Why are Bryce Harper and Manny Machado still available on the free agent market, with relatively few teams in the hunt for two 26-year-old stars? As The Athletic’s Ken Rosenthal (subscription required) explores, their situation is another sign of how baseball’s “current economic system is outdated and flawed.” Teams are increasingly leery of signing players to ultra-long contracts, yet are also just as worried about signing players to contracts with fewer years but higher average annual salaries out of fear of crossing the luxury tax threshold. The result is “baseball’s version of a Catch-22,” Rosenthal writes, and he also points out that teams seem unnaturally adverse to making luxury tax payments given that relatively tiny amount of money actually spent on the tax.
More from around the game as we head into the weekend…
- In a conference call with reporters (including ESPN.com’s Coley Harvey) today, Yankees GM Brian Cashman said that he kept in contact with Manny Machado’s camp, and let them know in advance about the team’s plan to sign Troy Tulowitzki. Beyond that, Cashman unsurprisingly didn’t share details about New York’s pursuit of Machado, and in fact stressed that Tulowitzki is atop the club’s depth chart at shortstop, at least until Didi Gregorius is healthy. “We have really reacted in a positive way to have that type of dialogue with Troy and to commit to giving him that opportunity to be our everyday shortstop,” Cashman said. Of course, this doesn’t necessarily close the door on the idea of Machado joining the Yankees — beyond just gamesmanship on Cashman’s part, Machado could also be deployed as a third baseman, with Miguel Andujar then either moving to first base or perhaps traded to another team.
- Yusei Kikuchi received several seven-year contract offers from teams, agent Scott Boras told reporters (including TJ Cotterill of the Tacoma News Tribune) during Kikuchi’s recent introductory press conference. While such offers guaranteed Kikuchi more security, they also would’ve required Kikuchi to adopt a regular MLB workload right away, which concerned both the southpaw and Boras given how several Japanese pitchers in the past have suffered arm injuries while adapting from a Japanese pitching schedule to North American baseball’s every-five-days rotation lineup. Mariners GM Jerry Dipoto answered those concerns with both a unique plan for managing Kikuchi’s arm and innings, as well as a contract that could last three, four, or seven years in length.
- Pitching has gone from a weakness to a strength for the Red Sox over the last five seasons, and Alex Speier of the Boston Globe details how the club upgraded its scouting and development system to better identify talent and then further build on that talent once on the Sox roster. Speier delves into the team’s acquisition of Nathan Eovaldi at the trade deadline, and how Eovaldi took on some tips from pitching coach Dana LeVangie and assistant pitching coach Brian Bannister to make his fastball more of a weapon. These tweaks and an increased usage of his curveball took Eovaldi’s performance up another notch (after he already pitching well for the Rays) after joining the Red Sox, and he then was one of the stars of Boston’s World Series run.
Andujar at first makes a lot of sense. Hopefully Cash can sign Manny and play him at third
Best case scenario, no way that Andujar should be traded, he is an elite talent
fasbal, Andujar might be an elite talent in your eyes—he’s hardly a unique athlete. In fact, his overall athleticism is quite lacking.
That’s where you’re wrong. He’s not fast in terms of a SB threat but he’s no lumbering baseball player.
What I’ve seen of him at third has looked really quite bad. His front office seems to also view him as less than stellar.
I’ve yet to hear ANY rumor that the Yanks were shopping Andujar. Rather, the opportunity to sign a guy like Manny who can play SS short-term and move back to 3rd and then use Andujar in a package to get a FOR starter or move him to LF or 1B is the scenario they’re contemplating. I’d rather they pass on Manny, sign Harper in LF, give Andujar a chance to improve and see what Voit can do with 500 at bats. If Manny wasn’t on the market then I don’t think Andujar’s name would be in trade rumors this off-season.
That could be, I did not have the luxury of watching him day to day.
Defense at 3b is a problem, he may be better suited for 1b
How about Andujar’s range?
The one tool better than his offense, based on scouting reports. How about throwing arm?
Most u tap out after u see “-16 UZR, -25 DRS.”
He will become a better 3B. 23 year old rookie.
“Despite his offensive prowess, Andujar’s most impressive tool is his cannon arm. He has slightly below-average speed, but more than enough range for third base, though he still needs to polish some rough edges on defense. While he has lapses with his footwork and throwing accuracy, he’s making progress…”
baseballsavant.mlb.com/savant-player/miguel-anduja…
Andujar right now is best situated as a DH. Just remember while he was the FOTY
Andujar right now is best situated as a DH. Just remember while he was the ROTY (in my view), he was just a rookie and a sophomore jinx is possible (Sanchez anyone).
How can this article call pitching a strength for the Red Sox when they now have one of the very worst bullpens in the major leagues. Maybe starting pitching is a strength for them… Kind of. But they need to be expecting some regression from SP3-SP5 slots, plus the ongoing Spectre of a possible Sale injury
How do u see regression next year from slots 3-5? they are as solid as anyone in the AL, or better? Eduardo Rodriquez, Rick Porcello and Eovaldi. That’s a pretty good 3-5, the they have Steven Wright and brian Johnson as #6, along with Hector Velazquez. and everyone knows the BP won’t go into the season like it is now, tho it’s definitely not one of the worst in the game as u called it as it currently is made up in all probability.
Look at things in reality, rather than how u wish them to be next time please.
no you are wrong
Andujar as DH?? then what about Stanten??
Great pure hitter, though. Has hit at every level. He’ll slash .290/.325/.500 going forward. Yanks shouldn’t trade him.
Andujar and Gray for Kluber!
It would take much more the Andujar & a sub-par pitcher like Gray to a acquire a 2-time Cy Young award winner that’s under team control for 3 more seasons. Would have to add at least a top prospect or two…
He is Nick Castellanos with more years of control. But the Yankee uniform means he is a future HOF.
It was Sanchez 3rd year not sophomore
1. Sanchez was hurt pretty much all season. 2. It was his third season. And 3. Being a catcher is overall harder on the body then playing 3B/1B is.
LOL… There is an ongoing spectre of injury for any major league starter whether it’s Sale or CC Sabathia.. and other and losing Kelly who had a very up-and-down season last year.. how does this suddenly translate into the Red Sox having one of the worst bullpens. Kimbrel still out there. Red Sox have also resigned several relievers who had injury issues last year that will be coming back this year.. will they be good or will they be bad no one knows when it comes to a bullpen ..if anyone had ever told you last year Ryan Brasier would be a dominant reliever in the major leagues and being used in high-leverage situations in the World Series you would have said.. who.
My gosh xabial is there anything you won’t comment on? You seem to know everything and nothing at the same time. Hahaha you have been donged
Sign Harper in LF? Don’t they already have 5 outfielders! Left infield def more of a need and if the two, Machado is a better overall player. Who wants Bryce DH in 6-12 yrs?
Andujar was better at third than Headley who played there for years and Miggy is young and should get better. Machado on the other hand is an elite 3rd basemen, who can give an MVP season. Miggy hasn’t shown that level of talent. Yanks won 100 games with their best player Judge out part of the season, so the only way Cashman can improve the team is to get top players like Machado, Happ, and Paxton.
Put Stanton in Left or right field. People talk like Stanton is late career Carlos Beltran in the outfield. He’s a good OF. Surely Brett Gardner isn’t blocking Stanton at this stage of his career. Judge and Stanton corner outfield, however lines up best, and Andujar DH. Easy Peasy.
Who wants Manny in 6-12 years. They’re the same age and most of Harper’s injuries came from diving or crashing into walls. I think he’s learned his lessons. And can you really count on Ellsbury, Frazier or Gardner?
Sanchez came up in the middle of 16 and was amazing. Last year was his second full year but technically I stand corrected. His shoulder likely affected his bat but I doubt his laziness behind the plate. That or perhaps he had eye issues. Just wondering if he saw the ball right. Still love that arm but his failure to learn from Girardi or his apparent inability to listen concerns me big time. With that power and strong arm, I had compared him to a young Johnny Bench. 2019 is important for him.
Everyone talks about Andujar’s lousy play at third. Boston is still counting on Devers. Both are young, talented and full of promise but each has the potential of costing their team big time in the field. Funny how Andujar gets mentioned daily due to the Machado rumors but the talk on Devers is minimal.
Devers came through in the playoffs.
watch last years World Series?
If no great pitcher is available to trade for, put Andujar at DH or left field if need be (he may end up there at some point in his career anyways). His bat is so good, he cannot be neglected
with Stanton, you can’t have 2 DH.
You need to add at least 25 percent on to a DH WAR, they aren’t playing the field that much. Stanton has the potential for an 8 WAR in any given year if he plays the field. He is a good fielder, the Yanks are just protecting their investment. Yanks have a lot flexibity on this team.
Stanton has better defense than the casual observer might know. He was way better than Harper last year. Stanton is quite capable of handling the outfield
How can the Yankees go wrong with an elite, TWO war player?
@ Knowthemarket;
Ahhh-HA!
So they are in on Bryce Harper.
Wait…..The living legend did 1.3 last year.
Get the impression I’m a Harper fan or something? Not sure what gave it away. I mean I’m wearing this t-shirt of his hair with a helmet flying off and all.
Even if I were a Harper fan,
pointing out that Harper didn’t
give elite production last year
doesn’t do anything to validate
Andujar so your point is moot.
WAR is one stat. Man, there are others. I hate how the focus is on one flawed stat.
Andj is not an elite talent… Hes good. But he is farrrr from elite.
In his first season his bat wasn’t that far off from Manny’s.
Andujar. .297/.328/.528
Manny. 297/.367/.527
I could see his career path with the bat to project to the level of a Cano or Beltre type of hitter. A low walk rate in the 5-8% range, low k rate around 12-15%, great contact skills with a .285-.310 range and 25-35 homers.
So you are predicting that Andujar WILL be elite. Okay. Maybe so.
No. What I said was that his bat was just as good as Manny’s last year. It’s a fact. His low walk rate is something he has to improve upon but he has great contact skills. Aside from a 39pt difference in obp their % numbers were almost exactly the same.
How does it compare to Wally Joyner’s first year?
Andujar , Joe Charboneau elite?
Andujar already is a future hall of famer. No one else knows it outside of NY yet.
@stymeedone @teddy @yukon
I never said Andujar was elite. What I said was that in his 1st full season his bat was on par with Manny minus the 30 something point difference in OBP. Not a stretch to suggest that in 2 or 3 years his walk rate or hitting skills might adapt enough to maintain the bat avg and power and see a 5% uptick in his walk rate.
If you consider Manny’s bat to be elite then Andujar is close to being on par with him. Time will tell if he improves/regresses but he’s at a great starting point for his rookie year. I see a lot of Cano/Beltre in his bat.
He’s not elite …
Agreed. Very nearly hit .300 with 30 HR and 100 RBI. As a rookie. No way you trade that player. His defense will improve.
No it doesn’t.
Sign Harper, abandon all pursuit of Machado.
Harper really isn’t a fit, the outfield is already a log jam, putting him at 1b makes zero sense, now, if the trade an outfielder or two maybe, but not as the roster sits currently
There’s an obvious opening in LF unless you really think Cashman will go into the season counting on Frazier and Gardner?
In fact, the best improvement to the offense would be
Harper @ LF, Andujar @ 3rd, Volt @ 1B
Vs
Gardner/Frazier @ LF, Manny @ 3B , Andujar @ 1B.
The upgrade offensively from Harper over Frazier/Gardner is greater than the upgrade of Manny over Andujar – Voit.
I’m a Volt supporter who thinks it’s realistic to suggest that Volt might be a .275/.350 25-30 homerun hitter next season.
Well, he just MIGHT go into the season counting on an OF of Judge/Stanton/Hicks and Frazier/Gardner as back ups.
And a gaping hole at DH. The hitters are young enough where we shouldn’t have to worry about rotating anyone at DH unless they move Voit there and Bird some how makes the team or they acquire a full time 1B.
I really like Frazier and rooted for the kid to succeed and maybe he’ll be healthy in 2019. However, if I had a shot at Harper I’d take him over Frazier without thinking twice about it.
DH’s are pretty easy to come by. Andujar, for one, if you sign Machado. It makes since to put Andujar in the DH spot too. It brings his most important element and leaves out the glove which will hurt you. I think the Yankees can easily fill a DH spot or a 3B spot, which ever is the need.
That forces Stanton to play LF. The Yanks would be a better offensive team with Harper vs Manny. Not even sure if that’s debatable. He’s been better now and should be even better with half his home games are in YS.
God that outfield with Harper would be bad—especially in the many years ahead.
Why? Harper should be better in LF vs RF/CF, Hicks is a GG in CF. I see no reason why the Yanks wouldn’t retain Hicks if he has a good 2019 and Judge is a good RF and should be athletic enough over the next 4-5 years to stay at least league average.
I’m not so sure I see Judge as good defensively for the next 4-5 years. I’m dubious of his body type doing that for the next several years. I could be wrong. As for Hicks, fair enough, I was including Stanton in my assessment. As for Harper, I do t see how LF improves him that much, if at all.
It doesn’t improve him but there’s less responsibilities in LF than CF or RF. That’s usually where you hide your less defensively inclined outfielder. As for Judge, I’m not sure if he’s more inclined to grey injured or the same as any other player. There’s no doubt that he’s a tremendous athlete. He’s only 27 this season. I don’t see any inherent risk of him getting significantly worse in the near future. His only DL time came this year from a HBP.
@ knickscavsfan
Actually, there’s an easy way out of the Hicks/Harper dilemma……
Trade Frazier, Voit, and Ellsbury to the Angels for Trout and Simmons. Then after Manny is signed, move Andujar to 1B which is easier to play then 3B. Trade Bird, Tyler Wade, Sonny Gray, and CC (hate to see him go, but to get someone good you have to trade someone good) to the Indians for Kluber, Bauer, and Hand. Sign Harper. Trade Tulo, Gardner and a low-level prospect to the Red Sox for Mookie Betts. Sign Craig Kimbrel, Zach Britton, and Adam Ottavino.
1B – Andujar to start the year – platoon with Didi when he comes back
2B – Glayber
SS – Simmons
3B – Manny
LF/RF/DH – Harper, Stanton and Judge rotate
4th OF and backup 2B – Betts
SP – Severino, Paxton, Tanaka, Happ, Kluber, Bauer
CL – Chapman
SU – Betances, Chad Green, Craig Kimbrel, Zach Britton, and Adam Ottavino.
LOOGY – Brad Hand.
And, Oh! Trade Austin Romine, Kyle Higashioka and a low-level prospect to the Marlins for Realmuto, who can back up Sanchez if he’s still hurt
C – Sanchez, Realmuto.
One of the Yankees best defensive weapons the last few years has been Hard in left. Yankee Stadium LF is big and his defense in left is as good as there is even at his age. Whatever gains there are with the bat will likely be mostly negated. The exception in my view might be Frazier or Ellsbury (yes him) if either could stay healthy.
One of the Yankees best defensive weapons the last few years has been *Gardi in left. Yankee Stadium LF is big and his defense in left is as good as there is even at his age. Whatever gains there are with the bat will likely be mostly negated. The exception in my view might be Frazier or Ellsbury (yes him) if either could stay healthy.
Whoops, forgot……
CF – Trout
Frazier, Voit and Ellsbury for Trout aaaaand Simmons? So an aging 4th OF, A 1B who needs to re-establish his value and Frazier who can’t crack the starting outfield. Frazier might actually be worth something but you think those three are going to get one of baseballs best shortstops and also baseballs best player. You are insane.
Best parody post of 2019 this far.
That Might be the weakest hypothetical trade offer for Trout I’ve ever see, and there’s been lots of bad one’s. It’s way way way too light for the Angels, and then you want them to include Simmons too?! Lol. Try starting with Torres and Andujar. Yes both.. It doesn’t matter Trout only has two years of control left. Trading for Trout hurts, you can’t just throw a couple mediocre guys in and get him. They’ll want cheap, future studs with lots of control. Come on man.
Yeah, that dude’s either insane, an idiot, or completely joking. That’s the most insulting trade offer I’ve ever seen, so I’m hoping he’s joking. But his post seemed pretty serious, so I’m not sure.
such a troll, aren’t you?
Yeezus…
Good lord I thought you were serious from a second.
As if your post isn’t ridiculous enough, you have the best Catcher the game as a backup. Stick to the Mets articles Sam!!
The number of guys who can’t tell an obvious troll on this site are astounding.
I don’t remember Hicks ever winning a Gold Glove. Plus his injury history is a problem as well.
This!! Wait are you serious or joking?
Rember one thing. You are talking to Yankee fans. That is all.
That is the most absurd trade proposal I have ever heard. Put the pipe away.
Knowthemarket Your grasp of sarcasm is poor.
Hicks and Didi will be resigned by the Yanks, they are top 5 at their positions.
I think we all understand that we say he has a “Gold Glove” doesn’t necessarily mean he has an award but speaks more to his defensive skill.
If you put Harper in LF, you minimize his only genuine asset in the OF which is his arm.
To anyone who points out the absurdity of this post… the problem is you. Good Grief.
Judge and Stanton both have great arms from RF and Hicks has a cannon in CF. Nothing wrong with having Harper and his arm in LF. Since when is having all 3 OF with strong arms a problem? He’s not being signed for his defense anyway.
The Evil Empire deserves Manny. Both he n Harper did nothing against the Redsox. so I doubt any Boston fan is not scared of any of those 2.
This isn’t PlayStation, so Boston fans wouldn’t be pitching to them.
Harper will not be signed by the Yankees. Teams do not sign players to record deals to have them play a position they’ve never played. 1b is a lot more work than you might think for a guy that’s never played in the infield. Won’t happen.
LF?
Not for the Yankees!
I think long contracts with player opt-outs are what causes GM’s to flinch. A lot of risk, cause if a player gets hurt the team is stuck, but if the player does well he’s gone.
That’s why a mid-range higher AAV with opt-out “overrides” (like Arrieta’s but longer) make sense. It allows alternatives for both the player and team..
Read ur post in Kikuchi thread, agree 100%, Cat.
I too hope this is the future of contracts.
So far, it seems only Boras clients specialize in it. (Arrieta and Kikuchi contracts)
Thanks Xabail. To me it just makes so much sense.
Pay a premium player a premium salary for 7-8 years and he has an opt out after 3. But if he preforms the club can override the opt-out but adding an agreed upon amount of $$ (say $5M/year) for the next 2-3 years until the next opt-out.
If he opts after the first 3 and even if he is preforming well the team may have other needs. Maybe injuries destroyed the pitching staff and a youngster has come up that can replace the premium player. The team can let him walk and allocate the $$ for pitching.
It will more often than not be a win/win.
IDK if Klentak or Boras came up with the structure for JA’s contract. No matter who it was could re-shape the way contracts are done for years to come.
How about if the player gets an opt out at three years, the team gets the opt out at year 4. Gives the player the year to rebound, but gives the team an out, if the player suddenly pulls a Sandoval.
I understand the idea stymeedone but it would require a major change to the CBA and one, I doubt, the MLBPA would agree to.
Years following an opt-out are considered guaranteed as is a player option. Team options are not considered guaranteed (only the usual buy-out attached) and I doubt a team opt-out would be either.
An opt-out and opt-out override system is not perfect. there is always risk but it at least allows a team some flexibility that is not there now. It also gives the player the benefit of knowing if he preforms well and exercises the opt-out there is a good chance he is rewarded substantially without going to FA which has been volatile of late.
It’s a fallacy that opt-out contracts are a risk to the team. What’s the option to NOT give an opt-out? Giving a fully guaranteed contract. A GM should PRAY that after 4-5 years a Manny, Harper or Stanton opts out. It typically means the player feels his value is the same if not greater than what it was when he originally signed. From team perspective, if you give me 4-5 quality years and opt-out halfway thru a 8-10 year contract then I’ll take those years, say “thanks”, allow that player to find a contract elsewhere and repurpose his salary the best way I see fit. I might get that years shiny new toy at that position or maybe I can graduate a prospect up to fill that need and invest elsewhere on the roster.
Contracts with an opt-out are still fully guaranteed, they just give the player a chance to leave if they feel they can get a better offer., they are by definition not team friendly. Your scenario assumes all players given an opt-out will leave, they will only leave if their contract greatly favors the team.
Yeezus. What’s a GMs preference? To sign FA star players for shorter term contracts. If Harper could be had for 5/$175 he’d likely be signed by now. Well if you know nothing short of 8-10 years would be acceptable but an offer of 10/$350 with an opt-out after the 5th year is acceptable then you might have a win-win situation. If he has a great 5 year run and decides to opt out for more money then you can walk away if you wish. There is no more risk in an op-out vs non opt-out. If the player is horrible 5 years in then he won’t opt-out. If he’s horrible in a non opt-out then your’e stuck with them anyway.
Ahem….Heyward Pujols or Ellsbury contracts would not be better with opt outs.
But they wouldn’t be worse, either. I believe that’s part of his point.
He is saying they wouldnt be worse.
Heyward has/had 2 opt outs in his contract. He could have opted out after 2018 and can opt out after 2019, if he gets 550 PAs. But Heyward knew when he signed that contract he wasn’t going to opt out. The Cubs wish he would, though.
Heyward actually had an opt-out I believe. Shocker he didn’t use it.
You’re missing the point completely. It doesn’t help the team if the player doesn’t opt out. In CAN help the team avoid the inevitable declining years of a long term option should the player opt out because he’s had success and wants more money. If he does, you basically ended up signing him to a shorter term contract which is the way teams are leaning towards anyway.
The price is too high, it’s like selling a house, if it sits on the market long enough, you have to drop the price to sell it, no different here.
Ego is the factor both haven’t signed. Each wants to sign after the other for more money.
Machado and Harper are rubbing their fingers and thumb together and wondering where is the promised “Stupid Money”? Why isn’t “Stupid Money” between their fingers and thumb?
Time for Lozano and Boras to phone Palm Beach.
No disrespect meant but if Harper really still has a 10 year, $300m contract offer, that already is stupid money. With luxury tax implications, having injured or declining players on long term contracts are killers. Half the league could not have absorbed (with on field success) the Sandoval, Hanley, Ellsbury or the two huge Cubs deals just to name several). MLB needs a hard but flexible structure with both a floor and a ceiling. If the last two years continue, perhaps the union will soon realize there might be another way. Allow free agency after four years with a one year franchise tag like the NFL but also allow the team to go over the cap to resign your own players like the NBA. Fine tune it with union negotiations to allow teams to up to a point to go over the “hard” cap by say $10m twice every three years to allow for signings after inking your own players to extensions and in season adjustments. Such might need to be better modified but the idea is simple. Teams and fans need stabiity and there should be a reward for developing your own talent. Also give a three year grace to allow most of the current contracts to run out and exempt other past contracts so everyone starts the same.
I’m not the Commissioner of baseball, nor do I want to be. That makes me different than Bill Giles.
The Phillies have one World Series victory in 38 years under this current ownership group. John Henry has won four in a dozen years.
Can you imagine what the real Scott Rolen is gonna do to this clown!!
Interesting logic. I could say they have twice as many World Series wins in my lifetime than the Cubs do.
If you keep changing the rules, the market will not adjust. Leave the rules alone, and let the agents and teams learn to work with them.
I’m concerned about constant roster turnover making it hard for fans. It used to be you rooted for YOUR teams and its’ players. Now it’s teams and YOUR fantasy players.
How do you know it hasn’t been offered? Just because these two haven’t signed, doesn’t mean they haven’t been offered huge amounts of cash..no matter where they sign, it will be the biggest contracts ever..
Nothing is happening. No activity.
Feels more like collusion than “Stupid Money”.
However, the 29 owners will NOT collude against Manny and Bryce. Guys like Pollack? Absolutely. The other 29 would have been happy to collude against McCutchen too and anyone else like him.
Machado and Harper are true generational talents who are 26 years old. They have real value to teams and owners.
For both of them the rule is: “It only takes one.”
One of them has already. Harper was offered 10/$300 mil by the Nats and it was rumored they have since increased that offer.
“teams seem unnaturally adverse to making luxury tax payments given that relatively tiny amount of money actually spent on the tax.”
Teams are not adverse because of the luxury tax. They are increasing in wealth every year, their value is exploding. What they are doing is bargaining in bad faith, unwilling to spend the money generated by players on players. This makes them richer. We know this because the players share of the take is falling. It used to be around 50%.. now more like 35%. The grand bargain since the collusion events of the 1980’s has been that if you play hard and produce you will get rewarded by future contracts. Now they have you producing but not paying you by future contracts. It is making the owners very wealthier.
Make no mistake This was the agreed to system. future contracts for past production. Ask any player who produced about it. They all expected to be paid for that in the future, which is why they agreed to accept less pay in the current. 6 years a wage slave and then a contract.
The Proof. For many years they have know that players produce less as they age. Yet they gave huge contract to productive players knowing they will age.
I am also sick of hearing about players being ‘greedy.’ The sport makes money because of the players, so pay the players. It shoukd be like the NBA where they gave a 60/40 split with pkayers getting 60. Given the new ststem of not paying players over 30, I say all players automatically become free agents after their age 27 season or 6 years from the day they are put on a 40 man roster.
I disagree with you both. If teams thought they could get Harper or Manny for a record breaking aav of 5/$200 then teams would line up. The problem is they would rather pay more annually with half the years vs something like a lower aav on a 10/$300 deal. That’s less to do with owners being cheep but rather owners shying away from those contracts that take you into those declining years. Even tho a 10 year deal for Harper/Manny would end at a relatively decent age (compared to Pujols, Cabrera, Cano) those 32-36 age seasons are likely to be not as impressive as they’re 26-31 age seasons.
In theory, teams would be more inclined to increase the aav for elite players rather than take on the risk of lengthier contracts. That’s not really a bad thing for the players. It’s an inevitable market correction.
Excuse typo
Agreed but the cost to families attending also needs correcting. Basketball and hockey have 50% less games and 50%+ Stadium seats to fill whereas the NFL has a) only 8 regular season games and b) usually forces season ticket holders to buy two garbage preseason games.
Someoldguy you sound like a union man. Thank goodness the owners have come to their senses and stoped habitually paying players to perform far worse than expected—often for many many years.
And let’s be clear: payment isn’t simply for proven past performance but for anticipated future performance. They’re no longer duped in this regard, just a lot smarter. That’s not operating in bad faith; that’s operating with increasing awareness.
You sound like someone who doesn’t know the history: here is the History: In the 1990’s the Pohlad family came to the Minnesota legislature and asked for another publicly funding for a stadium. The Stadium they testified to was to make money specifically so they could keep their stars and add to them to bring a winning product to the field. I attended several of the hearings. This Statement was published and is part of the official record. Now having received public financing for a stadium The Pohlads are backing out on the deal with the Public and the players and refusing to spend the money generated as promised on players. That is FRAUD upon the public. Now every MLB team has said the same things to get More money .They NEVER said it was to get more profit. It was always said to get better players and bring winning teams.
And Then there is the Players who went to bargaining and were told specifically that Things wouldn’t change. That meant that if they worked hard and produced beyond the pittance they were being paid they would be paid with future contracts. Now they got the owners breaking that deal also. Its called bargaining in bad Faith.
and as far as PUBLICLY SUBSIDIZED Money: I’d rather see it going to the people who actually produce than the Billionaires who make fools of the public with their fraudulent claims.
Someoldguy: the municipality should sue if there is a contractual basis like Florida and Oakland in the NFL. One victory and the damages might self correct for the betterment of all cities. Reality however is the contractual language probably has many loopholes and cities need to develop backbones to a) not poach and b) force teams to pay for their own stadium improvements.
Its not only the contract. They have to be bargained in good faith. If you on the public record in testimony say the money is for team development, and instead it goes to the owners pockets, that is a breach of good faith. which could terminate the contract
SomeDrunkGuy…more profit to the owners means more taxes paid to the State. Also, how many huge contracts have actually worked out for the team vs the player?
Public record is not the same as contractual bargaining. If the intent was there, cities should have included contractual provisions forcing teams to put back into payroll or face say a penalty tax if they didn’t. Thus contractually they would have to spend. Cities will continue to get used unless they stand up to the teams. Perhaps new taxes based on over the air, cable and Internet watching revenue when the community owns the stadium where the game is held. I hate new taxes but such a tax might be a better way to finance stadiums.
For as much grief as Steinbrenner received, Pohlad has been the opposite end of the spectrum; yet deserves as much grief.
Everything someoldguy posted is documented and public record.
Yes, MLB is a business and capitalism is the bottom line; however, what Pohlad did to the Twins and the citizens of Minnesota remains appalling.
The 3 Ring Circus that has been The Marlins (read: blatant fire sales) has been the only modern day example of ownership worse than Pohlad’s
strictly imo of course
No they don’t they use the tax laws to make the profits disappear. “Under current generally accepted accounting principles, I can turn a $4 million profit into a $2 million loss, and I can get every national accounting firm to agree with me.” —Paul Beeston, President of the Toronto Blue Jays
There was a good article on Deadspin documenting how they made huge profits look like losses. deadspin.com/5615096/mlb-confidential-the-financia…
Facts show teams get the short end of most long term deals. Add to it the financial explosion in the game and the risks turn into a lot of money. A financial advisor usually says not to tie up too much of your assets and liquidity in one basket. The higher the overall payroll and the risks v rewards get magnified. Look at the Mets and Madoff and how the team’s ability to fund operations almost forced a sale (had good friend Selig not stepped in). Glad TVs have greatly improved because the cost of taking a family to a game in an urban market has priced many out.
when they tell you they are losing money they are lying: years ago : —Paul Beeston, President of the Toronto Blue Jays: “Under current generally accepted accounting principles, I can turn a $4 million profit into a $2 million loss, and I can get every national accounting firm to agree with me.”
a more recent article by Deadspin shows they commonly under-report their incomes thru tax methods where they can make 30 million that becomes a loss on the books thru tax accounting.
Simple fact is the MLB and the Teams are getting much richer: “In 2004, franchises in Major League Baseball had an estimated value of 295 million U.S. dollars on average according to Forbes. In its 2018 edition of MLB team valuations, Forbes estimates the average franchise value at 1.65 billion U.S. dollars.” ( statista.com/statistics/193637/franchise-value-of-…) the story goes on to show only 1 team is worth less than a Billion dollars: the Rays.
Apparently the long term contracts aren’t hurting team values.
There are very few long term contracts. Your argument is ridiculous.
It’s scary. The Internet, cable, gaming and fantasy have exploded. Is it sustainable long term? The family dollar can only be divided into so many slices.
I Am so sick and tired of this constant debate about paying free agents. Teams have learned to not pay for players entering into age 30+ seasons post steroid era. It’s called capitalism rosenthal. It’s a smart business decision not to pay free agents a huge sum which has been reflected by years of bad contracts with aging veterans.
I’d rather see the younger players that are still in their primes earning the larger salaries than older players that have peaked making the majority of the money. Pay the guys what they are worth today and not what they were worth or will be worth. -not saying I don’t want the players to make their fair share of the money.
I know it’s a veteran system that favors the guys that have put in their time, but it does suck seeing young guys that aren’t even arb eligible statistically outperforming veterans while making 1/10 of what the veterans make.
That’s unfair to the owners. For every star player earning under market pay there are veterans who are completely under performing or injured ( Ellsbury) and 100-150 minor league players in the farm that’ll never contribute to the mlb team. You need a Judge, Torres, Severino so you can offset the Ellsbury or Tanaka contracts.
Why on earth do you give any kind of a care about “being fair to the owners”????
@knickscavsfan seriously? WTF is wrong with you. Please explain. It’s lunacy what you are saying here. F the owners!!!!
Strike Four , well F you comrade. The owners put up the capital and deserve
a hefty return and that’s the way capitalism works. The baseball union has way too much powers and the owners need to take a stand and break them.
She wants the owners to be taxed 70% Federal, that’s for all those “tippy-top peeps” she so eloquently addresses.
Being this is a business and the no one signs a deal that completely favors the other side. If you want rookie players to earn market value immediately and due away with pre-arbitration and arbitration then the rational push back is to offer short term deals. Why would I assume that a 1st or 2nd year player won’t regress?
It’s stupid to NOT think that a deal has to work both ways.At the end of the day you’re a worker bee looking at it like a worker bee does. The owners have HUGE overhead and are taking the bigger risk. Player contracts are guaranteed. So what if they have to prove themselves before getting big money. Almost every player regresses towards their mid-30s but often that salary they are getting in their 30s isn’t is based off of what they did in their 20s.
A team like the Angels NEED cost-controlled young players to offset what they pay for Trout to keep him and the long-term deals they’ve committed to for Pujols and Upton.
Correction:
“Almost every player regresses towards their mid-30s but often that salary they are getting in their 30s IS based off of what they did in their 20s.
No the Public puts up the capital. They pay for the stadiums. Thats how capitalism works; the rich fooling people believing they ever earned anything while the government subsidizes them
that’s why baseball is losing american talents to other sports. naturally young fans will go to games and spend more money on the leagues bringing in top talents. baseball is doomed if this trend continues just as car manufacturers doomed themselves by being overly greedy.
Vizionaire: I don’t see talent going to other sports like in the past. Football is losing talent due to injury risk. Basketball is another thing but the sheer number is limited. I don’t want to get political but it’s the vast talent coming in internationally that makes it seem like American athletes are choosing other sports. I just want the same rules for foreign born and U.S. athletes. One set of rules based on age and get rid of the international bonus pool system.
Baseball is healthy and car sales are down because of ride sharing apps.
Sure I get it. Team owners are just pinching pennies. Probably a white privilege thing. Imagine not wanting to pay a 26 year old $400,000,000 for ten years. Sad what baseball has become. Before you know it, relief pitchers will have to settle for lousy contracts of only $80,000,000 for 60 innings of work a year.
Spot on
Yeah, screw the players getting those billion dollar profits. Let’s instead give those profits to those white haired nerds who never played the game! Yeah!!!!!
@fox471 you realize this is what you sound like, right? You’d rather some no-name senior citizen or tech investor get that money instead of the actual players of the game that made you watch it in the first place. Right? That’s terrible, you need to change your mindset up if this is what you think is fair and reasonable.
Strike Four you mean that no name senior citizen or tech investor that puts up the money so the team can exist? Don’t you have some Antifa rally to attend?.
They act like these teams are being cheap by not wanting to pay this ridiculous tax. I wouldn’t either if I was a team owner.
Totally agree. Let’s put into perspective how much these baseball players actually make.
compared to the Billions they have generated for the Billionaire owners..
Owners actually can lose money they invested if business slows; players cannot lose money because they invest nothing. And their contracts are guaranteed. Why is Pujols still being paid?
Why do people get upset when owners of sports teams make money? Do you get equally upset when the owner of a grocery store makes more money than the stock boy? Or when the owner of a restaurant make more money than the cook?
To put it another way, without the owners investing their money most of these players would be selling cars or working in a factory instead of making millions playing a game.
1, angels sell tickets.
2, fox paid extra billion for signing him. and it looks like arte is keeping most of that.
3, unlike harper or some other players there is no noise about him. he’s quiet but also shows his work ethic to the youngsters.
4, most angels fans love him. maybe not his contract but he has been a model citizen.
I get upset when owners make more money off the players, who get 100% of the criticism about salary and owners get 0% criticism over how much they make every year—and guess what? The owners get that money the players don’t when you complain about player salaries. It’s totally pathetic and we have failed as fans if we think the players are ever “overpaid” in a literal billion dollar industry. Like, damn. We suck for buying into that, so much.
hiflew, like seriously, don’t be a sports fan if you honestly think like this. its horrendous logic. please stop. your post is easily the worst ive ever seen on this site.
without the players bringing fans in owners have to go back to what ever they made money from. remember the replacements?
@bart “the players invest nothing”
Are you insane? They invest their entire lives. Grow up you loser troll.
Yeah, I am really going to take advice on my personal hobbies from someone that uses the phrase “like seriously” as if you were a Valley girl of the 1980s. And if you “like seriously” think my post is one of the worst on this site, then you haven’t been here very long. Why don’t you counter it instead of just using insults?
Owners do not get the money the players don’t. The owners make as much as they ever did. THE FANS PAY MORE when the players get more money.
BTW, the fast food industry is a literal billion dollar industry also. Does that mean the best fry cook should get a 6 year $100 million contract too?
People invest their entire lives in becoming concert pianists and artists as well. They entertain just as many, if not more, people. Are their lives just not worth as much in your mind? What about the people that invest their lives in becoming nuclear physicists and cancer researchers? Are their lives not worth as much?
I think you are the one that needs to grow up and stop looking at players like superheroes and look at them like the human beings that they are. They have a very exciting career and entertain a lot of people, but on the whole they expect a much larger percentage of their industry’s revenue than workers in almost any other field. That, sir, is the very definition of greed.
The owners are also the ones with EVERYTHING to lose if the business goes sideways. A player can hop on another team faster than an owner could buy a new team or such.
The owners are there to make money. Just like you make money for your boss. Got a problem w/ it? Be a boss, but that typically takes money to do, so…
No hiflew , they don’t have the acumen to grasp this. Baseball players are a dime a dozen and they come and go and most will never pan out. It takes many years to get where the owners are and they contribute much more to the world that an athlete/entertainer. Guys on here who side 100% with the players are pretty much wallowing in the insignificance of their lives.
There’s a big difference between the billionaire owner who has a strong business model and chooses NOT to spend vs the owners of teams that make a lot of money and spend a lot of money too. Why shouldn’t the owner of a business make more than their collective roster? You do realize that there’s an entire financial ecosystem that exists past the 40 man roster right?
False argument: specialized skills: the average fry cook can’t hit the ball or throw a strike: Besides the hamburger flipper will soon be a thing of the past robots are doing that job now. so the person will be out and the owners will make more money.
^Um, yeah….without the owners there would have never been Major League Baseball with multi millionaires. Let the players run the show? Yeah, good luck. You’d see things spiraling out of control real quick.
The players can also use their baseball skills to go to college on a free scholarship, get a free education without paying tuition and land a very nice job once school is over. There’s always that option if they don’t enjoy the league minimum of over half a million dollars if they reach the show.
Or the players can shut their mouths and the fans like us should focus on US and how we’re getting ripped off, not the players.
@GDC why do you imagine being an owner and not a player? Pathetic. Grow up.
Why do you call out someone for only looking at one side when every one of your comments only looks at things from the player’s perspective? There are two sides to this issue, actually three sides if you include the fan’s perspective. He was simply looking at it from a different one than you. Stop insulting people and grow up.
Strike Four – you need to a grown up to want to be an owner. And successful. Not only do you need to grow up you also need to learn how to think. Strike 5 and 6.
I wouldn’t have a problem with it if there was a payroll minimum. These teams with billionaire owners crying poverty and the chronic rebuilders are getting old.
Check out the Forbes article, every team in the MLB had revenues of over the 206 million cap including Tampa and the Marlins, The Nats owner Lerner wants to win so he spends the money to win, some just don’t. Yanks made the most at 619 million last year.
What were the expenses?
The Yanks need more left handed hitters. I think they would be better off with Moustakas at third. He would require a shorter contract and in Yankee stadium and the hitter’s parks in the AL east, he could hit 30 homers. He’s a solid defender too.
A guy like Cargo in left. He could add some power from the left side at a fraction of the price. Probably better defensively. The outfield is pretty solid defensively. Hicks is very good. Gardner is good. Judge is good. Stanton has a great arm, he just isn’t very mobile.
Andujar is still very young. He could be 1B and back up at third and spend some time at DH.
I’m a little surprised at Tulo for short… I expected a guy like Iglesias. I thought they would have wanted a solid glove on that left side. Tulo is below average, as is Torres and Andujar and Sanchez. The infield is very bad defensively.
I don’t think signing Tulo would prevent them from not signing Iglesias or Adeiny. Tulo is on league minimum. They could still pay a FA fair market value and a chance to start. Adeiny hasn’t been a starter since 2016 and Iglesias may not be adverse to being an overpaid super utility guy who can step in as a starter should Tulo get injured.
Rosenthal is staying on message as usual and hasn’t adding anything we don’t know already. Got to get those clicks, though.
Jerry might swing at some odd pitches but, depending on how Kikuchi turns out of course, lined this ball outta the park! Looking forward to see the revamp. Go M’s
i don’t understand kikuchi thinking 7 year contract required him to pitch at a full load right away.
All GM’s have brain damage if they think they aren’t going to get the best seasons of Machado or Harper. They are literally MVP finalists who are entering their prime years. It’s absolutely insane that neither of them are getting the $400+M they deserve.
You’re acting as if a 10 year deal won’t likely include some declining years. At one point
In hist first 6 years Longoria was arguably the best 3b in the game. If he had been a free agent at age 28 and signed a 8 year deal that contract would’ve been bad starting at the 1st year of his contract. Most teams are hoping to get at least 5 MVP caliber years before the decline begins.
Every single MLB team owner deserves to pay a $100M contract to ALL players. Or at least to whatever the profits the PLAYERS created for the company. Please everyone STOP giving a single s__t about the billionaire owners!!! Why are yall like this? The owners are EVIL.
100mm contract to all players? So each team should have a payroll of 2.5 billion? And you have the audacity to tell other people that their comments are insane? You need to relax and learn how to form arguments my man.
Best way to win an argument is to always end it with my man. Proven fact. 2.5 bill payroll means Raginbull would have to pay 36 dollars for his hotdog with ketchup at the stadium. He’s not having that.
Anyone who felt that the Yankees signing Troy take them out of the Machado race is kidding themselves. You have to figure Machado would know right from the beginning by August before they even got Troy he would be moving to third want to DD came back.
No salary cap means no salary floor. In the cap leagues, players get a specified portion of revenues (usually around 50%) whereas in MLB they get about 39%. In the NBA, teams toss stupid money at mediocre players just to reach the floor.
The solution to many (most?) of MLB’s problems would be to adopt an NHL style cap and floor system, but MLB will never do this because then it can’t put it’s finger on the scale for the big market teams.
And without such a system, there is nothing beyond the magic of Scott Boras to make teams pay more to the players than they absolutely need to…
That revenues are at an all time high means nothing when they are not contractually obligated to share it. If your salary doubled, would you start paying twice as much for everything you used to buy? They will pay no more than they have to pay.
And without a cap/floor, they don’t and they won’t.
Boras used to sell his trash to the Yankees, and now they’re not buying.
I agree that the Red Sox are doing a better job getting improvement at the major league level from pitchers acquired from other organizations but they continue to do a terrible job at drafting pitchers and developing them into major league pitchers. This shortcoming has led them to spend either big dollars in free agency for pitchers like Price and Eovaldi or trade valued young players like moncada and Travis Shaw for guys like Sale, Porcello, and Kimbrel. Eventually this will catch up to the Red Sox when they need to sign their young stars but the money isn’t there because of cap restrictions or the farm system lacks viable replacements because the better ones were traded to acquire pitching.
It makes absolutely no sense that the Cardinals aren’t in the hunt for either Machado or Harper as their final piece of the puzzle to contend for a World Series berth. Congratulations to the organization for the additions of Goldschmidt and Miller who put them in contention for a wild card play off ticket. But why judge with your heart in keeping Matt Carpenter as a starter. Why insist a manager play Fowler and Cecil who have proven to be extremely bad contracts which weakens the team?? Carpenter could be that left handed bat off the bench and a super sub rather than starting at 3rd base, his worst defensive position. With the addition of Machado and moving DeJong to 3rd, strengthens both offense and defense. Or, benching Fowler gives you both a left handed and right handed bat off the bench and an outfield super sub if Harper were the one to be signed. That strengthens both the outfield and offense. As the team is set. Starting Fowler and Carpenter at the same time both weakens the offense and defensive sides. Which makes them a hopeful wild card at best. The Cardinals can afford either but not both in the long term. If they can spend $260 million last season on Ballpark Village, why can’t they spend a little more than $260 million this season on Either Harper or Machado????? Mozeliak is the only hold up!!!
Maybe because the length of contract and the amount of money isn’t a smart business decision? Are the Cardinals one Harper away from multiple WS wins? Doubtful. Are they a Machado away from back-to-back WS wins? Unlikely.
Sure, Harper will put butts in the seats and so will Machado, but neither has displayed the ability to lead their team to the podium to raise a trophy.
The MLB should make teams spend a minimum . Every team has to have a payroll of at least $125 mil . No team should exceed $200.
Make the lower teams spend money, makes the top teams not get stupid about it … also, the teams that go over should have to forfeit draft picks instead of money —- or both.
Just a thought
I don’t think you’ll ever get that to pass, but I do like the idea of a more substantial penalty for teams that go over the limit.
The problem of a salary floor is illustrated by the NBA. You have a team like the Memphis Grizzlies who aren’t traditionally an attractive landing spot for most top NBA players. In order to meat the salary floor they have to grossly overpay marginal stars exorbitant contracts. Thus Connely signs what at the time was the biggest NBA contract ever and he probably wasn’t even a top 10-15 player in the NBA at any point in his career. Now in mlb that may not be as much of an issue because you have a 25 man roster as opposed to a 12 man roster but still. Can you imagine the Pittsburgh Pirates, who’s current payroll is at $50 mil, trying to sign players just to get to a $125 mil? What star player would want to go there? Certainly not the top tier guys. That means that lesser players are going to be getting $2o mil per aav when they deserve a lot less.
Hopefully, MLB is learning its lesson about signing guys (no matter how talented or peaking at this moment) to 7-10 year contracts. Has any player performed well up to one in years 7-10? Don’t say A-Rod or any other player who was known to be a doper.
Of all the unrealistic/fantasy scenarios possible as far as player contracts, I like to think mine is the most impossible … one I’ve had since Texas started the madness with A-Rod and reinforced when Player Opt Out became more the rule than the exception
If Harper/Machado want 10 years, give it to them, with the following proviso:
Subsequent season becomes binding upon reaching specific benchmarks during the current season
Not team-based benchmarks; player benchmarks
Run with that any way you choose, but I’m talking about basic stats; and excluding IR, because injury is part of the game and cannot be forecast so should not be penalized.
10 years for $300M?
Why not?
Teams can afford it, especially those with their own networks, and a player of that level will certainly increase fan interest (not necessarily rings lol)
However … as much as you want that financial security it should be a given that teams want performance security.
Year 1 @$30M:
Player meets contracted benchmarks then Year 2 @$30M attaches
Player does NOT meet benchmarks then Year 2 @ $25M
Year 2 @$25M
Player meets benchmarks then Year 3 @$35M attaches
etc.
Also, if player demands Opt Out then team has matching Opt Out based on the Performance Clauses described above.
Yeah I know … but that’s why I started this out with that clear “no chance in Hell” disclaimer lol
just thought I’d share
Why wouldn’t a move of Tulo to 3B be an option? Less wear and tear playing there. He could even play 2B if Manny is signed and Didi returns. He is so fragile I am sure all things are being considered.
Lux tax not with standing, having a high payroll usually corresponds to having vetrans and low having younger players. Having a payroll around 150 to 175 mil gives a team movability so when July 31st rolls around roster changes can happen. The right way to do business is in Atl and Houston, wrong way in the Angels way. Albert’s contract is killing the team in that he was good before 30, not so much afterwards. Paying the tax should not be a problem for the Angels since the cable tv deal, but they are right on track to losing Trouty to Phillies. Phillies are not all that sold on Harper or Machado and saving space for Trout.
not, grandpa.
Verlander won the series for the Astros, what does he make, and JD put the Sox over the top after signing a big contract!
I love how now that MLB is “weary of long term (10 yr -400$ mil) and short term (high contract value),” that it is considered economically flawed. Give me ONE example of a 10 year deal that played out fully in the team’s favor. The Dodgers fan base may be frustrated with the Friedman’s, however we aren’t the ones making it to the WS two.years in a row
We’re not going to see Machado and Harper sign for quite the astronomical figures they often were predicted to get because the majority of the league just can’t sustainably spend that much. The overall financial system limits the bidders to a few teams – it’s always the same big money teams in on big name FA, plus a few surprise teams that might try to make a splash. There just aren’t enough serious bidders to drive the dollar figure that high, and it doesn’t help that both of them are on the market at once somewhat diluting their value. On top of that, their biggest competition is the numerous decent players out there… you could pay $40m/yr for 6 WAR but, you can get players who will produce half that WAR for far less than half that price, without huge long term financial implications. Machado and Harper are substantially better players than the guy you drafted coming through your minor leagues, but if Johnny McProspect succeeds he’ll be a far better value, and if he fails, you demote him or DFA him or non-tender him and move on without being stuck paying him a half a billion dollars for a decade.
Ultimately he problem is the slanted financial system. $1 for one team does not equal $1 for another team. The luxury tax is great and all but most teams will never, ever reach those payroll levels because they simply don’t have the cash flow to sustainably do that. The teams that sign these huge contracts can generally afford for them to fail. Look at how much dead weight teams like the Yankees, Dodgers, and Bosox have carried in recent years… they can dump tons of money in the toilet and STILL build a good team. Lots of teams could pay a premier FA – but they NEED that Fa to perform commensurate with their contract for the entire life of the contract. Virtually NO player does that on these longer contracts. Even the shorter ones, due to the market they’re lower quality players and even the $12-15m/year price range contracts have an iffy track record.
So to fix it:
1) A cap/floor system. It wouldn’t work on its own but the points below would enable it to work pretty nicely when you draw it out. Robust enough revenue sharing would subsidize the floor for lower teams, which in turn would make a far more interesting market for low-end FA.
2) Serious reform of the journey from 0.000 to 6.000 and free agency. If players can cash in more when they’re having their best years early in their career, the need to sign guys to bloated contracts later will diminish. A better pay scale with ways foR players to escalate it with their performance from 0.000-4.000 would be a start. Some kind of limited free agency where teams can make offers that the player’s team can match at 4.000 would let players chase offers from other teams earlier. Really should have a load of extra money for minor league players as well so baseball doesn’t lose more talent to sports that have college ball as their minor leagues before a generally consistent jump in pay as a new pro player.
But good luck getting MLB and MLBPA to do anything about any of this. As long as the top slice of teams make loads of money MLB is happy, and as long as the top slice of premier FA make loads of money MLBPA is happy. MLB and MLBPA deserve each other. They’re both hard headed and neither of them care a whole heck of a lot about the majority of teams or the majority of players.
Okay, I’m done talking.
Signing anyone in MLB is insane. With a player aging, injuries, and just not putting out full effort to hustle the contract will end up a disadvantage performance wise and and financially. I am a Mike Trout fan, long before it was popular, but even Trout has in the last 3 years been showing up on the DL. Very few long term contracts of over 4 years work out in the last 35 years, for every good one there are 4 bad ones. Signing players to 30 to 36 mil a year does not equate to WS appearance. Now the Yankees have a ton of young talent and a mix of young and vetran and should be in the mix for years to come. Now in a few years how many long term contracts will they be tied to? A system of rewards should be tied to one year deals that pay the youth what they are worth than trying to tie it to the players long term or as they age. I believe that right now Mike Trout is worth 40 mil a season, but not for 10 years, but for 4 years. The game keeps changing and soon the money will not be there.. Expandsion will kill the game as it will become watered down, and fans will be resentful of the player’s big contracts and having to drop $200 for a family of four to watch a game. TV money will drop as cable decreases in size. The game is a changing, and long term deals will always look bad in 4 or 5 years,
brewers’ ticket prices have been generally growing whether they carried expensive player or not. same trend overall in baseball. many rebuilding teams raise prices all the time. it’s just a desire of owners to make more and more money.
To be honest, signing Trout to a 10/$400 deal seems just as insane as people say Harper or Manny at 10/$300 will be. Trout by far is the best player but he still plays 1 position. Where has he gotten the Angels? And that’s NOT to say that it’s his fault for their lack of success. You can replace Hicks with Trout and as good as the rest of the team is I’m not sure he would’ve been able to help us beat the Sox.
That 2014 Angels team won 98 games and had a good pitching staff and a good lineup and they couldn’t get past the Royals. Trout also had a horrible series that year too. Again, best player in the game but 10/$400 that runs thru age 40? No thanks.
Boras and the agent for Machado can brag about their clients for 300 mil contracts each about them, but that’s delusional as Stanton set a market ceiling.
Harper to the Angels: 10/260, back loaded with incentives.
If the angels ended up with Harper , then they could say bye bye to Trout unless they somehow kept them both.
that would be the dumbest thing the team does. it’s acting like it has no money to upgrade the pen and there are still holes in the line-up.
Stanton has better defense than the casual observer might know. He was way better than Harper last year. Stanton is quite capable of handling the outfield
Agreed, Stanton can play the outfield well, the Yanks didn’t need him in the outfield. If they sign Machado he will play more outfield and Andujar will DH some.
I was not an economics major and don’t profess to know much about how to fix contact issues many here seem to think needs fixing..
If MLB owners want financial relief (I’m not sure they need it), then they will also need to get the MLBPA on board..to that end, I can see the next CBA involving bringing the DH to the NL, and also expanding rosters in both leagues..
As a life long BoSox fan, the Yankees MUST sign Machado, just to keep the Rivalry alive. You go through the year with Manny at short til DiDi’s back. By then Tull will be on the DL so Manny can slide to 3rd and Andujar (all of you Yankee fans wanting to ship this present and future slugger out of town have just gone too long without a Series)slides over to your often problematic situation at 1B…
I am also a life long Red Sox fan and I think the Yankees will compete with the team they have now without Machado.
They can always add talent at the trade deadline.
Machado will only add unnecessary payroll costs for years to come.
Miguel Andújar is a very good looking young player at 3rd.
The Red Sox got some lucky timing again as the World Series will quell a retool/rebuild. Sale, Price, Rodriquez and Eovaldi have health issues. The kids will be coming up for contracts. Panda and Rusney Castillo contracts still have a few years left. Manny Ramirez is still getting 2 million a year deferred and Pedroia has something similar when his contract is up.
I do not see them ponying up the big bucks to the older veterans and not taking real shots at the kids. They are going to have to shift the payroll, draft well and hopefully get compensation picks when guys like Sale, Price, etc…. leave. I really hope this starts with Kimbrel signing somewhere else.
So because teams dont want to be stuck with a Pujols type albatross contract that handicaps them for a decade its viewed as a flawed/outdated system? Seems to me that teams are wising up to that fact that the players need the game not the other way around.
I don’t think it is a bad system. Teams are wising up to long contacts and trading their best prospects.
The fact that pitching has gone from a weakness to a strength for the Red Sox, over the last five seasons, and how the club upgraded its scouting and development system to better identify talent and then further build on that talent once on the Red Sox roster and from pitching coach Dana LeVangie and assistant pitching coach Brian Bannister is clearly visible.
My compliments to the Red Sox organization for this great insight and great job it has done.
So I agree that money can be saved by player development and good drafting.
The Red Sox also have the luxury of a high level of team revenue income and a wealthy owner should they see an opportunity to go in that direction as well.
Just imagine a Yankee lineup as below:
Gleyber Torres – 2B
Aaron Judge – RF
Manny Machado – 3B
Giancarlo Stanton – LF
Gary Sanchez – C
Aaron Hicks – CF
Miguel Andujar – DH
Luke Voit – 1B
Troy Tulowitzki – SS
I’d say that would be a great offense even if Tulo is only at 60 – 70%!
I know it would be tough to beat.