Skip to content

Curtis Granderson likely to reject Yankees’ qualifying offer

Nov 7, 2013, 10:15 AM EDT

granderson getty Getty Images

Curtis Granderson was among the free agents given a qualifying offer, but Ken Rosenthal of FOXSports.com reports that the center fielder is expected to reject the one-year, $14.1 million deal from the Yankees in favor of the open market.

That’s certainly not a shock–the Yankees were likely banking on that decision when they made their decision–but Rosenthal writes that even though the attached draft pick compensation will hurt Granderson’s market value he “will get paid” and speculates that it may come from a team with a first-round pick high enough to be protected.

Granderson is from Chicago and that list of teams with a protected first-rounder includes the Cubs and White Sox. Giving up a second-rounder to sign Granderson would no doubt be a lot more palatable to some teams.

  1. NYTolstoy - Nov 7, 2013 at 10:43 AM

    makes sense from his stand point. I actually like the qualifying offers. Even though people say it hurts the free agents it really might only cost them a few millions or so. Which is no real heart breaker if a guy who was going to get 50 million only gets 35. Also it alows the team to get better picks in the draft thus filling the Farm system. It also alows the team that signs said free agent not to spend so over the top by doing so helps control payroll. Win win in my book.

    • kalinedrive - Nov 7, 2013 at 11:37 AM

      At what level does a 30% reduction in contract value become a heart breaker?

      • stex52 - Nov 7, 2013 at 11:41 AM

        At the point where it stops setting up your great-grandchildren for life. At any level above that, it’s hard for me to see too much heart break.

      • NYTolstoy - Nov 7, 2013 at 11:59 AM

        If someone told me we cant give you 50 million we can only give you 35 million Im pretty sure il survive. Then kiss that man, and dance naked on your lawn.

      • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Nov 7, 2013 at 3:06 PM

        If someone told me we cant give you 50 million we can only give you 35 million Im pretty sure il survive. Then kiss that man, and dance naked on your lawn.

        Why do you keep saying he’s going to get a reduced contract? Granderson had a guaranteed $14.1M/1year contract from the Yanks, and he turned it down because he thinks he’s going to get more money, not less. The only thing prospective teams have to concern themselves with is signing Granderson can cost them their first round pick and the corresponding allocated dollars.

        On the open market he should get a lot more than $14M a year, not less. Why do you think the QO costs them money?

      • jwbiii - Nov 7, 2013 at 8:58 PM

        Draft picks provide significant surplus value to a team.

        http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/are-first-round-draft-picks-overpaid/

        This article is from 2009 and estimates that the value of a win on the free agent market is $4.4m. It’s closer to $7m now.

        If teams are going to surrender this valuable resource to sign a free with attached draft pick compensation, that amount, more or less, is going to come out of his contract.

    • ryanrockzzz - Nov 7, 2013 at 12:40 PM

      Plus it helps all the crappy teams who have a protected 1st round pick get better….or worse….

    • paperlions - Nov 7, 2013 at 1:23 PM

      Yeah, that sounds great, until you realize that the “people” saving the money have BILLIONS AND BILLIONS OF DOLLARS! And that every one of them will make far more money owning a baseball team, no matter how bad they are at it, than even the most highly paid player will make during his career.

      • stex52 - Nov 7, 2013 at 1:58 PM

        No argument from the owner’s standpoint, Paper. But it’s not zero sum for the player. He gets to be very rich or insanely rich. So “heart break ” is not the term that comes to mind.

      • paperlions - Nov 7, 2013 at 2:17 PM

        Yes, but the ONLY function of the QO and draft pick compensation is to serve as a drag on free agent salaries. It isn’t there as a mechanism for anything else. It doesn’t help low payroll teams that can’ afford to keep stars, because they trade those guys before they get expensive (or sign them to relatively cheap long-term deals). Look at the teams that made QOs….mostly teams that can afford to keep those guys if they wanted and teams that will be active in the FA market.

        I’m not crying for the players….but lets not act like that rule has any benefit to anyone other than the owners…just like the new spending caps on the draft or international amateurs.

  2. pisano - Nov 7, 2013 at 11:58 AM

    That will work for both sides, he K’s way too much, and his BA has consistently dropped each year, they would never give him a multi- year contract. He’ll leave just as Swisher did, and neither side will look back.

    • genericcommenter - Nov 7, 2013 at 1:39 PM

      Yeah, except Ks and BA don’t matter that much, independently.

      • Kevin S. - Nov 7, 2013 at 1:46 PM

        This has been explained, in great detail, to pisano over the last couple of years. He’s not interested in facts or evidence that upset his preconceived notions.

      • pisano - Nov 7, 2013 at 2:21 PM

        Kevin S. is correct, many don’t agree with me on the K’s, and a low BA I just can’t deal with the K’s and to boot a low BA. On the other hand I don’t care what a pitchers won, loss record is, all I’m interested in is the ERA.

      • raysfan1 - Nov 7, 2013 at 2:48 PM

        I gotta side with Pisano a little bit though–there is such a thing as striking out too much when it’s just giving away outs. His OBP has been under .330 4 of the last 5 years. He’s also going to be 33 and coming off an injury plagued season. .230/.320/.410 with an OPS+ around 100 may well be his new norm. If it is, and he keeps getting hurt, he won’t be worth $14M on a multi-year deal to me. Caveat emptor.

      • raysfan1 - Nov 7, 2013 at 2:50 PM

        …$14M per year… Accidentally left out the per year part.

      • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Nov 7, 2013 at 3:08 PM

        He’s also going to be 33 and coming off an injury plagued season.

        He broke his arm and knuckle from pitched balls. Like Dave Cameron’s latest post on bad FA’s, I don’t know why people are holding this against him. Are they a sign of things to come? Does he have some sort of ball-magnet in his body that makes him more likely to be hit by a pitch?

        He doesn’t have hamstring or quad issues, so it’s merely an age issue. He played in 156 and 160 games the two years prior.

      • raysfan1 - Nov 7, 2013 at 4:23 PM

        Full recovery in terms of limb strength, flexibility, and performance often takes a year or more even though generally normal functionality returns in 2-3 months. The bigger point is the age, likely performance decline as a normal occurrence, and that he should be paid based on expected production. Injury is always a risk and tends to be higher, with longer recovery, in older individuals. I do not mean to over-sell the injury issue, but I do feel it is a consideration. Even without it I would be wary of paying Curtis Granderson $14M or more per year on a multi year deal, meaning 3+ years. I agree with the Yankees’ one year qualifying offer for that though, and wouldn’t argue much with a two year deal.

      • genericcommenter - Nov 7, 2013 at 6:09 PM

        Never thought such a non-controversial statement would get down-voted 15 to 1 here. And funny how I qualified my statement, yet all the argument below goes into things that are not the same as Ks or BA. Notice I said “independently.” Yes, if your OBP and production are low because you strike out a lot and don’t hit, that’s bad. But you can have a low BA and high K rate and still get on base a lot and produce.

        Then again, this is the same site where MANY commenters refer to a 40 year-old guy with a sub- .300 OBP and no useful major league skills as “a guy who gets on base a lot.”

        I’d rather have a guy who hits .230 with power and walks some than a guy with a sub .300 OBP who rarely strikes out but swings at bouncing pitches and rarely hits out of the infield.

  3. philliesblow - Nov 7, 2013 at 12:18 PM

    Windmills can power the lights at US Cellular if Granderson joins Dunn in the Sox line up.

  4. kindasporty - Nov 7, 2013 at 12:35 PM

    You can always come back home Curtis. The Tigers have an opening in left field.

  5. genericcommenter - Nov 7, 2013 at 1:41 PM

    As a Yankees fan, I want him back. I’m not opposed to finding someone to replace him, but that’s easier said than done. As it stands now, the team has many outfielders but probably only 1 that belongs in the major leagues.

    • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Nov 7, 2013 at 2:11 PM

      As it stands now, the team has many outfielders but probably only 1 that belongs in the major leagues.

      They have Soriano and Gardner who both belong. Getting Granderson back would be huge; however, that shouldn’t stop them from getting rid of Wells at the least.

      • genericcommenter - Nov 7, 2013 at 6:13 PM

        I missed Soriano. Maybe I was thinking of him as a DH for next year. But my main point is getting rid of the guys who have no business being on a roster, let alone playing. Whether they are overpaid guys who haven’t been useful in 3+ years or AAAA guys, none of them should be starting.

      • stevequinn - Nov 8, 2013 at 8:35 AM

        @genericcommenter Your DH next year will be Carlos Beltran.

  6. cliverush - Nov 7, 2013 at 3:01 PM

    Red Sox nation says “Go west young man.”

  7. bfunk1978 - Nov 7, 2013 at 3:41 PM

    I know there were “only” 13 or so qualifying offers extended, but all it takes is one guy taking it for teams to be even less likely to hurt free agents’ AAVs by extending them. I would have been extremely hesitant to give one to a guy who is looking for a bounce-back season like Granderson. Lots of money to try to bounce back with.

    • bfunk1978 - Nov 7, 2013 at 3:41 PM

      Then again, if he’s going to turn it down I guess that’s why I’m not a GM. I think he’s crazy, personally.

  8. dylanesq - Nov 7, 2013 at 9:21 PM

    Curtis Granderson is pure GOLD !! letting him slide to someone else would be disastrous for the Yankees. Just because he’s quiet matters not..his skills and attitude ARE the Yankees !!!

  9. stevequinn - Nov 8, 2013 at 8:38 AM

    Granderson’s 2013 season, and his stats, were down because of his injuries. If he stays injury free in 2014, he will help whichever team drafts him.

    He’s one of my favorite ballplayers. He’s one of the truly good guys in baseball.

    • stevequinn - Nov 8, 2013 at 8:40 AM

      I meant “signs” him. Being a Ram fan, I’ve got the draft on my mind already.

  10. spc7ray - Nov 10, 2013 at 7:17 PM

    Am I out of line here? Some of these contracts are just not sounding right–Cano 300 million (He turned down 240) Kershaw 300 Million ( And he is thinking about it) Santana wants 100 million–Nolasco wants 80 million–Beltran is 37 and he wants a 4 year deal–Jeter is 40 and he gets 12 million–Tanaka hasn’t pitched in America and he will get 100 million—-I don’t like any of the deals–even Kershaw and he is just plain great–BUT 300 million? I think 15 teams are over 100 million in payroll –Is there that much money for them–Will they all be 200 million before long? Maybe Im just old

Leave Comment

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

Featured video

Pitching duel highlights Game 1 of WS
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. M. Bumgarner (3153)
  2. J. Shields (2760)
  3. T. Ishikawa (2676)
  4. T. Lincecum (2054)
  5. M. Morse (1962)
  1. Y. Cespedes (1925)
  2. L. Cain (1841)
  3. B. Posey (1712)
  4. B. Roberts (1544)
  5. A. Wainwright (1517)