DidiFan

2018-19 Off-Season and Hot Stove Thread

Recommended Posts

On hot stove stuff: allegedly a mystery team is now in on Machado. 

 

I'm guessing that mystery team is Machado's agent trying to drive up his price.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me, this would be funny if Machado signed with the Phillies leaving the White Sox with his brother-in-law, Jay, and his ex-third base coach from the BLT days. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, shakestreet said:

and once you reach a certain age you can only receive one year contracts. 

I hope you realize how incredibly ridiculous this is. Not to mention completely illegal.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 2ndCitySox said:

On hot stove stuff: allegedly a mystery team is now in on Machado. 

 

I'm guessing that mystery team is Machado's agent trying to drive up his price.

It's a fantasy owner from an auction league who wants to spend a third of his budget on him.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, azeri98 said:

The guy's you mentioned had a year that was an outlier. What did those guys do the year before and after those years you mentioned. We are talking about 30 million dollar contracts here. You better get it right

 

Harper and  Machado are looking for $300 million deals. If you use the $8 million/WAR system by Fangraphs, they would need to have a 37.5 fWAR over those 10 years. Let's make it 40.0 fWAr which would mean a 4.0 fWAR/season.

 

Since 2000 there have been 20 players who had 40+ fWAR seasons from age 26 to 35.

Since 1990 there have been 43 players who had 40+ fWAR seasons from age 26 to 35.

 

Harper and Machado don't even have to be historically good to live up to their contract.

 

Someone mentioned Josh Donaldson as a player who fell of a cliff last season because of injuries. True. Let's assume a team signed Donaldson to an 8-year $240 million contract after his monster 2013 season. So far he has a 27.8 fWAR over the first 5 seasons of that contract. He would need to have a 2.2 fWAR over his final 3 seasons to live up to this contract. That's all. It's because during the first half of that contract, he was so good.

 

Manny Machado is averaging 5.4 fWAR/season over the last 4 seasons and he just turned 26. He has every right to demand a 10 year/$300 million contract.

 

People keep looking at what could happen once these guys reach age 32/33 and how they'll be overpaid but ignore what they'll give until then. Yes there's the risk of getting injured but opportunities to sign guys like these who are in their prime are extremely rare. Why not more teams are willing to take advantage of this rare opportunity is baffling to me.

Edited by Sine_cera
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Low and Away said:

Has there ever been a 10 year contract that was good for a team?

 

You can't argue that A-Rod wasn't worth the money during his first 10-year contract because he was. You can argue if the Rangers were in position to spend that money on him. A-Rod had a 27.0 fWAR during his 3 years with the Rangers and they still finished dead last in their division. The Rangers already had players like Palmeiro, Young and Ivan Rodriguez and decided to add A-Rod when they should have spend that money on starting pitching.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Sine_cera said:

 

You can't argue that A-Rod wasn't worth the money during his first 10-year contract because he was. You can argue if the Rangers were in position to spend that money on him. A-Rod had a 27.0 fWAR during his 3 years with the Rangers and they still finished dead last in their division. The Rangers already had players like Palmeiro, Young and Ivan Rodriguez and decided to add A-Rod when they should have spend that money on starting pitching.

I agree.

And when team revenue and profit is as high as it is, is a 10 year 300 million contract really that bad? I'd argue no, from a financial standpoint. From a long-term success point of view, sure. Seattle wasn't bad because they signed Cano to a big deal. They were bad because they drafted poorly, has a ton of injuries to guys they thought would matter, and didn't put good pieces on the field.

It's all about the total package, not one contract.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t think there is any question Harper and Machado can get 10/300 and we already know Harper turned down just that, they are obviously swinging much higher than that.

 

Even if a technical argument is made that Harper/Machado are asking for a fair return on their WAR, I don’t think anyone can really fault teams for drawing a line in the sand and feeling confident they could spend the same money in smaller increments over the same 10 year period on other less-sexy-but-effective free agents (kinda like the McCutch and Brantley deals) and get the same or better WAR return for their money but with a more diversified portfolio to mitigate risk.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How many teams currently could afford a Harper or Machado? And I mean realistically. I'm sure ANY team could find the cash to do it, but at some point, it does become reckless (i.e. would exceed luxury tax threshold repeatedly, small revenue franchise, etc.)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Sine_cera said:

 

Harper and  Machado are looking for $300 million deals. If you use the $8 million/WAR system by Fangraphs, they would need to have a 37.5 fWAR over those 10 years. Let's make it 40.0 fWAr which would mean a 4.0 fWAR/season.

 

Since 2000 there have been 20 players who had 40+ fWAR seasons from age 26 to 35.

Since 1990 there have been 43 players who had 40+ fWAR seasons from age 26 to 35.

 

Harper and Machado don't even have to be historically good to live up to their contract.

 

Someone mentioned Josh Donaldson as a player who fell of a cliff last season because of injuries. True. Let's assume a team signed Donaldson to an 8-year $240 million contract after his monster 2013 season. So far he has a 27.8 fWAR over the first 5 seasons of that contract. He would need to have a 2.2 fWAR over his final 3 seasons to live up to this contract. That's all. It's because during the first half of that contract, he was so good.

 

Manny Machado is averaging 5.4 fWAR/season over the last 4 seasons and he just turned 26. He has every right to demand a 10 year/$300 million contract.

 

People keep looking at what could happen once these guys reach age 32/33 and how they'll be overpaid but ignore what they'll give until then. Yes there's the risk of getting injured but opportunities to sign guys like these who are in their prime are extremely rare. Why not more teams are willing to take advantage of this rare opportunity is baffling to me.

Some of you guys base everything on WAR it's not the gospel, Your Donaldson example proves it, the contract would have been great for 5 seasons and a bust or lost the last 2, we know the  trend of these guys slowing down in the 2nd half of the contract, teams would be irresponsible to sign such deals, sign them to 5 years for more money, why handcuff you team later on with a boat anchor contract, Harper was offered a $300 million dollar deal and turned it down, If you look at Machado's numbers , you can make the case for a $300 million dollar deal,  however throw in the fact that he's a dirty player and his lack of giving his best all the time raises character questions about him and his attitude, throw that in, I'm not so sure he's a $300 million dollar guy. Character counts for something

Edited by azeri98
add
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has any team won anything with having one of these boat anchor contracts on their team? Teams have figured it out, it hinders your team more than it helps. I don't care what the WAR is of a single guy, he can't win by himself, when was the last time a team won a world series that had a player on it with one of these monster deals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BlueJaysIn2030 said:

I agree.

And when team revenue and profit is as high as it is, is a 10 year 300 million contract really that bad? I'd argue no, from a financial standpoint. From a long-term success point of view, sure. Seattle wasn't bad because they signed Cano to a big deal. They were bad because they drafted poorly, has a ton of injuries to guys they thought would matter, and didn't put good pieces on the field.

It's all about the total package, not one contract.

 

Ask Baltimore about Chris Davis, or the Angels about Pujols and Hamilton, Do you really think when all is said and done the Cano deal won't be looked at as a bust?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://legacy.baseballprospectus.com/compensation/cots/league-info/highest-paid-players/

 

Here's a good list. Judge for yourself if these guys were/are worth it.

 

And here's one that adjusted for inflation:

http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/66784564/inflation-affects-mlb-contract-value

Edited by 2ndCitySox

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Note that the second article is from 2014. So keep that in mind

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, azeri98 said:

Ask Baltimore about Chris Davis, or the Angels about Pujols and Hamilton, Do you really think when all is said and done the Cano deal won't be looked at as a bust?

Did they put good players around them? Nope. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's amazing how cheap the Yankees have become in recent years and how a large percentage of the fanbase has bought into it... no matter the fact that their primary rival has completely surpassed them in every which way in the same time frame. 

 

Pretty incredible they could've gotten Corbin/Machado and instead brought in the corpse of Tulo, LeMahieu (.699 OPS away from Coors last year) and JA Happ. And a lot of Yankees fans are happy about it!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, azeri98 said:

Has any team won anything with having one of these boat anchor contracts on their team? Teams have figured it out, it hinders your team more than it helps. I don't care what the WAR is of a single guy, he can't win by himself, when was the last time a team won a world series that had a player on it with one of these monster deals.

 

2 hours ago, azeri98 said:

Ask Baltimore about Chris Davis, or the Angels about Pujols and Hamilton, Do you really think when all is said and done the Cano deal won't be looked at as a bust?

 

I have no idea why you're still debating this-- it's clear you're not going to move on it and others aren't. I bowed out of this awhile ago and it's shocking to me it is still going on. 

 

My last 2 C's. 

 

It comes down to one thing and one thing only: Do you consider the sample flawed?

 

WAR is irrelevant. You argue people using it "like gospel" but that's not really what this is. It is just the easiest way to simply write down a players value in modern baseball. Having to give a BA/OBP/SLG with HR and SB slash line is just annoying for every year.

 

I believe the sample is flawed because of the arb system, and that the reason the majority of contracts don't occur is that it's the time in which they are signed. Robinson Cano is another prime example of this. From ages 26-31, Cano had 33.8 WAR, over 5 WAR Per Season. He hit a minimum of .302 with 25 HRs I believe in all 6 seasons. It's in his late career as a 2B where his career has finally taken a few shots. And let me add, Cano still has yet to produce UNDER 2.8 WAR in a season I believe since before he was 26, so he has not been a terrible baseball lplayer for the length of the contract.

 

And asking Orioles fans about Chris Davis... misses the boat on the horribly ran organization that the Orioles have been for the last several years. Their (old) GM last year announced that they would start scouting internationally... because they were literally choosing to ignore the entire International FA pool, using it as a short term trade chip. It was a s--- organization ran from the top down. I don't know if Davis is the straw that broke the camels back, or rather just one symptom of an organization that was truly a disaster.

 

I don't, contrary to what you believe, believe that a team who makes one of these bad decisions will be unable to make it into serious Postseason consideration. They weren't as old of contracts, but the Cubs certainly had teh beginning of a true albatross on their team (Heyward) when they won the title, who contributed almost nothing. Look at Boston's payroll last year. They have 51 MIllion locked into David Price and Rick Porcello. Price was much better in the postseason last eyar, but those two pitchers were NOT worth 51 Million. Nowhere close. But when you  have Betts, Bog, Bradley in arb and players like Benintendi making 500K, it makes it certainly possible. Price is not worth 30 Million per year. Cano has practically been a better allocation, at that price. 

 

More importantly, you're continuing to not look at the fact that the money DOES exist. Maybe teams like the Angels and Orioles would maybe struggle with it, but the major market teams out there could suffer a huge disaster of a contract and still SHOULD, with record revenues, and manipulation of pre-arb and arb contracts, be able to compete, and still have more money to spare. Not choosing to continue to extend a payroll is just the choice to horde more money and increase profits.

 

I also don't understand why you would ever call a 10 Year Contract bad if it didn't live up to every year. That's just a logic that we don't share and that I don't understand at all. To me, the entire concept of a long-term deal is that the player probably pays out a little more AAV in the early years, the team probably overpays on AAV in the later years, but that's what you do to get the player on your team. What a player does in the last 3-4 years of a 10 year contract to me, if the first 6-7 were at the expectations of the contract, is almost irrelevant in terms of earning the contract. If you signed a massive deal and couldn't find a way to win something significant with a great player playing great for 6 years, that's on you, the GM. 

 

I think some of these teams like the Cubs are idiotic for not jumping out of their shoes at this slow market when they clearly have the organizational revenue to do it. 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd also like to point out-- the Chris Davis and Josh Hamilton contracts were some of the most DOA deals ever. Chris Davis didn't even hit the open market--- which is what makes that contract to me probably the worst ever. Duquette had no concept of the fact that intelligent teams were going away from valuing power-hitting 1B at a huge evaluation. The next offseason after Davis went, players with similar traits seeking 80+ Million like Trumbo off a great year got pennies. If the Orioles are just smart enough to wait into the open market, they'd have realized no one wanted to pay Davis taht much but them. 

 

Josh Hamilton was a textbook example of just ignoring problems. Hamilton had a huge K% jump and really showed huge signs of his ultimate decline in his last year before every coming to the Angels. I mean I'm a bit more picky about things, but how do you take a guy who went from a 17-18% K% to a 25+% K% right before you sign him and don't go "Hmmmm.... maybe this is going to be an issue moving forward." 

 

Again--- the number of COMPARABLE examples to high level, 26-YO players hitting the market in their primes. 

 

I'd be interesting to do a test for Manny Machado / Bryce Harper based on the following:

Harper and Machado both have 30-31 WAR on Fangraphs. Neither is 27 yet. I'd like to take a look at every baseball player in history who fits that criteria before age 27, and then see how much WAR on average they put up in the next decade of their career. I'd bet, and I don't know, that it looks like the average player to accomplish this would be worth 350+ Million. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, taobball said:

I'd also like to point out-- the Chris Davis and Josh Hamilton contracts were some of the most DOA deals ever. Chris Davis didn't even hit the open market--- which is what makes that contract to me probably the worst ever. Duquette had no concept of the fact that intelligent teams were going away from valuing power-hitting 1B at a huge evaluation. The next offseason after Davis went, players with similar traits seeking 80+ Million like Trumbo off a great year got pennies. If the Orioles are just smart enough to wait into the open market, they'd have realized no one wanted to pay Davis taht much but them. 

 

Josh Hamilton was a textbook example of just ignoring problems. Hamilton had a huge K% jump and really showed huge signs of his ultimate decline in his last year before every coming to the Angels. I mean I'm a bit more picky about things, but how do you take a guy who went from a 17-18% K% to a 25+% K% right before you sign him and don't go "Hmmmm.... maybe this is going to be an issue moving forward." 

 

Again--- the number of COMPARABLE examples to high level, 26-YO players hitting the market in their primes. 

 

I'd be interesting to do a test for Manny Machado / Bryce Harper based on the following:

Harper and Machado both have 30-31 WAR on Fangraphs. Neither is 27 yet. I'd like to take a look at every baseball player in history who fits that criteria before age 27, and then see how much WAR on average they put up in the next decade of their career. I'd bet, and I don't know, that it looks like the average player to accomplish this would be worth 350+ Million. 

Baseball reference similarity scores have these as the most 10 similar players to Machado/Harper.

 

Machado: Beltre, Santo, Andruw Jones, Ruben Sierra,  Ryan Zimmerman, Bryce Harper, Cal Ripken Jr., Eric Chavez, Ken Griffey Jr., Cesar Cedeno

Harper: Andruw Jones, Ken Griffey Jr., Justin Upton, Ruben Sierra, Frank Robinson, Mike Trout, Miguel Cabrera, Tony Conigliario, Jose Canseco, Eddie Mathews

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BlueJaysIn2030 said:

Did they put good players around them? Nope. 

Maybe because they gave so much of their payroll to one player they priced themselves out of others

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, taobball said:

 

 

I have no idea why you're still debating this-- it's clear you're not going to move on it and others aren't. I bowed out of this awhile ago and it's shocking to me it is still going on. 

 

My last 2 C's. 

 

It comes down to one thing and one thing only: Do you consider the sample flawed?

 

WAR is irrelevant. You argue people using it "like gospel" but that's not really what this is. It is just the easiest way to simply write down a players value in modern baseball. Having to give a BA/OBP/SLG with HR and SB slash line is just annoying for every year.

 

I believe the sample is flawed because of the arb system, and that the reason the majority of contracts don't occur is that it's the time in which they are signed. Robinson Cano is another prime example of this. From ages 26-31, Cano had 33.8 WAR, over 5 WAR Per Season. He hit a minimum of .302 with 25 HRs I believe in all 6 seasons. It's in his late career as a 2B where his career has finally taken a few shots. And let me add, Cano still has yet to produce UNDER 2.8 WAR in a season I believe since before he was 26, so he has not been a terrible baseball lplayer for the length of the contract.

 

And asking Orioles fans about Chris Davis... misses the boat on the horribly ran organization that the Orioles have been for the last several years. Their (old) GM last year announced that they would start scouting internationally... because they were literally choosing to ignore the entire International FA pool, using it as a short term trade chip. It was a s--- organization ran from the top down. I don't know if Davis is the straw that broke the camels back, or rather just one symptom of an organization that was truly a disaster.

 

I don't, contrary to what you believe, believe that a team who makes one of these bad decisions will be unable to make it into serious Postseason consideration. They weren't as old of contracts, but the Cubs certainly had teh beginning of a true albatross on their team (Heyward) when they won the title, who contributed almost nothing. Look at Boston's payroll last year. They have 51 MIllion locked into David Price and Rick Porcello. Price was much better in the postseason last eyar, but those two pitchers were NOT worth 51 Million. Nowhere close. But when you  have Betts, Bog, Bradley in arb and players like Benintendi making 500K, it makes it certainly possible. Price is not worth 30 Million per year. Cano has practically been a better allocation, at that price. 

 

More importantly, you're continuing to not look at the fact that the money DOES exist. Maybe teams like the Angels and Orioles would maybe struggle with it, but the major market teams out there could suffer a huge disaster of a contract and still SHOULD, with record revenues, and manipulation of pre-arb and arb contracts, be able to compete, and still have more money to spare. Not choosing to continue to extend a payroll is just the choice to horde more money and increase profits.

 

I also don't understand why you would ever call a 10 Year Contract bad if it didn't live up to every year. That's just a logic that we don't share and that I don't understand at all. To me, the entire concept of a long-term deal is that the player probably pays out a little more AAV in the early years, the team probably overpays on AAV in the later years, but that's what you do to get the player on your team. What a player does in the last 3-4 years of a 10 year contract to me, if the first 6-7 were at the expectations of the contract, is almost irrelevant in terms of earning the contract. If you signed a massive deal and couldn't find a way to win something significant with a great player playing great for 6 years, that's on you, the GM. 

 

I think some of these teams like the Cubs are idiotic for not jumping out of their shoes at this slow market when they clearly have the organizational revenue to do it. 

 

 

 

 

We disagree. I don't understand signing a guy for 10 years when history shows you the back half of the deal won't live up to expectations. You can sign them to a 5-6 year deal a a higher AAV. Your logic doesn't make sense to me to sign a guy knowing you won't get full value for the deal. Just because teams have the money it doesn't mean they should be irresponsible with it. That kind of thinking has handcuffed teams in the past with boat anchor contracts. As much as teams use WAR and analytics to determine a player's value the use the same analytics in terms of financial responsibility and teams have determined they are not worth it. I think we have exhausted this discussion. We just have different points of view 

Edited by azeri98
Add
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, azeri98 said:

when history 


Yeah, we just disagree how at all representative of Harper/Machado is of this history. It's not any 10 Year deals, it's high level players in their prime, who are a phenomenally rare thing to reach FA, and have very few examples.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, azeri98 said:

Maybe because they gave so much of their payroll to one player they priced themselves out of others

So that's poor decision making. It has nothing to do with the value of the contract in the overall context of revenue. If a team puts 30% of player payroll to old guys or crappy guys, that's their fault. It doesn't mean all big contracts are bad (or good). 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BlueJaysIn2030 said:

So that's poor decision making. It has nothing to do with the value of the contract in the overall context of revenue. If a team puts 30% of player payroll to old guys or crappy guys, that's their fault. It doesn't mean all big contracts are bad (or good). 

The overwhelming majority have been bad

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, taobball said:


Yeah, we just disagree how at all representative of Harper/Machado is of this history. It's not any 10 Year deals, it's high level players in their prime, who are a phenomenally rare thing to reach FA, and have very few examples.

Time will tell I guess whether these 2 guys are worth it or not. We will see there aren't many teams in the running which tells me the 10 years is the main issue teams are having problems with

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.