Around Baseball 2019

[Ray]

Surprised they went 13 years.

[Spanky__99]

They can easily sustain a much higher payroll. For reference, the Cubs made similar revenue, operating income, and actually had more debt in 2017. They had a opening day payroll of $215M. Not saying the Braves should spend that much, but they're not even remotely close to them. They're currently at a $118M payroll, in a division where the Phillies, Mets, and Nats got better.

 

They have a young cheap core for the next 3-4 seasons. If you don't spend now, when do you? Instead they're going to plop Markakis out there in RF even though he reverted back to a pumpkin in the 2nd half of the season.

 

That's their choice, they felt they over achieved, and selling assets might legit be wrong in the rebuild, plus who's to say they're done.

Lots of assets.

[bones10]

Machado is better than Harper, right?

[Spanky__99]

Machado is better than Harper, right?

 

Sorta, arguably etc, he was a spic so he signed for less, right?? lol

[bones10]

Sorta, arguably etc, he was a spic so he signed for less, right?? lol

 

I'm not really sure why he got less, but at that much money do you even care. I'm just having a hard time deciding who I'd want to sign, between the two.

[Ray]

Wouldn't you need to know what their profit was over say - the last 10 to 15 years to make that claim? I mean if some team is pocketing $100M in profit year after year after year and refusing to invest a little more in the team, then sure, but if they lost $400M over the past 10 years combined and then finally made some cash in 2018, you could understand why they aren't opening up the pocket book this year.

 

Even at that - businesses aren't required to break even. They're allowed to make money. If you don't like their product, you don't go or support them.

 

Well, they're at a pretty healthy level debt wise. It's not like they're massively in debt like the Marlins. It's not even about breaking even. They could spend $30M more on payroll and still have an operating income that is Top 10 in the entire MLB. They're very well off financially.

 

On top of that Liberty Media (their owner), is using their Braves profit and taking on more debt to fund their real estate ventures: https://mlb.nbcsports.com/2019/02/28/the-braves-are-rolling-in-money-but-arent-spending-it-on-baseball/

[Bobthe4th]

Wouldn't you need to know what their profit was over say - the last 10 to 15 years to make that claim? I mean if some team is pocketing $100M in profit year after year after year and refusing to invest a little more in the team, then sure, but if they lost $400M over the past 10 years combined and then finally made some cash in 2018, you could understand why they aren't opening up the pocket book this year.

 

Even at that - businesses aren't required to break even. They're allowed to make money. If you don't like their product, you don't go or support them.

 

As a European it’s so bizarre that North American sports teams are treated as businesses and that’s accepted by fans.

 

The Braves move to a new stadium a couple of years ago and start making massive profits, yet payroll goes down. If a European soccer team did that, there’d be riots in the streets, haha.

[BTS]

13/330 with no opt outs and a full no-trade

[glory]

Stanton signed for 13/325, so this was Boras trying to beat that deal specifically.

[Laika]

Why are people having knee-jerk reactions to the term?

 

Most people expected a 10 year deal around $330.

 

13/$330 is a strictly better deal for Philadelphia than 10/$330.

[Angrioter]

Why are people having knee-jerk reactions to the term?

 

Most people expected a 10 year deal around $330.

 

13/$330 is a strictly better deal for Philadelphia than 10/$330.

 

Nats offered 10/300M

[Orgfiller]

I don't get this for Harper. The deal probably has several opt outs, bonuses and a large signing bonus, but if he was being offered 10/300 by other teams then 13/330 is objectively a worse deal for him.

[Laika]

I don't get this for Harper. The deal probably has several opt outs, bonuses and a large signing bonus, but if he was being offered 10/300 by other teams then 13/330 is objectively a worse deal for him.

 

I read that there are no opt-outs. Just a straight 13 year deal with a full no trade clause.

 

I'm not sure it's worse. I mean he's getting $30 guaranteed for his Pujolsy seasons - that's not bad. I think 13/330 is better than 10/300 for him. 330 > 300 and either way the deal probably extends to or past the end of his useful baseball like (in 98% of the outcomes).

[devo]

I don't get this for Harper. The deal probably has several opt outs, bonuses and a large signing bonus, but if he was being offered 10/300 by other teams then 13/330 is objectively a worse deal for him.

 

No opt outs

[glory]

I don't get this for Harper. The deal probably has several opt outs, bonuses and a large signing bonus, but if he was being offered 10/300 by other teams then 13/330 is objectively a worse deal for him.

 

He would be a 36 year old FA if he signed a 10 year deal, and no guarantee he'd get $30m for the remainder of his career from that point on. That extra $30m for years 11-13 could easily be a lot more than he would have gotten as a free agent after 2028 season. Of course a lot can change in 10 years with markets.

 

Lower term is not good in today's MLB.

[Daniel Labude]

I dont like this at all for Harper, especially if teams were offering 45 million for a shorter term. Awesome deal for Philly

[Orgfiller]

I read that there are no opt-outs. Just a straight 13 year deal with a full no trade clause.

 

I'm not sure it's worse. I mean he's getting $30 guaranteed for his Pujolsy seasons - that's not bad. I think 13/330 is better than 10/300 for him. 330 > 300 and either way the deal probably extends to or past the end of his useful baseball like (in 98% of the outcomes).

 

I think there's a reasonable range of outcomes in which 36 year old impending HOF Bryce Harper can earn $30+M over his last 4 or so years of his career, with a lower risk of running into a Tulo-like humiliation release. It's not like I hate it for him, but surprised he wouldn't go for the $30-35M AAV over 8-10 years instead of this deal, assuming those deals really existed in the first place.

[Abomination]

I think there's a reasonable range of outcomes in which 36 year old impending HOF Bryce Harper can earn $30+M over his last 4 or so years of his career, with a lower risk of running into a Tulo-like humiliation release. It's not like I hate it for him, but surprised he wouldn't go for the $30-35M AAV over 8-10 years instead of this deal, assuming those deals really existed in the first place.

 

They said the deal may be heavily front loaded, so those last 3 years may not be worth 30M either (or they may be worth more).

[Stangstag]

Harper: im worth more than 300 million!

 

Also Harper: im not willing to bet on myself being good at age 36

[G-Snarls]

Nats offered 10/300M

 

People are now saying 100M of it was going up be deferred for decades

[Terminator]

Why are people having knee-jerk reactions to the term?

 

Most people expected a 10 year deal around $330.

 

13/$330 is a strictly better deal for Philadelphia than 10/$330.

 

Yeah it stretches out his AAV which will help them avoid the luxury tax. ~$25 mil a year isn't necessarily going to be THAT crippling in the year 2030.

[Terminator]

Seems like the home ballpark played a big factor as well. Citizens Bank is really homer friendly. Almost the complete opposite from the Giants home park which might be the worst for left handed hitters. Over 13 years that could actually make a big difference on his career homer totals.

[Angrioter]

 

Acuña to Juan Soto after Harper deal "When we are free agents there will be no money for us"

[Brownie19]

Reports saying Giants offered 12 years $310M - but the Cali taxes means they would have to offer a lot more to equal what he'd take home in Philly.

[Boxcar]

Lol so

10/330: decent deal for both sides

13/330: OMG TERRIBLE, WHY WOULD THE PHILLIES GIVE HIM 13 YEARS?!

 

Also a bit sad to see Bryce go to the all time losses leader in MLB history but better than the White Sox or Padres, I suppose.

[G-Snarls]

Lol so

10/330: decent deal for both sides

13/330: OMG TERRIBLE, WHY WOULD THE PHILLIES GIVE HIM 13 YEARS?!

 

Also a bit sad to see Bryce go to the all time losses leader in MLB history but better than the White Sox or Padres, I suppose.

 

Yeah. Even compared to 10/300, the longer term at lower AAV makes sense as it allows them to spend an extra 5M per season elsewhere.

[G-Snarls]

Seems like the home ballpark played a big factor as well. Citizens Bank is really homer friendly. Almost the complete opposite from the Giants home park which might be the worst for left handed hitters. Over 13 years that could actually make a big difference on his career homer totals.

 

Interesting point

 

Hall of fame potential could be affected if the writes don't figure outrague and park factor adjustments

[Abomination]

Interesting, in MLB's Gameday it now shows balls in the dirt with dust around the little ball/strike circle and damage to the chalk line. Nice, but useless touch.

[AintNoThang]

Can someone explain to me why teams wouldn't want to have a player option after say 5 - 7 years? To me I'd rather have Harper for 5 - 7 solid years and then hope he opts out. He'd be 31 - 33 at that point and I'd rather miss out on a few more productive years and not have to pay for 5+ years of poor production. Plus, an opt out would add a psychological effect of keeping his production as high as possible to earn another big pay day.

[Boxcar]

Can someone explain to me why teams wouldn't want to have a player option after say 5 - 7 years? To me I'd rather have Harper for 5 - 7 solid years and then hope he opts out. He'd be 31 - 33 at that point and I'd rather miss out on a few more productive years and not have to pay for 5+ years of poor production. Plus, an opt out would add a psychological effect of keeping his production as high as possible to earn another big pay day.

 

Harper isn't really the type of guy that requires monetary incentive. He truly wants to be the best. Also, with inflation and front loading, those back years will be cheap, and you wouldn't want to front load a deal and then have him opt out as he gets cheap.