Baseball Free Agency 2019
 

Spring Training has begun. Pitchers and Catchers have reported.
Every day for the past month, I read the sports headlines on the www: Harper and Machado have still not signed.

And then as a footnote, nobody else has signed, because every team, player, agent and GM is waiting for the Machado / Harper signings to happen first, and set the market, and come off the board.

It is clear to me, that there is a new world order in baseball free agency, with a combination of analytics and the luxury tax having a huge effect. With regard to analytics, I believe that the GM's have finally figured out that they should not offer long term deals and big money deals, in the same contract. The A-Rod deal of 10 years and $250 million with the Texas Rangers is a thing of the past. The agents and players don't get it, or don't know it, or don't accept it.

Now, a player like Harper can get $30 million per year for 2 years, or he can get $25 million per year for 8 years. But he can't have both, and he can't have 10 years. [with the exception being a guy like Mike Trout might get both]

It's not collusion as the players and agents want us to think. And holding out and having press conferences to spout off about a potential strike the next time the MLB and union negotiate. Read my lips, Its what the fan who loves analytics knows, a team that hands out a 10 year max money deal might have a chance to compete for 2 years, but after that they will be saddled with the big contract, unable to improve, as the players skill diminishes.

Throw in that top athletes often get hurt, and some are able to come back from injury, and some do not. Some come back, as a shell of their former self, and not as the studs they once were.

I am a Pujols fan, and I am an Angel fan, and I will never forget what the analytics guys wrote when the Angels signed him. They will be lucky to get 2 good years, then at age 32, he will very likely begin to decline. At age 34 and beyond, he will no longer be in his prime, and will not be worth the kind of money they have agreed to pay.

Once Harper and Machado and Boras come to accept and understand the new dynamic, they will need to decide on which option they want. Money or years.

The second tier free agents, and lower tier, who are very good players, such as an Ace like Dallas Keuchel, or a catcher like Yasmani Grandal, also need to see how this is playing out. They need to decide if they want security of having a deal early in free agency, and will take a discount to get it. Or a hometown deal early in free agency, and will take a discount. Or a long term deal [4-8 years] and will take a discount. Or they can wait, with uncertainty, and potentially a need to scramble, and take a 1 year deal.

Only when Machado and Harper sign, at the last minute, will things open up for other guys. The Giants and Padres and White Sox, who are rumored to still be in the mix to get one of these guys, are not going to sign another player, while the big fish is the target. But when they don't land the whale, they may sign a couple of smaller fish.

I don't need analytics to tell me that signing a 27 year old to a 10 year $300 million dollar contract is a bad idea.

Grandal signed with the Brewers already.

[QUOTE=Ray27Ray52;14384022]I don't need analytics to tell me that signing a 27 year old to a 10 year $300 million dollar contract is a bad idea.[/QUOTE]

This. If I'm an owner and I'm handing out a contract like that, no way it should be guaranteed, right Pablo Sandoval?

Let's talk about the O's FA signings this offseason. ___________

Scott Boras is the blame for Machado and Harper still being unsigned. Too money hungry.

A lot of FAs did sign though. Only a few are still impacted by the big 2. Jose Iglesias and Moustakas mostly. Gerardo Parra got a new job today; Harper turned down a short term offer from the Giants.

Keuchel and Kimbrel left for Pitchers.

Everyone else just about is 30+

I think also that the owners have the fans on their side on this, too. Give Manny Machado $33 Million and try and raise ticket prices and a lot of fans will just say "Nope". Ditto for raising pay-per-view prices - which is where baseball revenue is headed in the cord cutting era - much less gravy revenue from people who don't watch sports but had to buy cable packages. Giving someone $25,000 just to play an inning of baseball, or $10,000 just to throw a single pitch - I think plenty of fans have concluded - that's enough. Those #s don't have to increase to infinity and beyond, perpetually.

[QUOTE=JackThree;14384095]Grandal signed with the Brewers already.[/QUOTE]

yes, I wasn't clear. He was considered the best available FA catcher, and he signed.

I meant to show him as an example of a guy who signed a short term deal, probably below his value, for the certainty of having a deal, and not waiting until the end of the summer and whenever Machado / Harper sign.

[QUOTE=Copeskey45;14384388]Scott Boras is the blame for Machado and Harper still being unsigned. Too money hungry.[/QUOTE]

Can’t stand that guy. I’d rather go with Jay-Z.

[QUOTE=Triple B;14384119]This. If I'm an owner and I'm handing out a contract like that, no way it should be guaranteed, right Pablo Sandoval?[/QUOTE]

good point, the Panda contract

and I agree and think the fans would be on the owners side, with regard to ending or limiting guaranteed contracts.

The NFL and NHL do not guarantee, and neither should MLB

As a fellow Angels fan, that Pujols contract really hurts and may end up costing us a shot of re-signing Trout as well. Granted, Machado and Harper are a much younger 26, but I think the Pujols / Hamilton experience that the Angels went through has rightly scared a lot of front offices.

[QUOTE=oldgoldy97;14384466]Can’t stand that guy. I’d rather go with Jay-Z.[/QUOTE]

MLB should ban Boras lol

[QUOTE=Copeskey45;14385249]MLB should ban Boras lol[/QUOTE]

Dont hate on Boras. The man is brilliant, shame on the owners/GMs for falling for what he says and demands

Seems like just yesterday that people were speculating Bryce Harper would be the first $400-$500 million player.

[QUOTE=abide;14384471]good point, the Panda contract

and I agree and think the fans would be on the owners side, with regard to ending or limiting guaranteed contracts.

The NFL and NHL do not guarantee, and neither should MLB[/QUOTE]

What possible world do we live in that people would side with the owners?

[QUOTE=abide;14383913]

And then as a footnote, nobody else has signed, because every team, player, agent and GM is waiting for the Machado / Harper signings to happen first, and set the market, and come off the board.



Only when Machado and Harper sign, at the last minute, will things open up for other guys. The Giants and Padres and White Sox, who are rumored to still be in the mix to get one of these guys, are not going to sign another player, while the big fish is the target. But when they don't land the whale, they may sign a couple of smaller fish.[/QUOTE]

The first part isn’t true, many top players have signed.

No team is sitting there saying “if we don’t sign Harper we will just get Adam Jones”. There won’t be a domino effect.

The players are trying to get sympathy from the fans they know they don't deserve.

Risk isn't free. In investing, people expect to get a better return on an investment with higher risk. Same thing should logically be true in baseball. Whoever takes on the risk should have the other numbers work in their favor.

Some players are claiming analytics and owners fears about the risk of the player getting worse are just ways to justify paying players less and have no basis in reality. If that's the case, Harper and Machado should happily sign for $30 million per year, no matter how short the contract is. If they were both looking for $300 million over 10 years and there's no risk, they should have no issues with taking $30 million per one year, right? I'm sure multiple teams would offer that.

Instead they are insisting on longer contracts. They know there is a decent risk their play falls off and teams will be less willing to pay them, so they want a long-term contract to force a team to take on that risk. That's fine and is what most players do, but they then should be willing to take reduced pay in exchange for that. Instead, they complain about collusion and how unfair things are even though the offers they've turned down show that they understand the premium for the party that takes on risk.

Bryce Harper also has the issue of his defensive play. He was horrible in the field last year. Some people claim that the sample size was too small and that he should play better defensively this year. I've heard some people claim that the owners are playing his poor fielding year up to justify paying him less unfairly less. If he believes that's the case he should sign a one year contract, play better in the field, and then sign a bigger contract next offseason when his fielding is less of a concern.

The players who are complaining about free agency think that the average fan has little knowledge of business, modern baseball statistics, and ability to think logically. Instead of being thankful that owners used to overpay guys like Pujols and Howard, they're trying to use flawed logic to argue that the owners should continue to overpay and that if they don't, the fans should get mad at the owners.

[QUOTE=13goyankees13;14385544]The players are trying to get sympathy from the fans they know they don't deserve.

Risk isn't free. In investing, people expect to get a better return on an investment with higher risk. Same thing should logically be true in baseball. Whoever takes on the risk should have the other numbers work in their favor.

Some players are claiming analytics and owners fears about the risk of the player getting worse are just ways to justify paying players less and have no basis in reality. If that's the case, Harper and Machado should happily sign for $30 million per year, no matter how short the contract is. If they were both looking for $300 million over 10 years and there's no risk, they should have no issues with taking $30 million per one year, right? I'm sure multiple teams would offer that.

Instead they are insisting on longer contracts. They know there is a decent risk their play falls off and teams will be less willing to pay them, so they want a long-term contract to force a team to take on that risk. That's fine and is what most players do, but they then should be willing to take reduced pay in exchange for that. Instead, they complain about collusion and how unfair things are even though the offers they've turned down show that they understand the premium for the party that takes on risk.

Bryce Harper also has the issue of his defensive play. He was horrible in the field last year. Some people claim that the sample size was too small and that he should play better defensively this year. I've heard some people claim that the owners are playing his poor fielding year up to justify paying him less unfairly less. If he believes that's the case he should sign a one year contract, play better in the field, and then sign a bigger contract next offseason when his fielding is less of a concern.

The players who are complaining about free agency think that the average fan has little knowledge of business, modern baseball statistics, and ability to think logically. Instead of being thankful that owners used to overpay guys like Pujols and Howard, they're trying to use flawed logic to argue that the owners should continue to overpay and that if they don't, the fans should get mad at the owners.[/QUOTE]

Of course the fans should get mad at the owners, who else would they get mad at?

Why should the players take all the risk? Why wouldn’t the team take on some of that?

I just can’t understand the “players should just take what they get and play” thoughts. These teams are making millions of dollars a year and in a lot of places still are tanking. It’s silly

If I’m a Philly, Padres or White Sox fan and my team hasn’t been relevant in a decade(Philly) or longer and we tanked and now have all these cheap high end prospects and Harper fits perfectly in my team I’d be pissed at the owners too

[QUOTE=Peties Army;14385518]What possible world do we live in that people would side with the owners?[/QUOTE]

OK, you pay $10 per game to watch so someone can get the first $500 Million contract. or the first $600 Million contract. I mean, otherwise, you are on the side of THE OWNERS. The year after that, it will be $11. That is the only way salaries can rise, forever and ever. Eventually, you will be the only one watching.

Give every player a Million a year, fans are fine with that. But they well understand that they are the ones being asked to pay more, more, more, so players can get more, more, more.

[QUOTE=Peties Army;14385518]What possible world do we live in that people would side with the owners?[/QUOTE]

I side with the owners on nearly everything.

[QUOTE=Ray27Ray52;14385706]I side with the owners on nearly everything.[/QUOTE]

It's possible that you are intellectually disabled.

[QUOTE=Ray27Ray52;14384022]I don't need analytics to tell me that signing a 27 year old to a 10 year $300 million dollar contract is a bad idea.[/QUOTE]

So true

[QUOTE=bavariancream;14384128]Let's talk about the O's FA signings this offseason. ___________[/QUOTE]

I agree this is the much bigger issue because top players are still going to get paid like top players.

The 3-9 million a year players are the ones getting screwed.
Until owners are givin a salary floor or rewarded for winning it’s going to get worse.

[QUOTE=base set;14385597]OK, you pay $10 per game to watch so someone can get the first $500 Million contract. or the first $600 Million contract. I mean, otherwise, you are on the side of THE OWNERS. The year after that, it will be $11. That is the only way salaries can rise, forever and ever. Eventually, you will be the only one watching.

Give every player a Million a year, fans are fine with that. But they well understand that they are the ones being asked to pay more, more, more, so players can get more, more, more.[/QUOTE]

And the owners get the rest? What about an agreement where players get a fair share and owners get a fair share? At the end of the day they are both right and wrong. Most fans because of our income compared to players feel like they are over paid. But the reality is players as a collective group are underpaid.

[QUOTE=Ray27Ray52;14384022]I don't need analytics to tell me that signing a 27 year old to a 10 year $300 million dollar contract is a bad idea.[/QUOTE]

So true