Skip to content

Jimmy Rollins’ deal is finalized: $38 million guaranteed

Dec 19, 2011, 5:28 PM EDT

Jimmy Rollins AP

We had this all yesterday, but I heard Tim Tebow was doing stuff so as Americans we were all obligated to pay attention and thus you may have missed it. But now it’s final and has been officially announced by the team.

It breaks down as $33 million over the next three seasons, and an $11 million vesting option for 2015. If the option does not vest, it becomes an $8 million club option or a $5 million player option. So it’s worth a minimum of $38 million to Rollins, but as much as $44 million for four years.

  1. El Bravo - Dec 19, 2011 at 5:48 PM

    I applaud the Tebow usage.

    • El Bravo - Dec 19, 2011 at 5:49 PM

      Sunday is His day, after all. That said, He clearly likes Tom Brady more. Okay, no more football, I promise.

  2. firedude7160 - Dec 19, 2011 at 6:06 PM

    I am OK with a 4 year $11 million a year deal. His defensive ability is still better than most other available options. I would like to see Victorino and Jimmy switch batting order positions though. Victorino is the better leadoff choice at this point.

  3. mojosmagic - Dec 19, 2011 at 6:11 PM

    Rollins wouldn’t be a bad option at third if he loses range latter in his career.

    • ame123 - Dec 19, 2011 at 8:07 PM

      Yeap, if Galvis can hack at the big league level, JRoll would make an excellent 3rd baseman.

    • professor59 - Dec 20, 2011 at 4:24 PM

      Wait – A third baseman without power, speed or average? Don’t we have Polanco for that at a fraction of the price?

  4. Ari Collins - Dec 19, 2011 at 6:34 PM

    I’m the first to criticize a bad deal, but $38MM sounds fine to me for a quality if no-longer-elite player.

  5. spudchukar - Dec 19, 2011 at 6:54 PM

    St. Louis chose not to chase after Rollins and if it took 5 mil more per season to land Rollins then Furcal, then I believe it is a wise choice. Furcal is still the better defender, and the savings ought to help pay for Beltran.

    • Jonny 5 - Dec 19, 2011 at 8:06 PM

      You don’t know how to read Ultimate Zone Ratings do you (UZR)? Jimmy has a +47.4 since 2003 and Furcal has a -13.6 since 2002. On top of that he’s got a better fielding pct… Jimmy has less errors etc.. He’s an all around better defender. Almost every defensive stat that exists tells you that.

      http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/blog/big_league_stew/post/Everything-you-always-wanted-to-know-about-UZR?urn=mlb-212311

      Actually it’s pretty amazing to me that his fielding pct is better than Furcal with such a better uzr. He not only covers more ground but does it more successfully too.

      • siftin thru nonsense - Dec 19, 2011 at 10:49 PM

        fewer errors. If you can count it, use ‘fewer’
        Yeah, JRoll is top notch as far as defense and good offensively compared with other SS’s. He hits like a DH though, with the lower avg and power. He’s a DH with speed! Needs to lay off that high fastball. If he swung at strikes, he could hit .300.
        Back to defense, .. I just watch these guys play and form an assessment on them. The guy is smooth. He has soft hands, decent quickness, positions himself well and has a consistent, accurate cannon. Props for going the extra mile on the statistical analysis and the UZR stuff there. That would prove it statistically. Furcal is getting old. Who knows what his actual age is? Furcal gets hurt more than JRoll. Furcy has a good arm, but JRoll is more accurate and his arm is very strong as well. Furcal is no JRoll.

    • firedude7160 - Dec 19, 2011 at 8:07 PM

      Can you pass the bong please…

    • spudchukar - Dec 19, 2011 at 8:43 PM

      As I have illustrated s-o-o-o-o many times UZR statistics are awful. They are based exclusively on subjective interpretation by the evaluator, and at this point in their history are totally unreliable. I always get a chuckle when defenders admit, then champion the fact that they are getting better. Yeah, they have gone from butt ugly, to extremely hard to look at.

      He no longer has the range of Furcal, and Furcal’s arm is every bit as strong as Rollins, and he gets rid of the ball quicker. Furcal’s only drawback is his recent injury problems. But his history indicates a number of years where he played over 150 games, so he has had numerous healthy years, and that often indicates, bad luck as much as fragility.

      I want to emphasize that this isn’t an attempt to dis on Rollins’ ability. He probably has a couple of years left as a capable SS, and his arm makes up for his increasingly unaggressive style. His skills certainly haven’t eroded as much as numerous other Phillie regulars, so he is a good fit for them, and they are capable of overpaying since it is becoming clear that they will indeed exceed the luxury tax.

      • ame123 - Dec 19, 2011 at 9:07 PM

        Let me guess. Your eyes tell you that?

      • Jonny 5 - Dec 19, 2011 at 9:19 PM

        Even if you throw out UZR, Rollins is still better defensively by many other measures Spuds. Like all of them besides the one you prefer. Even BR who shows Furcal as having a better range factor also shows Rollins as consistently having a better dWar. Range factor is nothing but put outs and assists divided by innings, meaning it has much to do with how many chances a person gets, so this varies team by team. LAME. I think you misunderstand “Range” in Range factor. It doesn’t mean he has longer arms or gets to harder to catch balls, it could mean he gets more balls hit his way quite simply.

      • spudchukar - Dec 19, 2011 at 10:00 PM

        Screw You Johnny and your condescending attitude. I am well aware of the definition of range. The notion that UZR stats are more scientific then the naked eye is risible. Since, the naked eye is the determining factor in the gathering of defensive sabermetric defensive stats. Furcal gets to more balls because he has quicker feet and gets a great jump. Rollins has developed a more passive style, which is steadier, but also inhibits him from getting to balls Furcal does.

        One can make a strong argument that number of chances, divided by a percentage of the opponents hitting opportunites, coupled with some measurement of a pitcher’s results might well exceed the current UZR, which should either be properly employed or discarded. At least then, there would be some semblance of scientific authority.

      • Jonny 5 - Dec 19, 2011 at 10:27 PM

        I didn’t mean to come off as condescending, sorry if i did. If anything you were more condescending speaking of UZR and the “eroding skills of numerous other Phillies players” But back to the point, I can’t agree that Furcal is better defensively when every single stat I’ve looked at besides the one you prefer tells me otherwise. Rdrs/yr (defensive runs saved above average) from BR says Rollins has been better (avg 5 to 7 for Jimmy). And I’m not dissing Furcal. I just think you’re trying your best to make Furcal seem better defensively when he isn’t. I think dWar sums it up well.

      • Ari Collins - Dec 19, 2011 at 10:28 PM

        First off, there’s a difference between “the naked eye” and “a group of scouts analyzing every play.” One is UZR, and one is you.

        Yes, UZR isn’t perfect, but very few people consider it as flawed as you seem to. What’s more, taking a single fielding statistic with a grain of salt is probably smart. But when all the other fielding stats, fan scouting reports, and professional scouts all agree with a single fielding statistic, than that fielding statistic probably has a point.

        Then there’s playing time to consider, and here, you’re certainly looking very optimistically at Furcal’s health history. Considering that he’s only played 150 games once in the last five seasons, it’s difficult to categorize it as bad luck.

        If you compare the players without taking defense into account at all (which you shouldn’t do, because the evidence is overwhelming that Rollins is the better defender, but if you want to pretend they’re equal defensively), Rollins has been worth about a win and a half more per season the last five years (somewhere between $5MM and $7MM in value). And is a year younger.

        We don’t mean to sound condescending (well… I don’t, anyway). But if UZR isn’t your cup of tea, can you tell us what you are basing your opinion on? That may be why you’re getting condescending language: due to the way that you’re putting things, and your lack of referring to anything but your own opinion, it comes off as a hometown fan looking at his recently-resigned player’s defense with redbird-colored glasses.

  6. ame123 - Dec 19, 2011 at 7:51 PM

    Furcal -9.1 career defensive runs above replacement
    Rollins +36.4 career defensive runs above replacement

    2011:
    Furcal -5.4 dRAR
    Rollins +2.9 dRAR

    also
    2011:
    Furcal 0.5 WAR
    Rollins 3.8 WAR

    Not to mention JRoll is a year younger. Enjoy your decrepit shortstop, Cards fan.

  7. paperlions - Dec 19, 2011 at 8:19 PM

    MIF tend to decline quickly and Rollins is on his way already. A 4 year deal for that money isn’t likely to pan out from a baseball perspective…but from a fan experience/Jimmy Rollins is a Phillie for life perspective, it makes perfect sense.

    • Jonny 5 - Dec 19, 2011 at 8:39 PM

      The contract is sure to look less attractive as it winds to a close but for now he’s totally worth his pay still. I worry about injury with Jimmy as he’s missed a good a good amount of time over the last 2 seasons. All Philly fans can hope for is that he takes care of his legs and gets into a good routine to protect them. Although it isn’t said much, Jimmy is more than just the Phillies SS. The man is an important part of this teams chemistry too.

    • somekat - Dec 19, 2011 at 11:12 PM

      he’ll make a bit more than he should for a few years. But he made a lot less than he should have for the last few. So in the long run, it works out fine.

      I would of rather something like a 4th year at 10 mil, with a team buyout of 3 mil, but I can live with what they settled on. It is a fair deal for the next 2 seasons, after that, their cable contract is up. If they re-up with comcast, or start their own network, either way it will be a much better deal for the team, and they will have a large infusion of money

  8. xmatt0926x - Dec 19, 2011 at 9:17 PM

    It’s incredible how people can be stat drones and quote them all day on this site yet when it comes to fan loyaltytheir team they totally throw the stats in the trash in favor of loyalty to their own teams players. I need to get my eyes checked. I thought I saw someone say that Furcal was a better defensive shortstop than Jimmy Rollins. I’m not a huge Rollins guy and would have been content to have the Phillies move on from him as he is declining but I’m sorry, anyone with any amount of honesty in watching the game would say that Rollins is the better defensive shortstop. I’m not sure it’s even close. Furcal may be a better value for the Cards based on savings on the contract but it’s not because they view Furcal as being at the same level as Rollins.

  9. spudchukar - Dec 19, 2011 at 10:24 PM

    More great news in Phillieland, Ed Wade is back. Just rehired, announcement forthcoming. Getting the band back together.

  10. cintiphil - Dec 20, 2011 at 9:58 AM

    Well, I suppose I must get into the conversation between St. Lou and Philly. Stop making reference to history. I think Rollins is the better choice if you consider what each did for the past 10 years. However, what did he do last year? how does anyone know if he can come back form the injuries and play up to past playing level? Furcal was able to come back after injuries last year and helped the birds to a W-S win. He looks to be all back. The Philly fans are thinking that Rollins will outperform Furcal in 2012 or longer, but that is not certain. Both of these guys may have hit a brick wall.

    There is a slight age difference, and Rollins has it there. After that, the Cards made the better deal, because it was for less money and for a shorter period. if Jimmy can’t perform as he did in the past, this is going to cost the Phills a lot of cash, and limit resources for future players. Both teams took a little gamble on each of their guys however, if they both bomb, Phills 38 Mil, Cards 14 Mil. I think the Cards have the best of it. And, if they both do very well, at least the Cards can sign him up for two more years, if Furcal can still and wants to play. The total price will be under 38 Mil in any event. Advantage Cardinals.

  11. cintiphil - Dec 20, 2011 at 4:48 PM

    I hope that settled it.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

Pitching vs. history in NL wild card game
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. D. Jeter (3026)
  2. R. Martin (2418)
  3. A. Rodriguez (2107)
  4. J. Hamilton (2044)
  5. D. Gordon (2003)
  1. J. Altuve (1974)
  2. C. Kershaw (1951)
  3. M. Shoemaker (1851)
  4. E. Volquez (1822)
  5. Y. Cespedes (1714)