Matt Moore and Contracts

Despite its title, this post was actually inspired by Trevor Cahill.  I was reading Keith Law's take on the Cahill/Parker trade (he doesn't think the A's got enough) and Cahill's contract caught my eye.  I hadn't realized he was signed through 2015 at a very reasonable price, with club options through 2017 (which includes very reasonable buyouts, I might add).  In the last 2 years of the deal, Cahill will be making 7.5 and 12 million dollors (how much are the Reds giving Bronson Arroyo?) and as Law points out, Cahill has the potential to be more that just a middle of the rotation guy.  In his age 22 and 23 seasons he's turned in 2.2 and 2.5 WAR (fangraphs).

But this isn't necessarily about Cahill.  It's about his team friendly contract.  This also got me to thinking about Matt Moore, who earlier this week may have set a new standard for team friendly contracts.  His 5 year, $14M signing may make him the most valuable trade chip in baseball (again, fangraphs).  And those numbers don't even include his 3 years of club options.  See the fangraphs article for more details.  This isn't the first time the Rays have done this.  If Moore's contract is the most team friendly in baseball, it's only slightly more so than teammate Evan Longoria's.  This isn't news, but when all is said and done the Rays have the potential to have enjoyed 9 years of Longoria's services at severely below market cost.

Point is, teams are doing this, and the Reds need to do this.  They already have, somewhat, with Jay Bruce, but compare these contracts:

Bruce: 6 years, $51 million, 1 club option, 8.0 career WAR before signing
Cueto: 4 years, $27 million, 1 club option, 5.4 career WAR before signing
Cahill: 5 years, $30.5 million, 2 club options, 2.8 career WAR before signing
Longoria: 6 years, $17.5 million, 3 club options, 20 major league at bats before signing
Moore: 5 years $14 million, 3 club options, 19 major league innings before signing

The differences here are obvious.  Just one man's opinion, but I think the Reds are waiting too long.  The Rays are pushing the envelope, and when you're in the AL East with their payroll, you need to.  The risk the team is taking on is nothing compared to the potential reward.  Obviously Longoria has worked out.  Remember, Bruce and Longoria were fighting it out for the title of #1 prospect just a few summers ago.  The Reds could have put themselves in the same position, and though Longoria has reached super-stardom, he is getting a third as much guaranteed money as Bruce.

What about Mike Leake?  Straight out of college he has produced 2.5 WAR in his two seasons with the Reds, and his style has drawn comparisons to Greg Maddux (though obviously not quite at the same level).  While not yet a star, he'll be just 24 next year and most consider him the second most reliable starter the Reds have (hopefully third most by the end of this offseason).  Are the Reds waiting for his breakout year to sign him to a long term deal?  Why not do it now for a fraction of the cost?  I am literally just pulling numbers out of thin air here, but don't you think they could sign him to a Matt Moore type deal but with less money?  Think of how little risk there is there with massive upside.  Four years $10 million with a couple club options?

It's time for the Reds to be proactive and realize that teams with their payroll need to sign their promising young players BEFORE the price gets to high.