Jump to content

2018-2019 MLB Offseason Thread

Beau Vine

By Beau Vine
in Baseball

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 863
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

MAROON
MAROON

best comment i read so far about the contract length.   "There are Phillies fans not yet born that will be throwing batteries at him in the later years of this contract".

Beau Vine
Beau Vine

From Levi Weaver's column in The Athletic:  

Beau Vine
Beau Vine

Gammons rambles way too much and it's like his editors are afraid to touch his work, but I like him because he loves baseball.  Not just MLB.  Gammons loves BASEBALL. And he hit this one out of t

Bartles

Bartles 769

Posted
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, patrickdrinksbeer said:


yeah, that was not thinly veiled sarcasm

OK, here's Ken Rosenthal from Feb 1 of this year. My point is if the Dodgers were willing to do a mega deal, why not get in on Harper earlier? It's rare to see a team totally change course in late February. So this might just be a Boras ploy to raise the Phillies price. I also think he'd be OK with Philly but his family really wants to get him west.

Quote

Teams, though, do not simply want to get below the threshold one time. Dodgers president Stan Kasten, in an interview with the Los Angeles Times’ Dylan Hernandez, said: “If we can do whatever we do and stay under, there are a lot of advantages to being under — by the way, a lot more advantages than you all write about . . . I’m not going to go into that because that’s real inside baseball economic stuff.”

Kasten wasn’t only referring to the taxes and surtaxes teams face for exceeding the three tiers of the threshold, or the loss of 10 spots in the draft order for going $40 million over. Other parts of the collective bargaining agreement also figure into the equation, though typically in less meaningful fashion.

If a big-market team such as the Dodgers exceeds the threshold for at least two consecutive years, it forfeits a percentage of the revenue-sharing refund it would otherwise receive. Teams also must remain in compliance with the debt-service rule, earning enough profits to adequately service their debt.

 

Edited by Bartles
Link added
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bartles

Bartles 769

Posted
Posted
14 hours ago, TheFlagship said:

Cespedes but then he got Mets’d. The Dodgers have plenty of money they shouldn’t worry about luxury tax 

Good call on Cespedes, who is repped by Roc Nation. He signed for 3/75 in 2016 and for one year, both sides were thrilled with it. So before 2017, they made it 4/110 and that has been a disaster. Mets have to sit there while he gobbles up payroll, YC has to worry about his long term prospects. Of course injuries are unpredictable, but have to figure Harper and the Dodgers have reasons not to do a high dollar, short term deal.

It's probably obvious I'm trying to talk myself into Harper/Phillies still happening. But if he and his family are dead set on going west (or Yankees), so be it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
henrygandorf

henrygandorf 29198

Posted
Posted

Teams, though, do not simply want to get below the threshold one time. Dodgers president Stan Kasten, in an interview with the Los Angeles Times’ Dylan Hernandez, said: “If we can do whatever we do and stay under, there are a lot of advantages to being under — by the way, a lot more advantages than you all write about . . . I’m not going to go into that because that’s real inside baseball economic stuff.”

i'm a big fan of the expression "inside baseball" and use it from time to time.  that said, this is the first time i think it's ever been used to describe something actually related to baseball.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
shnsajax

shnsajax 3592

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, TonyTexas said:


$330mm/13 yrs, while a great contract, is less than I thought he would get. Machado got $300mm/10 yrs. Arenado got $260/8 yrs. Harper’s deal has no deferred money. Don’t know about the other guys structure.

I think because its a little bit less Trout can get even more on an AAV, though I could even see him taking a slight home team discount.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheFlagship

TheFlagship 436

Posted
Posted
23 minutes ago, MNLonghornFUKM said:

I watch 5 innings a year...is Harper that good? This seems insane

It’s really not that insane. It’s only $25M a year which is what A-Rod got from the Rangers and MLB revenues have doubled since then. Sure it’s a lot of years, but the actual dollar value is very reasonable.

also yeah he’s pretty good 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bartles

Bartles 769

Posted
Posted

Harper is all over the board - tons of strikeouts, bad defense but great walk rate and will always hit bombs. It's not like he's been in a bad lineup. I'm hoping Citizens Bank Park helps him with both HRs and defense (more playable corner spots).

There's no way it's a bad contract unless he gets major injuries in the early years. A lot of people (inc. national media) thought he would average more than $35 million over 10 years. This is like $33 million  over 10 years plus three years free!

This also makes Trout to Philly (his hometown, just across the river) a very real thing from both a trade and FA perspective for the next couple years. Y'all are going to get sick of media talking about it, will he go home or take a Yankee mega-mega-deal?

The Phillies still have challenges. Rotation isn't really playoff-worthy. Minor league system very sparse which hurts in terms of trade chips and also just general depth. But man it's good to be able to believe for the first time in almost a decade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Wild Bill

Wild Bill 324

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Bartles said:

 

This also makes Trout to Philly (his hometown, just across the river) a very real thing from both a trade and FA perspective for the next couple years. Y'all are going to get sick of media talking about it, will he go home or take a Yankee mega-mega-deal?

 

Trout will be a Yankee. Bank on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
UTexasFight

UTexasFight 9572

Posted
Posted
It’s really not that insane. It’s only $25M a year which is what A-Rod got from the Rangers and MLB revenues have doubled since then. Sure it’s a lot of years, but the actual dollar value is very reasonable.
also yeah he’s pretty good 

What this post pre-supposes is....
That A-Rod deal was reasonable at the time.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bartles

Bartles 769

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Pig Bellmont said:

I hate he’s still in the NL East, but the Nats did more with their spend over multiple acquisitions than just give it to Harper. He won’t be very welcome in DC

Oh he'll get a huge ovation at Nationals Park. Seems to be at least 30 pct Phillies fans even in the recent down years

That was LOL about the batteries...hopefully by then we're throwing micro-solar panels instead though

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hank Chinaski

Hank Chinaski 6324

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, UTexasFight said:


What this post pre-supposes is....
That A-Rod deal was reasonable at the time.

I'd argue that it was. $25mm then was certainly more than it is now, but these were A-Rod's WAR (B-R) totals, for 10 years starting in 2001 (the original deal was 10 years, he opted out after the 2007 season and basically signed this deal again): 8.3, 8.8, 8.4, 7.6, 9.4, 4.5, 9.4, 6.8, 4.2, 4.2

So, that's 7.2 WAR per year for 10 years. That's MVP-caliber play for a decade. This was one of the rare enormous FA contracts that actually worked out. 

Now, I understand that the Rangers didn't win anything with A-Rod, and ultimately traded him because the contract was prohibitive of them building a team around him (I guess); but that doesn't mean that A-Rod was overpaid - it means that Texas didn't draft and develop other players well enough in that era to take advantage of having one of the 3 best players in the game (at the time, along with Bonds and Pujols) on their team. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheFlagship

TheFlagship 436

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, Hank Chinaski said:

I'd argue that it was. $25mm then was certainly more than it is now, but these were A-Rod's WAR (B-R) totals, for 10 years starting in 2001 (the original deal was 10 years, he opted out after the 2007 season and basically signed this deal again): 8.3, 8.8, 8.4, 7.6, 9.4, 4.5, 9.4, 6.8, 4.2, 4.2

So, that's 7.2 WAR per year for 10 years. That's MVP-caliber play for a decade. This was one of the rare enormous FA contracts that actually worked out. 

Now, I understand that the Rangers didn't win anything with A-Rod, and ultimately traded him because the contract was prohibitive of them building a team around him (I guess); but that doesn't mean that A-Rod was overpaid - it means that Texas didn't draft and develop other players well enough in that era to take advantage of having one of the 3 best players in the game (at the time, along with Bonds and Pujols) on their team. 

Agreed. Also steroids happened

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Helobious

Helobious 9483

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Wild Bill said:

Trout will be a Yankee. Bank on it.

No he won’t. Current NY ownership has made it crystal clear they don’t care about doing what it takes to win. They just want to line their pockets. 

What a disaster of an off-season for the MLB. 2 of its biggest stars end up at franchises that no one cares about, with non-existent fan bases. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tx 3 putt

tx 3 putt 77669

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Helobious said:

No he won’t. Current NY ownership has made it crystal clear they don’t care about doing what it takes to win. They just want to line their pockets. 

What a disaster of an off-season for the MLB. 2 of its biggest stars end up at franchises that no one cares about, with non-existent fan bases. 

 

the next players strike will be ugly

 

hopefully the astros have open tryouts for scab players, im already in training 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hank Chinaski

Hank Chinaski 6324

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, Wild Bill said:

Trout will be a Yankee. Bank on it.

For some reason, I could actually see Trout doing another extension with the Angels. Maybe that's because he already sold them a few of his FA years, maybe it's because he's a low-key guy. But I wouldn't be shocked if he never hits free agency. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
UTexasFight

UTexasFight 9572

Posted
Posted
For some reason, I could actually see Trout doing another extension with the Angels. Maybe that's because he already sold them a few of his FA years, maybe it's because he's a low-key guy. But I wouldn't be shocked if he never hits free agency. 


I hope not.
As a fan of baseball, I’d like to see the greatest player of his generation actually win a playoff game
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...