2018 Offseason And Targets

[50PoundHead]

What about Aaron Hicks? I don't know what the Yankees plans are and Gardner did drop off dramatically last season, but I've always liked Hicks and if the Braves are in on Gray (I hope not), maybe they should try to make the deal a little bigger to include Hicks.

 

[DirkPiggler]

If there were no such thing as opt-outs, I'd agree he should take the 5/$200MM over 10/$300MM. Harper will get the best of both worlds...the short-term contract with the ability to take advantage of escalating salaries, combined with the worst-case scenario of a guaranteed $300MM if he gets hurt or Heywards.

 

[BeanieAntics]

Wouldn't it make sense for the player for the shorter contract with the higher AAV though?

10 years / $300m with opt outs at 3/5/7 years....
5 years / $200m with opt out at 3 years

even if he were to opt out at 3 years, he still makes more money.

No the 10 year deal makes more sense because it offers more long term security and more flexibility. That is worth more than the extra 30 million he would get if we are assuming he'd opt out after year 3 in both contracts. Baseball is just too volatile to take short term gain over long term security when you have the opportunity for the latter.

 

[Carp]

Wouldn't it make sense for the player for the shorter contract with the higher AAV though?

10 years / $300m with opt outs at 3/5/7 years....
5 years / $200m with opt out at 3 years

even if he were to opt out at 3 years, he still makes more money.

Not really. The most he can make extra is 50 million over 5 years. Realistically, he probably opts out in 3 years, so 30 million is the extra he potentially could bring in. But he's risking guaranteed 100 million dollars to make an extra 30 million. Not a very smart decision, imo.

 

[DirkPiggler]

Wouldn't it make sense for the player for the shorter contract with the higher AAV though?

10 years / $300m with opt outs at 3/5/7 years....
5 years / $200m with opt out at 3 years

even if he were to opt out at 3 years, he still makes more money.

That's smart, but it takes away the security in the event that he doesn't live up to the value of the contract.

For example, if Jason Heyward opted out this year, do you think he'd get anywhere near the same AAV on his next contract? I'm not comparing the two players at all, but there is a risk of catastrophic injury or just flat out failure to perform to a level commensurate with the salary.

 

[nsacpi]

What about Aaron Hicks? I don't know what the Yankees plans are and Gardner did drop off dramatically last season, but I've always liked Hicks and if the Braves are in on Gray (I hope not), maybe they should try to make the deal a little bigger to include Hicks.

Yankees dont have anyone else to play center

 

[Enscheff]

Wouldn't it make sense for the player for the shorter contract with the higher AAV though?

10 years / $300m with opt outs at 3/5/7 years....
5 years / $200m with opt out at 3 years

even if he were to opt out at 3 years, he still makes more money.

Because he's going to get way more than 10/300, and it could very well be front loaded anyways.

Harper is going to get both the chance for a huge short deal and the security of a $350M total deal, so he doesn't have to settle for $200M guaranteed.

Some team is going to buy the rest of the median projection WAR Harper is going to produce for the rest of his career (40+ WAR if he is a true talent 5 win player now and follows typical aging curves). It doesn't matter if they spread that commitment over 10, 12, 15 or 20 years. In fact, most teams bidding for Harper will prefer the longer term to lessen the impact on the luxury tax threshold.

Harper is going to get the chance to decide to cash in again if he actually becomes the monster everyone thinks he can be, despite only really being a superstar for 1 season. If he turns into a true talent 8 win player over the next couple years (basically ARod, but less than Trout) he will be able to sign another contract buying the rest of his projected WAR...but this time as an 8 win player rather than a 5 win player.

40+ WAR is $400M+, minus some amount of value assigned to the opt out clause(s). He will blow by $300M guaranteed, and won't even consider something like 5/200...unless he just really wants to be a Dodger.

 

[Southcack77]

Because he's going to get way more than 10/300, and it could very well be front loaded anyways.

Harper is going to get both the chance for a huge short deal and the security of a $350M total deal, so he doesn't have to settle for $200M guaranteed.

Some team is going to buy the rest of the median projection WAR Harper is going to produce for the rest of his career (40+ WAR if he is a true talent 5 win player now and follows typical aging curves). It doesn't matter if they spread that commitment over 10, 12, 15 or 20 years. In fact, most teams bidding for Harper will prefer the longer term to lessen the impact on the luxury tax threshold.

Harper is going to get the chance to decide to cash in again if he actually becomes the monster everyone thinks he can be, despite only really being a superstar for 1 season. If he turns into a true talent 8 win player over the next couple years (basically ARod, but less than Trout) he will be able to sign another contract buying the rest of his projected WAR...but this time as an 8 win player rather than a 5 win player.

40+ WAR is $400M+, minus some amount of value assigned to the opt out clause(s). He will blow by $300M guaranteed, and won't even consider something like 5/200...unless he just really wants to be a Dodger.

I'm trying to see if I can come up with an absurd situation where you might think about it.

10/350 vs:

3/150 That's 45 million more over first three years. Risking 200m.

3/180 That's 75 million more over first three years. Risking 170m.


I guess at some point the money doesn't really matter that much beyond keeping score. taking the money up front might be the best way of taking a chance at getting the high score.

Not really a practical problem. Hard to see anyone pass up the guarantee, particularly with the opt out.

 

[tululush]

I'm trying to see if I can come up with an absurd situation where you might think about it.

10/350 vs:

3/150 That's 45 million more over first three years. Risking 200m.

3/180 That's 75 million more over first three years. Risking 170m.


I guess at some point the money doesn't really matter that much beyond keeping score. taking the money up front might be the best way of taking a chance at getting the high score.

Not really a practical problem. Hard to see anyone pass up the guarantee, particularly with the opt out.

Something you're not thinking about is what can you do with the extra money per year? If you're talking about 30 mil vs 40 mil per year you can invest the extra cash up front and conceivably make up the difference you're losing with a shorter contract, and then you can sign another long term deal after your short term deal ends. Assuming you're smart with your money, of course.

 

[Enscheff]

I'm trying to see if I can come up with an absurd situation where you might think about it.

10/350 vs:

3/150 That's 45 million more over first three years. Risking 200m.

3/180 That's 75 million more over first three years. Risking 170m.


I guess at some point the money doesn't really matter that much beyond keeping score. taking the money up front might be the best way of taking a chance at getting the high score.

Not really a practical problem. Hard to see anyone pass up the guarantee, particularly with the opt out.

Take the most extreme case, a 1 year deal. Harper's projection for 2019 is ~5 WAR, so the hard cap on a 1 year deal is about $50M. The starting point is probably $40M to even get him to consider. I'd peg a 1 year deal for Harper at closer to $50M than $40M. The same $50M per year hard cap is likely in place for the next 3 years as well, so a 3/180 contract would never be offered by a team. The 3/150 deal is at least plausible though.

His 10-15 year deal will have 1-3 opt outs, so it is entirely plausible it is structured such that he already has a 3/150 deal up front before the opt out, or very close to it.

With opt outs I see no way it will be beneficial to pass up $300M-$400M guaranteed when he can simply structure the deal to be front loaded and approximate 3/150 before the opt out anyways.

Throw in the fact that Harper hired Boras specifically to break the MLB contract record, and this is a no-brainer prediction to make.

 

[bravesfanforlife88]

Jon Morosi
‏
Verified account

@jonmorosi
2m2 minutes ago
More
Sources: #Indians trade talks involving Corey Kluber have continued this week. The Cleveland front office is very thorough. #Dodgers, #Brewers, #Phillies, #Reds among the teams that have shown interest. @MLB @MLBNetwork

 

[UNCBlue012]

Jon Morosi
‏
Verified account

@jonmorosi
2m2 minutes ago
More
Sources: #Indians trade talks involving Corey Kluber have continued this week. The Cleveland front office is very thorough. #Dodgers, #Brewers, #Phillies, #Reds among the teams that have shown interest. @MLB @MLBNetwork

I’ve long though the Dodgers would grab Kluber and sign Harper.

 

[Enscheff]

I’ve long though the Dodgers would grab Kluber and sign Harper.

The Indians need OFers, so OFer plus more for Kluber makes sense after Harper takes a spot in the OF.

I just want the Harper/Machado/JTR portion of the off season to finish so the Braves can get to work picking at the scraps.

 

[Freshmaker]

I’ve long though the Dodgers would grab Kluber and sign Harper.

Kershaw/Kluber/Buehler then 2 of Hill/Ryu/Wood/Maeda is pretty sick. Then add Harper? Yikes

 

[DirkPiggler]

Because he's going to get way more than 10/300, and it could very well be front loaded anyways.


Some team is going to buy the rest of the median projection WAR Harper is going to produce for the rest of his career (40+ WAR if he is a true talent 5 win player now and follows typical aging curves). It doesn't matter if they spread that commitment over 10, 12, 15 or 20 years. In fact, most teams bidding for Harper will prefer the longer term to lessen the impact on the luxury tax threshold.


40+ WAR is $400M+, minus some amount of value assigned to the opt out clause(s). He will blow by $300M guaranteed, and won't even consider something like 5/200...unless he just really wants to be a Dodger.

That's an interesting way of looking at it...basically financing the same number of WAR over a longer period. It does make sense for a team that can afford it, especially as the value of a win goes up over time.

Regarding the record-breaking contract aspect...I wonder if Harper and Machado are playing some kind of game of chicken, with each holding out to make sure that the other doesn't sign for a little more. The amounts of money are already going to be obscene. Something as seemingly silly as the largest contract in MLB history might mean more than an extra million or two in the bank at that point.

 

[UNCBlue012]

Kershaw/Kluber/Buehler then 2 of Hill/Ryu/Wood/Maeda is pretty sick. Then add Harper? Yikes

They were already good. It's just not fair. lol

 

[bravesguy]

Kershaw/Kluber/Buehler then 2 of Hill/Ryu/Wood/Maeda is pretty sick. Then add Harper? Yikes

I believe if you consider the various comments / rumors that have come out along with the comments by AA and other Atlanta brass, that AA has put in place his offers and is waiting for answers. It will likely be until January before the key things happen so the moves can be made.

Maybe...
1) He has offered Riley + for JTR, but is waiting on LAD to back out so MIA will make a call.

2) He has a standing Wright for Verdugo swap verbally approved pending Harper accepting LAD.

3) He has a conditional Fried/Mueller for Bumgardner trade pending getting #2.

4) He will have ~13M available for relief.

 

[jpx7]

I believe if you consider the various comments / rumors that have come out along with the comments by AA and other Atlanta brass, that AA has put in place his offers and is waiting for answers. It will likely be until January before the key things happen so the moves can be made.

Maybe...
1) He has offered Riley + for JTR, but is waiting on LAD to back out so MIA will make a call.

2) He has a standing Wright for Verdugo swap verbally approved pending Harper accepting LAD.

3) He has a conditional Fried/Mueller for Bumgardner trade pending getting #2.

4) He will have ~13M available for relief.

Why would we want that? I’d rather keep Fried.

 

[Enscheff]

Why would we want that? I’d rather keep Fried.

A lot of folks are holding onto the idea of what Bumgarner was. It's typically people who think players named Bumgardner and Mueller actually exist.

I'm not saying those people are stupid, but my sig has immortalized the dumbest Bumgarner idea I've seen yet...and that guy is even dumber than clvderpclv...so...

 

[Freshmaker]

I believe if you consider the various comments / rumors that have come out along with the comments by AA and other Atlanta brass, that AA has put in place his offers and is waiting for answers. It will likely be until January before the key things happen so the moves can be made.

Maybe...
1) He has offered Riley + for JTR, but is waiting on LAD to back out so MIA will make a call.

2) He has a standing Wright for Verdugo swap verbally approved pending Harper accepting LAD.

3) He has a conditional Fried/Mueller for Bumgardner trade pending getting #2.

4) He will have ~13M available for relief.

I think it will be awhile, yeah. If Harper goes to LAD it will give us several additional OF options. I don't think Harper will sign this year because they're trying to drive up his price. I wonder though, what high payroll teams need him? NYY has publicly stated that they're out (and they're rumored to prefer Machado anyway). Plus they already have Judge/Stanton/Ellsbury/Hicks/Gardner/Frazier. The Cubs and Red Sox can't sign him w/o going over the luxury tax threshold (assuming no trades of course). The Astros aren't in on him. While I'm sure he's got plenty of suitors, it's a legit question to wonder who can actually afford to give him the kind of contract he's looking for. Maybe that's a reason you hear the White Sox rumblings