10 years 292 Million
He's 30 years old

Pujols and ARod welcome him to the club

He will be 31 in 3 weeks.

"He is a once in a generation player."

"He can do what no other player has ever done."

These are all things we heard about A-Rod, Barry Bonds, Josh Hamilton and Albert Pujols.

"He is defying the idea your performance diminishes with age."

That is the jest of what we heard about A-Rod and Bonds.

Pujols:

Season averages:
155G / 40.0 HRs / .328: Prior to joining LAAA
126G / 23.5 HRs / .275: Playing for LAAA

He is now 34.

Hamilton:
123 G / 27 HRs / .303: Prior to joining LAAA
151 G / 21 HRs / .250: Playing for LAAA

Soon to be 33.

Jury is still out, but neither look poised to return to prior glory.

And they have every reason to NOT do anything "stupid," ala ARod. The money is in the bank.

Cabrera will have $292M reasons to NOT do anything "stupid."

What are the odds that Cabrera wins the triple crown this season?

5%?
10%

The reason I find this interesting is that I can't remember a player ever having a better than "close to nothing" chance.

Andres Gallaraga and Larry Walker are two (in my mind) that went into each season with what I'd consider the "best chance but only if someone else has a subpar season." They'd be among the top favorites in one or two catagories.

Cabrera is actually among the favorites to win EACH catagory if you looked at each catagory independently.

Miggy is INCREDIBLE and and he is a great investment for 4 more years...but 10??!?!?

Baseball contracts are just insane

Keith Law's ESPN Insider article is pretty harsh on both the deal and the timing.

They could have done this next year after making sure he stays healthy this year.

The crazy part is that if Detroit hadn't paid him, someone would have. He is that talented, but 30M+ to a 31 year old bad bodied slugger that adds nothing in defense and base running is crazy.

This is what I put on the Free Agency thread:

That is insane to sign a player until he is 40 at 31mm AAV. Contracts in baseball keep getting crazier and crazier. At least the Dodgers are getting Kershaw at his prime, you're extending a guy from 32 to 40 and you don't exactly have a stocked farm system to keep bring up talent around him. In fact, Detroit has an awful farm system right now.

It is actually going to be through 41. A buddy of mine is a Tigers fan and was excited about the contract, saying he will just switch to DH once he is old. Is your DH really worth 31mm per at the end of the contract? Absolutely not. People will never learn. Detroit has a window of maybe 2-3 more years max anyway. They may lose Scherzer after this season as well, and have next to nothing in the pipeline. Any additions will have to come through FA anyway.

quote:

---

The crazy part is that if Detroit hadn't paid him, someone would have. He is that talented, but 30M+ to a 31 year old bad bodied slugger that adds nothing in defense and base running is crazy.

---

This is true though. But you let your opponents make that mistake, as tough of a pill as it is to swallow. He still had two years on his contract anyway. The timing is confuses me on this one...

What do you think the cardinals would have done with Miggy?

I think the Cardinals would have made a sizable, but much less crazy offer to Miggy, and definitely not with two full years remaining on the contract.

That way, when he does leave for a bigger offer, a la Pujols, you can turn to your fan base and not get hammered for letting the face of the franchise walk away for nothing. Then you sit back with your owner and the rest of the front office and breathe a sigh of relief that you're not going to be paying someone $30M+ at ages 36-41.

Why why why do teams continue to do this? Do all gms have Alzheimer's

quote:

---

Why why why do teams continue to do this? Do all gms have Alzheimer's

---

Cabrera's $43,195 per at bat sounds high, but the Tigers can afford it. The GM's are doing their job in making the owners a tidy profit. MLB team revenues continue to outpace team salaries.

Looking at the difference between MLB and NBA salaries cracks me up. Lebron James makes the same amount as Mark Buerhle.

quote:

---

Looking at the difference between MLB and NBA salaries cracks me up. Lebron James makes the same amount as Mark Buerhle.

---

True but
NBA endorsements >>>>>>>>>>>mlb endorsements

God I need to be a GM, you can get 3+ all star players for that money. Miggy is an incredible, HOF player. Can drive in runs with one hand on the bat, but he's older. And 10 years is ridiculous. Look at the mets after 04. Salary cap hell because of that Beltran deal. None of these end up being worth the money. The only 10 year deal I would sign as an owner/gm would be a player under 27 that has proved he is worth the money

quote:

---

Look at the mets after 04. Salary cap hell because of that Beltran deal.

---

Yeah... you might want to look at that a little deeper, yourself.

The Mets' woes have less to do with Beltran and more to with Made-Off, IMO.

2005 - $11.6M
2006 - $13.6M
2007 - $13.6M

2008 - $18.6M
December 2008 - Madoff arrested
2009 - $19.2M
2010 - $19.4M

Feds hit the Mets owners with a $1B lawsuit, of which they ended up settling for $162M, in March 2012.

I think I'd pucker with that. The Feds only bring cases they will assuredly win. The only question is how much the Judge will let you keep.

I mean he wasn't anywhere close to the money.. How much money was he worth per RBI/hit/HR? Not a lot…

i'm glad none of you misers are GMs. There's a reason why the oakland A's have won zilch with penny pinching and letting go of all of their potential franchise saving players

The A's are extremists. They have to do it the way they do it because their market sucks and they don't have the space to sign 210 million dollar deals. For them, their system puts the best they can on the field. To be successful you have to utilize your payroll in the most efficient way possible… Signing these 10 year deals does not do that.

quote:

---

They have to do it the way they do it because their market sucks

---

you know how many baseball teams are in ****ty cities? if cincinatti can pay their generational talent joey votto, the A's can pay whatever next talent they get.

quote:

---

i'm glad none of you misers are GMs. There's a reason why the oakland A's have won zilch with penny pinching and letting go of all of their potential franchise saving players

---

What has Anaheim, Texas, Detroit or Yankees won in the last decade spending hundreds of millions?


Answer one total championship

[This message has been edited by Mr.Bond (edited 3/30/2014 4:18p).]

boston also has spent hundreds of millions

so have the giants, phillies, twins, blue jays, mets, cardinals, etc

how many titles are we at now since 2004?

boston -3
nyy -1
stl - 2
SF - 2
PHL - 1

The white sox (77M) are the true exception when they beat the astros.

There is a direct correlation between sustained success in the MLB over the last decade and spending to keep your best players

The gigantic outlier is the cubs, who have spent tons over the last decade and have nothing playoff wise to show for it. literally nothing

You generally get what you pay for in the MLB over a long period of time (5+ years). You invest in your team and keep your best players or attract the best talent at reasonable rates, you will give your team a chance to compete. the Tigers HAD to sign him to a long term deal and while many deadpanned the move, it was the right move for them to make. They didn't just make up a number and handed it to him. It was a lot of analytics which said he should be worth between 200-330M of production over the next 10 years and i'm going to guess they took the number they hoped would be a happy medium. I hate 10 year deals, but this is a once in a generation hitting talent.

Hes also going to be 42 when the deal is expired…..