Official Offseason Thread
- Thread starter Hudson2
- Start date
Southcack77
Well-known member
It's difficult to evaluate who wins and loses on these types of contracts without knowing what the various options are.
One thing we know is that every club and every agent is aware of the time-value of money. We can assume that negotiations are conducted with that being a factor.
A player that defers money is likely to receive more money than they would have received in a traditional deal to offset inflation.
A player that gets more money up front may well receive less money than they would have otherwise gotten.
Of course, clubs make bad deals sometimes. Often, perhaps. So do players.
Southcack77
Well-known member
The new projection for Ozuna was 5/100m in that article.
That's a far cry from 4/70.
That's a far cry from 4/70.
market has changed
I think the market is responding to the fact that its a foregone conclusion the DH is coming to the NL in a few years.
Luxury tax is still based on the average salary of that player over the life of his contract. A player can sign a 2 year contract and make 30 million this year and 2 million next year and the Luxury Tax implication 16 million for both years.
Last edited:
chop2chip
Well-known member
Sorry. I was referring to a salary cap situation like the NBA where it can be advantageous.
This. If we blew all the money on the bullpen and left two positions subpar with no cleanup hitter, it's a fire-able amount of stupidity.
tululush
New member
If this is true I bet he signs with us soon. Unless someone comes in and offers a 5th year or a ton more money. Where did you hear we included a fourth year?
tululush
New member
Just saw this. Is this where you saw your news, thethe? Not sure how much you can trust Bowden, but he says Donaldson’s market is hot, everyone is at 4 years, and it may take 5/125 to sign him. Lol if that’s the case then I pass. That’s crazy money for a 34 year old. He says Braves, Nats, Twins, Philly are all involved and this is all coming from a singular source. Take it with a grain of salt.
[TW]1211656808365989894[/TW]
[TW]1211656808365989894[/TW]
MadduxFanII
Swallowed by Mark Bowman
I mean, Donaldson should absolutely get his, but five years for Josh Donaldson is crazy town.
tululush
New member
Yeah if it takes 5 years I pull out and say good luck to you. Then pivot to Colorado and try and work something out there. We have a surplus of prospects, some of whom won’t have a place to play. Might as well use them. And if we’re going to, might as well aim high. I’d prefer Chapman, but I seriously doubt Oakland would move him so my next guy is Arenado.
Hudson2
Well-known member
If we all have 4 year deals and the money is pretty close then somebody will have to offer another year or a good bit more money for him not to choose us. I could see Washington or Philly offer a 5th year option and if that’s the case we could offer a 5th year option with like a 5 million buyout to get him a little more money. Hopefully this ends soon and we can move on.
Hudson2
Well-known member
I’m like Sheff. If Anderson does have real spin rate concerns then I’m selling high on him now. If Oakland would listen on Chapman I’d no doubt offer Anderson and Waters in the same deal for him.
tululush
New member
Agreed. I’d only let Waters go for either Chapman or Arenado. But I’d want cash back in the Arenado deal. Lol for Chapman, I’d pretty much say ‘here take all my prospects.’
Where did the spin rate concern rumors start with Anderson? Not doubting their validity, but just curious where they began bc everyone has touched on them for a while now. And if true, I agree, we should sell high.
Hudson2
Well-known member
They came out quite a bit last year. I know sheff brought it up a lot and when it comes to stats he’s usually pretty spot on. I know Chapman is probably a pipe dream but Beane is a strange dude and may over value guys that others wouldn’t. A Riley, Waters, Anderson package would be a very strong offer. Pache can’t be traded imo.
AFAIK it came from like, one FG chat months ago that said someone got a super low reading on his spin rates. Scheff can touch on it more, but his splits also indicate he's working with an arsenal confusing to MiLB hitters but not indicative of MLB success.
the reports/talks are FAR from conclusive and we likely need actual MLB data to draw any real conclusions. IIRC the spin rate data cited would suggest he basically has no breaking ball at all, which seems unlikely. FG has a 50/55 on his CB so...
as i stated below you, AFAIK literally all the spin rate talk is being derived from one comment in a FG chat about someone getting a super low reading one time. talked about a lot, but not backed up by much data at all. still a huge question, and far from factual.