The MLB Thread

Not surprisingly,  Keith Law hates the deal as much as he hated Prince's deal,  Howard' deal in Philly and Pujols' deal in Anaheim.  Too much money at the back end for too many years.

I did laugh at this though: "even if it implies that a free-agent version of Mike Trout would be worth the GDP of a small island nation."

Julian, wrote: so… You think it's going to make them fairly competitive but not win a title, or no…?

It going to take 5 years to a decade,  but I think they'll win the AL West before Seattle.

The Pirates were the 4th or 5th best team in the league last year,  but 4th and 5th were distant to the top 3 (BOS,  STL,  DET) . And unlike the Dodgers,  they couldn't spring the cash to upgrade their weaknesses via free agency. Houston  is going to have the same problem.

Hard to argue with this logic on why the Tigers should not have gone 10 years with a 31 year old:

"You could give him $35 million for three seasons [in an extension]," said one official, "and you would've saved yourself more than $100 million in risk. Hell, you could give him $45 million a year for three years, and it would've been impossible for him to turn that down – and you save money on the back end."

vansmack wrote:
If the Angels announce something next week (like I think they will)

The Angels will sign the paperwork on a 6 year deal tonight and announce it tomorrow.

Edit: only $144 million.  BARGAIN

vansmack wrote:

vansmack wrote:
If the Angels announce something next week (like I think they will)

The Angels will sign the paperwork on a 6 year deal tonight and announce it tomorrow.

Edit: only $144 million.  BARGAIN

That has to be the worst deal in the history of sports.  The Angels get 2 years of his free agency years for 140 million.  The Angels GM is the worst GM in the league by far.  He doesn't know how to not sign players to terrible deals for the team.  I wake up every day thanking him for turning the Orioles down. 

It's 3 years, not 2.

And he's arbitration eligible next season, where after Cabrera's deal, he was likely to make $25-$30 million next year and as much as $40 million in 2017.

2015 - $25 million
2016 - $30 million
2017 - $35 million

So that's $90 million the Angels were committed to.

So for another $50 million, they signed Trout for 2018-2020 for an average value of $18 million.  That's the definition of a bargain.

When the O's don't do the same with Machado and he becomes a Yankee, I'll remind about how good GM's and Owners handle once in a generation talents.   

yeah..to me it looks like a bargain…

Pretty soon it'll be $50 to sit in the bleachers.  There's your bargain. 

Shemp wrote:
Pretty soon it'll be $50 to sit in the bleachers.  There's your bargain. 

TV revenue is driving these salaries,  not ticket sales.  Your cable bill will go up at a higher rate than bleacher seats.

I need another stellar healthy season or two from Manny before I call him a once in a generation player…

Shemp wrote:
Pretty soon it'll be $50 to sit in the bleachers.  There's your bargain. 

that is true…it is getting pricey to go to games

vansmack wrote:
It's 3 years, not 2.

And he's arbitration eligible next season, where after Cabrera's deal, he was likely to make $25-$30 million next year and as much as $40 million in 2017.

2015 - $25 million
2016 - $30 million
2017 - $35 million

So that's $90 million the Angels were committed to.

So for another $50 million, they signed Trout for 2018-2020 for an average value of $18 million.  That's the definition of a bargain.

When the O's don't do the same with Machado and he becomes a Yankee, I'll remind about how good GM's and Owners handle once in a generation talents.   

The Angels will be awful with Trout.  How do you get 25 million for 2015. There has never been an arbitration award close to that.  Much less the ridiculous number you put up for 2017.  He has to be compared to other 4th year player none of whom are making half of that.  

If Machado goes I won't be mad as I am sure it will be the benefit of the team.  I would rather have a winning team without Machado than a losing one with him.  I can tell you this that DD would never give him an insane deal like Trout got. And what is worse is other players are going to use Trouts figure in their arbitration.  Angels idiot GM is hurting other clubs with stupid deal.

In 2016 the Angels will be spending 112 million on 5 players.  Add to them having the worst farm team in baseball and things will be really ugly for them.

vansmack wrote:

Shemp wrote:
Pretty soon it'll be $50 to sit in the bleachers.  There's your bargain. 

TV revenue is driving these salaries,  not ticket sales.  Your cable bill will go up at a higher rate than bleacher seats.

Very true, but ticket prices are also a part of the equation.

atomic wrote:
There has never been an arbitration award close to that.  Much less the ridiculous number you put up for 2017.  He has to be compared to other 4th year player none of whom are making half of that.

As usual,  you are ignoring certain parts of the CBA that pertain to this particular case.  It's called the "special accomplishments"  clause:

"This shall not limit the ability of a Player or his representative, because of special accomplishment to argue the equal relevance of salaries of Players without regard to service, and the arbitration panel shall give whatever weight to such argument as is deemed appropriate"

Essentially the player's representative can argue that the player's accomplishments are so unique as to demand comparison to players outside the designated group of comparable players.

The Players Association was chomping at the bit to test this clause with Trout.  MLB owners and GM's are praising the Angels for not letting Trout get to Arbitration.  Can you imagine if he had won the MVP this season and then gone to Arbitration?

James wrote:
I need another stellar healthy season or two from Manny before I call him a once in a generation player…

I agree.  I was being hyperbolic to prove a point. 

The entire Yankees starting lineup tomorrow (and they are their likely regulars) will be over the age of 30.  And their first pinch hitter will likely be 40.

atomic wrote:

vansmack wrote:
It's 3 years, not 2.

And he's arbitration eligible next season, where after Cabrera's deal, he was likely to make $25-$30 million next year and as much as $40 million in 2017.

2015 - $25 million
2016 - $30 million
2017 - $35 million

So that's $90 million the Angels were committed to.

So for another $50 million, they signed Trout for 2018-2020 for an average value of $18 million.  That's the definition of a bargain.

When the O's don't do the same with Machado and he becomes a Yankee, I'll remind about how good GM's and Owners handle once in a generation talents.   

The Angels will be awful with Trout.  How do you get 25 million for 2015. There has never been an arbitration award close to that.  Much less the ridiculous number you put up for 2017.  He has to be compared to other 4th year player none of whom are making half of that.  

If Machado goes I won't be mad as I am sure it will be the benefit of the team.  I would rather have a winning team without Machado than a losing one with him.  I can tell you this that DD would never give him an insane deal like Trout got. And what is worse is other players are going to use Trouts figure in their arbitration.  Angels idiot GM is hurting other clubs with stupid deal.

i know it's a different decade and a different ballclub, but DD was responsible for the manny ramirez lucrative contract.  i don't think he'd hesitate to pull the trigger on another huge deal again. 

Proud to live in the only state in the Union where Opening Day is a State Holiday (Albeit for totally different reasons, but I'll take it).

Play ball!  For 12 straight hours!

O's!!!

what great weather (minus wind..i think i have wind burn) for opening day