Jump to content
  • Welcome to AngelsWin.com

    AngelsWin.com - THE Internet Home for Angels fans! Unraveling Angels Baseball ... One Thread at a Time.

    Register today to join the most interactive online Angels community on the net!

    Once you're a member you'll see less advertisements. Become a Premium member and you won't see any ads! 

     

IGNORED

What's the Absolute Maximum you would spend on Gerrit Cole? (And others?)


Angelsjunky

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, Lou said:

being able to amnesty a contract would be a huge advantage to those teams that can afford to sign players to big contracts. 

The amnesty would only apply if through an agreeable process that a player is proven to have basically sh*t the bed halfway through his contract. The team still needs to pay the player but should be allowed to get some form of AAV relief. All teams would benefit. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Calzone 2 said:

I’m not saying that the team should get out of paying the entire contract. I’m suggesting that they should be allowed an amnesty against the AAV because of their good faith obligation. The Hamilton contract is a perfect example of that.

I agree in principle, but I think it could only be for players you actually have released - you can't get relief from the Pujols contract while still playing him.  

Of course, the AAV is only useful for the luxury tax calc - they still have to pay those contracts - so it would only benefit high-payroll teams that are near that "cap" - and have enough money to pay for someone to replace a bad contract.  In any given year, that's 3-5 teams, maybe?  

I actually think the union might support it, as it might tend to increase total payrolls paid slightly, as teams can potentially spend more on FA's  to replace cut players without hitting the luxury tax penalties.

I think most teams without luxury tax implications would oppose it, so probably won't happen without some kind of spiff for them to support it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, DCAngelsFan said:

I agree in principle, but I think it could only be for players you actually have released - you can't get relief from the Pujols contract while still playing him.  

Of course, the AAV is only useful for the luxury tax calc - they still have to pay those contracts - so it would only benefit high-payroll teams that are near that "cap" - and have enough money to pay for someone to replace a bad contract.  In any given year, that's 3-5 teams, maybe?  

I actually think the union might support it, as it might tend to increase total payrolls paid slightly, as teams can potentially spend more on FA's  to replace cut players without hitting the luxury tax penalties.

I think most teams without luxury tax implications would oppose it, so probably won't happen without some kind of spiff for them to support it.

 

I think that if a team has player that signs an 8 year contract but then decides to buy him out (paid in full) after 5 seasons then the AAV should die with it. They shouldn’t be under any additional future AAV obligation on paper. They should be able to reset at that point. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25% less than I would have before he wore a Boras cap to post game 7 interviews.      Let the Mariners pay him full price... he'll fit in nicely with their other talented/roided under performing cast.   I just don't see someone with such lack of judgement and character performing well after age starts to catch up with him a bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Rally Gorilla said:

25% less than I would have before he wore a Boras cap to post game 7 interviews.      Let the Mariners pay him full price... he'll fit in nicely with their other talented/roided under performing cast.

that's just batshit crazy 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Rally Gorilla said:

25% less than I would have before he wore a Boras cap to post game 7 interviews.      Let the Mariners pay him full price... he'll fit in nicely with their other talented/roided under performing cast.   I just don't see someone with such lack of judgement and character performing well after age starts to catch up with him a bit.

This is incredibly dumb with all due respect. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Stradling said:

This is incredibly dumb with all due respect. 

His act after a game seven shows a lack of common sense and character and those kind of guys don't tend to age well.  It takes smarts and mental toughness to stay in shape and adjust once the 97mph fastball goes away.    His selfishness after a freakin' game seven also doesn't build confidence that he will become the kind of leader you want on a team.  So, with all due respect, signing him through his age 36 season at huge $$$ would be too much of a risk, and therefore dumb.   Thanks for respecting my opinion though.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gerrit Cole is a clone of Max Scherzer.  Plain and simple. Both have been relatively healthy their entire career.  They avg 34 starts per season.  Seeing how amazing Max has been since he signed his large contract, it's a no brainer Cole should collect the highest salary for a pitcher.  I for one will be pissed off if we don't sign him.  If he signs with the Dodgers, I will go ape shit.  Don't F$)#  this up Arte/Billy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, halonatic13 said:

Gerrit Cole is a clone of Max Scherzer.  Plain and simple. Both have been relatively healthy their entire career.  They avg 34 starts per season.  Seeing how amazing Max has been since he signed his large contract, it's a no brainer Cole should collect the highest salary for a pitcher.  I for one will be pissed off if we don't sign him.  If he signs with the Dodgers, I will go ape shit.  Don't F$)#  this up Arte/Billy.

you're obviously forgetting that he wore a hat

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Lou said:

you're obviously forgetting that he wore a hat

Who cares about the hat.  I think it's hilarious that he wore it.  The dude is getting paid either way.  Boras knows he can't play the same game as last year since his strategy didn't work.  Cole wants to play for the Angels and those cars were already shown.  I bet Boras told him, "If you wear my hat after the series, I'll take a certain % off of your total Angel's deal."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, halonatic13 said:

Who cares about the hat.  I think it's hilarious that he wore it.  The dude is getting paid either way.  Boras knows he can't play the same game as last year since his strategy didn't work.  Cole wants to play for the Angels and those cars were already shown.  I bet Boras told him, "If you wear my hat after the series, I'll take a certain % off of your total Angel's deal."

d3f69a95d220805b4e810f92af06d1674b12ebe6ae58e508a2459318ad283a4f.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Angelsjunky said:

5 years, $85 million. 7.7 fWAR, 2012-16.

I remember those days when we thought we were getting a steal for that "hometown discount."

Weaver: ‘How much more do you possibly need?’

BCB2E230-F6FE-456C-A181-9F5E879E01F9.jpeg

Edited by Calzone 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...