Fans and salaries

[Dtwncbad]

I notice fans will talk about existing large contracts being the reason the team "cannot afford" signing a premium player.  When the Angels were up against the lux tax with Pujols and Hamilton, etc. . . .I get it, that's fine.

But what I find peculiar is when there is projected room and fans still seem to prefer going cheap, dismissing the idea of chasing an expensive player.

I don't understand dismissing signing a premium player when the team has ample salary space under the luxury tax.

I understand keeping a little room to be able to make a move midseason, sure.

But if there is space, why would fans prefer to pass on a very high impact player because of the salary cost?  Why?

"Too much money" isn't complete enough of an answer.  Isn't it too much money only if it puts you over the luxury tax?

I know if you need three impact players you cant spend all your money on one player.  We all know that.

But why pass on a player just because they are "expensive"?  It is pro sports.  Don't we kind of have to get over the fact that these guys make silly money? 

[UndertheHalo]

I want the Angels to spend as much money as possible at all times.  

That said, they won’t do that and I’d rather they spend money on the players that I think will help more then on those that I think suck.  I’m interested in the financial heath of the club in so far as I’d like it to be able to keep the best players around and you know... to be able to exist.  It’s not really more complicated then that.  I’m sure most fans see it that way.  I guess I don’t know for sure, but I figure most fans don’t give a shit about how much profit Arte may or may not be  pulling off the team.   

[2112]

Lou Brown: I thought you said we didn't have any high priced talent.

Charlie Donovan: Forget about Dorn, he's just high priced.

[Taylor]

When's the last time a lengthy, expensive contract for a SP worked out for the team who signed him?

[m0nkey]

1 minute ago, Taylor said:

When's the last time a lengthy, expensive contract for a SP worked out for the team who signed him?

Max Scherzer has provided 27.3 WAR  in almost 4 years out of a 7 year deal.  Not bad

[Tyler]

Buy season seats when the Angels suck (now) and fill up the stadium so they have money to go after these FA's in the offseason. Do your part as a fan.

[Taylor]

10 minutes ago, m0nkey said:

Max Scherzer has provided 27.3 WAR  in almost 4 years out of a 7 year deal.  Not bad

Good call. I believe he's one of the few, and he was entering his age-28 season when the Nationals signed him. Corbin will probably want a similar deal.

[Ace-Of-Diamonds]

10 minutes ago, Taylor said:

When's the last time a lengthy, expensive contract for a SP worked out for the team who signed him?

Nolan Ryan, Randy Johnson, Justin Verlander?

[Troll Daddy]

In before someone says we’re saving money to sign Trout 

[Sully151]

We are saving money for... shit, missed it by that much.

[eaterfan]

Would you pay $100 for a Pizza Hut Pizza? I understand passing if you didn't have $100, but if you have more than that in the bank then I don't understand why you wouldn't buy a Pizza Hut Pizza for $100. It's too much money just isn't a good enough reason.

I'm joking for the most part. These owners are making money hand over fist. They can spend way more than they have been. That being said, spending money just to spend money is silly. There needs to be some evaluation of quality and efficiency. Plus, as long as the owners are only willing to spend to a certain level, then efficiency definitely matters.

[Stradling]

There is such thing as too much for a player when you have to consider re-signing Trout.   So if Machado is going for $35 million per year for 10 years with an opt out after 3 years, that just might be too risky.  

[eaterfan]

5 minutes ago, Stradling said:

There is such thing as too much for a player when you have to consider re-signing Trout.   So if Machado is going for $35 million per year for 10 years with an opt out after 3 years, that just might be too risky.  

Machado is the best backup for Trout there is. A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. Not signing Machado and then losing out on Trout would be by far the worst case scenario of:

1. Sign Machado and Trout

2. Sign Trout

3. Sign Machado

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4. Lose out on both.

[Angelsfan1984]

1 hour ago, Taylor said:

When's the last time a lengthy, expensive contract for a SP worked out for the team who signed him?

Kevin Brown was worth the money. Anytime the dodgers get shafted its worth it.

[Lou]

2 hours ago, Dtwncbad said:

I notice fans will talk about existing large contracts being the reason the team "cannot afford" signing a premium player.  When the Angels were up against the lux tax with Pujols and Hamilton, etc. . . .I get it, that's fine.

But what I find peculiar is when there is projected room and fans still seem to prefer going cheap, dismissing the idea of chasing an expensive player.

I don't understand dismissing signing a premium player when the team has ample salary space under the luxury tax.

I understand keeping a little room to be able to make a move midseason, sure.

But if there is space, why would fans prefer to pass on a very high impact player because of the salary cost?  Why?

"Too much money" isn't complete enough of an answer.  Isn't it too much money only if it puts you over the luxury tax?

I know if you need three impact players you cant spend all your money on one player.  We all know that.

But why pass on a player just because they are "expensive"?  It is pro sports.  Don't we kind of have to get over the fact that these guys make silly money? 

where did this come from? which player(s) are you talking about?

[ten ocho recon scout]

2 hours ago, NotMyCat said:

Lou Brown: I thought you said we didn't have any high priced talent.

Charlie Donovan: Forget about Dorn, he's just high priced.

Love that line.

[Angelsjunky]

The problem is that the Scherzers are the exception not the rule. Most mega-contracts turn out poorly. I’d rather only spend big on extending in-house players and the occasional, rare premium player. 

[Dtwncbad]

38 minutes ago, Angelsjunky said:

The problem is that the Scherzers are the exception not the rule. Most mega-contracts turn out poorly. I’d rather only spend big on extending in-house players and the occasional, rare premium player. 

The occasional rare, premium player will get a mega contract that tons of fans will freak out over.

Even a notch down from the generational players still freak out fans. People were adamant that JD Martinez was too expensive.  He looks like a deal now. . .

[eaterfan]

3 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

The occasional rare, premium player will get a mega contract that tons of fans will freak out over.

Even a notch down from the generational players still freak out fans. People were adamant that JD Martinez was too expensive.  He looks like a deal now. . .

People were also adamant that Hamilton and Pujols were too expensive. And they were right.

[kevinb]

You have to trust the GM, the scouts and owner to hopefully make the right decision. At the end of the day no GM is perfect and we as fans have to hope they hit more times than they miss. Only time will tell. 

[Angelsjunky]

35 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

The occasional rare, premium player will get a mega contract that tons of fans will freak out over.

Even a notch down from the generational players still freak out fans. People were adamant that JD Martinez was too expensive.  He looks like a deal now. . .

Yes, but my point is that for every JD Martinez (or Scherzer) there are several Jason Heywards, Josh Hamiltons, Ryan Howards, etc etc. 

[Lou]

1 hour ago, Lou said:

where did this come from? which player(s) are you talking about?

ok, thanks.

[IEAngelsfan]

4 minutes ago, Lou said:

ok, thanks.

Lou, don't listen to the voices in your head.

[Lou]

12 minutes ago, Lou said:

ok, thanks.

you're welcome 

 

[Dtwncbad]

1 hour ago, eaterfan said:

People were also adamant that Hamilton and Pujols were too expensive. And they were right.

Agree but if that means the Angels just pass on all "expensive" players now because of those contracts, it will be a mistake.