No Extension Talks For Jacoby Ellsbury

The Red Sox have been without reigning AL MVP runner-up Jacoby Ellsbury for most of the year due to a shoulder injury, part of the reason why they've had to use a dozen different outfielders. Today, agent Scott Boras told reporters (including WEEI.com's Rob Bradford) that there have been no discussions with the team about a long-term extension.

"We've only had the traditional discussions of one-year contracts," said Boras. "(GM Ben Cherington) and I will certainly begin contract discussions at year's end because we have to. We have at minimum a one-year contract to discuss. We're going to play through the season. Ben's operating his team and I'm signing draft picks, operating my team."

Boras went on to explain that Matt Kemp's eight-year, $160MM contract extension with the Dodgers isn't a fair reference point for a potential Ellsbury deal. 

"The Matt Kemp contract is not a free agent contract," said Boras. "It's not a barometer that has a great deal of relevance other than it's what players get who are not free agents and are really talented. So when you look at the free agent markets and you look at those types of contracts you can understand there is always a big disparity between a free agent contract and a contract that is signed before the player is a free agent."

Ellsbury will earn $8.05MM this season and remains under team control as an arbitration-eligible player next year. He can become a free agent after 2013. During the offseason, Ellsbury indicated a willingness to sign a long-term deal with the Red Sox but said he will leave negotiations up to Boras. MLBTR's Mark Polishuk suggested that a seven-year deal worth roughly $130MM could work for both sides, though that was predicated on another MVP-caliber season. The shoulder injury throws a wrench into that.


75 Responses to No Extension Talks For Jacoby Ellsbury Leave a Reply

  1. Dylan 3 years ago

    One season of power does not equal 160+ million dollar contract.

    • stl_cards16 3 years ago

      Who said it does?

      • RetroRob 3 years ago

        No one directly, although Boras’ words imply that Kemp’s contract represented a discount off market rates, so if Ellsbury were to become a free agent he might get more.

        Ellsbury had a fantastic year in 2011, but one that was off the charts considering his projected talent level.  I’d want to see him put up similar numbers before I’d elevate him to being among the best in the game.

        • Agreed…Boras was implying that the Dodgers got a discount because he wasnt a free agent. i realize beastmode is hurt right now, but id rather have him than ellsbury…no contest! dont see a scenario where he should be making more than kemp

          • LazerTown 3 years ago

            Unless he can improve over last year he is still behind granderson for cf in my view.  Plus so far 2/5 of his years in the majors he spents a long time on the dl. 

            Kemp is in a class of his own, that was a good contract for the dodgers.

          • MaineSox 3 years ago

            Unless he can improve on last year?  He was better last year than Granderson ever dreamed of being.

      • Dylan 3 years ago

        Scotty did.

  2. Nick Sossamon 3 years ago

    Who the hell would pay 8/160 for Ellsbury?  Already missed nearly two seasons with injury issues and has one legitimate elite season under his belt in six years of service time.  And for Boras to even hint that he would be worth even MORE than Kemp because he’ll be a FA is downright absurd.

    Who knows though, it is Boras.  Hopefully Ellsbury doesn’t turn into Carl Crawford 2.0. 

    • LazerTown 3 years ago

      He is a good leadoff hitter, but he never hit like that except last year.  If he could repeat he could get alot of money, but he has had injury problems. 

  3. MaineSox 3 years ago

    I hope they work it out so they can keep him, I really do, but if it’s going to take a contract like that I’d let him walk.

    • johnsilver 3 years ago

      I agree. Even 7/130m with the people signed long term is more than think they should go. Bradley is at AA now, get more ready just in case and let him go.

      Edit: Guess you saw that story on WeeI about his callup that also had the scouting reports from other teams scouts? Even better than thought regarding bradley.

      • MaineSox 3 years ago

        Yeah I did see that – good stuff from Speier per usual.  I knew everyone was really high on him, but it kinda surprised me just how high those two scouts were, particularly scout #1.

      • Rabbitov 3 years ago

        I’d argue 7/100 is way more than they should go. 

        • MaineSox 3 years ago

          I don’t think 7/100 would be unreasonable.  I’d rather they not give him more than 6 years, but 7/100 would only be ~$14M per year.

      • LazerTown 3 years ago

        He will be 30 when he hits fa.  I wouldnt give him 7 years for cf especially if he cant stay healthy.

  4. Encarnacion's Parrot 3 years ago

    I love Ellsbury, but he’s not really worthy of $100MM, perhaps not even a 5-year term. He’s just too injury prone to be that valuable of a commodity IMO.

    • MaineSox 3 years ago

      Getting a flying knee to the ribs and having a 200lb second baseman jump on your shoulder does not make you injury prone.

      • Sky14 3 years ago

        Seems like every time one person accuses somebody of being injury prone a fan will pull the freak injury card.

        • MaineSox 3 years ago

          Well, it’s the truth.

          • Rabbitov 3 years ago

            Ellsbury should train MMA if he wants that contract.

        • notsureifsrs 3 years ago

          you don’t have to worry about what people say; just look at the facts: 2 serious injuries, 2 freak accidents

          if you want to explain how those 2 incidents were not in fact freak accidents, i’d love to hear it

          • Sky14 3 years ago

            I was just making a general statement based off an observation. If you don’t think a player is injury prone why defend the player? Like you said, ”
            you don’t have to worry about what people say”. I am confident I never said his injuries were common occurrences, but for some reason you want me to defend that position.Since you would love to hear my explanation I guess I can come up with something. 

            The game of baseball is littered with injuries that occur from collisions/ sliding. Morneau’s concussion, Longoria’s hamstring, Nishioka’s broken leg, Wells, etc. My point being, getting injured during a collision or sliding doesn’t happen often but its not terribly uncommon. Also, similar plays happen regularly but since the players involved are uninjured nobody takes note of those plays.

            No player plans to get hurt no matter the circumstances, so call it injury or freak accident it really doesn’t matter.What does matter is that Ellsbury has missed significant time because of his injuries. How the injury occurred is irrelevant. In 2010 he was placed on the dl 3 times for the same injury from a collision and this year he has been on the 60 day DL for a dislocated shoulder. Its not really a good sign that he gets severely injured on plays that happen throughout a season.

          • notsureifsrs 3 years ago

            if you’re trying to figure out the likelihood that more injuries will follow, of course it matters whether it’s a freak accident or a routine play

            very basic probability here. for every one freak accident there are likely tens of thousands of routine ones

            the fact that you can come up with a list of freak accidents proves nothing at all. that definition renders the term ‘injury prone’ useless: everybody is ‘injury prone’ to the extent that they tend to get injured when their ribs are crushed or they get hit in the face by a fastball

            ‘injury prone’ players are those that also tend to get injured more often than others during routine play. that doesn’t describe ellsbury

          • MaineSox 3 years ago

            I don’t know about you, but I get kicked in the ribs and have my shoulder jumped on all the time, and I never get injured.

          • That’s true but these injuries accumulate, whether they are freak or not. That shoulder will never be brand new and those ribs will never be the same either. Granted, they were freak accidents. I’m a Sox fan and I love Ellsbury but the Sox won’t be giving Ellsbury along term deal when his contract is up. With Crawford’s contract in Left they can’t afford it. Your center fielder for 2014 is going to be Kalish or Jacobs.  

      • Encarnacion's Parrot 3 years ago

        I’m well aware that in a couple instances they were not caused by his own doing. At what point when freak injuries keep occurring, however, do they become a case of injury prone?

        Matter is he keeps finding himself in these situations for freak accidents to happen, which, by definition, is injury prone, but of a different type.

        • MaineSox 3 years ago

          It’s happened twice, so even if you could make that distinction, you couldn’t do it with Ellsbury.  And it’s not like he’s banging into walls and hurting himself (a style of play that can lead to guys getting injured a lot) – one was a 3B charging out on what should have been the left fielder’s ball, and the other was a routine play trying to break up a double play and the 2B couldn’t get out of the way in time and fell on him (a play he’s done hundreds of times in his life without getting hurt).

          • NYPOTENCE 3 years ago

            I’m sorry but Ellsbury is pretty much the definition of Injury-prone if not then that’s Brian Roberts. It doesn’t matter that the circumstances are not conventional the point is that he has still found ways to hit the DL multiple times over the last couple of seasons and is an definitely an injury risk.

          • MaineSox 3 years ago

            Whatever makes a Yankee fan feel better I guess, but you obviously either don’t know the definition of “prone” or the definition of “definition.”

          • NYPOTENCE 3 years ago

            Prone means someone or thing that is regularly or for a long period of time susceptible to a certain action or event.

            Ellsbury has been injured plenty of times in his career and fits definition. Not saying he’s not a tremendous player just stating a fact.

          • MaineSox 3 years ago

            He’s been injured twice in his career, and he’s no more susceptible to injury than anyone else in the game, so if he’s injury prone so is every single player in the game.

          • Ptk123 3 years ago

            Haha a yankees fan saying Ellsbury is the definition of injury-prone! What is Arod called then?

          • Notin J. Notin 3 years ago

            If Ellsbury is injury prone, A-Rod should be considered legally dead

          • Vmmercan 3 years ago

            Old? How often was A-Rod hurt at Ellsbury’s age?

          • BostonRedSox777 3 years ago

            was he even hurt at that age?? wasn’t he on roids at the time though?? kinda negates the argument…

          • NYPOTENCE 3 years ago

            A-Rod was on roids when he was with Texas or seattle something like that. Not when he was 27/28 like Ellsbury is so, yeah.

    • Slopeboy 3 years ago

      I like Ellsbury-I like him a lot, he reminds me of Fred Lynn who also seem to get hurt early in his career. This year seems to be a wash as far as establishing what he is. Next year will be the year that he will either earn a big contract or have to settle for what ever, again assumming he stays healthy.
      As I recall, Lynn went on to have a nice career after the first few years of injuries and disappointments. Fans need to be patient and look towards the future instead of the immediate when it comes to promising players like Ellsbury.
      ‘sometimes stuff happens’

  5. Casey McMahon 3 years ago

    Jacoby better drop Boras and his so-called JD Drew syndrome or he might price himself into the minors.

  6. AmericanMovieFan 3 years ago

    He’s had 3 full, healthy seasons, he’s only ever played over 150 games twice, he’s only hit for power once. Come back next year and duplicate your 2011 performance, then do it once more in 2014 and *then*, *maybe* he’ll be worth $20MM a season….maybe. Probably not.

    • MaineSox 3 years ago

      2007 he didn’t get called up from the minors until late in the season; 2008 he was splitting time with Coco Crisp, but still got into 145 games, and had over 600 PA; 2009 he played in 153 games and ~700 PA; 2010 Beltre broke his ribs; 2011 he played in 158 games and ~730 PA; this year someone fell on his shoulder and dislocated it.  The number of full healthy seasons he has played in really isn’t a consideration when it comes to his long-term value – it might make figuring out who the “real” Ellsbury is, but it in no way makes him injury prone.

      • Rabbitov 3 years ago

        I agree with you, but from a business standpoint he still is incredibly risky. 

        • MaineSox 3 years ago

          Risky because you still can’t be sure exactly who the real Ellsbury is, not because he’s a risk to get injured.

          • Mario Saavedra 3 years ago

             Even if they were freakish accidents, he probably won’t be the same after them, trying to pretend they didn’t happen is nonsense.

          • MaineSox 3 years ago

            Nobody is trying to pretend they didn’t happen, just trying to realize that they don’t make him injury prone.

            “he probably won’t be the same after them” — he put up the best year of his career after one of them.

      • LazerTown 3 years ago

        Regardless, teams want to see healthy players. 

        • MaineSox 3 years ago

          Obviously, everyone wants to see healthy players, but he’s only been injured twice, and both of them were on strange plays that you’re not likely to ever see happen again.  He’s just as likely as anyone to go the rest of his career without an injury.

    • bobbybaseball 3 years ago

      I agree the Sox need to see much more before they sign him long term, but if he duplicates 2011 twice again, I guarantee you he will earn more than $20 mil per season.

  7. garylanglais 3 years ago

    Boras is suggesting the contract of one Dodgers OF.

    I’d guess the Red Sox would suggest the contract of the “other” Dodgers OF.

  8. Croagnut 3 years ago

    Surprised noone’s mentioned that Red Sox want nothing to do with Boras FAs since Teixiera.  Excluding the one-year make-good deal with Beltre, theyve avoided long-term contracts with his clients like the plague.

    Expect the Sox to make a valiant effort, but fall short in the end on Ellsbury.

    • MaineSox 3 years ago

      That’s not really true.  There haven’t been a ton of Boras guys who have really fit needs for them since Teixeira besides Werth, and we know why they didn’t sign him…  But they have drafted a ton of kids who are advised by Boras, and as you mentioned they did sign Beltre, who is a Boras client, so they have dealt with him plenty since then.

      • Croagnut 3 years ago

        adrian beltre? matt holliday? werth? Seriously?  

        • MaineSox 3 years ago

          Nobody was going to outbid the Nationals for Werth (and nobody was given a chance to), and as has been mentioned a few times now they did sign Beltre.  I thought at the time that they should have made a harder push for Holliday, but they did take a shot at him and he ended up staying in St. Louis.

          • Croagnut 3 years ago

            As I mentioned Beltre was brought in on SHORT money (a steal if you will) for a low risk ONE YEAR.  When it came to putting up Long-Term, they didn’t.  Holliday wouldve been a perfect fit and they came up short as they wanted to (think Boston couldve outbid St Louis if it really wanted him).  You can even add Prince Fielder to that category.  I say they went after Gonzalez just so they didnt have to deal with Boras the next off-season.

          • MaineSox 3 years ago

            Now you’re just being silly, they went after Gonzalez because he’s a better player, and much much more likely to be a good player toward the end of his contract – they also got him cheaper.  With Betre it doesn’t really matter if it’s 1 year or 10 years, they are still dealing with Scott Boras (and trying to work out an abnormal deal like the Beltre one was likely a lot more difficult than the one the Rangers worked out with him).  And the same with Holliday, if it was about not dealing with Boras it wouldn’t matter if they ended up signing him or not, they still had to deal with Boras.

            And what about the – literally dozens – of kids they have drafted who were advised by Boras?  Do they not count?

          • Croagnut 3 years ago

            Im silly? Give me “dozens” of names? theyve drafted since 2009.

          • Croagnut 3 years ago

            So to recap: they avoided loads of talent they couldve used Holliday, reupping Beltre, Lowe, Fielder, Werth.  Instead signed such players as Crawford, Lackey, A Gonzalez.  Havent drafted/signed a single Boras amateur (even though they have been overspending their slots for years).  

            But thats all negated by a one-year 6mil contract with Beltre, and a half-hearted effort (which i doubt) to land Holliday.

            And you call me silly?

          • MaineSox 3 years ago

            Yes, I am.  The only one of those guys who would have made any sense at all for Boston is Holliday.  Gonzalez is a better and cheaper player; Werth signed for way too much money, and signed extremely early (before anyone had really even started the off season); to re-sign Beltre they would have had to trade Youkilis, who at that point had a more consistent track record of success, and was cheaper and would take up salary for a shorter period of time; keeping Lowe would have been several years before the Teixeira deal, and if you’re talking about when he signed with the Braves he got 4/60 as a 35 year old and has barely been league average since signing.

            So, three of the five would have been terrible deals, and one didn’t fit with the Red Sox anyway, so that leaves you with one example of a player who was a Boras client that the Red Sox should have signed.

          • johnsilver 3 years ago

             Take it or leave it offer of..5/75m as recall to Boras/Holliday that they only gave Boras 24 hours to ponder, or it was going to be withdrawn and it was supposedly over bad taste from Boras and the tex negotiations, or how I read into that and Lackey and his agent had signaled a willingness to sign in that same area.

            Holliday..For his supporters.. Had not hit at Oakland, but had a track record of being an “air” stadium hitter at that time at denver. I wasn’t in favor of signing him either.

      • Croagnut 3 years ago

        Who are the “ton of kids” the Red Sox have drafted?  They have one minor leaguer in their entire system thats represented by Boras.  And he was acquired in a trade for Bedard.

        • MaineSox 3 years ago

          Off the top of my head – Jackey Bradley, Anthony Ranaudo, Brandon Workman, Noe Ramirez, and Deven Marrero just in the last couple years.

        • MaineSox 3 years ago

          They’ve also re-signed Varitek twice since then.

          • Croagnut 3 years ago

            Varitek got scorched on last contract.

            You right about minor leaguers, used wikkki for Boras client list (my bad). “off the top of my head” and 21 mins of research.

          • MaineSox 3 years ago

            I didn’t have to research any of those names – I don’t know how many there have actually been, those are just the ones I can remember – I just don’t sit on here anxiously waiting to respond.

            And it doesn’t matter what Varitek’s contract looked like, he was a Boras client and they had contract negotiations with him, not once but twice since the Teixeira thing. You keep throwing all these qualifiers on there of who counts and what matters, but you said that they avoid dealing with Boras “like the plague” and I’ve given you multiple examples of them dealing with him.

  9. Mike1L 3 years ago

    I don’t think Ellsbury is necessarily injury prone.  The bigger question is what type of player he is.  Is he the 08/09, or the 2011 version, or something in between?  The 08/09 player isn’t worth anywhere near what Boras seems to be asking.  The 2011 version obviously is at a different level of valuation.  I don’t know that an extension makes that much sense until you can figure that out.  He’s arb eligible next year, so offer him arbitration, since Boras is never going to sign an extension for less than absolute top tier “free agent” money.   The following year, if he’s the 2011 version, make a qualifying offer, preserve a draft pick, and negotiate.

  10. AFCFAN06 3 years ago

    Would be hard for RedSox to justify a long term deal for him now hurt a ton in 2010 went crazy in 2011 now been out almost all year im seeing an arby case and hope for the best sad seeing Ellsbury get hurt after such a break out year.

  11. wakefield4life 3 years ago

    I want to give you money, ellsbury, but 1 out of 3 seasons does not make the deal happen.

  12. ARod's Ring 3 years ago

    I smell a “Mauer one year fluky power year” from Ellsbury as well.

  13. I’m not sure where Boras is going by stating what Kemp signed for “isn’t a fair reference point for a potential Ellsbury deal.”, of course it isn’t.  Kemp is worth more than Ellsbury.  Is Boras actually saying he expects to get less?  That would be a first.

  14. hawkny1 3 years ago

    Question:
    What does Cherington do with Nava, Sweeney, Ross, Kalish, Podsednick and MacDonald when Ellsbury and Crawford return from the DL?

    • Slopeboy 3 years ago

      Nava and Kalish have options I believe,McDonald is cut and Posednick becomes the 4th OFer.

      • hawkny1 3 years ago

        but how does one justify sending Nava down? He is hitting .333 and playing an excellent LF

  15. MaineSox 3 years ago

    His WAR was higher than Granderson’s has ever been, his wOBA was higher than Granderson’s has ever been, and his wRC+ was higher than Granderson’s has ever been.  Or, if you prefer, his OPS was higher than Granderson’s has ever been.

  16. nestleraisinets 3 years ago

    what’s the point of WAR when ellsbury is not even visible within his own team…

  17. RetroRob 3 years ago

    If I have a choice between Granderson or Ellsbury, I’m taking Granderson 10 out of 10 times.   No knock on Ellsbury, who had a fine season last year, but Granderson will hit 40+ HRs again from center, while Ellsbury’s power seemed flukish.  And fair or not, two out of three years he’s missed significant time.  Last, Ellsbury got a signifcant boost in WAR last year because of what is acknowledged as faulty defensive ratings.  The Red Sox would take Granderson in a flash if offered even up for Ellsbury.

  18. MaineSox 3 years ago

    I really have no idea what you mean.

Leave a Reply