GatewayRedbirds.com

A Message Board Dedicated to Discussing St. Louis Cardinals Baseball!
It is currently May 23 19, 5:18 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 17 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

What would you do?
I'd sign Harper with Harper's contract terms 19%  19%  [ 5 ]
I'd sign Harper with Machado's contract terms 19%  19%  [ 5 ]
I'd sign Machado with Machado's contract terms 54%  54%  [ 14 ]
I'd sign Machado with Harper's contract terms 8%  8%  [ 2 ]
Total votes : 26
Author Message
PostPosted: February 28 19, 2:54 pm 
Offline
has a link from 538 to share
User avatar

Joined: December 31 69, 6:00 pm
Posts: 34586
Location: Chicago, IL
Assume you're a GM for a team and that all your players on the 40 man roster are average and no one in the minors is blocking their respective positions.

Which player would you choose? Which deal would you rather have?

Harper's Deal



Machado's Deal

Quote:
The agreement is for a record $300 million over 10 years, with an opt-out after five years and a partial no-trade clause.


Note: What the cardinals ownership should have done this off-season is outside of the scope of this thread. If you'd like to discuss that topic please create a new thread.


Last edited by Michael on February 28 19, 4:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: February 28 19, 3:02 pm 
Offline
Perennial All-Star
User avatar

Joined: April 20 06, 8:43 pm
Posts: 8394
Location: Please use blue font for the sarcasm impaired.
Machado/Machado


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: February 28 19, 3:05 pm 
Offline
Hall Of Famer
User avatar

Joined: November 9 06, 6:45 am
Posts: 19833
Location: a proud midwestern metropolis
The Harper deal is better by a long shot. He's got more upside and in the case that he realizes that upside he can't opt out. On top of that you're getting another three years of control for $10M per year which will be almost negligible in a decade.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: February 28 19, 3:16 pm 
Offline
Perennial All-Star

Joined: November 6 10, 10:58 am
Posts: 7112
Machado easy

He’s the much better overall player and if he starts to struggle def at SS or 3b, he can shift to 1b and most likely be an asset def there

Harper’s on his way to being a DH in a league that doesn’t have one (currently)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: February 28 19, 3:19 pm 
Offline
Hall Of Famer
User avatar

Joined: April 25 06, 9:48 am
Posts: 10752
Location: Appleton, WI
Leroy options for both Machado and Harper?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: February 28 19, 3:19 pm 
Offline
Everyday Player
User avatar

Joined: May 23 12, 3:16 pm
Posts: 358
cardsfantx wrote:
Machado easy

He’s the much better overall player and if he starts to struggle def at SS or 3b, he can shift to 1b and most likely be an asset def there

Harper’s on his way to being a DH in a league that doesn’t have one (currently)


The Harper deal really says alot about the liklihood of the DH coming to the NL.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: February 28 19, 3:21 pm 
Offline
Hall Of Famer
User avatar

Joined: April 25 06, 9:48 am
Posts: 10752
Location: Appleton, WI
I'm tremendously old school.

I don't see the value in signing any player to a contract longer than three years.

Injuries, life events, meteors...


Last edited by doe_boy on February 28 19, 3:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: February 28 19, 3:23 pm 
Offline
GRB's most intelligent & humble poster
User avatar

Joined: April 17 06, 11:25 am
Posts: 26875
If I had to choose, probably Machado/Machado. The opt-out is meaningless, because it cones after what should be his best years. Him opting out really saves you from the inevitable post-30 crash.

But in reality I don’t like either signing right now, because I think the next CBA won’t place such an emphasis on veteran deals. If all the cost-controlled rules change (as they should), and teams have to start paying younger players more, there’s going to be less payroll space to absorb these albatross veteran deals.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: February 28 19, 3:27 pm 
Offline
Perennial All-Star

Joined: June 5 06, 10:01 am
Posts: 9845
I can't fathom giving a player 13 years.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: February 28 19, 3:27 pm 
Offline
Hall Of Famer
User avatar

Joined: November 9 06, 6:45 am
Posts: 19833
Location: a proud midwestern metropolis
Quote:
But in reality I don’t like either signing right now, because I think the next CBA won’t place such an emphasis on veteran deals. If all the cost-controlled rules change (as they should), and teams have to start paying younger players more, there’s going to be less payroll space to absorb these albatross veteran deals.

If only the veterans of the MLBPA cared as much about labor as some of the members of this board do, they could drastically redistribute that 50% of revenue they get all the way down the line into the minor leagues, but essentially they'll have to skip a generation who feels like it's their turn to cash in.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 17 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Kincaid and 18 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group