Harper has turned down 10 years for 300M. Machado has turned down 8 years for 250M. Who feels sorry for the slow market? They’re creating a slow market.
The guys who get hurt are all the other players who will be grabbed up after six to eight teams each lose out on Harper and Machado.
Replies sorted oldest to newest
The money either goes to billionaire owners, or millionaire players. The billionaire owners have been rich and will be rich for generations; the players have a small window to earn with a unique ability God blessed them. How can you criticize players for trying to earn every penny they can? Someone's going to get the money and I'd rather it be the players.
It's called economic reality and right now it seems a couple of money grubbing agents telling them to wait it out because someone will pay them. I've said it elsewhere before - I don't see either player as worth that kind of money. They want long term contracts for "safety", but don't like it when someone passes them on the salary ranking. I'd say mgmt is going through risk assessment with their finance folks and deciding the value for their return on investment isn't worth it. There's only so much money it TV contracts, gate, ad revenue, stadium concessions, tax breaks, etc. that the market can bear. No one is in it to lose money especially not 'billionaire owners' who have either built it up or inherited it.
I wish they would sign. Sick of MLB network showing the Yankee lineup with Harper or Machado in it. Or the ripkensmoltzreynoldswhoever ex-player siren song of complaints of why aren't they and everyone else who has ever played signed for millions.
I feel sorry for the players having such a sorry ass union. Particularly the MLB players under club control.
Open the books, salary cap and a salary floor, and better revenue re-distribution.
Or forget all that and put Harper on Astros.
Springer
Altuve
Bregman
Harper
Correa
Gurriel
*******
whoever C, DH is
The game is skewing younger and front offices now understand how to properly value players better than before. The egos and impulsiveness of a small group of owners used to fuel the market for players, but that seems to have turned.
Last year it seemed like a no brainer that Hosmer was going to sign with the Redsox to a massive contract. They passed and signed Moreland for pennies on the dollar and got the World Series MVP for a minor league second baseman.
Hosmer got his money, but at the cost of going to SD. Moreland put up virtually the same numbers for a lot less.
Superstar pitching seems to be worth it. Superstar bats can go cold at any time. Harper and Machado have had some very ugly years. A league average replacement with some moves at the deadline can easily outweigh signing one of these guys for 10 years.
The owners are wealthy. But most teams aren’t making money hand over fist year after year. The return on investment is when the team is sold. But I don’t have an issue with players being paid whatever the market will bear. What the market will not bear is ten year contracts. Does anyone wonder if the Angels have any regrets over the Pujols contract?
Even seven years is risky. The Red Sox were fortunate the Dodgers were willing to take on Carl Crawford’s ridiculous seven year contract. When it was signed I was shocked a 29yo with a speed game got a seven year contract. I figured the Red Sox were willing to suffer later for immediate return. They turned out to be wrong all the way around.
What set me off last week was Even Longoria complaining about management. Anyone publicly complaining making what he makes is out of touch. He signed a lucrative six year contract five years ago. In four of the five years he’s had an average OPS. He’s been a waste of money.
I wouldn’t want to give Harper ten years. He plays so aggressively he’s offen banged up. How will he hold up in his 30’s. I wouldn’t want to give Machado ten years and hope his attitude holds up.
Like I stated I’m not against whatever owners will give players. But how much is enough? With money where it’s at for top players I would think more would be looking for the optimum place to play and live not bragging rights on the biggest contract. There’s always going to be the next bigger contract some else signs. Let’s say someone signs for 200M instead of 300M. It’s about 100M after taxes. If you have 100M in the bank instead of 150M what the hell is the difference? Once you have 10M you’re a 1 percenter. Take 100M and put it in a no risk 3% (CD bad investment). Chances are you can do better investing wisely. But it’s still 3M per year in interest.
The players who get screwed are those who are part of the domino effect. Until Harper and Machado sign this year’s market for players isn’t actually established.
If there is a problem it’s the fault of the players and the players association. In the last negotiations they agreed to a soft cap (luxury tax and draft slot penalties).
There is never enough for them, nor should there be. Revenues have more than doubled in the last 20 years, yet the players get a lower share than they did even in the 70s. No MLB team has ever gone bankrupt. The owners are like bums begging on the corner with a ham under the other arm. If every player took the philosophy of "this is enough money", they never would have gotten the money in the first place. Most of the people who are against the players union are big on other unions for more "respectable" jobs. Marvin Miller fought for free agency under the principles that teams would want to win and thus would spend money to win. Now, teams don't care about the product, and going into the season there are only 6 teams that could conceivably win the WS.
There is going to be a major labor war in 2022.
Teams have seen too much risk, low reward for long term contracts. First ridiculous one was when A-Roid signed with the Texas Rangers and the owner was basically bidding against himself.
Pay the minor leagues more than $16,000 a season.
All of baseball should be ashamed!
A 10 yr deal has small chance of being a winner for an organization, if you include the Manny factor it is considerably less, they are just beginning to figure it out. Scott Boras doesn't care a damn bit about anyone but Scott Boras, that includes his clients. Bitch all you want about greedy owners and players but the market forces eventually find a value.
Player strike in 2022 - they would be JACKASSES TO WALK OUT ON STRIKE but then again...
Hungry dogs run faster
Why wait? Strike now and bring up the Milb’rs
old_school posted:A 10 yr deal has small chance of being a winner for an organization, if you include the Manny factor it is considerably less, they are just beginning to figure it out. Scott Boras doesn't care a damn bit about anyone but Scott Boras, that includes his clients. Bitch all you want about greedy owners and players but the market forces eventually find a value.
Player strike in 2022 - they would be JACKASSES TO WALK OUT ON STRIKE but then again...
Hungry dogs run faster
The "market force" in this case is collusion. Whether it rises to the level of criminal behavior, I don't know.
BaseballBUDDY posted:Why wait? Strike now and bring up the Milb’rs
MLB will not bring up players during a strike.
Matt13 posted:old_school posted:A 10 yr deal has small chance of being a winner for an organization, if you include the Manny factor it is considerably less, they are just beginning to figure it out. Scott Boras doesn't care a damn bit about anyone but Scott Boras, that includes his clients. Bitch all you want about greedy owners and players but the market forces eventually find a value.
Player strike in 2022 - they would be JACKASSES TO WALK OUT ON STRIKE but then again...
Hungry dogs run faster
The "market force" in this case is collusion. Whether it rises to the level of criminal behavior, I don't know.
I believe the market force is good business sense. If a team signs a bunch of long term contracts they will get stuck with a bunch of dead money.
Between Sandoval, Ramirez and Castillo the Red Sox got stuck with a lot of dead money. They have Prices huge contract for four more years. They were fortunate to get out of the Crawford contract. They’ve paid a lot in salary tax and loss of draft position. With all the young players they have coming into free agency in the next two years they can’t afford to sign Kimbrel to a long term contract. Plus I don’t believe he’s worth after he became Maalox Man out if the pen at age thirty.
The Red Sox have been trying to work a long term deal with Mookie Betts for two years. I’m betting it hasn’t got done because they haven’t offered beyond 5-7 years.
Even the Yankees chose to build through development rather than offer a lot of long term contacts. The Dodfers spent so much money the past few years they can’t afford to spend anymore.
If the Red Sox, Yankees and Dodfers are now spending wisely the players and afents better take notice. These are the teams with money.
I cant imagine what Harper wants if he turned down 10/300 from the Nationals.
Matt13 posted:BaseballBUDDY posted:Why wait? Strike now and bring up the Milb’rs
MLB will not bring up players during a strike.
Not only will MLB teams use MILB replacement players during a strike, they have. Do some homework on 1995.
RJM,
There is no empathy here. Zero. This is big business with big numbers. Last time I checked this is a marketplace, whereby talented individuals and organizations are free to set their price. There is no collusion here, just freaking common sense. The MLB long-term-contracts pendulum is swinging back to reality. Everyone of us deals with a labor market when we look for a job or when our employer lets us go. Harper, Machado and others are not concerned about Joey-Bag-of-Donut's employment situation unless they are paying to come see them play MLB. Everybody does what they need to do to support their families and lifestyles, including baseball superstars. That is the free market economy.
A follow up question a could be...."Do you think Harper and Machado are getting bad business advice and read the labor market incorrectly a few months ago and are now trying to save face?" My answer is absolutely yes. Harper should have jumped at the Nats offer, and frankly I don't care what Machado does.
When the ceiling is raised for players like Harper and Machado the players below on the salary ladder tend to move up a step or two. So you could argue the agents are in collusion to drive up salaries.
Pedroia took a lot of heat from the players association when he signed a long term, hometown discount contract with the Sox. His attitude was it was enough money, his family has nothing to worry about and he will be a Sox lifer.
The person who really gets hurt by this whole situation is the dad in a family of four who has to tell his kids he can’t afford about $400 (decent seats, hot dog, soda, ice cream, parking) to take them to a MLB game.
Decent left field grandstand seats at Fenway are $60. The three food items are another $24. Parking is $40. Eating nothing and taking the T is still $65 per person.
I’m reminded of a sign in the bleachers after Bill Campbell blew another save (signed 3 yrs/2M). “Dump Campbell. Bring back the $1.50 bleacher seat.” When the Sox signed Campbell they doubled bleacher seats to $3. Even at $3 it was still the cheapest free high in America.
Matt13 posted:old_school posted:A 10 yr deal has small chance of being a winner for an organization, if you include the Manny factor it is considerably less, they are just beginning to figure it out. Scott Boras doesn't care a damn bit about anyone but Scott Boras, that includes his clients. Bitch all you want about greedy owners and players but the market forces eventually find a value.
Player strike in 2022 - they would be JACKASSES TO WALK OUT ON STRIKE but then again...
Hungry dogs run faster
The "market force" in this case is collusion. Whether it rises to the level of criminal behavior, I don't know.
please please expand on this. I would love for you to explain how multiple offers of 7 plus years and over 250m is collusion... the floor is yours.
