Varitek story revisited

There's been quite a bit of backlash over this story in today's Union Leader, a variation of an entry posted earlier this week in this blog. Among the points of constructive criticism:

Ok, let me see if I understand your logic here Mr. MacPherson. Varitek turns down an opportunity to earn $12m for ONE year and now will have to settle for a salary of $8-10m over TWO Years.

And you consider that a win?

Oh that's right, what Tek wants most of all is to play for two more years. If so, he should have taken the $12m this year and then offered up his services in 2010 to any team willing to pay him the Major League minimum. I'm not sure even Scott Boras would attempt to make the case that earning $4m LESS is a win for Varitek.
- CJ Mosca, Hudson

And another one:
CJ has this one correct. Tek is guranteed just 1 year of playing, 2009 and $8 mil. (Even then, he is just guranteed the money, not playing time.) There is no guarnatee that the Red Sox will play him in 2010 even if Tek exercises his player option. They pay him $3 mil. and they can say goodbye.
- B Chaiken, Boston, MA

Here's the big difference, CJ -- if you offer your services up to any major league team for the major-league minimum, what are the odds you're going to play 120 games? Whether it makes sense or not, salaries do factor into playing-time decisions. A team is far more likely to give extra playing time to a catcher they're paying $3 million or $5 million than a catcher they're paying the major-league minimum, particularly if he's on his way out the door.

Had Varitek taken arbitration and then decided he could live with a minimum-salary deal in 2010, isn't there a good chance he would have found himself in a Kevin Cash-type situation -- be it with the Red Sox or elsewhere? If he makes $5 million -- or even $3 million -- with the Red Sox next season, he's going to play at least three days a week no matter who the other catcher on the roster is. The Red Sox aren't going to cut him loose if he exercises his player option; eating money like that is something they've rarely been willing to do, particularly with someone of Varitek's experience and stature. That's the job security we're talking about here.

Brian, are you on Boras' payroll, or are you just bucking for a job with Team Boras. Your argument is inane. Boras started the winter insisting that Varitek was deserving of Posada money (the NYY catcher signed a four-year, $52 million contract last winter)... then he insisted that 'Tek should receive at least three years at $10-$12 million... then he declined arbitration and, in so doing, said the former Sox captain deserved to be paid at least what he received last year for two seasons. Now, at the end of the rainbow, Boras finds an emplty kettle instead of a pot'o'gold. His arrogance HURT his client. Yet folks like you want to dare suggest that this was somehow a 'win'. Two years at $8-$10 million (total) instead of one year at $10-$12; if you ask me -- and CJ and TT and BC -- those numbers add up to a BIG loss, not a win. You must have flunked math in grammar school!
- www.sox1fan.com, Loudon, NH

1. What's "grammar school"?
2. Yes, Boras and Varitek wanted a contract along the lines of Posada, but that clearly was never going to happen. That became obvious very, very quickly. We're talking here about priorities. What was more important to Varitek, an extra year or an extra $4 million on top of the $60 million he's already earned in his career?

Brian, Lad,
I fail to see your logic. V-TEK would have made 10-11 mill for one year. Now he gets 8-10 for two years.
- JakefromWorc, Manhattan Beach, CA 90266

Fans all the time complain that players always are in it for the money, for the maximum dollar, and that they don't care about anything else. What we're suggesting here is that Varitek might not be worried about every last dollar -- since, again, he's banked $60 million already -- and might instead be worried about ensuring himself some regular playing time for two more years rather than one more year. Is that really so inane? Isn't that what fans have been dying to see for years?

I don't know why all you journo's keep saying he would have had a contract for $10-12 million from arbitration. where did you get that? You better read up on the arbitration process. both sides submit a salary figure, and the panel selects that high or low figure, whichever is deemed more fair, in comparison to other players of similar service time and ability. (Please don't argue that Posada was the similar player !!) The Red Sox certainly didn't have to offer $10 million for a 37 year old .220 hitting catcher, and Boras certainly wouldn't have put in $10 mil. If the Red Sox had submitted $5 million and Boras submitted $13 million, which would have been chosen as more fair for the 2008 Jason Varitek?
- Totally Awsum, Outer Banks

The next time you hear about a player who received a pay cut through arbitration, let me know. Here's what the arbitration process takes into consideration:
(1) the player’s contribution to the club in terms of performance and leadership;
(2) the club’s record and its attendance;
(3) any and all of the player’s “special accomplishments,” including All-Star game appearances, awards won, and postseason performance;
(4) the salaries of comparable players in the player’s service-time class and, for players with less than five years of service, the class one year ahead of him.

Nowhere in there is anything about forecasted performance based on age-related decline. You don't think Varitek would have walked away with at least $10 million -- his salary of a season ago -- and maybe $12 million?

MacPherson, it is time to turn in your pen since you clearly are clueless. This was not at all about playing two years, it was about playing two years at $10+ million per year, and Tek and Boras lost.
Had he taken arbitration and the money this year, he certainly would have been welcomed back next year at a lower salary, even if he had to take a much lower salary. The only way that would not happen is if he were simply not good enough to play any more, and we had some young prospect that beat him out for the job. In either case, the money would not have been why he would not play.
- Kevin C, Nashua

I didn't use a pen, actually. It always messes up my computer screen.

If you believe he would have been welcomed back next season, more power to you. But the scenario you outline sounds awfully reasonable, and how likely will the Red Sox be to bring back Varitek again, at 37 years old, unless they already have money committed to him?

Tek would have already accepted the current offer if your theory was true. I think he lets the deadline pass. Here's why:
He has two things in his favor:
1. After June 1 he is truly "free", meaning no compensatory draft pick; and,
2. If the Sox' "Catcher by Committee" fails during Spring Training, his value, and his price, go up.
Imagine the public outcry if the pitching looks bad --"We need Tek"! Look at it from his perspective, there's no rush to meet the Sox' artificial deadline, he can wait it out. Odds are some team will need him.
-Chip from CT, Wilton, CT

Chip makes an interesting point. Varitek easily could let the deadline pass and wait until after the June draft passes, making him a truly unrestricted free agent. At that point, he certainly could jump on board with a team like the Marlins for a prorated salary for the rest of the season -- or, if the Red Sox are panicking about their catching situation, he could indeed get a more favorable offer from the Olde Towne Team at that point.

That's a gamble, of course, just like taking arbitration would have been a gamble. The Red Sox could do just fine with Josh Bard -- or they could go ahead and trade Clay Buchholz for Jarrod Saltalamacchia and be set at catcher for the next decade. And the only teams that would be interested in Varitek in June or July would be contending teams, which cuts down the market -- and if they have any doubts at all about the ability of a 36-year-old catcher to stay sharp during a nine-month offseason, they easily could stay away.

But it's certainly an interesting strategy. Roger Clemens did it, after all. Why couldn't Varitek?