FanPost

The Case for Extending Brett Lawrie

Billy Beane and the A's front office have done a lot of things right over the past decade and a half. Extensions are not one of these things. Part of this is due to a small sample - say what you will about the owners/budget, but the A's simply can't afford to be paying 36 year-old Yoenis Cespedes $20 million. Another reason for the small sample is how fluid the roster is. Nobody sticks around long enough to be extended.

A big reason for the lack of extensions is probably the lack of success on the few extensions that HAVE been given out. Coco Crisp, extended the day before FanFest 2014, battled injuries last season and saw his defensive metrics plummet. He is owed $22 mil over the next two years, and possibly $35 mil over the next three. These will be his age 35-37 seasons.

Then there was Brett Anderson. A few arbitration years were bought out a bargain price, for his age 23-27 seasons. He was the young, lefty ace of the A's, right? Wrong. After breaking out in 2010, Anderson managed to break seemingly every bone in his body. In the end, he netted the A's Chris Jensen and Drew Pomeranz, but I'd think it's still safe to say this extension was almost certainly a bust.

Finally, we turn back the clock even more to good ol' Eric Chavez. My absolute favorite player growing up, Chavez signed a 6 year, $66 million extension that covered his age 27-32 seasons (2005-2010). This was (and still is) the largest contract handed out in franchise history. Before signing this extension prior to the 2004 season, Chavez had accumulated 18.3 career fWAR over five seasons, not counting 48 PAs in 1998. He was a 25-30 HR, 80-110 RBI, 150 game, .280 hitting Gold Glove third baseman for four years in a row.

He kept this up through 2004 and 2005 (the first year of his extension). 2006 was a bit of an off year, due to a .257 BABIP and a couple minor injuries. Then, the injuries really hit. He played in 90 games in 2007, 23 in 2008, 8 in 2009, and 33 in 2010. His fWAR from 1998-2004 (before the extension kicked in): 21.3. His fWAR throughout the extension, from 2005-2010: 8.2. A sharp decline, fueled by injuries, by a previously durable third baseman.

Where does Brett Lawrie come in? Lawrie fits the Chavez profile - gold glove-caliber defense, power, ability to hit for average, a little speed. Alright. But Lawrie has already had serious injury problems. In four major league seasons, his career high for games played is only 125. Last year, he managed only 70. Why extend a guy with a serious risk of being the next Eric Chavez?

For one thing, upside. Lawrie's potential is through the roof. We're talking 25 dingers, 10 stolen bases, .280-.300 batting average. Basically prime Chavez, minus a few walks. He is slated to earn $1.8 mil in arbitration this year, so anywhere near that kind of production at that price would be a bargain. Once he starts producing, the price goes way up.

Another reason is how much the game has changed. Pitching has taken over the game. Offense is getting harder and harder to find, and more and more expensive. Kendrys freaking Morales just got two years, and almost $20 million. Money isn't the same as it used to be, either. Chavez's $66 million will get you an old, past-prime Nelson Cruz in 2014.

So, extend Lawrie now. Use the Chavez contract as a base, because Chavez's success prior to signing balances out the inflation. Let's start with a bump to $4 mil in 2015, then $7 mil in 2016, and $10 mil in 2017. Those are Lawrie's arbitration years. To me, that's in between what he would earn if he continued his previous production and what he would earn if he reached his ceiling. Next, three free agent years at $13 mil, $15 mil, and $16 mil. Throw in an option or two for $18 mil each. The total contract is 6 years, $65 mil, with the potential for 8 years, $101 mil.

Why does Lawrie accept this? The guaranteed portion of the deal keeps Lawrie through his age 30 season, letting him hit the market at age 31. It also gives him security, a big plus after his recent injuries. Finally, it lets him evolve into the franchise cornerstone he was once projected to be.

Is this a good deal for the A's? Last year, Lawrie was worth 1.7 fWAR in 70 games. Let's say getting off the turf/the Oakland training staff helps bump him up to 120 games a year. He would have been worth 2.4 fWAR last year if you extend that over 120 games. Let's say he is worth an average of that 2.4 fWAR a year over the 6 years of his contract. That's 14.4 fWAR for $65 mil, or about $4.5 mil per fWAR. The current market rate is $7.5 per fWAR, meaning that would be worth $108 mil, for a surplus value of $43 mil.

And that's seemingly Lawrie's floor. Steamer, a projection system, loves Lawrie. It has him projected for 3.5 fWAR in 120 games in 2015. Let's use that as his average fWAR. His total fWAR comes out to be 21, meaning about $3.1 mil per fWAR, for a surplus value of $92.5 mil. Woah. I'm not even factoring in the probable inflation of the market rate for fWAR.

Let's get silly. How about the best possible outcome for Lawrie? Let's give him 5 fWAR average over 150 games a year. That's 30 fWAR, or about $1.85 mil per fWAR over the six years. Surplus value? $160 MILLION. This makes me think my estimated extension could be off by 10-20 mil, but even if it is, the porbable surplus value is still considerable, and the possible surplus value if he hits his ceiling is still insane.

In a nutshell - a Brett Lawrie extension is good for everyone. The risk of him becoming post-extension Chavez is a real one, but the rising price for bats outweighs that risk. Lawrie gets his security. The A's get an above average third baseman at a bargain price, and possibly a stud third baseman at an absolute steal of a price. So, get on it, Billy Beane. Extend your new toy.