Around the League: 2017 offseason edition / 2018 Season

Horsehide Harry said:
I think this might be a Boras strategy play. Mous will be 30 for almost the whole 2019 season.

No way KC offers him another QO after this season and risk him accepting at $18M per. By taking this deal he resets his FA for next season without a QO. Sure, there are many others as good or better than him in FA next season. However, many teams appear to be lining up their payrolls to play next offseason which may produce a better market.

I wonder if the deal has a no trade clause attached? Two downsides: 1. He flops in 2018 and his market completely crashes 2. He gets injured and his market crashes.
Click to expand...

I believe the current CBA limits the number of QOs an individual player can receive in their career to one, so rebalances the incentives of taking a one-year deal to duck the draft-pick depression of a player’s market.
 
NYCBrave said:
Why do we want Mous on a 1 year deal in a year we aren't expected to contend, specifically because we'd lose a pick?
Click to expand...

Kinda the point - no reason to sign him if you're not doing it long-term - even if it's a bargain. One season would've bought more time for Riley, but would he have made the Braves a legitimate wild-card contender? Maybe, but how likely is that - especially if the numbers guys tell you he'll never replicate last season? If you were going to sign him for 4 or 5 years and turn Riley into a LFer I'd have been all for it, but that obviously wasn't happening.

He's a little too busy trying to kiss his own *ss to allow for those types of points though.
 
NYCBrave said:
Why do we want Mous on a 1 year deal in a year we aren't expected to contend, specifically because we'd lose a pick?
Click to expand...

Despite the fact clvderpclv can't grasp the idea, the discussion on these boards has been around giving Mous a back loaded 3-4 year deal that paid him $5M-$10M in 2018. Now Mous has essentially taken exactly that...$6M in 2018 and whatever 3-4 year deal he can get in 2019.

Getting Mous for a bargain now would allow the Braves to spend even more heavily upgrading LF and possibly the BP in 2019.

Of course that line of reasoning assumed the Braves could afford $5M-$10M in 2018, which may have been (and probably was) a faulty assumption.
 
What did us in was the hard cap that MLB enforces on Greeks per team, which includes front office personnel.
 
Nate
9:15 What is Moustakas' best case scenario for his contract next winter?
Jeff Sullivan
9:16 I mean, *best case* best case, he's an MVP this season and he signs for a fortune. But he should probably think about something similar to the Jay Bruce terms

For reference, Bruce signed for 3/39. Add that to the 1/6.5 Mous is getting now, and that's 4/45.5, paid out as 6.5/13/13/13.

That's the type of contract the Braves didn't want to give Mous.
 
Enscheff said:
Nate
9:15 What is Moustakas' best case scenario for his contract next winter?
Jeff Sullivan
9:16 I mean, *best case* best case, he's an MVP this season and he signs for a fortune. But he should probably think about something similar to the Jay Bruce terms

For reference, Bruce signed for 3/39. Add that to the 1/6.5 Mous is getting now, and that's 4/45.5, paid out as 6.5/13/13/13.

That's the type of contract the Braves didn't want to give Mous.
Click to expand...

Or couldn't if they have zero money right now which some of us think is the case.
 
thewupk said:
Or couldn't if they have zero money right now which some of us think is the case.
Click to expand...

I think it's probably a little more nuanced than that, but I agree they don't have much to spend.

They probably could have done something to swing an additional $6M this season, but they decided it wasn't worth it when they can see how Camargo and Riley pan out for free.

It would be quite amusing though if the Braves end up with Mous next year for Bruce money.
 
I can't figure out the whining over Moustakas. I posted earlier in the off-season that if you could get him for 3/$45 MM - $48 MM it would constitute decent value, but that wasn't considering the loss of the draft pick. Draft picks aren't the end all/be all, but our minor league depth is going to take a hit with the limitations in the international market, so surrendering any high round picks isn't prudent at this point.

As for Markakis, I don't think anyone here supported the 4th year of his contract. Bonehead move. But I get so tired of the constant dragging of Markakis into the discussion. He's here. Deal with it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jaw
NYCBrave said:
Why do we want Mous on a 1 year deal in a year we aren't expected to contend, specifically because we'd lose a pick?
Click to expand...

That is the pretty obvious other side of the coin.

FWIW, my guess was Moose back to the Royals on a one year deal some time ago. They don't figure to be good, but I guess their fans can come see someone they know and feel like the team was trying a little bit.
 
50PoundHead said:
I can't figure out the whining over Moustakas. I posted earlier in the off-season that if you could get him for 3/$45 MM - $48 MM it would constitute decent value, but that wasn't considering the loss of the draft pick. Draft picks aren't the end all/be all, but our minor league depth is going to take a hit with the limitations in the international market, so surrendering any high round picks isn't prudent at this point.

As for Markakis, I don't think anyone here supported the 4th year of his contract. Bonehead move. But I get so tired of the constant dragging of Markakis into the discussion. He's here. Deal with it.
Click to expand...

You realize the Braves would have given up a lower draft pick to sign Mous than they will give up next off season to sign a QO FA, right?

People bring up Markakis in an attempt to knock some sense into the most dense posters such as yourself who claim "$10M is no big deal" when intelli-Braves posters say how stupid the early promotions of Albies and Swanson (and potentially Acuna) were.
 
Enscheff said:
You realize the Braves would have given up a lower draft pick to sign Mous than they will give up next off season to sign a QO FA, right?

People bring up Markakis in an attempt to knock some sense into the most dense posters such as yourself who claim "$10M is no big deal" when intelli-Braves posters say how stupid the early promotions of Albies and Swanson (and potentially Acuna) were.
Click to expand...

I'm not defending the Markakis deal. The 4th year was ridiculous. I just get tired of all the whining. This team isn't going to contend this year even with Moustakas, so I don't see what the big effin'' deal is. We now have a GM who will likely avoid the kind of signing that put Markakis here for a 4th year. And losing a draft pick is losing a draft pick.

And for the record, I was never in favor of promoting either Swanson or Albies. Dumb moves by the previous regime. One doesn't need to be a rocket scientist to know that.
 
50PoundHead said:
I'm not defending the Markakis deal. The 4th year was ridiculous. I just get tired of all the whining. This team isn't going to contend this year even with Moustakas, so I don't see what the big effin'' deal is. We now have a GM who will likely avoid the kind of signing that put Markakis here for a 4th year. And losing a draft pick is losing a draft pick.

And for the record, I was never in favor of promoting either Swanson or Albies. Dumb moves by the previous regime. One doesn't need to be a rocket scientist to know that.
Click to expand...

Well that's the deal...

A serious of dumb moves made it so the Braves can't compete this year, even with Mous. A big part of that is not having that extra $11M to spend right now. There were several paths to contention this year if the Braves had another $10M+ to spend.

Those other dumb moves you pointed out might prevent the Braves from competing in future year(s). The $10M in surplus value they wasted promoting Albies could very well prevent them from acquiring a player like Mous 6 years from now.

I'm glad you're tired of reading about these stupid moves. Maybe you can help explain to the more dense posters why they were stupid so we don't have to debate them when they happen anymore.
 
Enscheff said:
Well that's the deal...

A serious of dumb moves made it so the Braves can't compete this year, even with Mous. A big part of that is not having that extra $11M to spend right now. There were several paths to contention this year if the Braves had another $10M+ to spend.

Those other dumb moves you pointed out might prevent the Braves from competing in future year(s). The $10M in surplus value they wasted promoting Albies could very well prevent them from acquiring a player like Mous 6 years from now.

I'm glad you're tired of reading about these stupid moves. Maybe you can help explain to the more dense posters why they were stupid so we don't have to debate them when they happen anymore.
Click to expand...

There is really no explaining it when the mistakes were so blatantly obvious.
 
clvclv said:
Kinda the point - no reason to sign him if you're not doing it long-term - even if it's a bargain. One season would've bought more time for Riley, but would he have made the Braves a legitimate wild-card contender? Maybe, but how likely is that - especially if the numbers guys tell you he'll never replicate last season? If you were going to sign him for 4 or 5 years and turn Riley into a LFer I'd have been all for it, but that obviously wasn't happening.

He's a little too busy trying to kiss his own *ss to allow for those types of points though.
Click to expand...

So you would rather sign a 1.8 WAR 29 year old through his age 34 season, locking you in to another likely bad contract, rather than grabbing him for a 1+1 and having a ton of short term flexibility with a solid player that would buy us time to find a younger long term solution at 3rd? That just sounds like a terrible idea.
 
BeanieAntics said:
So you would rather sign a 1.8 WAR 29 year old through his age 34 season, locking you in to another likely bad contract, rather than grabbing him for a 1+1 and having a ton of short term flexibility with a solid player that would buy us time to find a younger long term solution at 3rd? That just sounds like a terrible idea.
Click to expand...

Actually, I think he's suggesting signing a 2 win player to a 4-5 year deal, and then moving Riley to LF to be a 2 win OFer.

That won't be good enough to compete for much, but it's a clv "idea" that he stole from recent reports about Riley being able to possibly handle an OF corner, so you can't really expect it to be very intelligent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top