Author Topic: The MLB Thread  (Read 242897 times)

vansmack

  • Member
  • Posts: 17821
Re: The MLB Thread
« Reply #30 on: January 16, 2014, 03:56:40 pm »
this seemed far shorter than i expected, then i realized kershaw can opt out after 5 years, putting him as a free agent at 30, still very much in line for another potential record breaking deal

Yep - he traded 3 more years to the deal for the ability to opt out.  It looks more like Kershaw took the risk, but as was pointed out, it's not much of a risk with $215m in your pocket.
27>34

atomic

  • Member
  • Posts: 2093
Re: The MLB Thread
« Reply #31 on: January 16, 2014, 04:15:55 pm »
im not saying hes remotely in kershaws league yet, but i cant help but wonder what this will mean for strasburg in a few years.

This hasn't been talked about enough.  People keep focusing on future free agent deals, like Strasburg (who will test the free agent market and not sign an extension, and I'm willing to bet a lot on that), but Stras has two more years of arbitration left.

This deal means that the arbitration number is going to make a huge jump (it's based on players performance compared to the performances of other players and their compensation).  Small market teams are not going to be able to afford $15m Arb-1 and Arb-2 players.  Makes the David Price situation in Tampa look soft, by comparison.   

That is why I said he shouldn't have been shut down a couple years back with the Nationals in the playoffs. He is going to be gone anyway soon as he gets a chance.

vansmack

  • Member
  • Posts: 17821
Re: The MLB Thread
« Reply #32 on: January 16, 2014, 05:30:04 pm »
Makes the David Price situation in Tampa look soft, by comparison.   

And with that, Price gets a one-year, $14m deal.  Poor Tampa Bay...
27>34

Julian, Semi-Retired WUNDERKIND

  • Member
  • Posts: 20897
  • Hall of Fame Poster, Certified Weblebrity
Re: The MLB Thread
« Reply #33 on: January 17, 2014, 09:33:19 pm »
Scherzer resigns for one year, 15.5. Optimistic Julian says that's a good faith effort before a Long term deal. Pessimistic Julian says we just paid top dollar for a guy who's going to start for Boston/NY for the next decade.
LVMH

vansmack

  • Member
  • Posts: 17821
Re: The MLB Thread
« Reply #34 on: January 19, 2014, 03:53:31 pm »
Finally saw the Kershaw contract -  interesting trade clause: if the Dodgers trade him he becomes a free agent after that season.

I wonder what MLB is going to say about that.
27>34

vansmack

  • Member
  • Posts: 17821
Re: The MLB Thread
« Reply #35 on: January 19, 2014, 03:57:24 pm »
Scherzer resigns for one year, 15.5. Optimistic Julian says that's a good faith effort before a Long term deal. Pessimistic Julian says we just paid top dollar for a guy who's going to start for Boston/NY for the next decade.

Offense wants to sign for NY/Boston.

Post-steroid pitchers want no part of those ball parks. I predict the Tigers sign him to a long term deal before the trade dealine. Every move they have made this off season was in the vein of a long term deal for Scherzer (and arguably made the team better in the long run).
27>34

atomic

  • Member
  • Posts: 2093
Re: The MLB Thread
« Reply #36 on: January 19, 2014, 05:41:09 pm »
Finally saw the Kershaw contract -  interesting trade clause: if the Dodgers trade him he becomes a free agent after that season.

I wonder what MLB is going to say about that.

Seems like a really stupid contract for the team.  Also, giving him an option to opt out early is stupid.  Dumb contract overall for the Dodgers.

RatBastard

  • Member
  • Posts: 2955
    • Obscenitees
Re: The MLB Thread
« Reply #37 on: January 19, 2014, 11:16:38 pm »
LOL Pete Rose, sorry back to your ongoing discussion now!
FUKIT

vansmack

  • Member
  • Posts: 17821
Re: The MLB Thread
« Reply #38 on: January 21, 2014, 12:54:17 pm »
Seems like a really stupid contract for the team.  Also, giving him an option to opt out early is stupid.  Dumb contract overall for the Dodgers.

Not surprisingly, you might be the only person who thinks that.

Anything over 4 years for a pitcher is a risk to the team, but Kershaw wasn't signing anything less than 7-10 years next season.  So to pay what appears to be less than market value. while he's still under control, in exchange for an early out for the pitcher is a good deal.

Not to mention, money is no object for that team at the moment.  I still think they sign Tanaka.
27>34

atomic

  • Member
  • Posts: 2093
Re: The MLB Thread
« Reply #39 on: January 21, 2014, 12:58:49 pm »
Seems like a really stupid contract for the team.  Also, giving him an option to opt out early is stupid.  Dumb contract overall for the Dodgers.

Not surprisingly, you might be the only person who thinks that.

Anything over 4 years for a pitcher is a risk to the team, but Kershaw wasn't signing anything less than 7-10 years next season.  So to pay what appears to be less than market value. while he's still under control, in exchange for an early out for the pitcher is a good deal.

Not to mention, money is no object for that team at the moment.  I still think they sign Tanaka.

How can it be less than market value when he signed a contract for more than any pitcher in history?  It is only 7 year contract if he sucks.  Otherwise he bolts early.  Stupid for the team.  Great for him.

No one has unlimited money. Those who think so end up broke.

vansmack

  • Member
  • Posts: 17821
Re: The MLB Thread
« Reply #40 on: January 21, 2014, 01:59:27 pm »
You miss understand the market.  Yes his deal is more than the 2-3 other 7-year deals for Verlander, Sabathia, and Hernandez, but he's much younger and had better numbers.

Previous contracts are only one factor, and not the largest.  The real market is what other teams would be willing to pay for Kershaw, and just about everyone expected a 10-year $300 million deal, which is what he likely would have gotten had he made it to free agency and there was competition for his signature.  Especially at 26.
27>34

atomic

  • Member
  • Posts: 2093
Re: The MLB Thread
« Reply #41 on: January 21, 2014, 02:29:21 pm »
You miss understand the market.  Yes his deal is more than the 2-3 other 7-year deals for Verlander, Sabathia, and Hernandez, but he's much younger and had better numbers.

Previous contracts are only one factor, and not the largest.  The real market is what other teams would be willing to pay for Kershaw, and just about everyone expected a 10-year $300 million deal, which is what he likely would have gotten had he made it to free agency and there was competition for his signature.  Especially at 26.

10 year 300 million is less money per year than 7 year 210 million.  He is also going to be the highest paid baseball player of all time.  I don't see how you could say he is getting less than the market rate.  And the 5 year opt-out is bad for the team.  As basically they are only getting 4 years more guaranteed Kershaw and guranteeing him 7 years guranteed money at the highest rate in major league baseball.

Julian, Semi-Retired WUNDERKIND

  • Member
  • Posts: 20897
  • Hall of Fame Poster, Certified Weblebrity
Re: The MLB Thread
« Reply #42 on: January 21, 2014, 02:53:53 pm »
10 year 300 million is less money per year than 7 year 210 million. 
Quoted for emphasis.
LVMH

atomic

  • Member
  • Posts: 2093
Re: The MLB Thread
« Reply #43 on: January 21, 2014, 03:14:49 pm »
10 year 300 million is less money per year than 7 year 210 million. 
Quoted for emphasis.

Oh I meant to state :  10 year 300 million is less money per year than 7 year 215 million. 

hutch

  • Member
  • Posts: 15407
Re: The MLB Thread
« Reply #44 on: January 21, 2014, 03:17:29 pm »
10 year 300 million is less money per year than 7 year 210 million. 
Quoted for emphasis.

Oh I meant to state :  10 year 300 million is less money per year than 7 year 215 million. 

make up your mind dude! a minute ago you wrote

10 year 300 million is less money than 7 year 210 million