What's your max extension for Trout (if you're Eppler)?

[JarsOfClay]

2 hours ago, Blarg said:

Fuck WAR valuations, that is made up bullshit. No player is worth $500 million dollars. Not even Mike Trout. 

"We can replace Mike Trout with two 5 WAR players" 

[101halo]

6 minutes ago, JarsOfClay said:

"We can replace Mike Trout with two 5 WAR players" 

"...Scott Boras says while pitching Machado and Harper to Arte for a total of 750 million bucks."

[arch stanton]

I'd offer 12 years and $430 mil which puts him just under $36mil AAV and slightly eclipses the $35 mil AAV I'm predicting for Harper

Edited January 22, 2018 by arch stanton
typos make the math wrong

[tdawg87]

No one is getting 500 million. 

The Harper contract will definitely set the bar, but no one is going to pay him half a billion dollars. Not even close. He'll get the most expensive contract ever, but it'll be something like 12/360. That puts Trout at about 12/390. And that's an aggressive estimate.

It will be backloaded, so he'll take a few years of a "discount" before he starts making 40 million a year.

Of course I could be wrong. Some dumbass could give Harper $500 million (all it takes is one). But looking at how this offseason has gone, owners seem to be gun shy about offering absurd contracts.

Look at it this way, Pujols got 240 million. Is someone going to give Trout more than double that? Don't consider how Pujols has performed since signing the contract, consider how he performed before. 

Owners are now making more money than ever, which is why payrolls have ballooned. But at some point the bubble has to burst. I mean even with the tax threshold growing, you guys are talking about giving one single player a quarter of the entire payroll. And doing that for over a decade. 

I just don't see it. 

[ettin]

3 hours ago, Blarg said:

Fuck WAR valuations, that is made up bullshit. No player is worth $500 million dollars. Not even Mike Trout. 

Glad you were able to answer in a logical, informed manner with an argument that is based and grounded in some facts. Awesome response.

[tdawg87]

Lay off Blarg, he's had a particularly rough week since Denny's no longer accepts his AARP card.

[Dtwncbad]

It's a fun subject.

How about something like this?

13 yrs $390 million.

Every top 5 MVP finish he gets $5m bonus.

Every top 3 MVP finish he gets $10m bonus.

Every MVP award he gets $15m bonus.

This type of structure would let him earn as much as $45m per year in his prime winning an MVP but he would still earn $30m in years he wasn't an elite player later in his career.

Here is a cool detail.  All bonus money is deferred until retirement with interest paid.  After 10 years, any remaining salary also converts to bonus at retirement.

So if he is great for 7 years and then fades and suddenly stinks at year 10ish, he is motivated to get that monster retirement bonus he earned.  There would be no motivation to hang on and linger to get that last couple of years salary.

So if Trout was 36, and he stinks (but he was excellent for a good stretch for years before), he wouldn't want to linger for 3 more years to collect $90m when walking away would put like $160m in his pocket (call it $70 million in the MVP bonus money and $90m remaining in salary).

Minimum he would earn mathematically is $390.  But he is way, way too good for this to be realistic.  Probably the minimum he would get is more like  $440m.

Max he could earn is $585m.

People can play with the numbers but some deal where he gets fat bonuses for being this today's version of Mike Trout. . .and the deferred element of those bonuses that removes any incentive to linger if he ends up bad at a late age.

[ettin]

So we've talked about this before but I'll point it out again: Giancarlo Stanton, just over three years ago, signed a 13-year, $325M extension contract. Remember that players who sign extension contracts are taking a reduced salary in order to secure significant life-changing money.

Fast forward to the 2018-2019 off-season and you have a fairly similar player in Bryce Harper who is going to hit free agency. Bryce will get his fair market rate. This year is simply an outlier in terms of activity, you can fully expect that the big spending teams will be active in next years market including the Dodgers, Yankees, Phillies, and Red Sox.

Harper should easily hit a minimum of 8 years, due to his age, probably more. He will probably get an opt-out or two somewhere in his contract. Alternatively he could take a 5-year deal at a very high rate of pay and then re-enter free agency again and make another large contract (depends on how he wants to spread his risk out and how much he wants to bet on himself). In my opinion Bryce will want to sign the greatest free agent contract in history and will go for the maximum number of years and money. Using Stanton as the base I see no reason why Bryce cannot crest $400M in free agency.

Trout won't technically be a free agent next off-season but he can and should be paid more than Harper. So $500M might not happen that was my personal guess and estimate. But it does represent a specific watermark that Mike's agent will probably shoot for, again, in my opinion. As I said in the Primer Harper will set the goal posts.

You can take a dump all you want on $/WAR models @Blarg, but every front office uses a sophisticated version of it with risk models, production estimates, etc. to make their decisions. You may not like it but they help create informed decision making.

[tdawg87]

I personally don't agree about the extension part. Stanton's extension is currently the largest contract in MLB history. I don't think he was giving Miami any kind of discount. I don't think Stanton gets more as a free agent. That contract is absurd.

[ettin]

7 minutes ago, tdawg87 said:

I personally don't agree about the extension part. Stanton's extension is currently the largest contract in MLB history. I don't think he was giving Miami any kind of discount. I don't think Stanton gets more as a free agent. That contract is absurd.

I agree that it is absurd and am willing to consider the likelihood I could be wrong. There is a concern that baseball could be entering an economic bubble with the TV deals reaching a potential plateau and coming back down so there are potential issues. This year is just about the Yankees and Dodgers wanting to get under the CBT threshold to reset and the Phillies not quite ready to jump all in like they will next year. There are other teams like the Brewers and Twins who have room to spend. I think next year will potentially shock a lot of people in terms of spending. I will be surprised if Trout doesn't make over $400M in an extension contract or in free agency. Maybe I will be the one who winds up shocked at how far I'm off.

[Ohtaniland]

28 minutes ago, tdawg87 said:

Lay off Blarg, he's had a particularly rough week since Denny's no longer accepts his AARP card.

AARP? You mean EBT.

[tdawg87]

11 minutes ago, OHTANILAND said:

AARP? You mean EBT.

Blarg is a Republican.

[beatlesrule]

Whatever it is, front load it with incentives please.

[totdprods]

I'd tell Arte to wait a year.

[Fish Oil]

10 hours ago, 101halo said:

Agreed. While I'd pay it if necessary, there's gotta be a consideration for injury. Knocks on every bit of wood in the house. No way you'll find someone to insure that kind of contract, right? 

One of the reasons big league clubs are reluctant to go over three years on a free agent contract is because that is the point where insurance costs escalate.

[nate]

15 hours ago, Stradling said:

15 years and $500 million. The last five years would be $10 million a season.  The idea being he retired after the first 10 years where he’d make $45 million a year. It would put his tax number at $33 million a year. 

Almost certain this is against the CBA.

I think 10/400 could happen.

[totdprods]

19 minutes ago, nate said:

Almost certain this is against the CBA.

I think 10/400 could happen.

I feel that's pretty realistic. That's still a full $75m more than Stanton's and a good raise. 

[Ohtaniland]

I’d rather he go free agent so he can get $600M. 

[Taylor]

10 years, $325 million. And he gets to be the weatherman for KCAL.

[Tank]

5 hours ago, totdprods said:

I'd tell Arte to wait a year.

i'm having lunch with him tomorrow and i'll share you advice with him.

[Tank]

8 minutes ago, Taylor said:

10 years, $325 million. And he gets to be the weatherman for KCAL.

wait, that'd mean he kicks jackie johnson and evelyn taft to the curb? pfft, forget that noise.

[Angelsjunky]

I think we're all in for some eye-openers when Machado and Harper hit the market. I would be very surprised if Trout doesn't end up getting a contract worth half a billion or more. Hope I'm wrong.

[Angel Oracle]

14 hours ago, JarsOfClay said:

"We can replace Mike Trout with two 5 WAR players" 

Eppler >>>>>>>>>>>>> Buzzard Bavasi + Buzzard Jr.

[Angel Oracle]

Because 10 year deals may be going by the wayside, it will be more money for fewer seasons.

Since he's 29 going on 30 for his first year under any new deal:   8 years/$350 million

And by then the luxury tax threshold should be what, $210 million?   Pujols' contract is almost done then. 

Gives Trout a chance to be paid again in his age 37/38 through age 39/40 seasons.

[Hubs]

It depends on when he signs his extension. If he signs after next offseason, once Harper signs (Machado maybe valuable but he's not in the other two players class), then he's effectively replacing 2/70. Then I'd give him 12 years. 40M average, starting with 35 for the next 4, then 37.5 for 2, 40 for 2, and 42.5 for 2 and finally 45 for the final two. 470M.