So you're saying I shot myself in the temple too soon?

I suspect that it would be a PR nightmare if the Yankees give him a pay cut. Unless Rivera makes it plain that he considers 2013 a "make-up year" and signs for the minimum or something (which I don't suspect he would). I'll be interested about the money.

I suspect that it would be a PR nightmare if the Yankees give him a pay cut. Unless Rivera makes it plain that he considers 2013 a "make-up year" and signs for the minimum or something (which I don't suspect he would). I'll be interested about the money.

One never knows, of course, but I imagine Rivera will end up signing a deal with a relatively low base, and some fairly easily reachable incentives assuming he is healthy and effective. I mean, I can't imagine he or Fernando Cuza would really be concerned the Yankees are going to move him out of the closer's role in an attempt to save some cash.

It's the Yankees. He'll get 2/50 or something.

What is his fmv?

What is his fmv?

Nathan at his peak was Rivera-esque. He missed all of 2010 and pitched 44 lousy innings in 2011 (but good K/9 and K/BB) and he got 2/$14.5 at age 37. I doubt anybody wants to give Rivera a 2-year contract but 1/$9 sounds about right. Maybe add $1-2 M given all the money out there.

I suspect that it would be a PR nightmare if the Yankees give him a pay cut.

Disagree. It might be a PR nightmare if the Yankees hardball him and "force" him to take a pay cut. I suspect the negotiations aren't going to be contentious though. Rivera knows he's not getting $15 M and he knows he's not getting a 2-year contract (vesting option maybe).

But also, the Yanks have been down this path before. They survived the Bernie debacle. They survived Pettitte leaving town. The fans actually seemed more annoyed than grateful that they didn't can Posada earlier.

But also, the Yanks have been down this path before. They survived the Bernie debacle. They survived Pettitte leaving town. The fans actually seemed more annoyed than grateful that they didn't can Posada earlier.

This isn't quite the same.

Mo is an icon and everyone know it. Plus the business has an inflated sense of closers' value. I suspect the talks start at 1/$10M and go up from there.

Cashman: Hi, Mo. How ya feeling?

Mo: I AM the droid you are looking for. (waves hand creepily)

Cashman: You ARE the droid I am looking for.

Mo: 1 year, eleventy BILLION dollars.

Cashman: Yes. That's the droid AND the price I am looking for....

Cashman: Hi, Mo. How ya feeling?

Mo: I AM the droid you are looking for. (waves hand creepily)

Cashman: You ARE the droid I am looking for.

Mo: 1 year, eleventy BILLION dollars.

Cashman: Yes. That's the droid AND the price I am looking for....

Emperor Selig: Excellent.

The Yankees aren't going to low ball Mariano Rivera. He'll get the opportunity to earn about what he earned before, but possibly structured differently - ~$10-12M in salary and ~$3-5M in bonuses based on appearances. Maybe with a player option for 2014 that vests if he hits those appearance numbers.

~$3-5M in bonuses based on appearances

I thought they got rid of those?

This isn't quite the same.

Not quite, no. But every team says goodbye to their icons sooner or later. The Yankees have never had any problems shooing their icons out the door and the fans don't go away.

Even the drunken-est bonehead in the divey-est bar in the seediest part of NY knows that Mo missed all of last year and will be 43 years old. Even that guy doesn't think Mo is the 2013 savior. Sports radio would flare up and everybody would yammer about it in spring training but it only becomes a major issue if the Yanks blow their first 9 saves or something.

But it's a moot point because it's not going to happen. He'll sign with the Yanks for good, not great, closer money (possibly with incentives and options) and that will be the end of it.

Look at A-Rod. Look at Jeter. Mo will get whatever he asks for. He's Mo. It's the Yankees.

The general (though not universal) attitude in this thread is confusing to me. It seems to be, essentially, "face the facts, we all know he's done", or at least something approaching that.

Why wouldn't you give him a two year deal? The man's been awesome more or less continuously from 1996 right up to the freak injury, and as far as I know has shown zero signs of not continuing to be awesome. I admit I don't know much about the prospects of comebacks from torn ACLs for pitchers, but is it really something that is obviously insurmountable?

I'm certainly not saying he's definitely going to be awesome, but I wouldn't have said he'd definitely be awesome even if the injury didn't occur and he was awesome through a full season last year. And the opposite attitude - "he's obviously done" - seems kind of weird to me.

Look at A-Rod. Look at Jeter. Mo will get whatever he asks for.

Jeter's agent did float a trial balloon about a $150M contract being reasonable last time around. Lots of teeth were gnashed before he settled for his current meager contract.

Why wouldn't you give him a two year deal

Well, after the A-rod deal I can see why you'd ask. But the answer would be that injuries to 42-year-olds are not freak injuries.

The other reason is that you do not fear losing him to free agency after this season. At this point you can sign him to a series of 1-year-deals until he decides to return to his home planet.

Mo is an icon and everyone know it. Plus the business has an inflated sense of closers' value. I suspect the talks start at 1/$10M and go up from there.

I think 1/10 with incentives is how it will play. Mo takes a paycut but gets to hide behind a nice round double digit number. The incentives cover both sides and if Mo squints hard enough, he might even theorize it's not a paycut. It's only 1 year and doesn't impact the magical 2014 budget. And it puts asses in the seats just in case the Yankees struggle and aren't making the playoffs in 2013.

I'm a big proponent of overpaying for 1 year deals under normal circumstances, but double considering 2014's budget AND triple considering it's Mo. Just sign Kuroda, Andy, and Mo, throw some crap in RF, and call it an offseason.

Wasn't it widely believed that Rivera was going to retire after 2012 had he not been injured? In fact, didn't he practically say as much? Why should we think he's interested in anything more than a one year deal for 2013?

CA has it right in 19. I can't imagine he's looking for two years. I think the 1/10 with incentives proposed in 18 is perfect.

I suspect whatever happens, it will be smooth - no one is going to have interest in fighting about this one.

Wasn't it widely believed that Rivera was going to retire after 2012 had he not been injured? In fact, didn't he practically say as much?

He actually said the reverse, that he was planning to come back regardless. But given that as early as '99 Rivera has been talking about retiring to be a Priest, a one-year deal seems more than reasonable.

EDIT: Sorry, I meant to source that:
http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/05/09/mariano-rivera-was-probably-pitching-in-2013-regardless/

Wasn't it widely believed that Rivera was going to retire after 2012 had he not been injured?

Rivera has talked of retiring every time his contract comes up. Might be just a bit of a negotiating ploy.

The general (though not universal) attitude in this thread is confusing to me. It seems to be, essentially, "face the facts, we all know he's done", or at least something approaching that.

He's obviously not done. His CPU needed a year to be upgraded and he'll be back to the old robot.

Why wouldn't you give him a two year deal

Well, after the A-rod deal I can see why you'd ask. But the answer would be that injuries to 42-year-olds are not freak injuries.

Is that first sentence supposed to be some sort of zinger? The idea that a two year contract for one person is as bad of an idea as a ten year contract for another person is questionable at best.

As for the second sentence, of course his injury was a freak injury. It was pretty much the definition of a freak injury. He may be more susceptible to injuries than he used to be due to his age, but if so that's true regardless.