Nov 17, 2010, 9:28 AM EST
I seem to have misplaced my calendar, and I can’t figure out if today is “the Yankees are going to overpay Derek Jeter” day, or if it’s “The Yankees are going to hold the line and pay Jeter what he’s actually worth” day. Can someone help me? Ah, there’s Joel Sherman now:
In a meeting in Tampa last week, Yankees officials did the requisite lap of respect with Derek Jeter. They honored his place in organization history, his meaning to the fan base and his legacy on and off the field. But once the admiration portion of the program was complete, Yankee officials also made sure to tell Jeter it is their intention to offer him a baseball contract. Period.
Snark aside, I like the way Sherman — or, if the phrase came from a source, the source — phrases this. Because that’s what we’re really talking about here is whether Jeter is going to get a “baseball contract” or something that places some Face of the Franchise value on him. Sherman called it a “victory lap deal” on his Twitter feed this morning, and I rather like that construction.
But whatever you call it, that’s the kind of conversation that is important. Now that it has been had, the dollars are way easier to consider. Well, that is unless Jeter simply doesn’t believe that he should get a baseball deal as opposed to a multi-faceted marketing/warm fuzzies kind of deal.
- Report: Two agents rumbled in the parking lot at the Winter Meetings 30
- Mets sign 40-year-old Bartolo Colon for two years, $20 million 39
- MLB rules committee decides to eliminate collisions at home plate 63
- Mariners sign Corey Hart to incentive-laden deal 28
- David Price would not consider an extension with the Mariners if he’s traded there 35
- Robinson Cano agrees to $240 million deal with Mariners (260)
- Report: Mariners willing to offer Robinson Cano a 10-year, $240 million deal (143)
- Report: Yankees have agreed to a three-year deal with Carlos Beltran (125)
- Not everyone is happy about home plate collisions being taken away (115)
- Brett Gardner is drawing “significant” trade interest (113)