Of RF Jayson Werth’s new, $126 million, 7-year pact with Washington, the WaPo’s Adam Kilgore opines the Nats have completed “a sudden move that enhanced their credibility as an immediate contender androbbed the division rival Philadelphia Phillies of one of their best players.” It’s also a contract that presumes Werth will continue to improve late into his 30’s, which is either a tremendous gamble on the part of Washington GM Mike Rizzo or tacit acknowledgment the team believes that HGH will soon become part of the (legal) pregame spread. At least one early comparison to Kevin Brown’s last (insane) contract was made, though Yahoo Sports’ Jeff Passan prefers to live in the modern era, stating, “the Nationals socked the sport in the face Sunday.”
All it takes is one team “ one with a complex or a dream “ to upend the entire damn thing. And while the Werth contract won™t change everything, just as the Alex Rodriguez(notes) deal didn™t, just as the Zito pact didn™t, just as all of the previous albatrosses didn™t, the standard it sets in the present frightens the financially prudent.
A player whom Baseball-Reference.com compares to Brad Hawpe, Kal Daniels, Corey Hart, Curtis Granderson and Juan Rivera received what could be the contract of the decade. Werth is a far better player than those five, sure, but he hasn™t had the career of Matt Holliday, for whom Boras could secure only seven years and $120 million last season.
The visit from Nationals owners Ted and Mark Lerner couldn™t have hurt. Werth is extremely intelligent, well-spoken and, despite the scraggly beard that adorns his face, presentable. Though Boras didn™t go into details about the Lerners™ trip to California to meet Werth, it™s easy to envision him charming the hell out of them.
Charm, apparently, costs more per ounce than gold. Because a player who convention figured would struggle to get nine figures is now sitting on a $126 million pile of cash, and the rest of the market is readying to readjust, aftershocks certain to follow, namely with Carl Crawford and the eight years and $160 million for which he can reasonably ask.
This is probably preferable and better for the sport than a 90-win team trading its superstar, face of the franchise player, to a big market team for three prospects. I guess San Diego is being more “rational” than the Nationals, but I know which team has happier fans right now.
…and I’m not saying that it won’t be tried (or even that it won’t work), but I see nothing “reasonable” about taking one aberrant data point and claining it to be the new market baseline. Everyone knew the Nats would have to overpay to get a big name. I suspect some other name free agents (maybe even Crawford) could have had a similar contract from Washington, if they wanted to play there.
OTOH, if it buys them credibility this may not be such a bad deal for Washington.
Imagine an outfield of Jason Bay, Gary Matthews Jr. and Jayson Werth. Alas, Omar Minaya never got that chance.
I was shocked when I heard about this but I’m running with the theory that Washington is going to have to overpay for stars until they start winning. This will only work, though, if the Nats have a good minor league system and can sort of emulate the Marlins of the 90’s, but even they TRADED Piazza for prospects.