- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 2/13/19 at 3:35 pm to KCT
Because Scott Botas thinks he can get these guys paid absorbent amounts of money for ridiculous years.
People blame MLB and all, but IMO, it’s Boras and him thinking he can get what he wants. It’s absurd and he uses the media to try to bully teams into signing these guys for 10 years.
People blame MLB and all, but IMO, it’s Boras and him thinking he can get what he wants. It’s absurd and he uses the media to try to bully teams into signing these guys for 10 years.
Posted on 2/13/19 at 3:37 pm to KCT
There are way more examples of long term contracts being bad, than there are of them actually being beneficial.
I will give you 4 current names / contracts -
Jason Heyward with the Cubs
Miguel Cabrera
Albert Pujols
Joey Votto
Go look their stats up and whats left on their contracts... .they aren't worth the money going forward.
Statistics tell you, over 162 game schedule, the difference between Harper and a mediocre MLB player.... the difference is marginal. How many more wins will Harper give you?
Harper's name alone will help with ticket sales and or other sales, but.... is it worth 10 years $350 million?
Obviously, teams aren't seeing that value or else they would have already been signed by now.
I will give you 4 current names / contracts -
Jason Heyward with the Cubs
Miguel Cabrera
Albert Pujols
Joey Votto
Go look their stats up and whats left on their contracts... .they aren't worth the money going forward.
Statistics tell you, over 162 game schedule, the difference between Harper and a mediocre MLB player.... the difference is marginal. How many more wins will Harper give you?
Harper's name alone will help with ticket sales and or other sales, but.... is it worth 10 years $350 million?
Obviously, teams aren't seeing that value or else they would have already been signed by now.
This post was edited on 2/13/19 at 3:38 pm
Posted on 2/13/19 at 3:38 pm to Prominentwon
quote:
Because Scott Botas thinks he can get these guys paid absorbent amounts of money for ridiculous years.
Well, he kinda comes through on that more often than not.
Posted on 2/13/19 at 3:41 pm to idlewatcher
True, but he hasnt in any 10 year $300M a year.
I don’t understand why it can’t be so cut and dry when it comes to signing or not signing these guys.
Owners don’t want to invest that much money into a player. If they don’t want to sign him, he’s more than welcome to stay a FA.
I think it has more to do with the years than it does the money though
I don’t understand why it can’t be so cut and dry when it comes to signing or not signing these guys.
Owners don’t want to invest that much money into a player. If they don’t want to sign him, he’s more than welcome to stay a FA.
I think it has more to do with the years than it does the money though
Posted on 2/13/19 at 3:42 pm to Prominentwon
quote:ding ding ding
I think it has more to do with the years
Posted on 2/13/19 at 4:07 pm to WestCoastAg
I don't think I have seen a long term deal that ever made me think "wow that is going work out for everyone". I love the indignation of the players posting on twitter bitching about how these guys haven't been signed. They are pissed they wont get a 10 year retirement contract.
Posted on 2/13/19 at 4:17 pm to lsu xman
quote:
feel like Aaron NOLA got ripped. 4/45mil for being an ace.
That was an extension and not a FA deal
Still had 2 years left on his old contract
Posted on 2/13/19 at 4:27 pm to Cosmo
Was that a straight up extension or was it arbitration?
Posted on 2/13/19 at 4:28 pm to tigercubs
Nats already offered that
Posted on 2/13/19 at 4:29 pm to Dizz
thats an extension. he is taking that contract in place of arbitration
Posted on 2/13/19 at 5:23 pm to WestCoastAg
You don’t sign someone to a 10 year deal thinking they’ll be the same player in that 10th year. You do it because you’re earning surplus value in the first half of the deal
I know WCAg realizes this, speaking to everyone else ITT
I know WCAg realizes this, speaking to everyone else ITT
This post was edited on 2/13/19 at 5:25 pm
Posted on 2/13/19 at 5:29 pm to DallasTiger45
I think teams are starting to realize that it's better to pay more for the surplus WAR producing years while being able to avoid the down years than it is to pay less for the surplus WAR years while being tied to the down years. That's why the most years weve given out under this front office is five
This post was edited on 2/13/19 at 5:30 pm
Posted on 2/13/19 at 5:34 pm to WestCoastAg
Well if they’re realizing that then they need to pay guys appropriately over the shorter contract. 5 years for 200-250 million or whatever
Posted on 2/13/19 at 5:43 pm to DallasTiger45
It's a balancing act. I think a team like the Dodgers, in a vacuum, would rather a deal like that, than one for 10 years. But almost every organization have decided to treat the tax threshold as a cap which is decided by AAV.
Like I think the Dodgers would tell you they dont want to give harper a 10 year deal under most circumstances, but they also dont want to give him something with a high AAV cause they dont want to push the tax threshold
They want to have their cake and eat it to which is frustrating
Like I think the Dodgers would tell you they dont want to give harper a 10 year deal under most circumstances, but they also dont want to give him something with a high AAV cause they dont want to push the tax threshold
They want to have their cake and eat it to which is frustrating
Posted on 2/13/19 at 5:57 pm to WestCoastAg
quote:it is a little hypocritical to blast Anaheim for paying Pujols like they did and expect new deals like that to be signed elsewhere... But that's what the open market should take care of. It should behave in a way consistent with what the owners make in revenue
Like I think the Dodgers would tell you they dont want to give harper a 10 year deal under most circumstances, but they also dont want to give him something with a high AAV cause they dont want to push the tax threshold
Posted on 2/13/19 at 6:16 pm to chalmetteowl
quote:
There needs to be a salary floor...
And the owners would agree to one, when the players agree to a salary cap.
Posted on 2/13/19 at 6:17 pm to Pettifogger
quote:
Harper turned down 10/300m,
sf giants radio is saying Los gigantes offer 40 million for way less years. Two makes sense.
Boras is agent.
Posted on 2/13/19 at 6:40 pm to TigerintheNO
quote:players agreed to a luxury tax. They didn't agree to make the luxury tax an informal cap
And the owners would agree to one, when the players agree to a salary cap.
Posted on 2/13/19 at 6:51 pm to wheelz007
I beg to differ on Votto. I’m a Reds fan who watches darn near every game, and Votto has been worth every penny. That dude is a professional hitter. His stats were down a little this year, but in 2016 and 17 he was damn dominant. He put up numbers in both those second half’s that only Ted Williams could match.
Now, on the Harper subject. I like Bryce Harper, but he is overrated as hell and shouldn’t get anywhere near what he is asking.
Now, on the Harper subject. I like Bryce Harper, but he is overrated as hell and shouldn’t get anywhere near what he is asking.
This post was edited on 2/13/19 at 6:52 pm
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News