| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Lamar's Bud
Star Player
Joined: 24 Jun 2005
Posts: 2232
|
 Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2019 11:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| LongBeachPoly wrote: | Nope. But if they've identified Harper as someone they want to go after, then this is the price they're going to have to pay.
If they don't think Harper is worth it, then don't go after him. But if you're going to go after him, then you're going to have to pony up.
But to get to this point and then balk at a 10 yr deal is silly to me.
That's like walking into an LV store, browing around trying on different purses and then balking at the prices as being "unreasonble." |
Curious. Maybe I missed it earlier, but where do you stand on what the Dodgers getting Harper? Do you want him at all? At what cost?
I don't think this Dodgers FO have ever, or will offer Harper a 10/$300 contract. Their history (and common sense) would say not to. I think they're in the discussion because they're offering him a high AAV on a shorter length contract. Probably also the proximity to Vegas is also of consideration for Harper.
Not sure how buying a purse is comparable to an MLB contract...does the purse store only allow you to use it for 5 years? 10 years? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
loslakersss
Franchise Player
Joined: 31 Dec 2008
Posts: 11853
Location: LA
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2019 11:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| LongBeachPoly wrote: | | loslakersss wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | loslakersss wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | loslakersss wrote: | The Matt Kemp deal was something that seemed like a good deal at the time but in hindsight we can see it was far from it.
This is a reason to be cautious about any big/long term deals going forward even if the player looks great at the time.
Basically we should look at the Kemp deal as a lesson. Along with the Pujols deal and A-Rod. Trout would be the only player I'd trust with a deal of that size. |
Yeah, and Trout comes along like once every 100 years? And if I'm Trout, why settle for a 10 yr deal when every team would be willing to give him a 10 yr deal, no problem.
Why not ask for a 15-20 year deal? At the very least, he should ask for a 13 yr deal like Stanton.
If Trout says to the Angels right now, 15 yr extension or I'm leaving for Philadelphia, what do the Angels say? |
He definitely is a once in a generation talent. It's unreal how good he is.
15 years for a 27 year old means he's 42 at the end of it. 12 years is more reasonable but still quite long. It also would depend on the per year salary. 15 year/$375M contract would be $25M a year which would be quite the discount on the prime years and would balance out overpaying on the later years but wouldn't be a massive burden considering the cap will continue to increase. 12 years/$348M would be $29M a year and would end before he's 40. That'd be the best for both sides involved.
What I'm hearing now is 8 years/$320M which is a insane $40 a year. He's worth it if he keeps playing the same way for 6 of those years.
I think what stops Trout from asking for a 12 or 15 year deal is what also makes offering him that kind of deal justified; he's not playing for big contracts, he's just dedicated to his craft and is extremely gifted. |
Yeah, but think about what is being said.
You're going to wait for a generational talent that comes around every 100 years. What's the chances that he comes up in your system? What's the chances that he'll hit the market?
Also, if for some chance he hits the market, you're hoping he's not a greedy person that's going to be demanding an outrageous contract.
I mean, if those are the parameters around which you spend your money, you're going to wait a LONGGG TIME. |
So you're saying that we have to be okay with overpaying for someone via FA because that's how the market works? (Correct me if I'm wrong). I agree, but you also have to be selective. I would have offered Kemp and Kershaw the same contracts they recieved. I'm willing to sign Harper for $25-30M a year but 6 years would be the absolute maximum length.
Overpaying is typically what happens in FA but I'm okay with it as long as you're not losing on both salary and length. If you want to give a guy more than he's worth, shorten the contract. If he wants a longer contract he's not going to get the same yearly salary. IMO, you only break both rules for a superstar. |
Yeah, you have to be selective. But the time to be selective happens before you start courting Harper.
You don't get this deep into negotiations, only to balk at his price. That's just silly to me.
How deep did we get with Machado? We were "selective" with Machado. We never really seriously pursued him, because we didn't feel he was worth it to us.
But, if they've did their homework and feel that Harper is the one they want to go after, there's no point in balking at his contract demands then. Everyone knows what it's going to take to sign him.
At this point, there's no point in drawing the line at a 7 yr deal. Might as well not engaged in talks with him to begin with. |
I agree. But the fact that Harper keeps meeting with the team shows he's considering what is being offered. Or they just misled him and are changing the conversation now. I think the team let him know they want to sign him but have X amount of years in mind of X amount of dollars but there is some room to negotiate. Maybe the hold up is he wants 8 years and not 6 or 7. or maybe he wants 10 and they've gone from 6 to 8 but wont budge from there. We don't know how the conversation is going but the fact that it is ongoing shows they're working with each other and there is mutual interest. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16137
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2019 11:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Lamar's Bud wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | Nope. But if they've identified Harper as someone they want to go after, then this is the price they're going to have to pay.
If they don't think Harper is worth it, then don't go after him. But if you're going to go after him, then you're going to have to pony up.
But to get to this point and then balk at a 10 yr deal is silly to me.
That's like walking into an LV store, browing around trying on different purses and then balking at the prices as being "unreasonble." |
Curious. Maybe I missed it earlier, but where do you stand on what the Dodgers getting Harper? Do you want him at all? At what cost?
I don't think this Dodgers FO have ever, or will offer Harper a 10/$300 contract. Their history (and common sense) would say not to. I think they're in the discussion because they're offering him a high AAV on a shorter length contract. Probably also the proximity to Vegas is also of consideration for Harper.
Not sure how buying a purse is comparable to an MLB contract...does the purse store only allow you to use it for 5 years? 10 years? |
My stance is this. I personally don't think he's worth it.
However, no elite free agent is really worth it, and the prices only go up every single year.
This FO has gone the cheap route and it's been alot of wasted money.
Kazmir, Oliveras, McCarthy, others I can't think of. If you add them all up, it's been a ton of wasted money.
They want Harper, for whatever reason. I say if you want him, pay up for him then.
And I don't think it's just a baseball decision. It's a business decision as well. Harper probably brings in a ton of revenue. He probably can maybe get DirecTV to buy their cable TV package. Who knows.
I think they've done the math and it makes sense for them. So, I don't mind it.
They've wasted alot of money going the cheap route. Maybe they should try their luck spending money on the more expensive players.
And the LV analogy was for you. Courting Harper is like shopping at an LV store. He comes with a price tag - and that's $300M+. That's what he ended up getting. You and everyone here balking at the price tag is like someone walking into an LV store, and balking at the prices for the purses talking about how "unreasonable" it is that a purse should be this expensive.
You knew it was going to be expensive before you walked in. No need to talk about how expensive it is now. Everyone knew Harper's price tag was 10 yrs $300M. It was not a secret. No need to court him and then now try and have a discussion on how expensive he is. That's just the price if you want him. And the Phillies were willing to pay that price and they got themselves a new LV purse.
Last edited by LongBeachPoly on Thu Feb 28, 2019 12:18 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16137
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2019 11:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| loslakersss wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | loslakersss wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | loslakersss wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | loslakersss wrote: | The Matt Kemp deal was something that seemed like a good deal at the time but in hindsight we can see it was far from it.
This is a reason to be cautious about any big/long term deals going forward even if the player looks great at the time.
Basically we should look at the Kemp deal as a lesson. Along with the Pujols deal and A-Rod. Trout would be the only player I'd trust with a deal of that size. |
Yeah, and Trout comes along like once every 100 years? And if I'm Trout, why settle for a 10 yr deal when every team would be willing to give him a 10 yr deal, no problem.
Why not ask for a 15-20 year deal? At the very least, he should ask for a 13 yr deal like Stanton.
If Trout says to the Angels right now, 15 yr extension or I'm leaving for Philadelphia, what do the Angels say? |
He definitely is a once in a generation talent. It's unreal how good he is.
15 years for a 27 year old means he's 42 at the end of it. 12 years is more reasonable but still quite long. It also would depend on the per year salary. 15 year/$375M contract would be $25M a year which would be quite the discount on the prime years and would balance out overpaying on the later years but wouldn't be a massive burden considering the cap will continue to increase. 12 years/$348M would be $29M a year and would end before he's 40. That'd be the best for both sides involved.
What I'm hearing now is 8 years/$320M which is a insane $40 a year. He's worth it if he keeps playing the same way for 6 of those years.
I think what stops Trout from asking for a 12 or 15 year deal is what also makes offering him that kind of deal justified; he's not playing for big contracts, he's just dedicated to his craft and is extremely gifted. |
Yeah, but think about what is being said.
You're going to wait for a generational talent that comes around every 100 years. What's the chances that he comes up in your system? What's the chances that he'll hit the market?
Also, if for some chance he hits the market, you're hoping he's not a greedy person that's going to be demanding an outrageous contract.
I mean, if those are the parameters around which you spend your money, you're going to wait a LONGGG TIME. |
So you're saying that we have to be okay with overpaying for someone via FA because that's how the market works? (Correct me if I'm wrong). I agree, but you also have to be selective. I would have offered Kemp and Kershaw the same contracts they recieved. I'm willing to sign Harper for $25-30M a year but 6 years would be the absolute maximum length.
Overpaying is typically what happens in FA but I'm okay with it as long as you're not losing on both salary and length. If you want to give a guy more than he's worth, shorten the contract. If he wants a longer contract he's not going to get the same yearly salary. IMO, you only break both rules for a superstar. |
Yeah, you have to be selective. But the time to be selective happens before you start courting Harper.
You don't get this deep into negotiations, only to balk at his price. That's just silly to me.
How deep did we get with Machado? We were "selective" with Machado. We never really seriously pursued him, because we didn't feel he was worth it to us.
But, if they've did their homework and feel that Harper is the one they want to go after, there's no point in balking at his contract demands then. Everyone knows what it's going to take to sign him.
At this point, there's no point in drawing the line at a 7 yr deal. Might as well not engaged in talks with him to begin with. |
I agree. But the fact that Harper keeps meeting with the team shows he's considering what is being offered. Or they just misled him and are changing the conversation now. I think the team let him know they want to sign him but have X amount of years in mind of X amount of dollars but there is some room to negotiate. Maybe the hold up is he wants 8 years and not 6 or 7. or maybe he wants 10 and they've gone from 6 to 8 but wont budge from there. We don't know how the conversation is going but the fact that it is ongoing shows they're working with each other and there is mutual interest. |
Well, of course, every team is going to try to win the negotiations by getting him to take a lesser deal. That goes w/o saying.
The point is, do you draw the line in the sand at that point? Because if you do, I think you're never going to land any FAs that way. You'll just constantly get outbid. And what's the point of shopping but never buying?
I'd rather they not shop at all if that's the case. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16137
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2019 12:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
sources: Harper finalizing deal with Phillies
espn
| Quote: | Sources: Phillies finalizing deal with Harper
11:56 AM PT
ESPN
The Philadelphia Phillies appear to have won the Bryce Harper sweepstakes, finalizing a deal with the free-agent outfielder, league sources told ESPN's Jeff Passan on Thursday. |
| Quote: | | Bryce Harper’s deal with the Philadelphia Phillies will be for $330 million, a new record for overall dollars, topping the $325 million of Giancarlo Stanton, league sources tell ESPN. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DuncanIdaho
Franchise Player
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 17247
Location: In a no-ship
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
loslakersss
Franchise Player
Joined: 31 Dec 2008
Posts: 11853
Location: LA
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2019 12:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LongBeachPoly wrote: |
Well, of course, every team is going to try to win the negotiations by getting him to take a lesser deal. That goes w/o saying.
The point is, do you draw the line in the sand at that point? Because if you do, I think you're never going to land any FAs that way. You'll just constantly get outbid. And what's the point of shopping but never buying?
I'd rather they not shop at all if that's the case. |
I don't know if drawing a firm line helps. It helps with us not speculating but I'd think they'd wanna keep negotiations open as long as possible if they havent come to an agreement.
I think they do have to start overspending on shorter contracts if they don't want to sign anyone long term though. They can't expect to farm the whole team and win a title. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DuncanIdaho
Franchise Player
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 17247
Location: In a no-ship
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2019 12:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| At least he didn't go to the Giants |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lamar's Bud
Star Player
Joined: 24 Jun 2005
Posts: 2232
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2019 12:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
AAV isn't bad....but damn, 13 years. NL team. I'd be curious to see if Harper is still an every day outfielder in the NL when he's 38/39. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16137
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2019 12:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| loslakersss wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: |
Well, of course, every team is going to try to win the negotiations by getting him to take a lesser deal. That goes w/o saying.
The point is, do you draw the line in the sand at that point? Because if you do, I think you're never going to land any FAs that way. You'll just constantly get outbid. And what's the point of shopping but never buying?
I'd rather they not shop at all if that's the case. |
I don't know if drawing a firm line helps. It helps with us not speculating but I'd think they'd wanna keep negotiations open as long as possible if they havent come to an agreement.
I think they do have to start overspending on shorter contracts if they don't want to sign anyone long term though. They can't expect to farm the whole team and win a title. |
Well, if we take these 2 deals (Machado, Harper) - drawing a line at anything lower than 10 yrs pretty much took them out of serious contention. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
loslakersss
Franchise Player
Joined: 31 Dec 2008
Posts: 11853
Location: LA
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2019 12:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| $25M a year. I'd have given him $30M for 7 years at the absolute max. I'm glad they passed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16137
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2019 12:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| loslakersss wrote: | | $25M a year. I'd have given him $30M for 7 years at the absolute max. I'm glad they passed. |
Why would Harper want another 3 yrs for $30M? That seems so strange to me |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
loslakersss
Franchise Player
Joined: 31 Dec 2008
Posts: 11853
Location: LA
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2019 12:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LongBeachPoly wrote: | | loslakersss wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: |
Well, of course, every team is going to try to win the negotiations by getting him to take a lesser deal. That goes w/o saying.
The point is, do you draw the line in the sand at that point? Because if you do, I think you're never going to land any FAs that way. You'll just constantly get outbid. And what's the point of shopping but never buying?
I'd rather they not shop at all if that's the case. |
I don't know if drawing a firm line helps. It helps with us not speculating but I'd think they'd wanna keep negotiations open as long as possible if they havent come to an agreement.
I think they do have to start overspending on shorter contracts if they don't want to sign anyone long term though. They can't expect to farm the whole team and win a title. |
Well, if we take these 2 deals (Machado, Harper) - drawing a line at anything lower than 10 yrs pretty much took them out of serious contention. |
Yeah so they're either going to have to change their views on that or overspend on guys that don't demand 10+ years. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16137
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2019 12:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| loslakersss wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | loslakersss wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: |
Well, of course, every team is going to try to win the negotiations by getting him to take a lesser deal. That goes w/o saying.
The point is, do you draw the line in the sand at that point? Because if you do, I think you're never going to land any FAs that way. You'll just constantly get outbid. And what's the point of shopping but never buying?
I'd rather they not shop at all if that's the case. |
I don't know if drawing a firm line helps. It helps with us not speculating but I'd think they'd wanna keep negotiations open as long as possible if they havent come to an agreement.
I think they do have to start overspending on shorter contracts if they don't want to sign anyone long term though. They can't expect to farm the whole team and win a title. |
Well, if we take these 2 deals (Machado, Harper) - drawing a line at anything lower than 10 yrs pretty much took them out of serious contention. |
Yeah so they're either going to have to change their views on that or overspend on guys that don't demand 10+ years. |
Yeah, or re-sign their guys to long term deals like what Philadelphia did with Aaron Nola |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
loslakersss
Franchise Player
Joined: 31 Dec 2008
Posts: 11853
Location: LA
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2019 12:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LongBeachPoly wrote: | | loslakersss wrote: | | $25M a year. I'd have given him $30M for 7 years at the absolute max. I'm glad they passed. |
Why would Harper want another 3 yrs for $30M? That seems so strange to me |
What? I meant his 13 year deal averages out to $25M a year. The most I would have given him is a $30M a year deal but only for 7 years. I know that that's a far worse offer. I just meant that's the most I think he would be worth. Philly way overpaid but they had to. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
loslakersss
Franchise Player
Joined: 31 Dec 2008
Posts: 11853
Location: LA
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2019 12:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| We do seem to do okay with trades though, so we can survive without FA's, for now anyways. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16137
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2019 12:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| loslakersss wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | loslakersss wrote: | | $25M a year. I'd have given him $30M for 7 years at the absolute max. I'm glad they passed. |
Why would Harper want another 3 yrs for $30M? That seems so strange to me |
What? I meant his 13 year deal averages out to $25M a year. The most I would have given him is a $30M a year deal but only for 7 years. I know that that's a far worse offer. I just meant that's the most I think he would be worth. Philly way overpaid but they had to. |
No, I'm saying he turned down 10 yrs $300M to negotiate for another 3 yr $30M deal. That seems strange to me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16137
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2019 12:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| loslakersss wrote: | | We do seem to do okay with trades though, so we can survive without FA's, for now anyways. |
Yeah, we've been lucky picking up the Max Muncys, Chris Taylors, etc.
And we've got cheap labor in Seager, Bellinger, Buehler, Pederson, Urias.
It's going to be interesting if they turn out to be elite players and need to be paid. We'll see how we go about it. Do we act like the A's and trade them for more prospects? Or do we try and get them to sign team friendly extensions?
Or do we let them hit free agency and get into a bidding war for their services? One thing we've seen with this FO, they don't win bidding wars. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
srm90
Franchise Player
Joined: 29 Dec 2007
Posts: 10662
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2019 12:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well at least the Giants didn't get him.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lakersken80
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Aug 2009
Posts: 38777
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
srm90
Franchise Player
Joined: 29 Dec 2007
Posts: 10662
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2019 12:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Pollock was the better fit anyways for what we paid him, much better defensively and right-handed bat to balance the lineup. I hope he can stay healthy.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
srm90
Franchise Player
Joined: 29 Dec 2007
Posts: 10662
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2019 12:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Now that the Harper domino has fallen, all of the remaining names should start signing quickly. It'll be interesting to see where Keuchel lands.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
loslakersss
Franchise Player
Joined: 31 Dec 2008
Posts: 11853
Location: LA
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2019 1:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LongBeachPoly wrote: | | loslakersss wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | loslakersss wrote: | | $25M a year. I'd have given him $30M for 7 years at the absolute max. I'm glad they passed. |
Why would Harper want another 3 yrs for $30M? That seems so strange to me |
What? I meant his 13 year deal averages out to $25M a year. The most I would have given him is a $30M a year deal but only for 7 years. I know that that's a far worse offer. I just meant that's the most I think he would be worth. Philly way overpaid but they had to. |
No, I'm saying he turned down 10 yrs $300M to negotiate for another 3 yr $30M deal. That seems strange to me. |
Ohhh. Gotcha. Yeah, weird. I wonder if there was any reason aside from an extra $30M and now having the status of "biggest contract ever" - until the next guy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
0514
Star Player
Joined: 16 Nov 2012
Posts: 6309
Location: Fountain Valley
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2019 1:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I wanted to get Bryce but 13 years with no opt outs? That’s a disaster waiting to happen. Phillies fans will be brutal if Bryce can’t produce |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lamar's Bud
Star Player
Joined: 24 Jun 2005
Posts: 2232
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2019 1:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| loslakersss wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | loslakersss wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | loslakersss wrote: | | $25M a year. I'd have given him $30M for 7 years at the absolute max. I'm glad they passed. |
Why would Harper want another 3 yrs for $30M? That seems so strange to me |
What? I meant his 13 year deal averages out to $25M a year. The most I would have given him is a $30M a year deal but only for 7 years. I know that that's a far worse offer. I just meant that's the most I think he would be worth. Philly way overpaid but they had to. |
No, I'm saying he turned down 10 yrs $300M to negotiate for another 3 yr $30M deal. That seems strange to me. |
Ohhh. Gotcha. Yeah, weird. I wonder if there was any reason aside from an extra $30M and now having the status of "biggest contract ever" - until the next guy. |
Probably this. Harper doesn't exactly come across as being humble. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
