• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

2018-2019 MLB Hot Stove Thread

If Harper would come down to 225-250, Dodgers would get back in.

My take is that the contract length may be where he's overplaying his hand. If he threw out 3 years at $30-35 million per with a team option for a fourth year, I suspect a few more teams would be sniffing around.
 
Boras and Harper feel compelled to exceed the total value of the Stanton contract -- $325 million. The only way to get there is with a 10 year+ commitment. Teams are getting smarter, and not willing to risk a 10 year commitment where the player can opt out if he out performs the contract, but the team can never opt out. In retrospect, the Stanton contract (which is a 14 year deal with a player-opt out after 2020) was a bad deal. The Marlins wanted out of it, and now the Yankees would love to get out if it.

Agree that if Harper was willing to take a deal of 5 years or less, there would be a lot more suitors, and he would have options. FWIW, looking at Harper's body and how he has aged from 19 to 26, I don't think he is going to be one of the rare players that dominates deep into his 30s. There is no chance that I would risk the future of my franchise on a 10+ year contract for Harper.
 
There have been so many big money free agent busts that teams have wised up:

- Zach Greinke (D-backs can't dump his contract)
- Josh Hamilton
- Pablo Sandoval
- Jeff Samardzija
- Jason Heyward
- Carl Crawford
- Arod (twice)
- Yu Darvish

Even the Stanton contract in retrospect looks bad. A bad mega contract can set a franchise back for a long time. There are a lot more misses than hits.

The first A-rod contract is definitely not a bust.
 
Boras and Harper feel compelled to exceed the total value of the Stanton contract -- $325 million. The only way to get there is with a 10 year+ commitment. Teams are getting smarter, and not willing to risk a 10 year commitment where the player can opt out if he out performs the contract, but the team can never opt out. In retrospect, the Stanton contract (which is a 14 year deal with a player-opt out after 2020) was a bad deal. The Marlins wanted out of it, and now the Yankees would love to get out if it.

Agree that if Harper was willing to take a deal of 5 years or less, there would be a lot more suitors, and he would have options. FWIW, looking at Harper's body and how he has aged from 19 to 26, I don't think he is going to be one of the rare players that dominates deep into his 30s. There is no chance that I would risk the future of my franchise on a 10+ year contract for Harper.

The Stanton contract is not a "bad deal" for the Yankees (remember it is offset by the Marlins). It is roughly what Harper is looking for and there is a pretty easy argument that Stanton is a better player than Harper. No one knows how he will age, but he is a big, sturdy power hitter in a hitter friendly park. Even on the back end of his contract, he should be good for 25 hrs, 75 rbi as DH.
 
How did Arod contract #1 work out for the Rangers?

Three years; three finishes at the bottom of the AL West; losing records every year. If the contract was favorable, why did the Rangers trade Arod to the Yankees? They wanted out of the contract because he took up so much payroll that they couldn't build around him.

As for Stanton, the Yankees essentially are committed to pay $26 then $28 then $32 million for a part-time OF and part-time DH until 2028. Have heard that the Yankees would love to get out from under that contract, but no team is willing to assume it. If Stanton was on the open market now, there is no team that would give him a 10 year contract that averages $29 million a year.
 
Last edited:
There have been so many big money free agent busts that teams have wised up:

- Zach Greinke (D-backs can't dump his contract)
- Josh Hamilton
- Pablo Sandoval
- Jeff Samardzija
- Jason Heyward
- Carl Crawford
- Arod (twice)
- Yu Darvish

Even the Stanton contract in retrospect looks bad. A bad mega contract can set a franchise back for a long time. There are a lot more misses than hits.

Some of those aren’t even busts. Heyward has always been mediocre. It was just a dumb deal.
Harper with some of these values is an awful deal too. He barely hit over the Mendoza line for half of last season. I don’t think that’s going to get better...only worse.
 
How on Earth can anyone say ARod was a bust in TX? His OPS was over 1.000. His slugging was .610. He averaged over 50HRs/over 130 RBI/over 125 runs, won an MVP and came in second another year. He won three GGs.

That they came in last with HOF Pudge, steroid HOF Palmiero, the very solid Ruben Sierra. michael Young was an up and coming 2B. They also had Tex and JuanGon for part of the time.
 
The blueprint for success has changed. There is only so much money available. The recent past has shown that money is best spent in developing players that are controllable and affordable over the course of several seasons. This is especially true for small market franchises that can ill afford betting large sums of money on one or two players to make them competitive. The same money can be spent on development with a greater chance of success. This is not a novel approach. Branch Rickey instituted it in the 1920"s by developing a farm system still in use today. The realities of free agency have returned franchises to a system for success that has proven itself for the almost 100 years. It works.
 
The blueprint for success has changed. There is only so much money available. The recent past has shown that money is best spent in developing players that are controllable and affordable over the course of several seasons. This is especially true for small market franchises that can ill afford betting large sums of money on one or two players to make them competitive. The same money can be spent on development with a greater chance of success. This is not a novel approach. Branch Rickey instituted it in the 1920"s by developing a farm system still in use today. The realities of free agency have returned franchises to a system for success that has proven itself for the almost 100 years. It works.

I agree with this 100%. It’s why I am hoping that, no matter what the cost is, the Braves don’t offer either one of these guys.
 
This will be an interesting barometer for Trout in two years considering the age difference between Machado/Harper in 2019 vs. Trout in 2021. That said, you might see Trout get something more like 5/$225m than 8/$300m.
 
Im not willing to put Darvish 6/$126 in the same group as those others after 1 injury plagued year. JHey was a bad deal, but I don't think anyone saw him forgetting how to hit a baseball (18.7 WAR in the previous 4 years) - and one the Cubs likely wouldn't have spent so much on if they didn't get into a bidding war with the Cards - who offered more than the Cubs.
 
The blueprint for success has changed. There is only so much money available. The recent past has shown that money is best spent in developing players that are controllable and affordable over the course of several seasons. This is especially true for small market franchises that can ill afford betting large sums of money on one or two players to make them competitive. The same money can be spent on development with a greater chance of success. This is not a novel approach. Branch Rickey instituted it in the 1920"s by developing a farm system still in use today. The realities of free agency have returned franchises to a system for success that has proven itself for the almost 100 years. It works.

Exactly.
 
This will be an interesting barometer for Trout in two years considering the age difference between Machado/Harper in 2019 vs. Trout in 2021. That said, you might see Trout get something more like 5/$225m than 8/$300m.

Came to raise this question. Is his market going to struggle as much as it appears Harper’s and Machado’s have? Obvious answer is no because he’s far and away the best player in baseball, but who will be willing to throw $40+ a year at him?
 
Came to raise this question. Is his market going to struggle as much as it appears Harper’s and Machado’s have? Obvious answer is no because he’s far and away the best player in baseball, but who will be willing to throw $40+ a year at him?

The Phillies. He's local. If Trout gets to free agency, the Phillies would not be out bid.
 
Will they have the money to do so if they sign two of Manny, Bryce, Kimbrel, or Keuchel? Even if they do, they'll be extremely hamstrung to build the rest of the team - even with all the young guys on cheap deals. They'll still have to fill out the roster.
 
Will they have the money to do so if they sign two of Manny, Bryce, Kimbrel, or Keuchel? Even if they do, they'll be extremely hamstrung to build the rest of the team - even with all the young guys on cheap deals. They'll still have to fill out the roster.

Phils supposedly are saying they want Bryce, Keuchel AND Kimbrel - I still think they would shell out for Trout if possible.
 
It seems pretty hard to overstate just how much money the Phillies have. It doesn't seem like they need Kimbrel, but Keuchel and one of the two marquee guys doesn't preclude them from backing up the Brinks truck for Trout.
 
Yanks pick up Ottavino. At this point, after 5 innings of a starter you have Ottavino, Britton, Betances and Chapman - with Green in there somewhere, its a crazy good pen.
 
The Phils also had money when they gave Ryan Howard that absurb contract. Hopefully these next ones will tie them up for years like that one did.
 
Last edited:
Yanks pick up Ottavino. At this point, after 5 innings of a starter you have Ottavino, Britton, Betances and Chapman - with Green in there somewhere, its a crazy good pen.

Yankees have signed six free agents (including re-signing their own players). None has a contract longer than 3 years. Wise.

So far, only 3 FA have signed deals for more than 3 years:

- Corbin 6 years
- Eovaldi 4 years
- Kikuchi (the Japanese phenom signed by Mariners) 4 years

Just too much risk involved with long term contracts.
 
Back
Top