Schilling's Contract
In another very interesting move, Curt Schilling made public his contract with the Red Sox. In reality he is probably revealing only 1% of it as the other 99% is legalese and boiler plate.
$8mm base
$3mm in Innings Pitched Incentives
$2mm in bonuses for 6 seperate weigh-ins.
$1mm bonus for receiving a Cy Young vote (more on this later)
And some other things that he didn't elaborate on.
First off, great deal for him as he is getting $8mm guaranteed. The $2mm in weight bonuses is essentially a lay-up as if you hire some fitness freak to wake your rear end up at 8AM three times a week, you are going to make weight. Heck, give the fitness person 5% of the $2mm bonus as salary and bring him/her on the road if need be. Easy money for a pro athelete.
The real test will be the IP bonuses. If he gets all of the listed incentives/bonuses, he is at $14mm, $1mm more than 2007. If you are the Red Sox, you should hope he gets all of the incentives/bonuses because that means he had a very good season and was in shape.
As for the Cy Young vote, man, that is genius. He can just offer Tony Massarotti a nice dinner and get the vote that way. I'm kidding, but you know if the local writers that get to vote feel he treated them well, he has a good shot at getting one vote.
Ok, Schilling is wrapped up, on to Mike Lowell (same feelings as Schilling if you read his post, a great read).
Comments
This is a good news story. He certainly could have received more money elsewhere, and like you said Andy, if he gets the bonus money it will have been well earned. Bodes well for the team that veteran players are willing to give up some dollars to stay. Hopefully Mike Lowell is thinking that way too!
Posted by: wade | November 7, 2007 10:38 AM |
Personally, I think weight clauses for athletes are a joke. You are an athlete, stay in shape!
But, the Cy Young thing concerns me. What's to prevent Curt from essentially buying a vote from a writer as you mention? I don't think baseball should allow this type of incentive.
Posted by: Peter![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://yankeesredsox.com/nav-commenters.gif)
|
November 7, 2007 11:26 AM
|
Wade, I am hearing that length of contract is the biggest issue with Lowell right now.
Posted by: andy![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://yankeesredsox.com/nav-commenters.gif)
|
November 7, 2007 12:25 PM
|
I agree that pro athletes shouldn't need financial motivation to stay in shape. I think the Globe or Herald said the incentives were VERY tough to meet meaning the Red Sox weren't interested in just handing him $2mm, they wanted him to be in really good shape to meet them.
As for the votes, any incentive tied to an award (most players seem to have them) is subject to the same concern.
Posted by: andy![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://yankeesredsox.com/nav-commenters.gif)
|
November 7, 2007 12:27 PM
|
Love the deal for Schill, weight and Cy Young vote clauses notwithstanding. As Curt said, "RESIGN MIKE LOWELL!"
Posted by: Jack | November 7, 2007 05:46 PM |
No, there is a big difference. Getting one vote is very, very easy to do when compared to getting enough votes to win the award.
Posted by: Peter![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://yankeesredsox.com/nav-commenters.gif)
|
November 7, 2007 07:54 PM
|
Peter, you say there is a big difference. Then tell me where the line should be set. Should it be a certain amount of votes or a finishing in a certain place in the voting?
I have to take issue with you on this as there is no answer that is good on this one. Top 10? Top 20? 25 votes? Hey, maybe Boston knows there is a VERY good chance he will get 1 vote and basically put it in there as the "if you show up and give us a few decent innings, we'll give you a $1mm bonus."
But back to the real question, where would you draw the line on # of votes or placing in voting? Or would you do away with this type of incentive entirely?
Posted by: andy![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://yankeesredsox.com/nav-commenters.gif)
|
November 7, 2007 10:00 PM
|
I think the line is Top-10 finish, winning the award, etc.. One vote is too easy to manipulate. I have no problem with a guy getting a bonus for being the MVP or near the top of the voting.
And, if that is what Boston is saying, why not just make it an innings pitched thing or games started? You could use one of the "new" stats, how about K/BB rate? There are so many ways to offer an incentive to a player that I don't think there is a need for this. I just don't want us sitting here next year if Schilling collected another million because some writer gave him a vote he didn't deserve.
Posted by: Peter![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://yankeesredsox.com/nav-commenters.gif)
|
November 8, 2007 12:46 AM
|