Harper Deal - 13 years $330 million
14,328 Views |
74 Replies |
Last: 4 days ago by Farmer1906
I hope the Astros never sign a player to a contract like that.
13 years? Lol.
He's got to have an opt out in there. Lower AAV than Machado.
the Phillies are nuts
Anyone else feel this is a better deal from a team perspective than arenado and especially Machado
ORAggieFan said:
He's got to have an opt out in there. Lower AAV than Machado.
Reports indicate no opt out. Full no trade also.
13 years and no Bobby Bonilla money. That's nuts. This is like buying a car on a 13 year note. Upside down forever on a depreciating asset.astros4545 said:
Anyone else feel this is a better deal from a team perspective than arenado and especially Machado
Will be a helluva battle between the Phillies and Mets for 3rd place in the NL East the next few years.
The Braves should be the class of the division for the foreseeable future. The Nationals lost their third best offensive player but added a frontline starting pitcher. Don't see the Phillies or Mets topping either.
The Braves should be the class of the division for the foreseeable future. The Nationals lost their third best offensive player but added a frontline starting pitcher. Don't see the Phillies or Mets topping either.
It is nuts, but it's nothing like buying a car, which as you said is a depreciating asset. Unless it's a classic, a car is never more valuable than the day you buy it. Harper is just entering his prime.mathguy86 said:13 years and no Bobby Bonilla money. That's nuts. This is like buying a car on a 13 year note. Upside down forever on a depreciating asset.astros4545 said:
Anyone else feel this is a better deal from a team perspective than arenado and especially Machado
This contract should get ugly towards the end, but he just turned 26 years old. Pujols contract was stupid because he was 32. If someone had signed him to a 13-year deal at age 26, they'd still be getting a bad deal now, but would have gotten a couple of MVPs and nearly a decade of all-star caliber of play.
What's more is if the annual value remains steady throughout like Machado's & salaries continue to skyrocket, it won't seem like such an awful deal 13 years from now. 13 years ago, the highest annual salaries were around half of what they are now.
I'm not saying it's not crazy to invest that amount of money over that lengthy of a term, but because of his age it's not the guaranteed awful deal everyone is making it out to be.
No trade and no opt-out clause
Agree with the previous post. (Err, two above)
10-13 years from now his salary won't seem nearly as high as it does right now in 2019.
And he's not a depreciating asset at this point. Nor when most of us are buying a car are we competing with others for the particular car we want.
10-13 years from now his salary won't seem nearly as high as it does right now in 2019.
And he's not a depreciating asset at this point. Nor when most of us are buying a car are we competing with others for the particular car we want.
however in 3 seasons, Harper has played in less than 120 games. He has an injury history.
and the obvious thing...he's playing in Philadelphia -- home of the notorious Philly fans. All of this could go south in a hurry if he has a subpar or injury-plagued season. Then both of them are stuck with each other
and the obvious thing...he's playing in Philadelphia -- home of the notorious Philly fans. All of this could go south in a hurry if he has a subpar or injury-plagued season. Then both of them are stuck with each other
Turned down 4/$180 woth Dodgers.
I would too if I got a guaranteed $330,000,000. We are talking about changing his great grandkids (or the next generation) lives with this type of money. And if invested wisely his entire lineage.ORAggieFan said:
Turned down 4/$180 woth Dodgers.
For fun. He will be making:
$25.38 million each year
$2.1 million each month
$70,512 each day
$2,938 each hour
All for the next 13 years. If he took a lump sum each year his annual salary would earn $1.27 million in interest at 5%.
Think about that kind of money. It's crazy. He would be dumb to not take it even if he gets stuck in crappy Philly.
$25.38 million each year
$2.1 million each month
$70,512 each day
$2,938 each hour
All for the next 13 years. If he took a lump sum each year his annual salary would earn $1.27 million in interest at 5%.
Think about that kind of money. It's crazy. He would be dumb to not take it even if he gets stuck in crappy Philly.
Sure makes all the players that tweeted about him not signing yet look ridiculous. If players go on strike their sport will die
Is Trout going to get a 20 year deal for 500 million?
I would have tried to front load it even more if I were the Phillies, but with the DH eventually moving to the NL he'll have a higher likelihood of staying healthy long term.
He's a career .279/31HR/91RBI offensive player. He's been well under that BA 2 of the last 3 years. He's also missed significant time 3 of the last 6 years, so I'm not sure you can bank on him just getting to or being in his prime. He MAY have passed it. In 2015, he hit .330 and hit 42 HRs. 20 mil for THAT may make sense but 75% of that output? Plus, he may not even be that.
You've got a (primarily) right fielder who, while he doesn't make many errors, also doesn't have many assists -- I don't know how that compares to other NL outfielders. His batting line is good but not irreplaceable. Just exactly what are the Phillies paying for again because I'm not sure I get this? Or am I just looking at this wrong?
To say this is nuts is like saying Trump has a few people that aren't too wild about him. Let's revisit this thread in 5 years.
You've got a (primarily) right fielder who, while he doesn't make many errors, also doesn't have many assists -- I don't know how that compares to other NL outfielders. His batting line is good but not irreplaceable. Just exactly what are the Phillies paying for again because I'm not sure I get this? Or am I just looking at this wrong?
To say this is nuts is like saying Trump has a few people that aren't too wild about him. Let's revisit this thread in 5 years.
If I was Harper and the Dodgers offered $45m/year for 3 years, I would have taken the offer. He would still hit free agency at 30 with enough time to sign one more big deal. He wouldn't have the record for largest contract ever, but he would for AAV by a pretty large margin.
Easy for me to say. I've never been offered a deal worth within $329.8 million of what Harper took.
You guys are weird, he worked hard and put in a ton of time to get to this point and a rich billionaire who wanted to spend "stupid money" decided to give it to this hard working young man and you guys are weirdly concerned about the salary. Be happy for the man, CEO's make this much and Bryce is much like a CEO here, he's the face of the franchise and one of the most popular players in the game. I don't know if the billionaire will get the ROI he wants or if he even cares, but the Phillies should be positioned to be pretty good for a while and the NL east looks like it should be a blast to follow for the next few years with 4 teams actually trying to win now.
Sometimes in order to get nice things you have to pay the big bucks. I think it's awesome that Harper wanted to spend the rest of his career in one city and hope that loyalty pays off for him.
Reminder, it's not your money, it's the owner's money.
Sometimes in order to get nice things you have to pay the big bucks. I think it's awesome that Harper wanted to spend the rest of his career in one city and hope that loyalty pays off for him.
Reminder, it's not your money, it's the owner's money.
What is the tax difference between CA and PA? 40mil in CA might not be worth 30mil in PA
AggieEP said:
You guys are weird, he worked hard and put in a ton of time to get to this point and a rich billionaire who wanted to spend "stupid money" decided to give it to this hard working young man and you guys are weirdly concerned about the salary. Be happy for the man, CEO's make this much and Bryce is much like a CEO here, he's the face of the franchise and one of the most popular players in the game. I don't know if the billionaire will get the ROI he wants or if he even cares, but the Phillies should be positioned to be pretty good for a while and the NL east looks like it should be a blast to follow for the next few years with 4 teams actually trying to win now.
Sometimes in order to get nice things you have to pay the big bucks. I think it's awesome that Harper wanted to spend the rest of his career in one city and hope that loyalty pays off for him.
Reminder, it's not your money, it's the owner's money.
I watch baseball and like to attend games. It's my money and if salaries continue to climb then my ability to keep watching will decline.
It's a great deal for Harper but I am concerned about the what future deals will look like.
I heard on the radio yesterday with people talking about how in 10 years it won't be a very big salary and all I could think was how are they gonna make salaries bigger. People aren't attending games at any higher rate and if they try to raise ticket prices too much, the attendance will drop. Only option is having richer owner, but I'm not sure that's gonna happen either.
wangus12 said:
I heard on the radio yesterday with people talking about how in 10 years it won't be a very big salary and all I could think was how are they gonna make salaries bigger. People aren't attending games at any higher rate and if they try to raise ticket prices too much, the attendance will drop. Only option is having richer owner, but I'm not sure that's gonna happen either.
I assumed, for most sports, TV revenue continues to be the largest source of revenue for these teams?
Just simple fact of inflation
Salaries now are bigger than salaries 13 years ago
Salaries now are bigger than salaries 13 years ago
Is he worth that much money? Maybe....BUT history shows in ten years or so the chances of him being an elite player is very slim.
Hell, even now one could argue he isn't even elite. Is he good to great, yes, but IMO he isn't worth that kind of cash. Most importantly he isn't worth being stuck on your roster for 13 years.
Hell, even now one could argue he isn't even elite. Is he good to great, yes, but IMO he isn't worth that kind of cash. Most importantly he isn't worth being stuck on your roster for 13 years.
Trout will be 29 when hes a free agent, coming off a season making $33mm.Frok said:
Is Trout going to get a 20 year deal for 500 million?
My guess is 10 years, $365mm
That is going to be a crazy contract he is going to get. Not to mention he looks like a fat bomb waiting to go off when he hits his 30'sBMX Bandit said:Trout will be 29 when hes a free agent, coming off a season making $33mm.Frok said:
Is Trout going to get a 20 year deal for 500 million?
My guess is 10 years, $365mm
How will your ability to watch games on TV change if salaries continue to climb? And I don't disagree that ticket prices might go up a bit, but ticket prices are a function of supply and demand. Tickets are expensive for sure but they are priced in line with what the market can bear. The contract of an individual player only affects ticket prices in that perhaps demand to come and see this player spikes demand for tickets and thus the prices go up. The owner can't pay for this contract by gouging fans at the ticket office.
Some of you seriously seem like you'd prefer some sort of communist system in baseball that artificially depressed salaries and ticket prices rather then letting the free market decide the value of these commodities.
Some of you seriously seem like you'd prefer some sort of communist system in baseball that artificially depressed salaries and ticket prices rather then letting the free market decide the value of these commodities.
If anyone tries to deny Trout isnt worth every penny of whatever insane contract he gets then you arent paying attentionAustinCountyAg said:That is going to be a crazy contract he is going to get. Not to mention he looks like a fat bomb waiting to go off when he hits his 30'sBMX Bandit said:Trout will be 29 when hes a free agent, coming off a season making $33mm.Frok said:
Is Trout going to get a 20 year deal for 500 million?
My guess is 10 years, $365mm
What's funny is they were talking 10/$400 before him having a bad year. 10/$330 would never have been viewed as that crazy, Phillies basically getting three years free.
Profits are way up in baseball and the Phillies shrunk payroll while rebuilding to make a move like this. It won't hamstring the organization by any means.
Profits are way up in baseball and the Phillies shrunk payroll while rebuilding to make a move like this. It won't hamstring the organization by any means.
Featured Stories
See All
SEC Round-Up: Dawgs facing possible playoff elimination this week
by Olin Buchanan
33:59
6h ago
816
Pick 'Em & Rip 'Em sponsored by PrizePicks: Week 12
by Matthew Dawson
14:58
6h ago
904
Assessing Earley's first signing class at the helm of Texas A&M baseball
by Ryan Brauninger
Tom Kazansky 2012
Number of football tickets A&M provided to t.u.
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
91