Helton Trade Talks Confirmed.....

[denverbearsfan]

The point wasn't about Ryan Shealy being the 2nd coming, it was that the Rockies don't have a consistent plan. Helton's salary suddenly didn't become a problem this offseason - it's been a burden for several seasons now. The plan last offseason was to keep Todd long term and try Shealy in the outfield to open up a spot for Ryan. Now all of a sudden Todd's salary is judged to be too big of a burden for the team by the Monforts. Why not recognize this seasons ago when Todd had more market value? (especially when the team had other options at first base)

Some may say "well they expected Todd to bounce back to his all star performance" Even if Helton did perform better the last two seasons his salary still didn't make sense with the Monforts not raising the overall payroll to upgrade other positions on the team.

[sg8335aa]

I think the plan is still consistent.....but the market has changed. The Rockies thought they could resign their own players AND keep Helton. However, salaries went CRAZY this off-season and as such the price to keep players such as Atkins, Jennings, Cook...etc...is higher and thus impossible to keep their homegrown players and keep Helton.

[RMF]

Originally Posted by sg8335aa

I think the plan is still consistent.....but the market has changed. The Rockies thought they could resign their own players AND keep Helton. However, salaries went CRAZY this off-season and as such the price to keep players such as Atkins, Jennings, Cook...etc...is higher and thus impossible to keep their homegrown players and keep Helton.

The baseball market isn't stable. The fact that the Rockies would plan for a stable environment as you suggest SG is crazy. This team will always continue to be a day late and a dollar short. You can't be purely reactionary and succeed in MLB.

Frankly I have a hard time imagining the rockies can be successful on the field with their current business strategy. They seem to be going in the wrong direction. Everybody in baseball is taking on debt. Not the Rockies their $$$ goes straight into the Monforts pockets. There really is no other explanation. If Monfort really is looking to make $$$ you'd think he'd want to at least shop the team. He doesn't seem to want to do that either.

Unfortunately, I think Charlie has made the Rockies his toy and the city and franchise continue to suffer for it.

[rockieprogress]

If the options are to get rid of Helton, and keep Cook, Atkins, Fuentes, who we can all agree will need to leave at a rate of 1 per year, or keep Helton at a decling rate of production, then where is the downside to the trade.

I don't see the downside of this.

While I could stand on the mountain tops and yell "the Rockies need to spend more money" for 5 years, one of the quickest ways to fix their payroll issue is to dump Helton, and take on no more than 1 year of contracts of players like Lowell and Taveres. Then adding money can bring real improvement.
It solves an awful lot of the player issues in one swoop.

HF, I disagree with your Holliday in '10. He's gone next off-season IMO.

[Roxpert]

The downside is that talent keeps leaking out of the organization at inopportune times simply because ownership arbitrarily decides it has to have a bottom-5 payroll in MLB. The failure to plan for this by the franchise is simply a plan to fail.

Helton is clearly being shopped to Boston. Why wasn't this done one or two years ago?

The franchise has been caught flat-footed with the escalation in payrolls this offseason, and the only way they saw fit to responding to salary inflation was to use this as an opportunity to unload a contract that seemed unmovable a year ago. While we see this as "selling low", Monfort probably sees this as selling high, or at least at a near-term peak of player salaries. He views this as taking advantage of a frenetic market by selling into it.

At least, that would be my educated guess.

[TheIncredibleRox]

Yeah, it's just obvious; this is cooking up to be an awful deal.

What's that line from Full Metal Jacket? Something like "it's a big s**t sandwich, and we're all gonna have to take a bite."

This rumor is so prevalent, so strong, and so well sourced that it looks like it has a 90% chance of happening. I really, really hope it doesnt.

I understand Boston is incurring some risk with Helton's rumored back problems and with his recent decline.

But if they're just going to be paying him essentially $8 mil a season from here out, that's a steal in this market as long as he doesn't dramatically decline. We should be able to force some real talent out of them, considering the proposition; or at least better than a poor contract of their own plus a live arm for the back of the bullpen. I just feel sick to my stomach.

The real kicker is this; even if we're optimistic and assume we don't get stuck with a poor contract (Lowell, Clement) in return, our total $$ savings from this would be around $7 mil a year. What's that going to get you on next year's FA market? It wasn't enough to get Randy Wolf or Eric Gagne [i]this[i] offseason, and those were the contracts [i]deflated[i] by a huge amount of perceived risk.

So, you know what this gets you, kids? A year from now, when offseason rolls around, Daddys gonna buy you an extra Latroy Hawkins. Group hug everybody, we did it!

[Below C-Level]

Originally Posted by TheIncredibleRox

But if they're just going to be paying him essentially $8 mil a season from here out, that's a steal in this market as long as he doesn't dramatically decline.

What orifice do people keep pulling this $8M figure out of? And why?

Helton is owed $90.1M in guaranteed money over the next 5 years. That's $18.2M annually.

If the Rockies pay $40M of that, then the Sox still would be on the hook for the lion's share of $50.1M over 5 years. That's just over $10M annually.

The Red Sox would be paying him $10M AAV through 2011.

The Rockies would be paying him $18.2M AAC through 2011.

The Rockies would realize $50.1 million in salary relief over the next 5 years, which is just over $10M per season...not $7M.

[Heltonfan]

If we cover $40M of Helton's contract, and have to take on Clement or Lowell, then we're effectively covering $49 million. Hence the $8m/year commitment for the Red Sox.

[Below C-Level]

Yeah, but that's some fuzzy accounting. I see what you're saying, but it's a slippery slope. You have to start evaluating it like you would an NBA trade after a while, with expiring contracts, etc. Besides, what value do you assign a 23 year old pitcher who isn't arbitration eligible until 2010?

[TheIncredibleRox]

Helton is owed $90.1M in guaranteed money over the next 5 years. That's $18.2M annually.

If the Rockies pay $40M of that, then the Sox still would be on the hook for the lion's share of $50.1M over 5 years. That's just over $10M annually.

That's not the correct way to do it. You're misrepresenting the average $ saved per year-- it escalates dramatically after 2010. Of course, with inflation that increase will be more than cancelled out.

So, assuming the contract is split (some say we pay more, some say we pay less) we're saving $8.3 mil year through 2010--so, those are the benefits we're going to see in the immediate future.

Assume we don't take on a bad contract in return (again, that's optimistic--if we do, then this deal REALLY sucks). Subtract the 2007 salary of Delcarmen and Hansen from the $8.4 mil, and you're under $7 M.

So take your $10.1m figure and shove it back up whatever orifice it came from-- it's no good.

[Below C-Level]

First of all, I used AAV for a reason. And that reason is because that's how MLB calculates salaries to avoid this exact conversation. You're talking about inflation and present day dollars when I was not.

Second. Inflation will "more than cancel out" the $2.5M increase in his base salary in 2011? Really? Sure you don't want to recalculate that? That's some pretty serious inflation... And that doesn't even address the $4.5M buyout that is due prior to the start of the 2012 season.

And you're also assuming a 50/50 split? Why? "Some say more, some say less"?
Show me a single news outlet that says the Rockies may be on the hook for more than half...or even half for that matter.

If you're hellbent on skewering every move the front office makes, or even contemplates, that's fine. But don't be intellectually dishonest about it.

[Heltonfan]

By my calculations, Helton was worth 3.35 WAR last year, despite spending two weeks on the DL and the last four months of the season in a weakened state. Such is the value of a .400+ OBP. If we take his '06 performance to be his true ability level going forward - which, to reiterate, is a ridiculous thing to do - he'd be worth $14.4 million AAV on the free agent market. If we assume even a modest rebound - say, 4 WAR - he's a $17 million player.

He's not worth that much to us, because we can't afford to pay $4.3 million per win to free agent talent... but to a team like the Red Sox, who a) play in a large market and b) are in a situation where each marginal win is immensely valuable (either for catching the Yankees or for holding off the Indians/Tigers/whoever for the wild card), Helton is worth damn near every penny. In fact, if I were Theo Epstein, and I had a one-time opportunity to deal Lowell for Helton straight up, with no money changing hands, I'd do it.

My point here is not to illustrate how awful the rumored deal is for us. TIR and I have done that already. My point is to show how absurdly great it would be for Boston. Given the names that are being bandied about (Hansen/Delcarmen plus assorted expensive crap), if we can't get the Red Sox to cover at least $65 million of Helton's contract, something is horribly wrong. Everything we've read so far suggests that the Red Sox are playing Monfort for a fool, trying to pull off a Kazmir/Zambrano-level heist... and I'm inclined to think that they're going to get away with it.

Oh, and C-Level: if you had read anything that TIR has written on other topics, you'd know that he's not "hellbent on skewering every move the front office makes." That's a ridiculous accusation.

[Below C-Level]

Interesting.

I think we've reached the point of diminishing returns as far as the trade speculation goes. DOD isn't even in town until tomorrow or Tuesday and there are so many rumored permutations of this deal that it's hard to even have a productive conversation if you can't agree on whether the Rockies are paying $30 million or $45 million, or getting back Clement, Lowell and Tavares or some combination of Ellsbury, Hansen et al.

IF it happens, I don't see the Rockies getting killed on this deal when all is said and done. If money really does rule the day on Blake Street, then why would they deal away Helton for a marginal savings of $7 or $8 million?

I think it will either not happen at all or look much, much differently by the time it does happen. Remember, it wasn't long ago when the name coming back from Boston was Manny Ramirez. Now it's Kason Gabbard and their worst contracts? Let it play out...

Edit: I apologize if I was unfair in my characterization of TIR's postings. I may well have confused him/her with one of the other incurable pessimists that this board is teeming with. If that's the case, then my bad.

[Roxpert]

Of course, it's all speculation at this point as to exactly what the terms of this trade may be. We are all reading the same articles, and while the likelihood of a deal seems real, we just don't know all the possibilities. For example, if this trade enables us to land Milledge or Baldelli, and costs us, say, $40 million of Helton's contract, maybe it will be palatable.

In my view, if the Rockies accept Clement's or Lowell's contracts, they would be IN LIEU of sending them dollars. In other words, we could pay in cash or in kind, or a combination. If the BoSox demand $40 million of subsidies for taking on Helton's contracts, I could see us actually sending out only $25 million (over time) and assuming $15 million of deadweight contracts. Why would the Red Sox want it structured that way? It may have something to do with the luxury tax.

In short, I have a hard time believing we would take on big contracts AND send Boston $40+ million cash too. I'm not liking the sounds of this deal, but I'm willing to give DOD and Monfort a chance to show us their work first.

BTW, I think this is a Monfort-driven deal since articles claim that financial terms have already been worked out at the ownership level (last fall?) and that DOD is in charge of finding the suitable talent to take back. Monfort may have just become MLB's worst meddler. Again, we'll see.

[TheIncredibleRox]

If money really does rule the day on Blake Street, then why would they deal away Helton for a marginal savings of $7 or $8 million?

Um.... seriously?

First of all, I used AAV for a reason. And that reason is because that's how MLB calculates salaries to avoid this exact conversation. You're talking about inflation and present day dollars when I was not.

Well, let's talk about it how it will actually happen; do a simple IF/THEN test to examine the options:

#1: Keep Helton, and he receives $16.6 next year.

#2: Take my terribly optimistic version of the deal (split contract, Hansen and Delcarmen and a Minor League PTBNL), and your marginal savings are just under $7M for 2006.

Now, that $7M of savings is really the high point of the marginal savings going forward. Two reasons;

1. Delcarmen and Hansen's salaries will rise every year we have them, Helton's won't rise until after 2010.

2. Salary inflation squeezes us on both ends.

For example, the present value of Helton's 2010 contract ($16.6M) is only $12.2m, assuming a very conservative 8% average annual inflation. Most people use 10% or higher.

That inflation also means that the rate of salary increase for the players we receive (Delcarmen, Hansen) will be higher annually than it's current level. A twice-compounded 8% increase on ~$2.5M or whatever they receive in their first arb isn't a huge sum, but is certainly worth mentioning, and it will keep growing.

So, just under $7M saved over the next season is the highest value yield we'll receive from this trade. Nowhere close to $10M per year.

don't be intellectually dishonest about it.

"Hey Kettle, this is the Pot calling..."