The AP has the scoop, and it's kind of complex, but that's why CTRL-C and CTRL-V were invented:
Griffey can earn $250,000 each for 450 and then 500 plate appearances. If Seattle draws 2 million fans this season, he would get $100,000 more for 300 plate appearances, $200,000 more for 350 plate appearances and $200,000 more for 400 plate appearances.
The money increases if more fans come. Griffey gets an additional $200,000 each if Seattle's paid attendance is 2.1 million and he has 300 plate appearances; 2.15 million fans come and he has 350 plate appearances; 2.2 million come and he has 400 plate appearances; 2.25 million come with 450 plate appearances; and 2.3 million fans are coupled with 500 plate appearances.
...
Additionally, if he is on the major league roster through July 31, Griffey gets $50,000 each for paid attendance of 2.35 million, 2.4 million, 2.45 million, 2.5 million, 2.55 million and 2.6 million.If he is on the major league roster through the last day of the regular season, he gets $100,000 each for attendance of 2.65 million, 2.7 million, 2.75 million, 2.8 million, 2.85 million, 2.95 million and 3 million.
Those roster bonuses would be prorated for any days Griffey spends on the disabled list.
The deal has a base of $2m and a maximum value of $5m, which Griffey can only earn if (A) he collects 500 plate appearances, (B) he doesn't go on the DL, and (C) the team draws 3,000,000 fans. Which is great for us, because if 3,000,000 people flock out to Safeco, presumably something is going incredibly well, and the team won't mind spending a little extra money. I love this contract. Not that it really makes much of a difference, but with the way it's written, there's pretty much no way for the team to lose. Even if Griffey suffers a catastrophic injury before the season begins, the team will have already made a good chunk of the guaranteed $2m investment in Griffey-related revenue.
The whole attendance incentives thing still sounds weird to me. A quick look at Cot's doesn't bring up any names with similar deals, and according to Darren Rovell, the last three players to have this sort of clause were Roger Clemens in 2004, Kenny Lofton in 2002, and Mark McGwire in 1997. So it's definitely unusual. Also, Kenny Lofton? The year before Lofton signed that contract, he hit .261 with 14 homers and 16 steals. What were the White Sox going for?
Man 1: Hey, you wanna turn that off and come out to the bar?
Man 2: Can't. Kenny Lofton's playing.
Kenny Lofton is such a popular attraction that, after posting a solid 2007 at the age of 40, he couldn't find work, and now nobody really knows what he's doing. That was one heck of a clause. I don't know which side insisted upon its inclusion, but I do know which side still thinks it's funny.
0 recs | 36 comments
If Griffey wants to play LF as badly as has been hinted at
does that mean the honeymoon is over?
JI - February 24, 2009
...and CTRL-V/C don't do anything
JI - February 24, 2009
If Griffey ends up playing a lot of outfield, I will be upset
If Griffey ends up DH’ing but throws a fit, I will be upset.
Jeff Sullivan - February 24, 2009
...2 guys who agree on everything
JI - February 24, 2009
If Griffey plays DH and demands a trade, I will be laughing.
Mariner John - February 24, 2009
If he ends up DHing and throws a fit, but still has to DH, I'll be just fine.
Let him whine. He’ll be gone next year anyways.
Faux - February 24, 2009
The idea behind Lofton might have been more wins=higher attendance.
Robert - February 24, 2009
Teams that reach the playoffs often trade for Kenny Lofton.
JI - February 24, 2009
We haven't traded for Kenny Lofton.
Robert - February 24, 2009
But then why not just give attendance incentives to everybody?
There’s nothing about Kenny Lofton that makes him uniquely appealing to the population. I think.
Jeff Sullivan - February 24, 2009
Because the MLBPA would get pissy?
Robert - February 24, 2009
He was a major character in that SA BBM thread
JI - February 24, 2009
Some of us don't have the attention span for that behemoth
Jeff Sullivan - February 24, 2009
The first one was good because Ozzie Guillen said "faggot" a lot.
JI - February 24, 2009
Much like Moneyball, I think I have heard enough about this from other people that I don't need to put forth the effort to read it myself
Jeff Sullivan - February 24, 2009
I read Moneyball in a day
It’s an easy read.
JI - February 24, 2009
At this point it's more principle than anything else
Jeff Sullivan - February 24, 2009
It's actually really well written
and lends itself to multiple reads.
JI - February 24, 2009
I'll just wait for the movie
sooper jeenyus - February 25, 2009
I don't think the principles in the book are the interesting parts
I think its fun just reading about the wacky characters. I agree its a well written book.
Edgar for Pres - February 24, 2009
That's not what I mean
Jeff Sullivan - February 24, 2009
oh yeah.....
Edgar for Pres - February 25, 2009
/joemorgan?
Sportszilla - February 24, 2009
I'm not proud of my principles
Jeff Sullivan - February 24, 2009
I understand somewhat.
Just hearing the word Moneyball makes me roll my eyes, though it’s really no fault of the book. It’s just so misunderstood and derided and overexposed that it’s hard to have any opinion on it other than indifference.
That said, it is a great read. Lewis is an awesome writer.
Teej - February 24, 2009
Lewis is my current favorite writer
except mayybeeee Stephenie Meyer… I mean uh….
Lewis does a great job exploring the side of sports that the casual fan doesn’t really think about, whether it be through advanced baseball analysis, the relative importance of the offensive left tackle in relation to both his offensive line peers and the offense as a whole or the revolution brought on by the true shotgun spread offense
seattlebruin - February 25, 2009
His financial writing is great as well.
At least he is for readers like me who are interested in the financial world but not all that versed.
Teej - February 25, 2009
Much how I feel towards some articles here
http://www.lookoutlanding.com/2008/6/16/766464/LL-ussm-weekend-recap#comments
Robert - February 24, 2009
That's a dead link.
JI - February 24, 2009
I pulled a Matthew :(
Robert - February 24, 2009
I liked it
Dewey N - February 25, 2009
Whoosh
JI - February 25, 2009
My favorite piece of baseball fiction
I hope and pray everyday that Gyroball will finish season 3 soon
SkipT - February 25, 2009
The incentives sound more like a complicated card effect.
ThundaPC - February 24, 2009
The Chains of Mephistopholes of contracts?
James F'n X - February 24, 2009
That dialogue
might be one the simples / most brilliant I’ve seen in ages.
Well done.
aet15 - February 25, 2009
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Lookout Landing to post a comment.