2018 Hot Stove League

[Stradling]

1 hour ago, Blarg said:

In context of how player salaries and length of contracts are progressing, Trout, if he wanted maximum years and dollars, should not have hitched his valuation on what Machado and Harper will settle for. His agent should have presented his best offer the week after the World Series ended while speculation about the other free agents value was still unresolved. 

But what is nice is with how tumultuous this off season has been, I think if presented with a nice contract extension Trout will be even more inclined to accept it.  If neither of these guys get $300 million, you’d have to think you can get Trout for around $350 million over ten years.  

[GrittyVeterans]

8 minutes ago, Stradling said:

But what is nice is with how tumultuous this off season has been, I think if presented with a nice contract extension Trout will be even more inclined to accept it.  If neither of these guys get $300 million, you’d have to think you can get Trout for around $350 million over ten years.  

Wishful thinking at its finest

[Stradling]

Just now, GrittyVeterans said:

Wishful thinking at its finest

Ok, what do you think he will get?  What did you think Machado and Harper were going to get coming into the off season?  Maybe I should have put $350-400 million.  But he isn’t getting the numbers ettin suggested he was going to get.  He isn’t going to get $500 million or some nonsense like that.  You can call it wishful thinking, but I would love to hear what you think the three guys are going to get.  Keep in mind that Trout will be two years older when he becomes a free agent and it certainly appears GMs/Owners are done with the really long contracts.  

[IEAngelsfan]

1 hour ago, Blarg said:

Verlander is living in his own past where owner's ignored aging data. Harper and Machado are living in the present that has too much information regarding both their projected value and in Machado's case the volitility of his temperament. 

Harper, if he wanted maximum dollars, should have taken the Nationals living in the past offer. Machado should have thought about his image in the post season if he wanted maximum dollars. Now there is no going back for the both of them.

Both choose the position they are in. 

[GrittyVeterans]

7 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Ok, what do you think he will get?  What did you think Machado and Harper were going to get coming into the off season?  Maybe I should have put $350-400 million.  But he isn’t getting the numbers ettin suggested he was going to get.  He isn’t going to get $500 million or some nonsense like that.  You can call it wishful thinking, but I would love to hear what you think the three guys are going to get.  Keep in mind that Trout will be two years older when he becomes a free agent and it certainly appears GMs/Owners are done with the really long contracts.  

He'll get more than 35 million per year...I think it will be 9/400

[Stradling]

4 minutes ago, GrittyVeterans said:

He'll get more than 35 million per year...I think it will be 9/400

Maybe, but I wouldn’t hold my breath.  I could be something like 9 years $360 million.  I don’t think we will see him get much over $40 million.  

[Docwaukee]

10/400 but that will include 2019 and 2020.  Maybe even a bit less depending on where Harper lands.  

[ettin]

4 hours ago, Stradling said:

Ok, what do you think he will get?  What did you think Machado and Harper were going to get coming into the off season?  Maybe I should have put $350-400 million.  But he isn’t getting the numbers ettin suggested he was going to get.  He isn’t going to get $500 million or some nonsense like that.  You can call it wishful thinking, but I would love to hear what you think the three guys are going to get.  Keep in mind that Trout will be two years older when he becomes a free agent and it certainly appears GMs/Owners are done with the really long contracts.  

There has been little evidence to-date that a premium free agent has not received a long, high-value contract. If that actually does happen this year (Harper and Machado not exceeding $400M) then I will reconsider my entire position.

Until then history has consistently shown that premium players get paid at a premium.

[Stradling]

1 minute ago, ettin said:

There has been little evidence to-date that a premium free agent has not received a long, high-value contract. If that actually does happen this year (Harper and Machado not exceeding $400M) then I will reconsider my entire position.

Until then history has consistently shown that premium players get paid at a premium.

I agree that premium free agents get paid a premium, but are we really past the days where $200 million isn’t a premium?  Or $30 million isn’t a premium?  

[Lou]

6 hours ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

What’s your idea of financially feasible?

$2.5M/yr for 12 years for a total of $50M

[ettin]

14 minutes ago, Stradling said:

I agree that premium free agents get paid a premium, but are we really past the days where $200 million isn’t a premium?  Or $30 million isn’t a premium?  

The bar has been set by guys like Stanton, Greinke and Cespedes in terms of length and AAV and those contracts happened some bit of time in the past. Add in inflation, player youth, and the desire to break new ground in terms of total dollars and/or AAV, you will see them both get a lot of money in my humble opinion.

Maybe I am wrong Strad, but I don't believe I am, particularly when you consider the number of teams that in on both of these young players. I'd even point out that we may not have seen either Manny's or Bryce's best performances yet because they are still so young.

We'll see what happens shortly.

[AngelsLakersFan]

There are a few factors at play this offseason that weren't in play a few years ago - or at least not to the extent they are today.

Players are clearly not performing in their mid 30's anymore.
Long term commitments to even young players like Jason Heyward have shown that nothing is certain beyond the financial obligations you commit to
The cable tv bubble is real and these record levels of revenue are not forever
Young players are great and they play for comparatively free

Sure teams can afford it, but most of them have finally figured out that they weren't getting much of anything in return for their massive investments.

[Lou]

@ettin what were your predictions again for Harper and Machado? iirc, you predicted something like $400 for Harper.  have you adjusted your thinking?

[ettin]

31 minutes ago, Lou said:

@ettin what were your predictions again for Harper and Machado? iirc, you predicted something like $400 for Harper.  have you adjusted your thinking?

I actually had them both exceeding $400M approaching $500M, something like $450 for Machado and Harper at $420 or something along those lines. I still believe both will exceed $400M. That is where I stand right now and I fully admit that I could be completely wrong.

[ettin]

46 minutes ago, AngelsLakersFan said:

There are a few factors at play this offseason that weren't in play a few years ago - or at least not to the extent they are today.

Players are clearly not performing in their mid 30's anymore.
Long term commitments to even young players like Jason Heyward have shown that nothing is certain beyond the financial obligations you commit to
The cable tv bubble is real and these record levels of revenue are not forever
Young players are great and they play for comparatively free

Sure teams can afford it, but most of them have finally figured out that they weren't getting much of anything in return for their massive investments.

I would point out that free agency by its very nature means you are not getting too much of a return. The change might revolve around a better understanding of aging curves but again this doesn't apply much to young superstars like Harper or Machado.

[Docwaukee]

12 minutes ago, ettin said:

I would point out that free agency by its very nature means you are not getting too much of a return. The change might revolve around a better understanding of aging curves but again this doesn't apply much to young superstars like Harper or Machado.

Friedman was interviewed on mlb radio a few weeks ago detailing their reasons for not wanting to do long term deals even for guys at the age of Harper and Machado.  It essentially revolved around the risk of making such a long commitment regardless of age.  

 

[Lou]

Looks like Harper isn't going to accept a short-term deal 

[Chuck]

14 hours ago, RBM said:

Down goes Nellie!! This is classic! Thanks. 

I couldn't stand that bitch. Great moment in the LHOTP series. 

[Blarg]

22 minutes ago, ettin said:

I actually had them both exceeding $400M approaching $500M, something like $450 for Machado and Harper at $420 or something along those lines. I still believe both will exceed $400M. That is where I stand right now and I fully admit that I could be completely wrong.

No team is offering them that kind of money. 

[ettin]

21 minutes ago, Blarg said:

No team is offering them that kind of money. 

So what are the actual exact offers that they have right now?

[ettin]

30 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

Friedman was interviewed on mlb radio a few weeks ago detailing their reasons for not wanting to do long term deals even for guys at the age of Harper and Machado.  It essentially revolved around the risk of making such a long commitment regardless of age.  

 

Not wanting to do them is different from needing/wanting to do them.

Friedman comes from a small-market mentality and has carried that over to the Dodgers, a team that can probably crush any other team, other than perhaps the Yankees, monetarily.

I do fully agree that long term commitments are hazardous and carry more risk but that does not stop what the free agent market will do unless, suddenly, every team feels that way about those types of contracts (and they might for all I know). Also most teams purchase insurance on those large contracts nowadays so the risk is mitigated, all or in part, when they do that.

[ettin]

Also I know I've said something controversial, in one or more threads, when I open up Angelswin.com and I have three alerts from @Blarg, @Dochalo, and @Lou !

[Docwaukee]

Just now, ettin said:

Not wanting to do them is different from needing/wanting to do them.

Friedman comes from a small-market mentality and has carried that over to the Dodgers, a team that can probably crush any other team, other than perhaps the Yankees, monetarily.

I do fully agree that long term commitments are hazardous and carry more risk but that does not stop what the free agent market will do unless, suddenly, every team feels that way about those types of contracts (and they might for all I know). Also most teams purchase insurance on those large contracts nowadays so the risk is mitigated, all or in part, when they do that.

it doesn't matter what they can do.  it's only matters what they will do.  

Every team has the spending power to add Harper or Machado and some Harper and Machado.  There's a reason they're not doing it and it's not because they can't afford it.  It's that it doesn't make sense for them to do so.  They have all the numbers and projection and budgets etc.  

Committing 8-10 years to these guys at 30+ mil has been vetted up an down by almost every team.  

I don't think there is a lack of activity because teams are suddenly better at controlling the rumor mill.  It's that they're just not interested in that length of contract.  Why have teams suddenly jumped in at the end?  Because they're not getting the length of deal they want.  Why is it taking so long?  Because they're not getting the length of deal they want.  

Agents used to present a number and teams would look at their budgets and say yeah or neigh.  Now the teams are telling the players what they are worth and not the other way around.  

[Angel Oracle]

Things that will happen before Harper and Machado sign new contracts:

Suns win NBA title.

Bills win Super Bowl.

Trump totally stops his tweets.

[Stradling]

14 minutes ago, ettin said:

Not wanting to do them is different from needing/wanting to do them.

Friedman comes from a small-market mentality and has carried that over to the Dodgers, a team that can probably crush any other team, other than perhaps the Yankees, monetarily.

I do fully agree that long term commitments are hazardous and carry more risk but that does not stop what the free agent market will do unless, suddenly, every team feels that way about those types of contracts (and they might for all I know). Also most teams purchase insurance on those large contracts nowadays so the risk is mitigated, all or in part, when they do that.

Ok, so he can crush any team financially and still won’t sign them to 10 year deals.  That only adds to the speculation that 10 year deals are not going to happen with these guys.