The recent negotiations that have come to light surrounding the Bryan Reynolds’ contract extension remind me of a popular anecdote from another famous negotiation:
As chronicled in John Helyar’s “Lords of the Realm”, when the Chicago Cubs signed Ryne Sandberg to a contract with a record $7.1 million average annual value—breaking Bobby Bonilla’s mark of $5.8 million—Houston Astros owner John McMullen, angered by the signing, shouted at Cubs chairman at the time, Stanton Cook, “Don’t you know there’s a number between five and seven? It’s six!”
It’s likely the Pittsburgh Pirates tried hitting the numbers between $70 million—the record setting contract signed by Ke’Bryan Hayes at the beginning of last season—and $100 million, but it seems that, at this point, if they want Reynolds to put pen to paper, that wasn’t going to work.
We know that they started at $80 million over six years, as Rob Biertempfel of The Athletic recently reported that the team offered that at the end of last season. Reynolds’ camp countered at $134 million over eight. After apparently no further negotiations, Reynolds’ side grew frustrated and requested the trade before the Winter Meetings.
Despite fielding offers, as they have for the past several seasons, Ben Cherington claimed the request would have little to no impact on their offseason plans and the sides obviously came into Spring Training without this matter resolved.
Reynolds showed up to camp as early as he possibly could and of course stole the show for the first day or two. Despite speaking in his typical unemotional, measured tone, Reynolds was diplomatic yet resolute in the fact that he wanted to be paid what he felt was a fair deal.
“I think I’ve been pretty open over the past few years that my number one would be to sign an extension in Pittsburgh, but I want that to be a fair deal for both sides — not one side or the other,” said Reynolds. “Not a crazy player [deal], not a crazy team deal. That’s always been my number one.”
Team officials showed up to camp, with reporters and fans dissecting every interaction between Reynolds and the likes of owner Bob Nutting and team president Travis Williams.
As camp went along, theatrics were largely cast aside, apart from interviews where Nutting, Williams, and Cherington shared the same sentiment: we love Bryan Reynolds and want him to be a member of the team moving forward.
“If there’s a way we can bridge the gap, we’re working hard to do that. We’re continuing this week to work hard to do it. Bryan’s important. We want to do what’s right for him, for his family and for the team,” Nutting told Jason Mackey of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, while Williams echoed similar sentiments to Alex Stumpf of DK Pittsburgh Sports:
“[W]e really like and believe in Bryan Reynolds as a person and as a player. I think he’s a talented individual, talented ball player. We would like to find a way for him to be a part of this organization long-term.”
As a deadline of sorts approached in the form of Opening Day—Reynolds stated a desire to have this all settled by the time the season started—reports began to trickle out in regard to rekindled negotiations. As first pitch approached, it was reported that the sides had agreed on years and dollars, but that a “conceptual issue” was holding up a deal being completed.
This seemed to puzzle many, with wild theories flying around as to what a “conceptual issue” could mean exactly. At first, without total compensation being clear, Stumpf reported Thursday night that Reynolds came down more than the Pirates came up, which is why they were holding firm on whatever this issue was. Friday is when everything started to become much clearer.
Biertempfel was the first to report that the issue was an opt-out in the contract. Not long after, Mackey reported the terms of the new contract were eight years in the range of $106 million. Subsequent reporting by Mackey and Stumpf made it seem that any extension will be tacked onto Reynolds’ current deal, with 7 years and $100 million representing new money.
This information allows for a comparison of exactly how much each side acquiesced to the other. If Reynolds started at 8 years and $134 million—assuming that those reports represented extra years and didn’t include 2023—that means he came down $34 million total and almost $2.5 million per year in annual average value. On the Pirates’ side, that’s an increase of $20 million and an increase in annual average value of roughly $950,000. If you include 2023 in those reports, the difference in which the sides moved is essentially nonexistent, but the average annual value differences are much greater, with Reynolds still giving more—almost $4 million per year, with the Pirates’ offer actually decreasing.
Based on these figures, Stumpf’s report certainly rings true, which is why his camp is insisting on this opt-out. It only took about an hour and a half for the desired year of the opt-out to come to light, which would be after 2026—four years into the contract. Currently, the Pirates have contractual control on Reynolds for the next three years, meaning that this commitment would only be guaranteeing them one extra year of contractual control, which has to be where the hang up is on the team side.
It’s not difficult to see why the team would be hesitant to commit to such an agreement, given that there really is no precedent for opt-outs by the team, or more importantly, in long-term deals for players in arbitration—at least for players with as much contractual control remaining as Reynolds.
According to Spotrac, 49 players have signed extensions while in their arbitration years since 2015, and only six have had any kind of opt-out language in their contract.
Since midnight is only time I can research:
Spotrac has 48 extensions signed during arb years since 2015. Only 6 contained some kind of opt-out language.
Per reports, what Reynolds is asking for would kind of be precedent setting, which one can see why the Pirates would balk: https://t.co/bAYOgaj4oI pic.twitter.com/JcR43Qkecs
— Ethan Hullihen (@EthanHullihen) April 1, 2023
As you can see, Reynolds is the only player with less than four years of service who would have ever received an opt-out, while Giancarlo Stanton is the only player with between four and five years that was guaranteed one, but it came six years into his new deal, ensuring the team four additional years of contractual control. As stated, if the requested conditions are met, Reynolds would be guaranteed to be with the team for only one additional year before having the option to opt-out and test the market if he felt he could do better in free agency.
Players are allowed to ask for whatever they like, and I have no issue with his side requesting it, but it’s not hard to see why the Pirates wouldn’t want to commit to that. Further reports suggested Reynolds is willing to backload the contract, with the idea that he would be cheaper in his guaranteed years and possibly drop out of the more expensive ones.
However, this really doesn’t seem like much of a concession. If Reynolds continues to perform, he plays out the next four seasons—one more than the team already has—opts out and leaves via free agency anyway, with the team not getting as much as a draft pick that they could get if they offered him the qualifying offer at the end of his arbitration years. If he gets injured or doesn’t perform, he is now locked in at a higher salary on the backend while not being as valuable, something the Pirates certainly wouldn’t be crazy about.
The Reynolds camp is essentially asking for a four-year insurance policy in exchange for one extra year of contractual control, with the team essentially taking on all of the risk. Again, it’s totally within their right to ask for it, but it doesn’t mean that the team has to agree.
At that point, anyone can have an opinion on how the two sides could bridge the gap that still exists, from more money and no opt-out, an opt-out later into the deal, or any number of other concessions. With both sides not choosing to offer any additional information over the last day or two, we are left with nothing else than what has been reported thus far.
Personally, if the Reynold’s side sticks to their ask of an early opt-out, I don’t see the deal getting done, despite the fact that deals often don’t come this far and not get done. If anything is going to happen, one would think it would be soon, however.
Otherwise, we’re probably on trade watch again come the deadline, with this seemingly never-ending saga continuing to trudge along to its unknown endpoint.
A longtime Pirates Prospects reader, Ethan has been covering payroll, transactions, and rules in-depth since 2018 and dabbling in these topics for as long as he can remember. He started writing about the Pirates at The Point of Pittsburgh before moving over to Pirates Prospects at the start of the 2019 season.
Always a lover of numbers and finding an answer, Ethan much prefers diving into these topics over what’s actually happening on the field. These under and often incorrectly covered topics are truly his passion, and he does his best to educate fans on subjects they may not always understand, but are important nonetheless.
When he’s not updating his beloved spreadsheets, Ethan works full-time as an accountant, while being a dad to two young daughters and watching too many movies and TV shows at night.
At 10 AM on the opener will announce the deal!
I was listening to the MLB Network radio yesterday and a former GM was flabbergasted Reynolds was asking for an opt out after year 4. In short, he said Reynolds isn’t good enough to reset the market. I tend to agree.
This is type of deal Pirates would make with a player like Cutch if he hadn’t signed a team friendly extension early in his career.
I personally think they should just sign the thing. Get the extra year of control out of it. They get to tout the whole, “We signed out best player! We signed our first $100+M contract!”. You let him have the opt out, hope he plays himself into expectations that he’ll opt out. The Pirates can then either re-open negotiations around that time for a new/restructured contract, or trade him to a different organization that wants him and the rights to negotiate with him.
I agree with just getting it done and take the extra year of control. That’s been my take on it since this hit the papers a few days ago. But, there are definitely other counteroffers that can be made by the club, and what opinions the other clubs or other GM’s have about it are simply that – opinions, and totally useless.
Ethan: Thank you for a great take on all of this. The one key I took away from it is that if he opts out after 4 the Pirates get nothing for him in trade. Sooner or later the Pirates have to start to rebuild, and that means trying to sign productive players to worthwhile extensions. We cannot expect players to commit to a franchise that has, so far, refused to commit to themselves or their fans. Reynolds is a winner and wants to play for a franchise that wants to win.
I’m on record already for a 4 yr $50 deal. Same concept as your post. It’s a win for everyone incl Pittsburgh baseball. Getting a 7th year of control is something that Players Union would go on strike for. It has value, espec for this franchise.
I think you’re smoking something if you believe Nutting is going to be the Owner to cave to a player in this unheard of manner.
Depending how the money falls, I don’t know if I see it as caving. If anything I think it is Reynolds seeing what Hayes is doing with the contract he has, and wants the ability to get out. Hayes will probably outplay his contract by end of next season. Again, depending how the money falls, the risk the Pirates are taking is that they get stuck with an oft injured player on the books. If he “slips” into being a 2.0 WAR player, he’s still valuable. This would basically just extend the window of when they’d “have” to trade him by a year.
Is extending his trade window by a year worth $60-$70 million dollars? It’s incredibly one-sided on the players side.
I mean, the $60M-$70M (allegedly) would only come into play if he doesn’t opt out. I think the only risk with B-Rey is if he develops a knack for sustaining injuries. So, even if he did settle in as a 2 WAR player, the presumed salary would be worthwhile even if he didn’t opt out.
Then if he was playing at a high enough caliber that it was expected he’d opt out and the Pirates weren’t going to re-negotiate the terms, he’d still have a high quality trade value. Both as a rental for half a season, as well as the acquiring team would have sole negotiating rights. The Pirates leverage would be, “You can either pay up now for him and his rights, or let him go to FA where you’re competing with EVERYONE else.”
Hopefully they can find some middle ground by either backing up the opt out to after year 5 or they add money to the deal.
Nothing is easy for Pirates fans.
Normally I root for the anti-nutting side but *if* opt-out is so important, it needs to be after year 5 min. No way it comes earlier than that.
Guys this is done. They will announce it at the home opener
big, if true
The report was that the number of years and dollars were agree too, BUT he wants to opt out early. If he wants to opt out early, doesn’t that mean nothing has been agreed to?
Assuming, if the Pirates were serious about negotiating away (or delaying) the opt out they would have to change the years or at least dollars to do so.
So nothing is really figured out, and this again feels like Pirates management pushing out reports in order to save face in front of their fans.
I think it is clearly Reynolds side putting out the PR stuff. They’ve done it all along with the trade demand leak. Reynolds is asking to set a precedent. That’s just not happening.
Not sure how this is on the Pirates management…
The fact that Reynolds is asking for an opt out does not mean this is clearly on Reynolds. He’s asking for an opt out because Pirates management will not pay him more money and because they have shown zero commitment to actually winning major league games. From a public relations standpoint, the Pirates have much more to gain by leaking the details of the proposed agreement.
Nah, he’s asking for an opt out bc he wants unlimited upside potential with downside protection.
Reynolds has said this multiple times “I think I’ve been pretty open over the past few years that my number one would be to sign an extension in Pittsburgh, but I want that to be a fair deal for both sides — not one side or the other. Not a crazy player [deal], not a crazy team deal. That’s always been my number one.”
I think the opt out is where it is because he doesn’t think the deal is fair to him, and this is his way of balancing it out.
I don’t really recall hearing that kind of language from many players working on big contracts, but he knows the Pirates have to save money because they are the Pirates. I’ve witnessed too much to give the Pirates management and ownership the benefit of the doubt in any situation involving money.
Appreciate the discussion though Anthony. Really hope they find a way to get a deal done, I think it would be huge to have an anchor veteran player to stabilize the rebuild, kinda like what the Braves did with Freddie Freeman before they won the World Series.
The guy has a guaranteed $106 million staring him in the face. If you ask me, I’d be saying “where do I sign”. He’d be crazy to risk that for some opt out goofiness.
The Pirates are being asked to commit to 7 years and $100M. That amount isn’t a large payday in MLB terms and won’t bankrupt any franchise, even the Pirates. At that price, I would back load the contract and agree to the opt out after 4 years. With the opt out, Reynolds stays hungry and needs to perform so that he can earn more money. He will be 32 at the end of the 4th year so you want him to opt out so that you don’t have to pay the final 3 years at the backloaded value. He dropped his asking price by $34M in exchange for the option to end the contract early. I think that is a fair trade off.
If you want him to opt out then you should frontload the contract.
The more money at the end the harder it will be to find a larger free agent deal after 4 years and he ain’t opting out to make less money.
You’re right. But what team signs a player for 7 years and “hopes” they opt out after 4 years?
If they front load the deal, it will be to give them financial flexibility to add to team when guys like Cruz, Roansy, Endy, etc. are no longer minimum wage players.
Exactly!
Just doesn’t make sense, which is why I think the holdup is very understandable.
I have been kicking this around, because this is true but also then we pay the expensive part and miss out on the more extensive savings. Maybe the best move is to equally spread money with an opt out after 5. More money and security pre-opt out and we gain one extra year of control?
If a sweet spot exists, this proposal would seem to be awfully close.
I think Reynolds is begging for a trade to a team with a real major league lineup, where he could thrive and put up better numbers and get more in arbitration or a better extention. He gave them an offer they have to refuse. He’ll be traded some time this year at or before the deadline.
Where’s the downvote button?
You think Reynolds is going through the motions of negotiating with no expectation of making a deal? Sorry, I don’t see Bryan as a lying piece of shit since he himself said his first choice is to make a fair deal with Pirates.
How about $120 million and an opt out after 5 years?
$112 and you’ve got a deal
I mentioned this the other day, but the Cronenworth deal could serve as a reality check for Reynolds’ team. I’m sure the team would agree to a similar deal, and given that the two players have had similar value and are at similar ages, it would be hard to argue that a similar deal isn’t fair.
I’m tellin you man, an org who has the restraint to avoid a ton of long term deals right now is going to be in the drivers seat over the last half of this decade. You’ve got clubs like San Diego and Atlanta literally locking their lineups in place for the better part of a decade, and won’t have much choice in who they’ll be playing five to seven years from now even if they want it.
The pendulum on extensions is so far to one side that you’ll find increasingly large value in short-term free agent deals.
That’s definitely one possibility. On the other hand, revenues could increase dramatically with new streaming deals and younger people getting into game after rules changes that are clearly geared towards addressing their concerns. And if revenues go up dramatically, the extensions Braves and Pads made will look team friendly.
team-friendly or not, I think it’s still and open question of whether or not its good baseball strategy.
After all, how often do we actually see a club harmed when a superstar signs a long-term deal elsewhere?
If anything, the opposite seems far more often to be true!
The sweet spot is a year or two after team control, but the current breed of extensions locks clubs into far more than that.
You basically have to accept long-term risk in order to get those extra years as a rule in the modern extension environment.
Very much still an experiment in terms of how smart this ends up being, kind of like I pointed out last week with early extensions to avoid service time issues. They’ve mostly sucked!
I think you’re probably right about this. There’s certainly going to be some extensions that blow up in the team’s face. The question for me is will they be able to eat the contract(s) because of new money coming in.
I’d forgotten how hog-wild SD had been with extensions. From 2023 thru 2027, SD is gonna pay at least $110M to Machado, Bogaerts, Tatis, Musgrove, Darvish, Suarez, and Cronenworth. Not only is that a healthy chunk of change, but all of those guys save Cro and Tatis are 30 or older. That’s risky as hell, although it is fun to see a team go for it like that.
At least with the Braves, lots of their signings were guys like Riley, Ozzie, Acuna, Strider, and Harris who are all 26 or under. They’ve also somewhat lessened their risk with a slew of club options on short term deals after this year. If they decline all of them (Morton, Rosario, d’Arnaud, McHugh, Yates), that saves them close to $50 M.
Cleveland seems like a good in between spot: lock up your best position player or two to long term deals if you can, and see who else wants to sign without falling in love with keeping the band together forever.
Good take.
Amen.
Really helps that Cle can rely on their never ending pitching development pipeline so they wont ever really need to shell out money for it as they can confidently replace from within. Spend on a few offensive cornerstones and they can sustain
True, although I think an organization can’t depend on that forever. If they find a good young arm is amenable to an extension, I’m sure they’d go for it if it’s reasonable.
I feel like the current area to exploit are early 30s guys on 3-5 year deals. Still should be young enough to stay productive while not completely tying yourself up for the next decade
Bingo!!!
Great piece Ethan. Well measured and thorough reporting.
No way do I give him an opt out after year 4. I probably wouldn’t give one at all. Maybe when there’s one year left. That’s a terrible business deal from the team side unless the per year values are super suppressed in exchange. If he insists on an opt out or more than $13-15M per year, I stop negotiations and go year-to-year and seek good trade value. He’s a good player. Not a great player. And look how Cutch has aged. He was a great player.
this story is getting boring
i wish we could hear some new trade rumors
What did he hit with runners in scoring position last year?
Good write up. I think this highlights the difficulty they find themselves in. It’s late in the rebuild game to be trading him for prospects: they should’ve traded him a couple of years ago. The contract extension options are unappealing, as he’s 28. If they really want to do this, the best option is an opt out after year 5, then pray he exercises the opt out, leaving you off the hook for what are sure to be his decline years. Then you’re paying him 5/$65 MM.
i dont things have to be so black and white as “its too late for prospects”
you can always trade him for prospects now, and then trade prospects for help in a year.
Or if youre really good at finding players, you pick the right prospects and theyre ready and good in 2024.
That’s the hard thing. They want to be better this year. It’s hard to figure that you can trade him and not take a step back. It’s also hard to think that you’re maxxing your value taking major league ready/near major league ready players in return. Usually best value are guys lower in the system, think what we did with Peguero, Endy, etc. Why from a strategic standpoint, the best time to make this trade was a couple years ago.
a couple years ago was his rookie year…you were going to trade him after 2019? or after 2020 when he hit under .200? Really I guess after 2021 you could have traded him, but why would you at that point, really makes no sense, you have to let things play out to see what you have and what you need when you have a player of this talent, it goes you an opportunity to lock him up, or trade for pieces you NEED.
It’s easy to say that they should have traded him prior. No doubt they had offers. We have no idea who offered what. I am sure if they would have received a deal that they could not pass up, they would have pulled the trigger. I would have been more upset if they would have traded him for a handful of low level lotto picks to be honest.
With the amount of teams expressing interest, I find it hard to believe there wasn’t at least one fair value offer. The Pirates rumored asking price could have also been a deterrent. They were never getting Julio Rodriguez etc for Reynolds.
Nor were they asking for this, but they have zero reason to sell him without getting better than market value. Guys like this just aren’t available with 3 years of control everyday.
There was reporting that they asked for Julio. And I’m confident we could’ve gotten better than fair value. Problem is, they wanted a team to empty out their minor league system. Reynolds isn’t that kind of player. Your reason for selling him: a contract extension isn’t wise, and you likely aren’t going to be competitive before he’s close to free agency.
Considering we never really heard about a fair value offer, I’m not sure there was one. I think that there really wasn’t a perfect time to trade him, other than last offseason when he came off the outstanding 2021 season. The years of control he had would make him expensive, because the acquiring team would have him for four seasons (22-25).
But even though Reynolds is very good, he’s not a Soto type. So the acquiring team really seems to be acquiring years of control more than the players on field value. That feels tough to get equal value in return.
What you’re saying is that you’re over-valuing Bryan Reynolds.
Maybe. What I’m trying to say that it’s tough to get decent value on a player who is good but not great with a bunch of years of control left. I’m not sure what the right return for that kind of guy is. Is that a 50 arm and a 50 bat? Less? I’m turrible at figuring out trade value.
At this point, I’d rather just ride it out with him and say adios after 25.
Right on man, that I very much do get.
I think you’re right. If the Reynolds team continues to demand deals advantageous to themselves, the Pirates should keep him until he’s free, and gain the compensatory pick. Unless, of course, someone makes them “an offer they can’t refuse.” So far, I think, the Pirates are playing this correctly.
I’ve been there. You don’t want to be the small market team stuck paying $20m/year to a 220 hitting DH. He’s signed through arbitration year s and if he’s that good we trade him next year for the next Reynolds. He is not Barry Bonds.
If P2 has good informants the best info would be to find out if the original 7/135 the Reynolds camp wanted had an opt out in it…and if it was after year 4 or 5.
If 7/135 had an opt out that’s a ridiculous first ask and the Pirates had every right to tell them to take a hike. 7/135 straight is almost reasonable right now.
Pay the piper, play the game and run the organization like you care about winning. Any MLB franchise owner who balks at paying a player like Reynolds an average of $15 million a year over an eight year period has no business in the business. This squeezing and nickel and diming is bush league and embarrassing. The opt out proposal is a response to the Pirates cheap offer. Pay the man and play the game. The Pirates will never again receive equal value for quality players they can’t afford because every other organization knows the GM will eventually have to make a trade because the owner is a cheap POS.
What? They are prepared to pay the $100 million. You’re blathering. You’re ignoring the opt out clause
The opt out clause is only due to the lower dollar value he is potentially accepting. noone is ignoring it. We should just pay him his initial request. It is a fair deal
Is it cheap, or is it pricing in the risk of signing a 28 year old, which is something a small market/low revenue shouldn’t really be considering doing anyways…
This. The Kendall contract was an albatross for the team.
And Kendall was 2 years younger when he signed that extension. Good comparison in the sense that both the Kendall move, and this move, seem to be driven by some sort of desire to throw money around and impress the fan base by spending. Frustrating, because could do the same thing with Cruz and it would make far more sense.
Contract terms like ‘no-trade’ and ‘opt-out’ are clever complications that prolong uncertainty and tension for the length of the contract. An extension would be optimal but an end to the drama would be appreciated. It’s likely Reynolds agents are the originators of the ‘hardball’ tactics, and it may get them more money, but they’re tarnishing Bryan’s reputation in Pittsburgh. Sign or make an end. Enough!
If you aren’t buying out at least two years of free agency, preferrably three, its worthless.
I’m somewhat on the fence of just trading him for some prospects. I would think he could bring back something, and you look at his numbers- just decent not great.
look at WAR and OPS. not sure what other numbers equal money these days.
This is so blatantly obvious that it makes me feel like Reynolds’ camp isn’t negotiating in good faith. Either that or they’re in denial about the Pirates having three years of control remaining. I wonder who leaked that they had agreed on years and dollars, because that’s inaccurate given that an opt-out carries value. Maybe it was Reynolds’ camp hoping to win over the fans. I hope that’s not the case because if it is, then they take us for fools (maybe most of us didn’t got to a school like Vandy but we understand risk vs. reward).
In any case, great reporting here.
everything since the leak of the trade request has made it seem to me that the reynolds side is trying to win a PR war and force the pirates’ side into conseeding into something that they really really dont need to conseed into.
i mean, i guess the answer to every question you dont ask is “no”, so theres no harm in trying to get the best deal for your client.
the funny thing about all this to me, is that i’m at my core a “reynolds extension agnostic”
i dont CARE.
anything they do with reynolds can still lead to the ultimate reasonable goal – starting a winning window in 2024.
trade for prospects? those prospects can be up in 2024, and “reynolds money” can be spent elsewhere.
“baseball trade” for a mlb player with similar goodness and contractual control as reynolds? wonderful, maybe that can be a much-needed #2 type SP.
keep him thru arbitration and eventually offer a QO, and once he’s gone give someone else the “reynolds money”? great.
lock him in for 7 years at a reasonable cost? great
i dont care what happens, but i just want it to happen. i need the “takes” and drama to end. just give me closure at this point.
I spun the ol’ trade wheel and got Reynolds for Brady Singer/Gavin Cross.
I’m pretty much with you at this point. I’d prefer to just let him play out the contract and then let him walk if he and his team are digging their heels in on an opt out after year four. But jeez, just chart a path.
Singer’s not really my cup of tea, but it still highlights the concept well!
Maybe someone like Framber Valdez, who is a FA a the same time as Reynolds, would make sense, if McCullers ever gets healthy and Hunter Brown establishes himself. Astros a little thin in the OF at first glance.
i dunno. the specifics arent important at the moment.
at this point the biggest question for me is “Will Reynolds be super emotional and/or hold out and/or not try to win, if the Pirates go year to year in arbitration with him and also eventually offer a Qualifying offer?”
if Reynolds just puts his head down and plays hard throughout his collectively bargained pre-free-agency time, then its hard to not see that as the ideal pathway here at this point. shake hands and say bye after that 0-6 (plus potential QO acceptance) time, and give someone else the theoretical Reynolds money.
That said, if he throws a fit, there’s always the “do a baseball trade, for something like perhaps a good controllable pitcher” option.
That said, my personal calculations yield “7 years, 107” as a good offer for both sides. Reynolds gets the same amount of money as in the current offer, and for 12.5% less labor time, while trading away the opt-out.
I can go into my math in case anyone thinks that that 7 107 idea is bad.
Reynolds should check with Le’Veon Bell how this kind of thing works out. Not only would something like that give him a bad reputation going into FA, it would also reduce his arb salary due to lower performance, which would reduce the baseline for a FA deal.
It’s in his best interest to take an “I’ll prove them wrong” attitude. That gets him higher arb salaries and more suitors going into FA.
i’d bet on Reynolds and LeVeon Bell being two very different people lol.
That’s really my point. I dont think Reynolds is gonna be some huge problem child.
ultimately if this goes on much longer i hope they can simply agree to disagree, and just go year to year.
Yeah, he seems to be acting very professionally about the whole thing this year. I wouldn’t bet against the whole “trade demand” thing being something his agent floated and leaked – let the player be the good cop while the agent is the bad cop.
Thank you Ethan excellent article