Skip to content

Jimmy Rollins’ $11 million option for 2015 will vest tonight

Jul 25, 2014, 11:51 AM EDT

Miami Marlins v Philadelphia Phillies Getty Images

Jimmy Rollins‘ has an $11 million option in his contract for 2015 that vests if the Phillies shortstop totals at least 1,100 plate appearances between 2013 and 2014. Last season he logged 666 plate appearances and this season he’s got 432 more, which means tonight around the third or fourth inning Rollins will get paid for 2015.

Normally teams don’t want to give $11 million to 36-year-old shortstops, but Rollins’ performance hasn’t declined much at all. In fact, his current .724 OPS is 60 points higher than last season’s mark and slightly above his combined .714 mark from 2009-2013. Defensive metrics still grade his glove as above average, too.

Rollins also has the ability to block any potential trade, so even if contending teams think having him locked into place for 2015 adds to their interest level it may be a moot point.

  1. gargamelsmentor - Jul 25, 2014 at 12:12 PM

    Watch out over the next 9 hours for the lady in black from “The Natural” Jimmy.

    • DelawarePhilliesFan - Jul 25, 2014 at 3:18 PM

      Exactly! Why is everyone black catting him?

      On a side note – you do know that “woman in black” part of that story was based on a real life event, that happened to a Phillie no less!

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eddie_Waitkus

      • gargamelsmentor - Jul 25, 2014 at 3:48 PM

        I was aware of the history….but definitely a great link to include! Long live Roy Hobbs.

      • DelawarePhilliesFan - Jul 25, 2014 at 8:29 PM

        Roy is the man!

        “Time!…….Don’t do it, Al. Give them the real stuff”

        Ahhh…have to check Netflix, try to catch that again

    • spursareold - Jul 25, 2014 at 3:52 PM

      Amaro in a dress, tbh.

  2. jbriggs81 - Jul 25, 2014 at 12:19 PM

    Do the Phillies put vesting options in all of their contracts with players? Just off the top of my head I know that Cliff Lee, Marlon Byrd, and Papelbon all have vesting options.

    Why do they put these in their contracts? I know everyone is gonna say because Ruben Amaro is a terrible GM, but there has to be some type of reason for including these options in so many contracts, right? Do other teams do this?

    • hoopmatch - Jul 25, 2014 at 12:38 PM

      I’m still wondering about what another commenter said the other day to the effect that many of Amaro’s bad decisions were taken on orders from ownership.

      Here in mid-Michigan we just had a city manager fired after a number of citizens became irate with him about suddenly enforcing ordinances that hadn’t been enforced for years. Turns out he had been informally told by city council members, including the mayor, to enforce the ordinances. They fired him without admitting their own culpability. Maybe it’s going on in Philly, too.

    • stupidusername - Jul 25, 2014 at 1:56 PM

      The contract was already rich enough before the option. Perhaps Amaro feared competition from other clubs so he outbid them. Or in the case of Rollins and Howard, outbid his reflection.

      • clydeserra - Jul 25, 2014 at 3:17 PM

        but rollins has been worth his contract and at $11M next year, he is a good bet to be worth it again

    • raysfan1 - Jul 25, 2014 at 2:04 PM

      Vesting options are pretty common and can be reasonable. The idea is essentially that if a guy is healthy enough to make the required number of at bats or starts or whatever, the he is then likely still a productive player. Generally the option years are at or below the previous year salary, so it also affords some cost control in theory. The problem at times with Amaro is that he seems to bid against himself.

      • xmatt0926x - Jul 25, 2014 at 3:14 PM

        There’s no “at times” about it. He ALWAYS bids against himself. As has been mentioned, the contracts he offers are already ludicrous without any options. He just likes to throw them in there just to put the screws to the Phillies a little more.

        Nobody was bidding on Pap or Rollins and Byrd said himself that no other team showed as much interest. They all received silly options on their deals that are easily attainable and just added to the already horrendous price.

        Go Ruben!

  3. edelmanfanclub - Jul 25, 2014 at 12:39 PM

    If they really didn’t want him they would have designated him for assignment a while back, I guess they are fine with holding on to him through 2015. He isn’t going to accept a trade anywhere.

  4. American of African Descent - Jul 25, 2014 at 1:54 PM

    The challenge with DFAing the man is that you’ll draw a grievance from the union. Not worth it unless you’re sure you’d win (which you probably wouldn’t.)

    • clydeserra - Jul 25, 2014 at 3:18 PM

      why would you DFA a worthwhile player?

  5. chew1985 - Jul 25, 2014 at 1:54 PM

    He could have been a Hall of Famer if he had just played the second half of his career with the same drive and determination as he spent the first. The last few seasons have been hard to watch.

    The money is good though. Every boy in the USA has a dream of playing baseball and getting grossly overpaid by the Phillies.

    • clydeserra - Jul 25, 2014 at 3:21 PM

      how, pray tell is he overpaid?

      • SocraticGadfly - Jul 25, 2014 at 4:52 PM

        If one win, by WAR, is worth $6M, he’s been a little bit underpaid 3 of the last 4 years, being overpaid last year.

    • SocraticGadfly - Jul 25, 2014 at 9:11 PM

      Actually, on counting stats, he’s got an outside shot at 2,800 hits and 1,500 runs by the end of 2017, his age-38 season. He’s got a better than outside shot at 500 SB by that time, and at an 83 percent success rate. He would only be just over 20 WAA at that time, but would be over 50 WAR. So, in other words, I don’t know if I would rule him in HOF discussion at this time, I’m pretty sure I would NOT rule him out.

  6. sportsnut101 - Jul 25, 2014 at 3:06 PM

    Sit himfor rest of season lol
    Or cut him before the game

    • clydeserra - Jul 25, 2014 at 3:22 PM

      are you gonna cut a guy who is having a terrific season? wouldn’t you trade him instead? that way you can get something for him (because he is good and every would want him)

      • spursareold - Jul 25, 2014 at 3:53 PM

        Because only HE can determine if you “get something” for him?

      • clydeserra - Jul 25, 2014 at 9:06 PM

        I know he has said he doesn’t want to leave, but is that still true?

      • SocraticGadfly - Jul 25, 2014 at 9:16 PM

        He’s from SoCal, right? But the Dodgers and Angels are both kind of set. That said, if the Dodgers let Ramirez go, they could trade for him in the offseason.

      • clydeserra - Jul 25, 2014 at 9:27 PM

        no his is from Alameda. One BART stop form the coliseum The A’s have a need, and possible team control pitching.

        Just saying

Leave Comment

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

Featured video

Patience finally paying off for Royals fans
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. R. Castillo (3155)
  2. G. Stanton (2300)
  3. C. Kershaw (2219)
  4. D. Ortiz (2197)
  5. N. Arenado (2180)
  1. J. Hamilton (2158)
  2. A. Rizzo (2138)
  3. M. Trout (2044)
  4. A. Pujols (1846)
  5. H. Ryu (1764)