Taking on a contract?
- Thread starter Chico
- Start date
Pretty funny - I mentioned going after Braun and seemed to strike a nerve with several people. Of course if you compare his contract to what J-Up/Heyward/Cespedes are likely to get this winter, he looks like as big a bargain as Hamels.
blueagleace1
Playing the Waiting Game
Said the same thing and broke it down.
The problem with Braun is he has 5 more years left.
Will take 8 to get Upton or Heyward, and probably at least 7 to get Cespedes.
And whoever signs them will end up regretting it. I don't want any of those 3.
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
Am I correct in thinking the point behind your initial post is that by trading for guys with 1 or 2 years left on the contract you avoid the risks involved in the big long-term contracts.
Yes and no. Ideally I'd like to do some kind of Teheran for Soler trade where we don't take on any money. But, I think taking on a short term bad contract to do so, is still better than forking out big bucks on a 7 year deal that we'll ultimately regret. Gordon and Zobrist are the only free agent hitters that I can see getting proper value for, since their deals will more than likely max out at 4 years and 3 years respectively.
I just don't see Hart going on a spending spree in free agency. He's going to be more creative than that. We got Alex Minter and Touki for 16.5M. I think he sticks with a similar approach to stock the team without long term commitments.
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
I also would like to see us avoid taking on long-term risk. This is one of the reasons I like older buy-low options like Zobrist. But I suspect the somewhat artificial deadline for fielding a team that will get the fans excited in 2017 might lead to some risk taking that would otherwise be avoided.
The way our farm system is set up, our best talent right now is in the 17-18 age bracket. I think it would be best to let nature take its course and be patient in waiting for this group to ripen.
I don't know that this is a viable strategy. Giving away a prospect like Touki for some short-term salary relief was a move that was mocked by most of the baseball world, suggesting that other teams might not be so short-sighted. I don't quite see us being able to do that to many other front offices.
True, but that was a straight salary dump. My suggestion would be to do a hybrid salary dump and trade, kinda like the Pads did with us to get Kimbrel. The only difference is it being a shorter term contract on a more useful player we're taking on than the 3/45 the Pads took on a waste of a roster spot.
UNCBlue012
Well-known member
His regression has really scared me, but for a solid price, I would love it as well.
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
There is a glut of starting pitching on the FA market this year. Teams that are patient will come away with some bargains. Teams that decide they must have a particular pitcher less so.
We'll see on this. They certainly will get that if they want it, but I could see both taking a shorter-term deal so they can still hit FA again while putting up prime numbers.
We've seen massive deals for guys at 29 or 30, and for good reason; those guys were as good as they were going to be, and they get to be paid through their 30's. But we haven't seen many guys like Heyward and Upton recently, where they'll hit FA either on the front-end or even before they've really hit their prime.
I could see Upton even taking a really short deal and betting on himself to be better over the next couple years so he can get a bigger deal. He may see something like 8/$150 and think he's too talented to take that deal.
And for Heyward, he has a couple options; he could take an 8-10 year deal and hit FA again in his mid-30s. Or he could take a 5-6 year deal and hit FA again around 30-31. He could potentially even get more per year by taking the shorter deal as well and bet on himself staying healthy and at least as productive as he is now. If he continues with similar numbers, then he'll get a slightly better contract over 7-8 years, and if he improves, he'll blow it out on his next contract. On the other hand, if he takes the longer deal now, he gets more guarantees, but he also runs the risk of tailing off around 33 and getting significantly less at that point.
I think it's possible we could sign Heyward to a 5-6 year deal. I don't know that it's likely, but I certainly think there's going to be a decision for him to make.
Also, teams seemed less willing to give huge contracts out last year in FA. Scherzer got 7 and Lester got 6, but nobody else got more than 5, and most were no longer than 4. I think teams realize that when giving out a huge long-term deal, even to the best players in the league, they end up being bad deals pretty quickly and are anchors by the end of the contract. I think you'll see fewer and fewer. A guy like Heyward could get it, and Trout/Harper could as well, but the older guys are probably looking at around 7 as the absolute max and most will probably fall in more of a 5-year window.