None of this, “the meeting went well”, “we’re on the list” (following a mind-blowing pre-emptive offer three weeks before)….. Ask any experienced negotiator what that really means.

But it is a creative way for a small market team to influence a big-ticket player to their organization. The player can seek greener pastures, and the team can minimze long-term obligations (assuming the opt-out is exercised).

Having said that, the totality of your argument is compelling. CC would be a fool to turn down the Yankee offer from a monetary perspective. Sox fans are hoping that the specter of fat joke headlines in the Post and Daily News will be enough to dissuade him.

Brian,

You’re severely overvaluing the opt out clause here.

Let’s put it this way. Say you were his agent and think of it this way.

What is the probability that you exercise the opt out?

Let’s put it at 60% yes/ 40% no – and I think the actual probability of him using the clause is less.

That’s a 40% chance he gets no value what so ever from the clause.

People are generalizing way too much from the ARod opt out clause.

Here’s why.

ARod did not turn any of his value into non-monetary value by getting that opt out written in. That was already by far the largest contract in history – it was a complete outlier in terms of value.

So it wasn’t like ARod was picking between one deal that was $200M + opt out and the other that was $250M in dollars. In Alex’s case the opt out was a brilliant source of surplus value that Boras negotiated into the contract. It was surplus value on top of the record setting monetary value.

CC’s case is entirely different. Here the brewers are offerring $110M + opt out vs. $140M cash.

Do you think that the right to opt out is anywhere remotely close to $30M? No way.

If it was $140M + opt out vs. $140M cash only sure it has real value – then it would be closer to the ARod situation.

But why should CC ever defer any of his present value into potential future dollars? He would be dumb to make that exchange. If he could get both – maximum dollar and opt out then sure he should jump at that.

But sub-maximum value + opt out is not nearly as attractive.

Remember – he’s a pitcher. Projecting their future value is completely different than a position player.

If CC settles for $30M less and takes the opt out to make up value and then injures his arm that opt out becomes worthless – even after opting out he wouldn’t get an AAV of 24M/yr. That would be a disaster for him.

For CC the opt out as proposed by the Brewers would be an example of him externalizing his net value into non-monetary means. That makes little sense for him.

In the three big recent opt out cases – Alex, JD Drew and Burnett – all three players took the maximum guaranteed dollars offerred to them and then on top of that got the opt out written in. In none of those cases did the player trade his net value and externalize it into a future option. They got max money and the opt out.

That’s why those deals worked so well for the players. They had the best of both worlds.

That wouldn’t be the case with CC at all as he would be taking 22% fewer guaranteed dollars. And that’s what matters first and foremost – guaranteed money not future potential dollars.

Taking future potential dollars instead of guaranteed present dollars is almost the opposite way in which economics makes sense.

That would be an awful financial deal for CC.

Now if he could get the yanks to write in an opt out that would be brilliant on his part. But that’s not going to happen.