That may be OK, but I am not so sure he himself would agree to it. I am thinking that his performance this year gets him a legit multi-year ( > 1 year) contract with legit guaranteed money, and I think given his age/ability, he takes it. That is my prediction at least right now.
Do I think they will offer what you mentioned though? Even that, I guess I'm not sure - in the sense that, for a guy his age -- and I don't have the metrics here -- but I imagine for a guy his age, you have to expect regression. Take a quick hockey analogy here; you see Ovechkin and Crosby playing great in their late 30s, but is it the same level as their 20s? Basically, no athlete is at peak past the 30th year of life. It just isn't a thing, I think. So, you take past performance and say, what happens now? AP and others have the metrics, I guess, to make better guesses on what it means, but my thinking would be that they do not offer that type of deal either because after 1-year, the gamble is increasingly awkward each year. Could they make a contract structured accordingly to those metrics? Yes, but then the question is, can they do better/value-wise? If not, yes you make that offer. Sometimes a GM may have an idea on a particular position being fillable the next year via draft/FA, and then a contract like this just fills the gap too.
Again, this is a lot of guess-work, I don't really have time to dig into a lot of numbers, but I am basing some of this on some articles I read after the NFCCG. What I was reading at the time was to expect Fowler to be gone, and what I read made sense, but it (and I) could certainly be wrong too.