn’t be enough to justify accepting the problems that could arise between now and 2014.

Are the Rockies right about inflation? Maybe, but based on what I know about projecting economic futures, they don’t have any way of knowing. This is essentially an expensive guess about where the market is going in a time when no one really knows where the markets are going.

Given that this is the same organization now suffering under the weight of an extension given to Todd Helton with a similar premise, and the team that had to pay a huge chunk of Mike Hampton‘s contract to unload him two years into an eight year contract, you would think a little more long term risk aversion would be in order. From where I sit, the Rockies just took on too much needless risk. This seems like a deal they should have sat on for another year at least.




Print This Post



Dave is a co-founder of USSMariner.com and contributes to the Wall Street Journal.

153 Responses to “Colorado: The New Bull Market”

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
  1. CircleChange11 says:

    Not sure I understand the risk.

    He had a contract through 2014. He did not accept significantly less money per year for the extension. The extension basically signs a 26yo through his age 35 season … at a premium defensive position.

    Don;t get me wrong. I have no problem paying Tulo 20M/y. I just don;t get the 6-year extension while he already has 3 years on his current contract.

    Doesn’t seem like the benefit warrants the risk. This seems like one of those “if everything goes right” plans … where it almost never does.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Tomcat says:

      Did all of Cal Ripkens value to the Orioles come on the field? If not you understand why committing to a consistent product on the field can mean a lot to a fan base

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Steve says:

        Right, and this comment would be appropriate if the Rockies gave Tulo this deal on the eve of free agency.

        But based on the current reality, they could have struck this deal in December of 2013 and gotten the same type of currency with their fanbase.

        He wasn’t going anywhere until 2015. At the earliest.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Tomcat says:

        true that he wasn’t going anywhere for sure but what if he has an MVP caliber year(the way we know he is capable of) there is no way this deal gets done. He would have signed for a lot more than 6/120 on the open market, there is not a doubt in my mind.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • CircleChange11 says:

        If he has an MVP year, how much MORE over 20M/y would that add?

        What if he misses a whole year due to injury? How much should that take off?

        As I said already, Tulo got premium money for premium security with FOUR years left on his current deal?

        They could have made the same deal in 2013 or 2014. If he won an MVP or 2, maybe the price goes up to 25M/y … but so what, his performance would have improved, and is worth that money, and you’d gladly pay it.

        To me, there’s just too much that can happen over then next 4 years, let alone over the next 10.

        I’m reminded of Eric Chavez, Ken Griffey, and countless other “will be awesome for years” guys where one injury, followed by another, broke them down.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Matt says:

        “but what if he has an MVP caliber year”

        That could happen, and that could lead to it being worth it for the Rockies. But what is more likely: He has an MVP year in 2014, or he breaks his wrist again tomorrow, or the next day, or the day after that, or the day after that, or the day after that… or one of the 1400+ days after that.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Travis says:

        I am 100% on board with your statement that “committing to a consistent product on the field can mean a lot to a fan base.” However, I come to a different conclusion from the Tulo trade: that it was harmful to the Rockies’ ability to keep a consistent product on the field. With Tulo’s injury risk (he’s missed significant time each of the last 2 years), I think that the team could end up being hamstrung a la Helton by committing so much to one player.

        To me, one of the most crucial elements in being consistent on the field is payroll flexibility. The Rockies’ payroll flex just took a big hit.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • neuter_your_dogma says:

        “what if he has an MVP caliber year?” Ryan Howard?

        Vote -1 Vote +1

  2. benz says:

    I think the reasoning is due to the public perception of the Rockies in Colorado. They think the front office is cheap and won’t spend.

    They can make these two signings (DLR) now, while both the Nuggets and Broncos are in turmoil, and capitalize on the news to help increase the fan base.

    In the grand scheme of big contracts, this is no worse than others, but comes at a time in Denver that people are looking for any good news coming from teams, and the Rockies should be prepared for an even greater following next year, especially combined with the fact Josh McDaniels will probably be around to start next football season.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Graham says:

      I really don’t understand how you can say that this contract is no worse than other big contracts. We’re talking about a deal that doesn’t even begin for several years. A LOT can happen in that time. If the Rockies signed Tulo for 6/120 and the deal started tomorrow, that’d be one thing. But this is far, far different.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Seattleite says:

      Injuries happen. Look no further than the Helton contract.

      Also, the best way to grow the fan base is to win games. Generally speaking, if the team is winning, fans will pay. If they’re not winning, then won’t. Nobody in Seattle was showing up at Safeco to watch KGJ suck this season. Look at the Yankees. They know this and that’s why there not offering the world to Jeter. Even if he walks away, the fans are still going to show up.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • LionoftheSenate says:

        The contract the Yankees just gave Jeter was horrible on every level. The only reason it is not crippling is because the Yankees can absorb way way more risk than every other club.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

  3. ian says:

    The salary inflation issue is an important one, to be sure. (What’s the typical salary inflation figure, year to year?) But Tom Tango’s WAR-for-$$ analysis makes the deal look pretty reasonable even without the inflation figured in: http://bit.ly/eLHuya

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Dave Cameron says:

      Significant inflation is explicit in Tom’s chart. The rise in the $/win is inflation, and by using $500,000 per win for each year, he has a 10 percent annual inflation expectation over the next four years. Like I said, if that holds, than this deal makes sense.

      Projecting 10 percent inflation in each of the next four years is extremely aggressive, though.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Travis says:

      Please don’t use URL shorteners when you’re not limited for space. It’s unnecessary and potentially bad for the internet, long term. Did you know that the .ly domain is for the country of Libya? And that their president has already threatened several times to shut down all the .ly domains?

      If that were to happen, your link would suddenly (and unnecessarily) be dead.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

  4. Tomcat says:

    Tulowitzki is the face of the Rockies, and with three premium young players (Cargo and Ubaldo) on the roster one should be chosen to be the franchise centerpiece.

    If Troy Tulowitzki had signed a 6/120 as a 29 year old there would hardly be an uproar.

    This is not Ryan Howard or Barry Zito this is a Joe Mauer deal that energizes the fan base and points to a commitment to winning that Rockies fans have been rightfully suspicious about.

    With the Los Angeles Dodgers committing 19 million a year for the next two years of Uribe and Furcal I comfortable with committing this kind of money to the best MI in baseball

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Bronx says:

      Minor quibbles: Dodgers are spending the cash on 2 players, Rox on one (of course I’d take the one over those two) it still leaves the Rox needing to spend money on another position with less assets to use.

      Comparing to Howard is slightly different too, he is what, 10-15% of the Phils payroll, when in 2014 Tulo will be 20-25% of the Rox payroll?

      That is the bigger risk in my opinion, just tying up such a large portion of they spend on one position, given Tulo’s injury risk makes this worrisome. I don’t see how signing one player energizes a fan base. The casual fan doesn’t care if Tulo is signed through 2020, they care about putting a winning team on the field.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Tomcat says:

        you think 25 million is going to be 10% of the Phillies Payroll? Is your name Scott Boras?

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Bronx says:

        If we are talking salary inflation of 5-10% a year, then yes, towards the middle of Howards deal the Phils payroll should be between 200-250mm. Do the math, I know it is hard because it involves multiplication, but I think you can try.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

    • BX says:

      Had Mauer not signed that deal, he’d be a free agent NOW. Not in three years now.

      Had Tulo not been extended yesterday, he’d be a free agent in 2014.

      Huge, huge difference.

      +6 Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Tomcat says:

        you are of course right Mauer will make 184 million over the next 8 years and Tulo will make 160. 24 million dollars is hardly chump change especially to the mid market twins

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • ofMontreal says:

        More importantly, Tulo will be playing SS & 3B at those prices. Mauer will be C/1B/DH/OF?. Tulo is a better deal.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Heather says:

      How is this deal significantly different than the Ryan Howard deal? Both deals are good if the player in question continues to produce and inflation continues to rise at a break-neck pace.

      Both deals look silly if inflation doesn’t rise, and the player in question succumbs to age or injury.

      The Tulowitzki deal might not be as bad simply because TT is expected to age better than Ryan Howard, but these deals are not polar opposites.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Tomcat says:

        Because if Tulowitzki loses some of his range he can still become a plus 2B/3B/1B, is 26, and had a better OPS this year than Howard did. Howard is an average at best defensive 1B a position where finding a replacement for an .850 OPS is a hell of a lot easier than at SS

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • JK says:

        Hey Tomcat — The M’s want to know where these average defensive 1B are that have .850 OPS cause they’ve been looking for a while and can’t seem to find any.

        The deal may not be much like the Howard deal, but is it more like the Tex deal?

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Tomcat says:

        There are three or four on the free agent market Lance Berkman, Lyle Overbay, Adam Laroche, Derrick Lee, Adam Dunn(has one year at first could easily become an average 1B) and Paul Konerko are all good bets to put up 850+ OPS at 1B at least one more time in their career.

        They are all certainly a better bet than any of the FA SS are to put up a 750 OPS so maybe I could buy the Texiera deal as a comp, an elite level player signed for their entire prime for a salary in line with their comps

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Meh says:

        I would wager every dollar I own that of those guys you’ve listed only Dunn will have an .850 OPS.

        Plus I really don’t think Dunn is average def at 1B, nor will he become an average defender. So we are back to my original question. There really aren’t that many average def 1b Free Agents that have an .850 OPS.

        Konerko might get there, but what kind of salary is he doing to get? I’m guessing way more than he is worth.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Tomcat says:

        Where are you Meh? you owe me every dollar you own, Konerko 2011 .906 OPS and Berkman 2011 .959 OPS

        Vote -1 Vote +1

  5. JR says:

    Are you making a comparison between salary inflation in (non-sports) private sector employment, and the conditions under which the MLB market for services operates?

    Is the 10% during the dot-com and housing eras for all employment, or for baseball players? Since it seems low for the standard baseball raise, I’ll assume you mean it as a hypothetical number for high growth sectors of the economy.

    The contracts given to elite players during the recession are about the same as contracts give out before the recession. If baseball teams are continuing to give out contracts (say 0% inflation right now) without cutting down on the AAV for top players, there is good reason to think that 5% (and the $24m in savings) is a reasonable estimate of baseball salary inflation over the next ten years. Sure, they could have waited another year or two (or built in the extension to eliminate 2013-14 and raise his salary in order to end the deal earlier), but they run the risk of the US not going into a ten year depression and salaries spiking drastically. Particularly since this is a position at which there is a great scarcity of talent. $20m/year through his age 35 season seems like a fair deal.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Anon21 says:

      I guess the real question here is how much baseball salaries do inflate in an average year, with comparisons to periods of strong overall economic performance and weak overall economic performance. Without that information, it’s difficult to assess Cameron’s claim that 10% salary inflation per year for the next four years is unlikely.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Jim McLennan says:

      Here’s a table listing the average salary and increase over the past 20 years:
      http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/salaries/avgsalaries
      The increase hasn’t hit 10% in a year since 2001, since when it has averaged 4.3% per season.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

  6. Mike Green says:

    The three leading shortstop comps for Tulowitzki on BBRef are Ernie Banks,Vern Stephens and Nomar Garciaparra. Banks and Garciaparra were significantly better hitters through age 25 than Tulowitzki, and Stephens was probably as good once you make the wartime league adjustment.

    There’s no way that the Rockies ought to be committing $20 million for his age 30-35 seasons at this point as the comps illustrate because of the risk of significant decline due to injury is too great. It doesn’t really matter whether salary inflation is 0, 5 or 10 per cent per year.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  7. NEPP says:

    What a terrible terrible contract.

    Especially for a guy that has documented and repeated health issues. He’s averaged 125 games a year for the last 3 years (and he’s just 25). This could turn very bad for them if he continues to have those issues.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • JR says:

      Documented health issues such as: cutting his hand on a bat shard, getting hit on the wrist by a pitch, and straining his quad. Only the last is a cause for concern, and then, not really.

      It’s not like any of the injuries have had a lasting effect on his physical ability. Would you not pay fair value for a used car with 30k miles on it because you are afraid it might need a new head gasket at a 100k miles? C’mon.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • grandbranyan says:

        As a large part of injury occurrence is random some players will randomly be affected more and some randomly affected less. As Tulo has randomly had bad luck he should revert to the mean and play all 162 games for the next 10 years.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Jason B says:

        “Tulo has randomly had bad luck he should revert to the mean and play all 162 games for the next 10 years.”

        Tongue planted firmly in cheek, one would hope and assume?

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Travis says:

        The flip side is that the amount of time he missed may reflect his ability to heal. Health is a skill — JD Drew doesn’t have it, Albert Pujols does. Which of those guys, health wise, do you think Tulo more closely resembles?

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • NEPP says:

        The wrist was what I was referring to. Wrist injuries (however they are acquired) can often snowball as its simply part of the body (like the back) that doesnt heal right all the time.

        To give out a 6 year extension when he has several years left on his current deal is just silly.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

  8. Jeff says:

    What “health issues” are you referring to? 2010 saw Tulo get hit in the wrist in just the right spot to cost him 33 games and previously he has self inflicted a broken hand by hitting against a pole, bat or similar object. While I certainly do not justify self inflicted injuries as being a good thing, Tulo has had anything but health problems in his 4 years with the Rockies

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  9. Wilsonian Democracy says:

    This is a nice piece, Dave. It’s good to see you angling more and more into economic value, and it raises legitimate value issues with the Tulo deal. I think the most critical takeaway here is current economic instability as a detrimental factor to prediction. Assuming best-case market growth projections in an environment like this seems ill-conceived, and when you’re talking about an organizational budget the size of the Colorado Rockies it is certainly a questionable strategy. That there is the added organizational baggage of having several similar deals in the past collapse makes it that much more of a curious move at this point in time.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  10. fredsbank says:

    gee dave, maybe they wanted to secure a fan favorite and potential greatest player in franchise history from the prying east and west coasts, as well as ensure a base to aid in negotiations with carlos gonzalez and ubaldo jimenez in the (near?) future…. no, that couldn’t be it.

    -14 Vote -1 Vote +1

    • fredsbank says:

      yet another gem from dave cameron and the “games are only statistical happenings and not played in the real world” crowd

      -19 Vote -1 Vote +1

      • philosofool says:

        If anyone has a problem with the real world, it’s the Rockies, who just treated 2015-20 as though it’s not going to happen. This contract is crazy and totally unnecessary. Colorado has no idea where the club will be in 2015: they could be contenders, they could be re-building, they could be in-between. To spend $20 on a player for that season when they may rather have compensation draft picks is dumb.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Tomcat says:

        Says a Phillies fan, hello mister Pot my name is Kettle what a marvelous shade of black you are

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Cameron says:

        Shouldn’t you be Mister Pot?

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • JK says:

        @Tomcat — I know Phillies fans, and let me tell you sir, philosofool is no Phillies fan.

        Just because he has a ‘ph’ in his screen name does not make him a Phils fan.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Steve says:

      gee fredsbank, but no one from the east coast could “pry” until 2014. no one here is saying the Rockies shouldn’t secure Tulo. the issue is that he was ALREADY SECURED.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Ari Collins says:

      gee fred, you mean the fan favorite that was already secured really cheap for the next four years?

      Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Jason B says:

      fredsbank – thisguy, sans the whimsy.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Scott says:

      There’s no way they will be able to afford both Gonzalez and Jimenez with 1/4 of the payroll going to the shortstop. Maybe neither of them.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Tomcat says:

        Probably not but one or both of those guys will likely be traded for pieces that keep Tulowitzki led teams in contention

        Vote -1 Vote +1

  11. Luke in MN says:

    Seems like another indicator that money is flowing pretty freely for MLB front offices. The Texas TV deal is another. The Twins are rumored to be looking at a $125 million dollar payroll for 2011, which would be about a $25 million increase over 2010, which as the first year at Target Field was itself a $30-$35 million dollar increase over the Metrodome days. Twins fans figured 2011 wouldn’t see much, if any, increase since the revenue sharing checks would stop coming in 2011. Instead, they may double payroll over a span of two years.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  12. stratobill says:

    I cannot understand this move at all. Why in the world would the Rockies commit themselves now to paying $119 million to Tulo starting in 2015?

    The player that springs to mind for me is Nomar Garciaparra. Nomar was
    a great player in his early 20′s and a very good player in his late 20′s. But
    in his 30′s he was just a shadow of his former self. He is a classic cautionary tale for the Rockies. The chances are very good that Tulo will remain an excellent player for the next few years, but projecting that same level of performance into his 30′s is much less certain.

    And isn’t it possible that sometime between now and 2015 the Rockies will
    sign a young shortstop of the Tulo/Jeter/ARod mold? It could happen.

    This move is just as bad as the Ryan Howard contract with the Phillies. Best case scenario, you get extremely lucky and the player plays at an all star level for the next 10 years. Worst case, you cripple your team’s ability to sign and keep key players because you’ve committed too much money to a Barry Zito type contract

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Atticus says:

      Really? The player that springs to mind for me is A-Rod, who earned every penny of the 7 years he served on the 10 year, 252M deal he signed in Texas at age 25.

      This is a smart move, for at least 5 reasons off the top of my head:

      1. Tulo could end up having a Hall-of-Fame career. There aren’t many players you can still say that about at age 26. If he has that entire career in one uniform, that has terrific future value for the franchise, in terms of long-term marketing. We can’t quantify it, but we certainly shouldn’t discount it.

      2. Truly elite players don’t sign extentions when they are one or two years away from FA. The worst argument in this thread is the one from people who “don’t understand the timing.” Either you extend him now, maybe next season at the latest…or you’ll never have a chance to extend him. He’ll ride out free agency, where he maximizing his dollars. As a fan/critic, you don’t get to pick the argument “I would offer him a great extension one year prior to free agency!11″, because that’s like me saying I’d love the A’s to sign Al Pujols to a 5 year, $60M deal next year. No shit. But it’s not an option.

      3. Colorado isn’t one of the five most desirable free agent destinations. Tulo’s a Californian. If he was allowed to get all the way to free agency – which, again, is exactly what would happen if he wasn’t extended within the next 6-12 months at latest – it’s very likely he would’ve headed elsewhere.

      4. He plays the premier position on the defensive spectrum, and great shortstops seldom even make it to free agency in their prime. It’s very easy to foresee a scenario where the Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers or Angels paid him $25M a year for the next six years to be their shortstop after ’14.

      5. Where else would Colorado spend their money? For those who don’t like the Rockies tying up a big percentage of their payroll, again, I stress that this isn’t a very desirable free-agent destination. All teams have to spend money somewhere, which is why undesirable teams like the A’s end up throwing $10M at Ben Sheets – they didn’t have anyone desirable who would take their money. By investing hugely in Tulo, the Rockies are ensuring that they have a worthwhile place to spend their money – on a future franchise icon – and thus, won’t be forced to make Ben Sheets-style acquisitions simply bump up payroll to reasonable levels to avoid scrutiny from the players’s union.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Kevin S. says:

        Truly elite players don’t sign extentions when they are one or two years away from FA.

        You’re right. Joe Mauer and Johan Santana and Roy Halladay absolutely did not sign extensions when they were a year away from free agency. Carlos Zambrano and Roy Oswalt did not sign extensions when they were a couple months away from free agency. Albert Pujols is not currently in negotiations to sign a contract extension, since he’s only one year away from free agency. Those things never happened.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Atticus says:

        Kevin S. –

        Johan Santana and Roy Halladay signed extensions prior to ever throwing a pitch for their new team, and we can assume that back-channel negotiation of an extension by the acquiring teams was ongoing even prior to them being traded for.

        Carlos Zambrano and Roy Oswalt are not truly elite players, and that’s why I was careful to phrase my statement as I did.

        And Joe Mauer doesn’t count because I don’t have a good rebuttal for him and he negates my point.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Kevin S. says:

        I fail to see how it’s relevant that they were with new teams. There’s no reason to suggest they wouldn’t have signed extensions with their former teams if said teams were willing to commit the resources and those teams were competitive – in fact, IIRC, Santana very much wanted to sign an extension with Minnesota that offseason, but the Twinkies weren’t ready to spend money. I also don’t understand how you could consider Roy Oswalt to not be elite. At the time of his extension, he was averaging six WAR/year for the previous three years, and aside from a down year in 2003 when he was merely above-average, he had been either a six WAR player or was on a six WAR pace (pro-rating his partial rookie season over 200 IP) every year of his career. That’s elite. Zambrano I’ll give you, I thought he descended from his “perennial All Star” status after the extension, but that actually happened before hand. Still, I think Mauer, Oswalt, Halladay and Santana are all incredibly relevant here. Boras clients don’t sign extensions, and the Yankees have a no-extension policy (buying out arb years notwithstanding), but other than that, there’s no systemic evidence that elite players are unwilling to sign extensions near FA.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Joe says:

      All the professsional GM’s on this site apparently think the only time you can extend someone is a year or so before a contract is up.

      Guess what? A superstar player may not be all that interested in signing an extension a year before free agency (even if he wants to stay put) as his leverage markedly increases as they get closer to free agency.

      Folks I guess are assuming if the Rockies offered 5years at 20 per, 1 year before Tulo’s free agency he will take it? Well what if he’s still putting up 6 WAR seasons at that time? The other factor may also be length of contract…. if he’s close to free agency (or is one) he may leverage that for a 6-8year deal.

      Yes there’s some obvious risks, but the assumption this same deal could have been had 1, or even 2, years before free agency is a flawed one.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • CircleChange11 says:

        Think about it ….

        [1] How much more can his price go up? They’re paying him 20M/y for his age 30-35 seasons. Who else would do that at this point?

        [2] If he develops into a perennial MVP candidate, where he would command 25M/y … then pay it. Well worth the risk, and the extra money ain’t that bad. A team would be HAPPY to pay that extra 5 M/y for an MVP candidate.

        This is like leasing a car for the next four years, and then re-upping the lease for double the money for the 6 years after that because you’re THAT happy with the car … even though you could wait a few years and re-up the lease for the same cost, only without the risk.

        The point is that there was no need to do it NOW, even 2 years from now would be early, but more acceptable.

        Did you buy your wife the 10-year anniversary ring at a premium price during the 4th year of your marriage? Why or why not?

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Tomcat says:

        Cars loose value at a predictable rate, Shortstops with 40HR potential are a little harder to read

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Joe says:

        How much more could his price go up?

        If you go with just a 4% inflation rate… 20mil today would be 23.4-28.5mill in his contract years or an aggregate of +35 mil over those 6 years. Then there’s a question of whether he will get paid as a ~4.5 WAR player. If he gets say 23-25mil per that’s another 18-30mil.

        To go in another direction that I don’t think people see…. let’s put the 20mil he’ll get in 2020 in today’s dollars(assuming a 4% inflation rate) – you know what that works out to?

        …….

        He’ll be getting ~14mil in 2020! Which is what ~3WAR at age 35?(or 36?) Is that an incredibly bad contract? And if inflation is higher that number comes down even further.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

  13. Tom Robinson says:

    You assertation is correct in that Arod earned his money from Texas on that deal, but you fail to mention that investing 20%+ of their payroll on one player was one reason that the franchise was crippled for years.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Boo Radley says:

      I disagree, Tom. I think the franchise’s failure to roam the waiver wire effectively, invest in high-upside non-tenders, sell high on arb-eligibles, etc.

      I think that every team in baseball could afford one $20-$25M per year superstar if they diligently operated the rest of their team in the most cost-efficient/cost-effective way possible.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Bob Ewell says:

        Boo, that is a fair point, except I don’t see every team diligently operating the rest of their team in a cost effective manner. There are too many mistakes and their are too many owners that are more concerned with their investments (bottom lines) rather than winning.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Matthias says:

        Harper Lee for life, fam.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Meh says:

        They had something interesting going there and you had to go and spell it out like that. lame.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

    • fredsbank says:

      texas didnt have the farm system then that the rockies do now

      Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Tomcat says:

      If the Rangers had taken Cano instead of Tejeda, ARod would not be any kind of cautionary tale at least not for the Texas side.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Bronx says:

        Could of, Should of, Would of.

        This is nonsense if you are claiming this time is different. There is no way a 10 year contract is going to work out to the teams advantage unless the team has ability to still spend tons elsewhere.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • fredsbank says:

        which they do, since revenues have been rising steadily ever since 2007 without an according increase in payroll.. if nothing else, this demonstrates a commitment by the monforts to put at least some portion of a winning team on the field for some time

        Vote -1 Vote +1

  14. Hank says:

    The upside is not merely the inflation of 20mil now vs 5-9years down the line. You also have the upside of 20mil (or the equivalent of adjusted dollars) being an underpayment for performance as well.

    In other words the upside is both the inflation and the possibility that 20mil is an underpayment of performance. Unless Dave thinks 20mil is the max value Tulo will ever be able to perform at, that factor should also be considered (especially since he’s exceeded that value 3 of the 4 last years).

    Folks can debate the likelihood of this, but you think there’s a possibility that Tulo’s putting up >4.5 WAR seasons in his early 30′s? If so that would be a second part of the risk/reward equation.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  15. Luke says:

    So do you think Evan Longoria is mad he signed for $44mil over his 1st 9yrs when Tulowitzki will now make $65mil over his 1st 9 yrs?

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  16. dte421 says:

    It shocks me that 42 comments in, no one has mentioned a major reason why this contract is terrible for the Rockies… and that’s because they are the Rockies, and as such, they play at Coors Field.

    Playing in Coors Field gives the inherent advantage to a hitter at all times, and leads to a severe misalignment of a players numbers. For his career, Tulo is a triple slash .269/.342/.448 batter on the road vs. his .312/.383/.544 line at home. It’s hard to see how other smart teams out there would be willing to give a 30 year old SS $20M a year if his away from Coors numbers continue to be as they are, especially considering the going rate for premium SS in baseball right now. Due to his success at Coors Field, he has a great deal more value to the Rockies than he does to other teams. Now, that’s not to say that he couldn’t replicate his success in the AL, especially when you consider how many of his road games are played in cavernous NL parks, but it’s hard to imagine him producing $20M a year numbers without playing 81 games a season in the altitude.

    It just strikes me as crazy for the Rockies to go over his true market value by THIS MUCH, especially with so much time left on his current deal. I just don’t get it.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • CircleChange11 says:

      Not just the altitude, but all that outfield space (more hits, extra base hits).

      Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Tomcat says:

      if you like splits why don’t you go look up Matt Holliday’s splits in his first few years at Coors, then go look up his Cardinals numbers

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • dte421 says:

        You mean like the 1.132 OPS he put up at Coors in 2006, or the 1.157 OPS he put up in 2007? Cause those are definitely a little different than his .932 OPS hitting behind the greatest hitter of the modern era.

        And speaking of Holliday, exactly how many teams outside of the Cardinals were standing in line to offer him a massive contract last offseason? And how many of those teams had “sources” telling the press that they were scared of Holliday because of his Coors splits?

        The ignorance in your reply is ridiculous. Did you have the same snide comments to make when people pointed out Jake Peavy’s splits away from Petco? Or were they idiots too?

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Tim Beckham's five-tool package says:

        dte421, your tone is way harsher than his. I don’t understand why.

        Hitters in Coors will have harsh splits not only because their park favors them, but because their park makes it HARDER for them to succeed on the road. Curveballs break differently in thin air. Basically, you’re seeing different pitches on the road than you are in Colorado.

        So you can’t just discredit a Colorado guys numbers at home and consider his road splits to be his “true talent.” That’s disingenuous.

        You’re also trying to compare market demand for a guy on the far left of the defensive spectrum (Holliday, LF) to a guy on the far right (Tulo, SS).

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Tomcat says:

        dte if you look at half of the splits you get half of the story his splits were extreme in
        2006 1.132Home OPS
        .819Road OPS 142 WRC+ 4.0WAR

        2007 1.157Home OPS
        .860Road OPS 155WRC+ 7.1WAR

        2010 .934Home OPS
        .909Road Ops 155WRC+ 6.9WAR
        Holliday is just as valuable away from Coors as he was in a Rockies uniform his WRC+ in 06 tied for 16th in 07 it was 10th in 2010 it was 8th in MLB

        If you have any numbers pointing to Jake Peavy being just as valuable after leaving PETCO I will concede the point

        Vote -1 Vote +1

    • dte421 says:

      Tim, we can agree to disagree here.

      I am not merely judging him solely on his road numbers, I’m pointing out that he continues in the Colorado tradition of having a significant gap between the home and road numbers. I’d accept your logic, and there is SOME truth to that, but there’s also precedent, and I’ll give some examples.

      Vinny Castilla left Colorado for 4 seasons at age 32, averaged 16 HR and 65 RBI and put up a triple slash of .250/.289/.405. He went back to Colorado at age 36 and posted a .271/.332/.535 with 35 HR and 131 RBI.

      Holliday’s .313/.392/.523 over the last two years is much better, but still nothing near his Colorado heights.

      In Larry Walker’s last 4 full seasons before coming to Colorado, he was a very solid .293/.366/.501 guy who averaged 20 HR a year. In his 9 Colorado years he was .332/.425/.618.

      I could go on and on with other players who fit this mold, and you can’t chalk that up to mere coincidence.

      As for the value of a corner OF vs. a shortstop, the current media storm around the Jeter negotiations has brought to light the going rate for SS, and it’s far below that of the elite corner OF’s. While the position may be more valuable in practice, right now, market rate disagrees with the practical.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • brentinKorea says:

        I think you should bring up splits that are since they used the humidor baseballs.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Tomcat says:

        yes Walker put up nice numbers in the depressed run environment of the early 90s then he much like people from Brett Boone, to Luis Gonzalez, to Sammy Sosa benefited from the addition of 4 new pitching staffs to MLB. Colorado helped some but it hurt some too.

        Unless you think Wade Boggs and Billy Williams were inferior hitters because they had more than one season with a .200OPS difference between road and home you have to admit that Holliday has had the Splits between road/home nearly disappear even in a depressed run environment in 2010 he put up a career best 149 WRC+ on the road
        Home .306/.412/.522
        Road .318/.368/.541

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • dte421 says:

        Brent, the humidor was introduced in 2002. Castilla and Holliday are both post-humidor examples.

        Tomcat, I’m not really sure what you’re trying to get at by saying Holliday’s splits normalized in 2010 other than proving the point I was trying to make – he’s still a very good player, but now his home and road splits are normalized by not playing in Coors Field, and his OVERALL triple slash and power numbers are decently close to his road numbers from 2006-2008 with Colorado. If Tulo were to similarly follow suit, would he still be a $20M a year player at age 30, based on what other elite SS are currently making?

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • fredsbank says:

        tulo’s career road wOBA is .342, and has increased every single season of his career, to .377 in 2010. career road wRC+ of 102, which also has increased every season, to 129 in 2010.

        LOLCOORZ

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • joe says:

        Coors may certainly be a portion of the stats, but I think people are too quick to fall back on that analysis crutch (similar to folks looking to knock Cargo down a peg come MVP time)

        Josh Hamilton has something like a +300pt OPS split this year… noone seemed to care about that.

        If you look at Tulos #’s over the last 2 years not only has his wOBA been increasing as mentioned above, but his road OPS is also over .850 both years (which isn’t too shabby fora SS)…. to put that in further perspective has posted nearly the same road OPS as Josh Hamilton the last 2 years…. maybe Hamilton is feeling the Coors effect in Texas?

        And FYI – the Jeter negotiations aren’t shining a light on the value of a SS vs a corner outfielder… it’s shining a light on a guy coming off a 2.7 WAR year and who is up there in age, on the decline and might not be able to stick around at SS in the latter years of a potential contract…. way to completely mis-analyze the situation.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • dte421 says:

        Yes Joe, the Jeter negotiation IS shedding light on the current market value of a shortstop, because the Yankees are using players like Hanley Ramirez, Jose Reyes, and Jimmy Rollins as elite SS with significantly lower salaries than what Jeter is asking for. Every media outlet is reporting this, so it’s now in everyone’s face that SS’s just aren’t paid that much right now.

        Tulo is most likely the most complete SS in the game, thanks to his defensive proficiency vs. Ramirez, but he now makes $8M more per annum than any other player at his position. How is that NOT blowing market value out of the water?

        By comparison, Holliday’s $17.1M per annum contract is roughly the same as Jason Bay, Carlos Lee, Ichiro, Alfonso Soriano, and Carlos Beltran to name just corner OF’s. Therefore, the market value for a corner OF is a lot higher than a SS.

        Market value isn’t dictated by stats, or how important a position is defensively, or anything else you’d like to say. Market value is determined by the price associated with similar assets, in this case, players that play the same position. As we can clearly see, Tulo’s contract is nowhere near the current market value for elite SS, whereas Holliday’s contract is. That’s my main point.

        Tomcat, you are missing my point, so we can agree to disagree. Tulo’s splits have clearly improved, but not to the point where he needs to be paid 75% more than any other player at his position. That’s just ridiculous, especially over such an extended period of time, when he had 4 years on his current deal, and “freak” injuries or not aside, he’s missed at least 40 games in 2 of his 4 seasons.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Tomcat says:

        Tulowitzki is not making 8 million more than anyone else at his position he is making 5.5 million in 2011 from 2015-19 he would be making 8 million a year more than anyone currently, but still considerably less than A-Rod was as a 29-34 year old

        To put it in perspective the Phillies will be paying Ryan Howard between 135 and 158 Million between now and 2020 for his age 31-38 seasons The Rockies will be paying Tulowitzki 154 million for his age 26 though 35 seasons with a 15 million dollar option on his age 36 season, it doesn’t really seem outrageous to me

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Tomcat says:

        Also Hanley is making more than Tulo through 2014 when he becomes a FA when if he is still at short stop will likely command 25+ per annum. Jimmy Rollins signed his deal 4 years ago as did Reyes none of those SS have ever been a FA when they are they are sure to be closer to Tulo money than to Bartlett money

        Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Jolly Roger says:

      Spot on.

      His road numbers n contract value makes him practically UNTRADEABLE.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • dte421 says:

        Tomcat, let me try one last time to make this clear.

        Tulo is now signed for the next 10 years at $153.75M – so his per annum is $15.4M over the length of the deal, which is STILL 35% higher than the per annum value of the next highest paid player at his position. That’s ridiculous! Especially when considering his road splits over 4 seasons suggest that he’s not anywhere near THAT much better than anyone else at his position.

        You’re obviously whiffing on the concept of market value since you keep naming players that play other positions – A-Rod from 29-34 was a 3B, and a FAR superior offensive player to Tulo; Ryan Howard is a 1B; Matt Holliday plays LF. All three positions have different values in the open market.

        You made it clear that Rollins, Reyes, and Ramirez signed their contracts before free agency – well Tulo had four more years until his own free agency too! And if you think Hanley Ramirez is going to sign a $25M per annum contract at age 31 as a SS, I think you’re out of your mind. Even if he is still a SS (which would be shocking), his market value would be set by the Tulo deal, which smart big market teams like the Red Sox, Angels and Yankees would use as leverage against him. If you think Reyes and Rollins are going to be signing deals ANYWHERE near Tulo’s deal when they hit free agency, you’re crazy. Rollins played in only 88 games last year, and the year before that, he had a triple slash of .250/.296/.423 – even if he has a monster year this season he’s not getting better than $12M per year as a free agent entering his age 33 season at a position where players decline young. Reyes’ injury history, coupled with regression at the plate and in the field, as well as his perceived attitude problem will definitely hold him back from a deal on par with Tulo’s. Again, we’ll see what he can do in 2011 to change those perceptions – of any of the players you mentioned, he’s the only in a position to come anywhere near Tulo’s terribly priced deal.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Tomcat says:

        You are of course right the Yankees while willing to pay a 39 year old Derek Jeter 19 million would never pay a 30 year old Hanley Ramirez 25 million a year

        Vote -1 Vote +1

  17. Jesse says:

    The timing may not be ideal, but don’t you think the Cards would have loved to get Pujols’ next deal out of the way 2-3 years ago?

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • CircleChange11 says:

      Yes.

      [1] They tried. Pujols said he’s not talking contracts until the current one is up.

      [2] I don’t prefer using Pujols as an example for anything dealing with anyone else*. He has shown himself to be a unique circumstance.

      * Miggy Cabrera would be a close comparison though. Really. No Joke.

      Pujols is basically a top 3 MVP candidate every year. Extremely durable. Plays a less demanding position. Has pretty much avoided injuries.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

    • epoc says:

      Yeah, knowing that Pujols continued to be the best player in baseball over those 2-3 years surely makes them wish that they’d given him his extension 2-3 years ago. On the other hand, I’m not so sure the Mets wish they’d given Jose Reyes an extension for 2012-2017 2-3 years ago. It could go either way. The issue here is that the Rockies paid market rates four years ahead of time. That’s not that smart. Maybe there are peripheral, marketing-type considerations that make this a good move for the Rockies, but as a purely baseball move it’s very questionable.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • CircleChange11 says:

        The issue here is that the Rockies paid market rates four years ahead of time. That’s not that smart.

        Preachin to the choir, brother.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

  18. fredsbank says:

    and, isnt this the kind of thing that’s good for baseball, just like the mauer and longoria contracts? (longo and tulo, both long beach state alumni, fun little fact) young, superstar players signing for long periods of time with the organization that drafted them and developed them, and where they are immensely popular? as a rockies fan, i can tell you that tulo is the single most driven person in the organization; no one wants to win as badly as he does, and few have the incredible talent to make it happen like he does.

    another thing the critics seem to be forgetting: this changes nothing about the rockies payroll until 2015. look at the other shortstops to sign similar deals, and the numbers they went on to put up afterward: arod hit .305/.395/.615, hit 156 home runs, won an MVP, and posted 24 WAR over 3 years in texas, and .303/.401/.573 with 208 dingers, 2 MVPs, and 34 WAR in 5 years before signing a new contract in new york; jeter hit .310/.380/.445 with 156 home runs and 43 WAR over 10 years with one second and one third place in MVP voting. tulo has hit 92 home runs and posted 18.6 WAR with two fifth-place MVP finishes and was the real 2007 ROTY over 4 years while missing significant time in two separate seasons.

    arod signed his contract at age 26, jeter at 27

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • CircleChange11 says:

      Just to redirect.

      The issue is not the age of the player.

      The issue is that the player has a CURRENT contract that is in place through 2014.

      That’s not close to ARod or Jeter’s situation. Not close.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • fredsbank says:

        my point is that tulo has accumulated WAR at a rate of .008/PA (including his 1 WAR 2008) before signing his deal, jeter had a rate of .007/PA, and a-rod had .01/PA.

        through the entirety of his original deal, jeter proceeded to post .006 WAR/PA, though also accumulated PA at a higher rate; arod put up .0097 WAR/PA before scrapping and renegotiating, and also acquired PA at a higher rate. yes, those two played in the AL and saw time at DH, though not significantly enough to have a serious effect on their WAR as SS/3B .

        tulo definitely projects more as an arod than a jeter, speaking from a hitting perspective (though i certainly doubt he will ever 40/40) if forced to pick between the two, and is far better defensively than either of them. it’s not unreasonable to expect his WAR/PA to increase, if not forever than certainly until he puts his 30th birthday in the rearview mirror, barring more freak injuries. and as this is probably what will happen, it would be almost guaranteed that he would get $20mil+/year as a free agent once his original contract had expired.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

  19. wobatus says:

    If Bernanke starts raising rates they’re screwed. Hmm, I guess it isn’t such a bad deal after all.

    Overheard; The dollar is the valedictorian of the summer school of unpegged currencies.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  20. xeifrank says:

    *****
    Are the Rockies right about inflation? Maybe, but based on what I know about projecting economic futures, they don’t have any way of knowing. This is essentially an expensive guess about where the market is going in a time when no one really knows where the markets are going.
    *****

    One of Dave’s better pieces. Good analysis of the contract. I think Tango has shown that the 10% inflation number you stated is a little high. I have it around 8.7% to get the numbers to match.

    Given the extra 6 years, the Rockies should’ve got a 10% discount on the total amount (or something around there).

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  21. Hank says:

    Would anyone here object to a 6 year 93mil contract extension for Tulo’s age 30-35 seasons? (or 96.6mil depending on when you start the inflation clock)

    That’s what the current contract is – assuming just a 4% inflation rate.

    The 10% is hyperbole to validate Dave’s theory (which is this is a bad contract/timing). If he assumed a “normal” (or conservative) inflation rate this still looks like a decent deal (unless folks think Tulo at ~15mil per is bad). There’s obvious risk involved, but locking up a guy like Tulo at effectively 15-16mil per for his age 30-35 seasons, doesn’t seem that bad to me.

    Could they have made a similar deal in the next year or two? Possibly, but if Tulo puts up another 5+ WAR year or two (which barring injury seems likely), I think the asking price goes up (and maybe the years)… and it’s unlikely he’s agreeing to the equivalent of ~15mil per.

    So I understand Dave’s conclusion – The Rockies would “only” be saving 24mil on a 118mil contract at a normal inflation rate…. that’s >20%…. is that really the small potatoes Dave is trying to make it sound like? What kind of discount should they expect? 33%? 50%?

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  22. John says:

    6 years @ $29 million = $174 million

    6 years @ $20 million – $120 million

    How would the Rockies save $45 million with 10% inflation?

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Hank says:

      Dave made several mistakes…

      1) It appears he took 5year * 9mil delta (instead of 6years) or it was just a typo and he juxtaposed 45 with 54.

      2) The more egregious mistake (since he is looking at this from an economics perspective)… is the assumption that the inflation rate suddenly goes to zero after 4 years…or he forgot to compound the inflation in Years 2-6 of the contract (either one is a real bad mistake if he is truly looking at this from an economics perspective)

      In other words, if he assumes a 10% inflation rate (which as he mentioned is much too aggressive) the gap is 9 mil IN THE FIRST YEAR, but this gap would widen in future years as inflation compounds.. if it stayed at the same 10% rate, year 6 of the contract would be in the neighborhood of 47mil (which also illustrates why a constant 10% inflation rate is way too aggressive)… but you can’t assume inflation to be 0% from 2015-2020.

      The “realistic” savings is also screwed up as he takes the gap in the first year (a little over 4mil) and merely multiplie this by 6 yars again, forgetting to compound the inflation over the life of the contract)
      1) Even if you stick with the 0% inflation over the life of the contract a -24mil savings on a 118mil contract is a significant discount (>10%), despite how Dave tries to spin it
      2) Using his 5% inflation assumption over the life of the contract the ACTUAL savings over the 6 years would be ****~45mi****, not 24mil… wonder if Dave would consider that substantial on on a 118mil contract?

      There is a significant difference between 24mil and 45 mil on a 118mil contract…. I would suggest that paying 118mil instead of 163 mil is substantial (whether it is worth the risk is a matter of opinion)

      Vote -1 Vote +1

  23. nolan says:

    The Rockies can trade Tulo any time. Say he’s still a productive player and someone wants him for $20 million for three years. And say that the Rockies are a rebuilding project in, say, 2017. Wouldn’t he be the 2017 Justin Upton?

    Of course, if he gets hurt/underperforms/zitos that changes everything. Therein the risk.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • CircleChange11 says:

      The Rockies can trade Tulo any time.

      Didn’t this same issue come up previously with Dustin pedroia and Boston?

      Given such drastic home/road splits, what non-Colorado team wants Tulo for 20M/y?

      Yes, the technically CAN trade Tulo if they want to get rid of him. But, realistically, if his numbers hold, what non-COL team wants a guy that loses a bunch of value the minute he leaves his home park?

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • fredsbank says:

        because his home/road splits have improved every season, and this gives us every reason to believe they will become better. and as discussed above, holliday, thought to be a LOLCOORZ, quickly proved critics wrong in st louis. his career road wRC+ is 102, 100 being average considering all positions including slugging DHs and 1Bs are included in the, which means that compared to other SSs, he blows them out of the water ANYWAYS.

        AND, its not the present tulo at 20m/y, its a future tulo admittedly with room for injury and decline, but also with room for improvement, his salary next year isn’t even 6mil(?), and there’s no team in baseball that wouldn’t take his skillset in a heartbeat

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Tomcat says:

        Because nobody wanted Matt Holliday right?

        Vote -1 Vote +1

  24. Fred says:

    Dave – as Hank mentioned above you have made a very critical mistake in your economic analysis.

    While the gap is 4mil (in terms of potential savings due to inflation) that is just in the first year, and it will grow over a 6 year period to over a 10 mil gap in the final year of the contract… On aggregate, using your constant 5% inflation assumption, the Rockies will be saving a yearly average of ~7.5 mil, not simply the 4 mil in the first year multiplied by 6 years (which assumes inflation magically ends in the year 2015)

    As such your analysis on the inflation rate you “have to think” the Rockies are banking on is as flawed as the rest of your analysis. An average 7.5mil per year savings on a 20mil per contract is a rather large discount (again this is using your 5% inflation assumption). At a 10% inflation rate you’d be talking well over a 100mil in savings over a 6 year contract. This is obviously absurd and is hint at why a 10% salary inflation rate would not be sustainable for an extended period of time.

    In summary the Rockies aren’t banking on a 10% inflation rate, they are just able to do the calculations better. A mere 5% constant inflation rate will lead to over a 25% discount over those 6 years from an inflation perspective. Is this worth the risk of such a long term contract? Hard to say but it’s now not as marginal as the 4mil/year picture you paint.

    On a side note one would have to assume that the Rockies front office are idiots if they made this decision banking on a 10% inflation rate. That probably should have been a signal to re-check your #’s and assumptions for accuracy.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • dte421 says:

      You guys understand that the inflation rate has been over 5% for just 3 months in the last decade, right? 2.5% is probably a much more realistic rate to use for something this long term, especially as inflation is receding from earlier this year, and it looks like we could see inflation actually turn negative again in the coming months, as it was for most of 2009.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Fred says:

        Fine – use 2.5%…. you know what? It still comes to ~21mil in savings on that… even with that conservative estimate the Rockies would be saving a substantiatl amount on a 119mil contract! As I stated, the major issue is the fact that for some reason Dave decided to stop inflation in the year 2015.

        Regardless of the rate you want to assume… Dave royally screwed up the analysis by assuming inflation stops and coincidentally came to the conclusion he wanted (this is a risky contract and you’d have to assume absurd inflation to justify it…. the #’s just don’t support that). This is still a high risk contract, but the attempted economics tradeoff was butchered by Dave.

        Also overall economic inflation does not necessarily equal inflation in a specific sector or business… If you want to use historical inflation #’s , you are probably better off using the inflation of baseball contracts (which I think is around 4-4.5%). Finally, depending on what you use as your inflation index for the economy (CPI? PPI?), it could be understated (or in some cases overstated) as the basket of goods they use to determine inflation is outdated (but you probably knew that too?)

        Vote -1 Vote +1

  25. grandbranyan says:

    Sizemore WARS 05-08 (5.4, 7.3, 5.7, 7.1)
    Sizemore contract post 08 (4.6, 5.6, 7.5, 8.5 option)

    Tulo WARS 07-10 (5.4, 0.9, 5.7, 6.4)
    Tulo contract post 10 (5.5, 8.25, 10, 15 option)

    Sizemore after 08 got HURT.
    Tulo after 10 got WAY RICHERER.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  26. bflaff says:

    It would be interesting if the Howard and Tulo deals were the product of a particular way of thinking that we haven’t yet considered. The supposition that there is only one way to rationally explain a deal like this (that the Rockies are betting on significant inflation) is a bit tenuous.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • fredsbank says:

      because the explanation absolutely could not be that management wants to lock up the franchise star with Hall of Fame potential for what could very well be his entire career.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

  27. ??????? ??? ?????? ????? ?????? ?? ???????? ??????? you-like.Ru

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  28. ??????? ????????? reggaechillout ? ???????? ??????? mixeda.Com

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  29. ?????????? ?? ???????????? ???????? ?????? ?????? ? ??? ??????? mixeda.Net

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  30. ????????? ????! ? ?????? ?????????? ??????? ????????, ????? ?????????? ????????? ??????? ?? ?????. ?????? ????.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  31. ????????, ????????? ? ????????, ???? ??????. ????? ??? ????? ?? ???? ?????!

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  32. ?? ?? ????, ?? ????????? ? ?????? ???????, ?? ??? ??? ??????? ????. ????????? ?????????? ???????, ?????? ??? ? ???? ????.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  33. ?????? ??????? ?????! ??????? ????????? ??????????, ?????? ??????? ?? ????????, ????? ? ?????.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  34. ? ????? ?? ?????????? ????? ?????????? ???? ?? ????? ??? ??????? ????? ????? ???-???

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  35. ?? ??????? ????????? ???, ??????? ????! ????? ?? ??????!

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  36. coimmesse says:

    ????, ??????? ??? ?? ????? ??????, ? ??? ???????? ?????. ???????? ????? ???? ?????????, ??????????????? ???? ????? ???????????? ? ???.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  37. Sistvoxosse says:

    ?? ?? ????????? ??????? ?????? ?????? ?? ?? ?????????? ??? ?????????? ??????! ? ?? ??? ??? ??????, ????? ??????????, ?????? ???? ???!

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  38. ?????????? ?????, ???????? ?????, ?????????? ?? ???????? ??????????.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  39. ??? ?????? ????? ?? ????????, ????? ?? ??????? ??????????.
    ??????, ???? ???? ????? ? ??, ????? ???? ?????? ????? ???????????? ?? ??????? ?? ??? :D

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  40. ???? says:

    ???????, ????????, ???? ????? ??????????, ? ??????????? ??????? :)

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  41. ???????? ?? ????, ? ??? ??? ?????????? ??? ?????? ?????????? ?????????, ? ?????? ?????? ???????)

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  42. ??????? says:

    ??????? ????, ?????????? ?? ???? ????? ?????, ???? ???????.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  43. ???????? ??????? ??????? ???, ????????? ????? :)

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  44. ???????????? – ??????? ?????? ??? ?????????. ? ????????? ?????? ?????? ? ????, ??? ????????? ?????? ?????????? ????????? ????? ???????????, ??????? ?????? ?????? ? ???????? ? ?????????? ????? ???? ????? ??????? ???, ??? ???? ??????.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  45. ????????????? – ??? ?????? ??? ??????????. ?????? ? ??????????? ?????????????? ???????, ??????? ?? ?????? ?????? ???? ???????, ??? ?????? ? ?????? ????? ??????????? ????? ????????? ??? ?????? ????????.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  46. ?????????????? – ?????? ?????? ??? ???????????. ?????? “?????????? ???????????” – ?????? ??? ?????, ??????? ?????????? ?????????? ?? ???????, ??????? ????, ???????????? ? ????????????. ?????????? ?? ?????? ??????? ? ????????????.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  47. ???????? – ???????????? ???? ??? ?????. ?????? “?????????? ?????” – ?????? ??? ?????, ??????? ?????????? ?????????? ?? ???????, ??????? ????, ??? ???????????? ? ?????. ??? ?? ??? ???????????? ?????? ? ??????? ??????? ? ?????.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  48. ?????-???????????? – ??????? ?????? ??? ?????-?????????. ?? ????? ????? ??????? ?????? ? ?????-?????????? ???????? ??????????? ??????, ?????????? ?? ??????? ???????? ? ?????????? ?????????? ??????????? ????????

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  49. ????? ?????? says:

    ????????? – ?????????? ???? ??? ??????. ??? ?? ??? ?? ????????????: ????, ?????? ? ??????? ??????? – ????????? ???? ?????? ??? ????? ??? ???????.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  50. ?????? – ??????? ?????? ??? ???. ?? ????????? ????? ?????? ?????? ????? ????? ????? ?????? ???????, ??????? ????? ?????? ????????? ? ??????????????.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  51. williams .482 says:

    what the heck?

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  52. ????????? says:

    ??… ? ?? ???????? ??????????? ??????
    P.s. ?? ????? ????, ??? ??? ????? ??????????? :D

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  53. ????? ????? ???????? ???? – ?????? ?????? ??? ???????????
    , ???? ???????? ?????? ??????????! ?????????? ?????! :)

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  54. ??, ?????? ?????? ??? ????? ????????? ????! ?????? ??????? ??? ????? ??????????! :)

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  55. ????? ?????? ? ??????! ???? ???????? ??? ??????? ??????
    .

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  56. ????? 53605 4?2 – ????????? – ????? – ??????? ?????????????

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  57. ? ? ??? ???? ????? ???????? +??? ???????????
    .

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  58. ???, ??????? ?????? ?? ?????, ? ?????? ????? ?? ??????? :)

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  59. ??????? ?????? ?????, ?????????????! ????????? ?????????? ????????? :)

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  60. Psst says:

    Does anyone doubt the Rockies saved more than 24 million still?>

    Vote -1 Vote +1

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Current day month ye@r *