Skip to content

A’s, Stephen Drew talking one-year deal with player option

Dec 6, 2012, 5:50 PM EST

Stephen Drew Getty Images

The San Francisco Chronicle’s Susan Slusser and CBSSports.com’s Jon Heyman are reporting that the A’s and Stephen Drew are discussing a one-year deal with a player option for 2014.

A major league executive told Slusser that he believed Drew would accept the contract.

Such a deal would give Drew the security of a two-year deal, but it’d also allow him to go back on the market next winter if he turned in a strong 2013 season.

One imagines the Red Sox could trump such an offer if they were so inclined, but their interest in Drew has seemed pretty mild. The Tigers have also inquired about Drew, but they only wanted to do a one-year deal.

Returning from a broken ankle, Drew hit .223/.309/.348 in 79 games with the Diamondbacks and A’s last season. The 29-year-old had his best season with the Diamondbacks in 2008, hitting .291/.333/.502 with 21 homers in 611 at-bats.

  1. APBA Guy - Dec 6, 2012 at 6:30 PM

    It will be interesting to see how high the A’s go on a 1 year plus option deal. With their young pitching they absolutely need the defense at short, but anything over $10M would really surprise me. The A’s commitment for 2013 is only $ 28.5 M (approx 1.4 Feesh) with 4 Arbs and 2 FA’s (McCarthy and Balfour) that they are in on. They also have about 14 (!) guys making minimum or another $ 7M total.

    So $ 10M is very do-able for Drew, while still leaving a nice raise for Balfour and McCarthy, unless someone goes crazy for them, which the A’s will not do. 2012 was immensely profitable for the A’s. 2013 is the last year for the old national TV contracts before the additional revenue kicks in 2014. So the A’s won’t go berserk on payroll but $ 62-65M is certainly feasible, and they’ll trade guys mid-year if the team stinks and attendance drops back to 2010 levels.

  2. tuberippin - Dec 6, 2012 at 7:16 PM

    Red Sox should know better than to trust a Drew.

  3. mazblast - Dec 7, 2012 at 12:04 AM

    I don’t see a lot to get excited about with this guy–

    http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/d/drewst01.shtml

    If he weren’t named Drew, he’d be considered fairly ordinary.

Leave Comment

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

Featured video

Cubs shore up rotation with Jon Lester
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. W. Myers (3236)
  2. J. Kang (3093)
  3. C. McGehee (2807)
  4. W. Middlebrooks (2784)
  5. J. Upton (2769)
  1. D. Ross (2509)
  2. T. Tulowitzki (2342)
  3. J. Shields (1854)
  4. M. Kemp (1803)
  5. M. Prado (1777)