The opt out clause will be a significant part of whether or not this is a good deal.

$18 mil a year..just wow!
but he is young, shown himself to be durable and productive. So it kinda works! Just how much money is floating around with these teams..

Less clutch than A-Rod

He's clutch. what are you talking about? He frequently hit important hits, carrying the offence when it was down. He had the game winner against Mariano Rivera in the 11th...

If you factor in the $6 million he makes next year, this is an 8 year, 132 million deal, which is almost the exact same as Soriano. His power numbers are a little less, but could be up there...he can steal bases if need be, and he's younger and better defensively. I hope he has a monster year next several years with Thomas and Glaus and OVerbay behind him and Rios in front of him. Damn!

Also, mlb.com alone gives every team 70 million dollars at least per year....so every team should have at least 70 mil for payroll just to break even. That doesn't count tickets sold, tv, merchandising....all teams are fine. Jays are trying to do what they have to to live in the AL east. Theyre better than most teams in baseball but are in the hardest quarters and trying to get even better.

Well, I know for a fact Jim Kaat approves.

Joking aside, Wells is an excellent player. A notch below great, but he can still take that next step.

Wow, this is surprising. But in a good way. Good for him and good for Jays fans.

Aren't they glad they didn't sign Gil Meche now?

This is a great move for the Blue Jays, locking up one of their franchise players through his prime.

If I were Wells, I would still test the free agency waters. But I could understand how it would be tough to turn away from this contract.

It still won't be enough to get the Blue Jays into the playoffs, but it ensures 3 quality teams in the AL East for the foreseeable future.

Also, mlb.com alone gives every team 70 million dollars at least per year...

What now? MLB.com takes in $2.1B in profit annually?

What, no Bagwell retires thread?

The MLB.com estimate is a TAD high. I think they are somewhere in the range of $500m in revenue and I assume that Bowman and company aren't working for free or that Manhattan rents are more in New York City than in Kansas, however, I wouldn't be shocked if teams see $20m per team from MLB.com within a year or two.

So much for one year Lofton stop-gap.

Here I can give you a link

In 2000, a few visionary executives saw the potential for baseball on the Internet and at the same time recognized the dangers of losing out to an upstart that could duplicate content such as stats or analysis. Baseball's 30 teams agreed to each kick in $1-million (U.S.) a season over four years to jump-start the venture at a time when streaming media was in its infancy.

Revenue from the site, which is divided equally between the 30 teams, soared to $195-million last year, from $36-million in 2001. Visitors have climbed to 1.7 billion from 190 million during that time, while subscribers — who shell out anywhere from $10 a season to $100 for access to video, audio and statistical breakdowns of games — hit 1.3 million last year, up from 125,000 in 2001.

When baseball considered taking MLB Advanced Media public in late 2004, four U.S. investment banks valued the company at between $2-billion and $2.5-billion. Thanks to the rapidly rising popularity of Internet video, that valuation has risen to between $4-billion and $5-billion since, the league says.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20061025.wmlbdotcomm1025/BNStory/Technology/einsider

Your right that averages only about $7 million per team.

f I were Wells, I would still test the free agency waters.

Rationally, this makes sense, but I cannot imagine being in a position where I could turn down a guaranteed $126 million.

So yeah, $6.5M per team, and that's taxed of course too. Per team, they likely only see a few million each from this right now.

When baseball considered taking MLB Advanced Media public in late 2004, four U.S. investment banks valued the company at between $2-billion and $2.5-billion. Thanks to the rapidly rising popularity of Internet video, that valuation has risen to between $4-billion and $5-billion since, the league says.
That's valuation, not profit. Am I right?

When baseball considered taking MLB Advanced Media public in late 2004, four U.S. investment banks valued the company at between $2-billion and $2.5-billion. Thanks to the rapidly rising popularity of Internet video, that valuation has risen to between $4-billion and $5-billion since, the league says.
That's valuation, not profit. Am I right?

Yes. It might be worth $70M or more (by these highest estimates, well over $100M) per team. But in terms of revenue, it's $6.5M/team/yr.

The Jays are buying the decline phase of a guy who is NOT a superstar and who is likely to give .345/.495 BEFORE declining, for $18 million a year, and I'm the only one who thinks the Jays are making a grave mistake?

I'd starting fitting JP for the millstone as soon as this turkey of a contract gets signed.

For me, this whole signing hinges upon a) how likely salaries are to keep rising, b) how likely the Jays payroll is to keep rising, and c) how difficult it would have been to replace Vernon.

It is true that Rios & Lind & Johnson would have given the Jays the option of just sticking Johnson in CF, but surely, one of these three will struggle in 2007. Not having Wells signed beyond the season would have brought in a lot of pressure to deal him and go with those three in the OF. Bringing in someone new later is very expensive if Matthews and Pierre weren't just blips.

Vernon is no superstar, but he is truly above average in a diffcult position.

I'm hoping that JP's figured out the market a little bit: his signings of Burnett and Ryan look very, very good now.