Skip to content

Report: Indians offered Shane Victorino $44 million

Dec 4, 2012, 7:15 PM EDT

Shane Victorino AP

Finally out from under Travis Hafner‘s deal, the Indians tried going big for once, offering free agent Shane Victorino a four-year, $44 million deal, according to’s Ken Rosenthal.

Victorino instead signed a three-year, $39 million contract with the Red Sox, netting him an extra $2 million annually.

The $44 million would have been the biggest contract ever handed out in free agency by the Indians, and the second biggest deal in team history, behind Hafner’s four-year, $57 million deal that just expired. Kerry Wood’s two-year, $20.5 million pact signed four years ago rates as the team’s biggest outside¬†expenditure¬†to date.

It’d seem to be a good sign that the Indians have the money to spend, though one wonders where they might redirect it now. They don’t appear to be in on Michael Bourn or Nick Swisher (who would likely prefer an ocean view anyway). Adam LaRoche would make sense, but they haven’t been mentioned in connection with him. They could go after Cody Ross or Ryan Ludwick. It’s possible they’ll be in the market for two outfielders since Shin-Soo Choo is on the block.

  1. thebadguyswon - Dec 4, 2012 at 7:22 PM

    These teams have taken the TV money and gone batshit crazy.

    • fanofevilempire - Dec 4, 2012 at 7:26 PM

      hey, you seen the #’s on those TV deals?
      when you think about it these contracts are not as bad as 100m contracts…..
      remember the Nats contract to Worth last year……..

      oh boy!

      • dcfan4life - Dec 4, 2012 at 11:38 PM

        Werths contract was a statement contract. At the time a last place team, 2 years ago mind you, they signaled to all future free agents that the Nats will spend. He isnt worth his contract by any means, but he was pretty good this year and now the Nats are going to be perrenial contenders. And free agents are signing with the Nats, especially pitchers. The contract fullfilled its purpose.

  2. Lukehart80 - Dec 4, 2012 at 7:23 PM

    I kind of liked the idea at 3 years and $30M, but not for 4 and $44M. Knowing they were willing to go this high on Victorino will just make it more disappointing when they end up not signing anyone of consequence instead.

  3. fanofevilempire - Dec 4, 2012 at 7:24 PM

    Charlie Sheen said he would never play for the Indians again.

  4. hammyofdoom - Dec 4, 2012 at 7:25 PM

    Well this makes me feel a little better that the Red Sox got him for 3/37: i’d much prefer a few extra mil a year for a shorter deal than committing 4 years to him. I can only imagine what Nick Swisher is going to get if Angel Pagan and Shane Victorino were looking at 4 years at 40+ million dollars. It’s a damn shame that the Indians are still having a hard time getting free agents, can’t make them feel good being shunned like that

  5. randygnyc - Dec 4, 2012 at 8:01 PM

    Hammy- it doesn’t help that the indian’s brass has gone on the record saying it doesn’t matter if you win or lose, but rather, how you play the game.

    • hammyofdoom - Dec 4, 2012 at 8:02 PM

      TOTALLY forgot about that quote, good call

    • mpic92 - Dec 4, 2012 at 8:05 PM

      I do think that quote from Shapiro is being misinterpreted though. It’s not exactly encouraging, but they are just trying to level some of their less-realistic fans expectations in the short-term. But you are right, it doesn’t help.

      Encouraging for us Sox fans to know that he wanted to come to Boston over another deal with more $ and years, even if Cleveland isn’t exactly wonderland.

      • tashkalucy - Dec 4, 2012 at 9:10 PM

        I have never heard the president or GM of a franchise from one of the four major professional sports, tell potential ticket holders that if they shouldn’t be buying tickets just in anticipation of the team winning.

        All Shapiro did was validate what every player and players agent in MLB knows – the Indians don’t care about winning, they’re just in a never-ending rebuild – taking the TV money and the revenue sharing money and turning a profit n a team that has lost over 90 games in 3 of the last 4 seasons, something never done in the over 100 year history of the Cleveland baseball franchise.

        Shapiro is a loser. And he and Antonetti are as inept as any MLB front office in the last 50-60 years.

  6. blantoncollier - Dec 4, 2012 at 8:15 PM

    Dont think for one minute the report is correct. Its very Tribe-ish to let it slip it later–see we were in the game. We tried.

    They are like the old Avis commercials–we try harder…but they always let Hertz beat them.

    • tashkalucy - Dec 4, 2012 at 9:12 PM

      They’ve been doing this for years.

      When’s the last time they brought home the bacon?

      Maybe it would help if Shapiro and Antonetti got away from their computers and their workout room, and took some courses in basic baseball scouting, the fans would be the better for it.

  7. motherscratcher23 - Dec 4, 2012 at 9:34 PM

    You guys are ridiculous. Courses in baseball scouting? Give me a break. Mark Shapiro has forgotten more about baseball scouting in the last week than you’ll ever know in your life.

    And his quote was misinterpreted. Anyone who actually read it knows this.

Leave Comment

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

Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. G. Springer (2777)
  2. H. Ramirez (2742)
  3. G. Stanton (2702)
  4. M. Teixeira (2474)
  5. J. Baez (2459)
  1. S. Strasburg (2457)
  2. B. Crawford (2429)
  3. C. Correa (2398)
  4. H. Pence (2367)
  5. B. Harper (2160)