Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Joel Kellen's avatar

I really feel like we are looking at more like a 6 year deal here. I just don’t see the royals going 14 years….and honestly, I’m not sure I see Witt going 14 years. Why would you lock yourself into a long term deal like that on a bad team? Six years….your 29/30…you’ve got an out if the organization never really competes. But I do think the Royals try REALLY hard this offseason to at least get a couple more years. If they can’t, the timing just isn’t right to trade him this offseason. You’re trying to get a new ballpark, and you trade the guy you said was going to be a star? Don’t think so….optics would be terrible and it wouldn’t be helping your cause at all for your project as owner.

Expand full comment
Tracey's avatar

Because I think every decision the Royals make this off-season is being made through the prism of the stadium campaign, I unfortunately (?) think it's much more likely they end up on the 6 year extension. That's because I think for purposes of impressing voters, what matters is extending him, not the details.

I'd rather see him locked up as long as possible, but it may work to our favor if they land on the shorter option: that would potentially make it easier for Sherman to stomach making multiple big free agent signings. My belief is that there must be at least 1 splashy FA if they expect voters to approve the stadium, but wouldn't it be nice if they signed 2 impact players, plus whatever they can get for MJ and Pratto and whoever else they deal?

While I'm spending Sherman's money, hopefully they also sign Vinnie to an extension instead of waiting for him to finish in the top 10 of OPS next season and then deciding he's too expensive.

Expand full comment
22 more comments...

No posts