Brewers Sign Rickie Weeks To Four-Year Extension

The Brewers avoided arbitration with Rickie Weeks, signing the second baseman to a four-year deal that includes an option for 2015. The AP (via The Boston Herald) reports that the first four years of the contract are worth $38.5MM. Ken Rosenthal of FOX Sports reports that the Brewers can void the fifth year of the contract if Weeks is not an everyday player in 2013 and 2014 and Bob Nightengale of USA Today has the details (Twitter links). The deal could be worth up to $50MM, according to Rosenthal (links).

Weeks' deal eliminates the need for tomorrow's scheduled arbitration hearing. Weeks asked for $7.2MM in arbitration, while the Brewers countered with a $4.85MM submission, as our Arb Tracker shows.

Weeks, a former top prospect, broke out with his best season yet in 2010. The 28-year-old hit .269/.366/.464 with 29 homers and 32 doubles. He was able to avoid injuries, playing in as many as 130 games for the first time in his career.

Weeks' deal, which has been in the works throughout the offseason, prevents the second baseman from hitting free agency and buys out three free agent seasons. Next winter's crop of free agent second basemen got a little less interesting, now that Weeks has agreed to a deal with Milwaukee.

Jose Bautista, who is working on a multiyear deal with the Blue Jays, and Hunter Pence are the two remaining unsigned arbitration eligilbe players.

Tom Haudricourt of the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel first reported that the Brewers had a tentative agreement with Weeks.

68 Responses to Brewers Sign Rickie Weeks To Four-Year Extension Leave a Reply

  1. Flharfh 4 years ago

    As a Brewers fan, its nice to have 2b locked up for the near future, especially since we traded away Lawrie. It should lessen the impact of losing Fielder after this season. Weeks reminds me a lot of Jose Reyes in that he is an amazingly valuable player when healthy.

  2. Rickie Weeks is garbage. Guy couldn’t hit water if he fell out of a boat.

    • uhh, .269 with 29 homers is pretty darn good production out of a second baseman. So I would disagree that he’s garbage.

      He is however, in my mind an injury risk. But if healthy he’s going to be a real valuable player.

    • Yeah, 29 homers isn’t what you expect from a leadoff hitter too. Perhaps he will eventually blossom into a good middle of the order hitter if he is able to maintain his power.

    • OK, suppose he is garbage. I suppose that means that EVERYONE can have a second baseman like Utley, Cano, Pedroia, or even Uggla. Do some research! Second baseman that are capable of .260 with 30 HR are not easy to find.

    • Jeff Weissbuch 4 years ago

      The guy has been a good not great player for the Brewers

    • magnushanso 4 years ago

      Yeah… 6+ WAR players are garbage.

  3. That’s a LOT of money for a guy who JUST had his first healthy year.

    • nm344 4 years ago

      If he’d play out 2011 like his 2010, he’d be worth more than the 45MM/3Yrs that they are giving him as he would be a free agent. Its a fair deal.

  4. Very risky. A perfect time for Weeks to sign an extension. Wouldn’t be surprised if they don’t get their money’s worth out of him.

    • Redbirds16 4 years ago

      I like this signing in all honesty. If he can stay healthy, the Crew will easily get their money’s worth out of this one.

    • Sage 4 years ago

      First off, we no longer have a replacement for him, since we traded Lawrie. That said, I’d call this a calculated risk. Think about it. If Weeks were to put up the type of numbers this year that he did in 2010, he’d be getting a lot more money than we just paid him, as is the nature of free agency. Obviously, he does have a track record of not staying healthy, but if he does, this risk pays off big time for the Brewers.

  5. renegade24 4 years ago

    Too much IMO.

  6. AmericanMovieFan 4 years ago

    I called it. Said 4 years/$40MM with an option. BOOM! But seriously, good for Weeks. Yeah, it’s a pretty high annual salary for a guy with Weeks’ track record, but I think it’s the Brew Crew trying to show Prince Fielder how committed they are to winning now and in the future in the hopes that Prince caves to giving them a hometown discount in order to keep the core unit together.

  7. TheCrew 4 years ago

    I like it. The fact that the 5th year is an option definitely makes me feel a little better about the deal

    • Agreed. Flexibility is good . . . makes Weeks tradable at that point if the Brewers suck.

      • Sam_Lee 4 years ago

        Be serious. This contract is as tradeable as Billy Halls was. It lacks flexibility. Its huge.

        • PostMoBills 4 years ago

          Any contract is trade-able if the player justifies it on the field.

  8. yea, but baseball contracts have always paid players for their potential, rather than their performance.

    • alxn 4 years ago

      That may be somewhat true regarding extensions, but almost all free agents are paid based on their past performance.

      • Drew 4 years ago

        That’s not necessarily true. I mean, it’s safe to say that past performance is used to predict future performance. But to claim that FA contracts are based on past performance would mean Barry Bonds would still be getting $35MM/year deals today…you know, since his past performance is so good.

        • PostMoBills 4 years ago

          I see his point though. If past performance wasn’t used, then injury history would never be considered. This all falls under the problem of buying high. A player has a breakout year and gets an extension. If that breakout year turns out to be his career year (which happens a lot), the team paid him too much.

      • Yes, their pay is based on past performance, but it is structured around their potential. E.G., Ryan Braun’s contract: 08:$0.455M, 09:$0.745M, 10:$1M, 11:$4M, 12:$6M, 13:$8.5M, 14:$10M, 15:$12M . . . Not hardly based on performance, but very structured towards potential.

  9. Now for all your people you think Weeks will be overpaid, let me pre-emptively tell you to shut your face. Baseball contracts have a long history of paying players for potential rather than performance, so its hard to argue that you get a better deal than what the Brewers have with Weeks. Given the amount of money they are spending on Weeks, though, this all but closes the book on bringing Fielder back. Personally, I would love to see Melvin get a AAA or MLB pitcher(s) in a trade for Fielder and move Gamel over to first base . . . . this is the only way we get decent value for Fielder, and I’m tired of the negative emotions that Fielder has in the clubhouse. Yea, he may be a leader, but everyone on that team knows that he has sold his soul to Scott Boras. Let him hit 20 HRs for the Crew before the All-star break and then trade him before his body collapses under its own weight.

  10. daveineg 4 years ago

    Considering there’s about a 98% chance they lose Fielder, they had money to give to Weeks.

    Batting lead off his entire career has hurt Weeks’ numbers to some extent because he’s sometimes too conscious of working counts and takes a lot of good pitches to hit. If he hit 5th, he’d be a 100 RBI guy every year provided he were healthy. Teams try to get him out with hard stuff inside (he gets hit a ton), because he can handle anything hard over the plate and turn around mid to upper 90’s fastballs as good as anyone.

    I would expect him to be a very productive offensive player over the next 3-4 years. The contract seems high, but this guy has always had the talent to be a big producer.

  11. SpeedS28 4 years ago

    Kudos to Weeks and the Brewers. Maybe its overpaying, maybe it’s not. The contract proves how important Rickie is to the Brewers. Keeping him was paramount because loosing him and prince would mean loosing 2 of your top 4 offensive players in a single offseason. That’s too much to overcome.

    Also, good job Brewer fans. By filling up the stadium the past three years the team was able to keep their own talent.

  12. SpeedS28 4 years ago

    Kudos to Weeks and the Brewers. Maybe its overpaying, maybe it’s not. The contract proves how important Rickie is to the Brewers. Keeping him was paramount because loosing him and prince would mean loosing 2 of your top 4 offensive players in a single offseason. That’s too much to overcome.

    Also, good job Brewer fans. By filling up the stadium the past three years the team was able to keep their own talent.

  13. 0vercast 4 years ago

    Wow! That’s a lot. And to think Ryan Braun signed an 8/$45MM deal less than three years ago.

    • That’s baseball for ya: sign your best player ASAP for the lowest amount and longest term you can. Compare the Brewers to the Rays: they signed Longoria right away to a sweet contract for their team (08:$0.5M, 09:$0.55M, 10:$0.95M, 11:$2M, 12:$4.5M, 13:$6M, 14:$7.5M club option ($3M buyout), 15:$11M club option, 16:$11.5M club option), but were unable to pony up for Carlos Pena. Guys like Rickie Weeks and Ben Zobrist fall somewhere in between

  14. “Talks have been going on for weeks with Weeks” GM Doug Melvin said. “He said last week that our first offer was weak, and wanted us to tweak the weak offer in the next week so we could retain Weeks. It would have been bleak for Milwaukee, had we not tweaked the weak deal for Weeks.”

  15. dc21892 4 years ago

    So I wasn’t crazy when I said 5/50. Nice to know. Glad like 5 people hated on me for thinking that.

  16. TheFakeSting 4 years ago

    10 million for Rickie Weeks? Isn’t this the website from that Swedish Guy exposing American secrets?

    • HerbertAnchovy 4 years ago

      I’m guessing you mean WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange (who is Australian, not Swedish) that publishes leaked documents from nearly every nation?

    • Crackis4lovers 4 years ago

      Very, very good!

  17. miguelisbeast 4 years ago

    rickie weeks suckkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  18. alxn 4 years ago

    would you consider $10M a year to stop making idiotic posts?

  19. Sixto_Lezcano 4 years ago

    Rickie Weeks sucks at baseball?

    The only player more valuable than him on the Yankees last season was Robinson Cano, and that was by a negligible 0.3 WAR.

  20. Lunchbox45 4 years ago

    I would!

  21. PostMoBills 4 years ago

    That would be underpaying you. alxn only said you had to stop making idiotic posts. You’d still be allowed to post here, but you just couldn’t say idiotic things like inferences that Rickie Weeks “suck(s) at baseball”.

  22. MilwaukeeBravesFan 4 years ago

    By my math, the Brewers got a home town discount of approximately zero million dollars, assuming Weeks stays productive.

  23. OK, and tell me what the alternative is for the Brewers? I agree it is a ridiculous contract, but considering the alternatives, the risk/reward makes too much sense for the Brewers to pass up on. If the Crew hadn’t traded Brett Lawrie, I might agree with you, but as it is, a “ridiculous” contract keeps a player with a high ceiling in Milwaukee, where letting him walk sends you to the trash heap looking for a replacement.

  24. daveineg 4 years ago

    Anyone that has watched Weeks his entire career knows his 2010 numbers are much more indicative of his talent than anything he had done before. Yes he can be aggravating. He strikes out too much. He has some slumps. He makes some erratic throws turning double plays. But the guy is talented to the extreme. The Brewers aren’t going to find talent like that on the open market.

  25. Sage 4 years ago

    Your comment has been flagged for unnecessarily insulting me. Now, if you would like to:

    a) Point out to me where in my post that I claimed this absolutely will not backfire. I even acknowledged that it very well may backfire because of his injury history.
    b) Explain why playing some random scrub at 2B would be better than taking a risk on Weeks.
    c) Do all this WITHOUT insulting me and without being condescending.

    I would be happy to hear your argument. Thank you, please try again. :)

Leave a Reply