IMPORTANT BLOG ANNOUNCEMENT

PLEASE CHANGE YOUR BOOKMARKS AND FEEDS TO THE NEW URL, THEYANKEEU.COM. TYU IS IN NO WAY AFFILIATED WITH THE NEW YORK YANKEES OR YANKEES UNIVERSE.
Dec 122009

From Joe Strauss of the St. Louis Dispatch, we learn that the Cardinals have extended a formal offer to free agent left fielder, Matt Holliday. According to Strauss, “a source familiar with the process said it does not offer an average annual value of $18 million,” and Holliday is “seeking no-trade protection as part of any deal.” This information will likely be prevalent to the Yankees if they are, indeed, open to signing the Oklahoma native, although, for financial reasons — yes, even the Yankees have payroll concerns — it’s unlikely (but such a signing can’t be ruled out).

Remarkably, for Holliday, as unbelievable as this may sound, average annual salary has always been discussed as a secondary issue. In the past, he has candidly noted that his main priority as a free agent would be to acquire security via a long-term deal, one with a no-trade clause attached.

During spring training in 2008, when the Rockies offered Holliday a 4-year deal worth $82M (before the market crashed), he rejected the proposal because of the lack of years provided by Colorado, and because the deal was devoid of no-trade protection. “How many years is the bottom line,” Holliday noted last September when discussing the rejected contract. “The offer doesn’t even have to be market value. But half of the years that I could get on the open market, to me, is not in the same ballpark. What about when they won’t give you a no-trade clause,” he added, “and the first chance that comes up where they want to trade you, they just trade you?”

Expounding on the issue of security, Holliday stated, “The advantage of being a free agent and having a long-term deal is the security of staying in one place, right? So you can raise your family and be a part of that community… If you get a chance to entertain offers of six or seven years with a no-trade clause, you can have a chance to live a normal life for six or seven years in one city.” Thus, to Matt Holliday, the virtues of free agency revolve around long-term comfortability for him and his family. Sure, money is a big part of that, too, but geographical security — knowing you will remain in one city for 6-7 years — might be more fundamental.

These are all good things for the Yankees, who have an opening in left field. While I doubt the Steinbrenners will open the vault and pay $18M per year, perhaps if Cashman offered Holliday a $115-120M contract over 7 years, with the deal backloaded a bit — it would give the team wiggle room for a DH or SP this season, plus Alex Rodriguez will be making $10M less by the end of the deal and Derek Jeter will be gone — and a no-trade clause adorned, then the team could make something happen. That’s a lot of money, obviously, however, Holliday would be worth it assuming he maintains previous levels of production (he’s been worth nearly $30M per, on average, over the past 3 years). Perhaps the added no-trade clause, the desire to play in New York, and the annual playoff trips will be enough to sway the burly left fielder to join the Bombers. It’s a long-shot, and Scott Boras will likely be against the offer, but it can’t hurt to try.

Photo by the AP

Related posts:

  1. Cards offer Holliday 8 years, $128M
  2. Boras used Yanks to obtain Holliday’s deal?
  3. Holliday Likely Off The Table
  4. Matt Holliday wants to be a Yankee?
  5. The Matt Holliday Sweepstakes

9 Responses to “For Holliday, security is key”

  1. jeremy says:

    does anyone know exactly what the yanks current payroll is? i dont have the exact numbers and stuff but for arguments sake i’d estimate around, oh, $40 million was off the books at the START of the offseason right? and they added 11.75 for pettite and im not sure EXACTLY how much for granderson, maybe $5-7? my point is, is that nyy wanted to be at around 185 i belive so unless they were to unload a guy like swisher, i dont think holliday will be a yankee. i love swisher, he’s a great guy but, am i the only one confused as to why he was terrible at home this year??? i’m not saying that he’ll be as bad in his 2nd year in 2010 but its a major concern to me at least. if the management is concerned, i could see them finding a good deal to send swisher somewhere, in order to have more payroll flexibility for holliday. personally, i’d like that move if it meant getting holliday OR to sign mike cameron for ONE year, then next offseason try to get either carl crawford or jason werth. comments?  

    (Quote)

    [Reply To This Comment]

  2. gfd says:

    Yankees are sitting at 180 million.This doesn’t include Damon or Matsui. They had about 50 million at season’s end come off the books.  

    (Quote)

    [Reply To This Comment]

  3. leftylarry says:

    Any chance Igawa can be bought out or that someone might assume 1-2 million of his contract this and next season?
    What is he making, 10-12 million per?  

    (Quote)

    [Reply To This Comment]

    jeremy Reply:

    lol!!!! wow, i forgot about him. i tell you what, if someone would be willing to take him, it wouldnt shock me to see the yanks pay half of his remaining salary! that would be the day huh?  

    (Quote)

    [Reply To This Comment]

    Chip Reply:

    Igawa is only making about 4 million per year. It was the posting fee that was so expensive.  

    (Quote)

    [Reply To This Comment]

  4. JD says:

    The redsox will sign this guy. No doubt.  

    (Quote)

    [Reply To This Comment]

  5. Chip says:

    Why wouldn’t you offer something more like 7 years/100 million? I mean then you’re looking at 14 or so million a year but with the long-term deal he wants. If he agrees, why not go for it?  

    (Quote)

    [Reply To This Comment]

    Chris H. Reply:

    Definitely begin with that or even something lower for an opening bid. It won’t get done, IMO, because it’s well under market value but it doesn’t hurt to try low, first.  

    (Quote)

    [Reply To This Comment]

  6. Great article, well written.

    I am the MD of text-lock and we are soon launching our new product text-padlock, which is a padlock which can be operated remotely by mobile phone, leaving an electronic signature of anyone using or requesting access. Please see http://www.text-lock.com/text-lock_GSM_SMS_padlock.html for more details on the product.

    I welcome your opinions on this and would be fascinated to see your views in this blog.

    You can contact me info@text-lock.co.uk if you need more information.

    Oliver  

    (Quote)

    [Reply To This Comment]

Leave a Reply

(required)

(required)