Some feel the Nimmo 8 year, $160 million contract that runs him through age 37 was a bad one, and see evidence of badness in his declining offense.
Yes, the 31 year old Nimmo is only hitting .247.
But his OBP in 2024 is a still-strong .368, close to his career norms.
And exclude his 1 for 21 in his first 5 games, which were essentially played inside a Frigidaire, and he has hit a solid .260 since.
He hit .315/.406/.598 in June, so has he just had a slow start that has now corrected itself? Seems absolutely so.
And what is slow about 50 RBIs in 77 games played, especially when in 40 of those games, he was batting lead off?
50 RBIs is 22nd best in baseball, very impressive for a player who has batted lead off in the majority of his games.
He is hitting .338/.466/.592 with runners in scoring position this year.
So…
They signed Nimmo for 8 years (6 years to run after this year). Even though he is paid a level $20 million a year, one would expect age-related decline into his later 30s, so I estimated below his “age-based salary” (if you tried to match his expected age-related performance to dollars, which is what they really are paying him for).
The club understood that, and so did Nimmo, when he signed the $162 million deal, that his best production was likely to occur in the contract’s early years.
His age-adjusted contract, had it been signed that way, would probably have been more like $30MM year 1, $27MM year 2, $24MM year 3, $21MM year 4, $19MM year 5, $16MM year 6, $13MM year 7, and $10MM year 8.
In other words, when they signed that contract with him, they expected him at age 30 to play like a $30MM player, and this year to play like a $27MM player.
In 2023, he production-wise appeared to be a $30MM-equivalent player (.274/.363/.466 in 152 games, with 24 HRs, 36 doubles/triples, 74 RBIs (again, mostly as a lead off hitter), and 89 runs scored.
His RBIs and very solid OBP so far in 2024 clearly seem to support a $27MM-equivalent ballplayer salary. And he has been very durable in 2023 and 2024.
Continuing to think along this logical approach, it appears they are satisified they properly paid him for 2023 and 2024, and really hope he will provide $103 million in value in 2025-30, over the last 6 years ($160MM - ($30MM year 1 + $27MM year 2)), even though he’ll actually get paid $120 million over the last 6 years.
So...is Nimmo's contract looking to you a bad contract or good contract, and why?
8 comments:
Look...
You know I don't like contracts that either extend or are new past five years. I don't care who they are for. Players decline and are seldom worth what you pay them in there final years.
That being said, I like Brandon and the current Mets outlook in the outfield is weak. He anchors one of the three starting spots so I guess I can live with this one, but don't be surprised that he is a utility outfielder in the last two years of this deal.
I love Nimmo. Love his hustle, his attitude, his striving to improve, etc. Overall I wouldn't say a bad contract, just too many years, since he's struggled with injuries.
Mack, that could catch up with Nimmo at some point, but after he missed a few months due to that bulging disc, he made a decision to not be reckless. And he has been very durable and productive in 2023 and 2024 as a result. I don't want him diving unnecessarily, running into walls (a la Mike Baxter - how did that work out for him?) or even stealing bases. I want Nimmo starting 150+ games each year.
I think if one looked at his $160MM and for simplicity, figured he'd earned $60MM of it these two years, that would leave $100MM for 6 years. Factor in inflation and that is risky but probably not excessive.
I wasn't keen on the contract when he signed it. I am now glad he did.
Jon G, he is a great and pretty unique talent and fan favorite. Like I said with Mack above, he altered how risky he is willing to be, and hence has played almost every game in 2023 and 2024. I sure hope that continues. I expect him to get more days off starting in a few years, to protect himself - perhaps as occasional DH.
Got to admit he's been clutch player this year.
Tom, not to go off topic, but Pete is similar. He is a fan favorite, but I don't think he'll age well. 4 or 5 years max is what I'd offer him, knowing that toward the end of the contract he'll be DH'ing more
Jon G, I agree that Pete is unlikely to age well. I do not want to get ahead of ourselves in terms of if he will be back next year, but I don’t think so. The Yanks do, however, love sluggers.
Ray, I think for Nimmo, “clutch” for him used to be working out walks where you’d ask yourself, how does he lay off pitches so close to being strikes? He is really valuable in constantly putting pressure on opposing pitchers.
Post a Comment