Jump to content

Morosi: White Sox interested in "both Machado and Harper"


Jose Abreu

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, turnin' two said:

I am all for front loading the deal to add some financial heft, but this seems batty.  Harper is great, and I'd love the Sox to sign him, but he isn't worth 50+ per season.  If he stays for the first 3 or 6 years,  it would be 3/160 or 6/315?????? That is insane.  It isn't worth it to the team.  You don't have to beat his suspected market value by 15 million per season.  In this scenario he would opt out after 3 or 6.  I would say likely after year 3, because he would still be 29 and would likely be able to command another 8-10 year deal, and if he couldn't command that deal, boy do you not want him at over 50 million for the next 3 seasons.  

The front loading is tricky with the opt outs (though remember the opt outs add value to the deal as well.  If they were doing something like this they would need to make years 1&2 attractive, 3 probably below average, then offer the opt out, then make 4&5 really attractive, with 6 below average.  Then make years 7-10 around AAV of the deal.  By doing that the Sox get some value out of years 3&6, and it should be looked at as if it were 2 separate 3 year contracts, and then a 4 year contract.  Harper gets 2 front loaded deals, and straight AAV on the back end.  So, if it is a 10/350 deal, something like 45/40/20 __OPT OUT__45/45/15__ OPT OUT__ 40/40/30/30.

That way Harper gets front loaded deals, therefore added value.  He still gets his opt outs, but the Sox get some protection.  They loading themselves up with risk averaging 50 million at all.  The AAV of the first 3 years is 35 million, though compared to a deal that is 35 across the board, it would add value, even more so compared to a backloaded or deferred deal.  The second 3 years averages the same.  The final 4 average to the same.  So the AAV would be 35.  But again, with the opt outs, you need to look at this as 3 separate contracts, with each being front loaded.  Would he opt out after 3, well, still maybe.  He would be 29, and could likely surpass 6/210 on a deal at that point.  I think, if you front load it more than that, you need to push the opt outs back.

My goal is for him to opt out in year 6 or 7. That said, I agree that you don't need to go that high on the numbers, but I was working with the number I got. Maybe something like:

45-45-40-/-55-50-40-/-40-/-25-20-15

Would be more palatable? That's 10/$375, which would still work out as the highest AAV in history (I think) while also reasonably assuring that your FA of choice (mine would be Machado) won't opt out after year 3, and will after year 7.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

There is realistically no amount of money that would cause me to flip sides.  I want a god damn whale.

Absolutely. I know this is far fetched, but if we woke up tomorrow to the headline, "White Sox sign Harper to record breaking 10 year, $480 million deal", I would be instantly excited. No part of me would be upset that we spent too much.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cubs are going to be among the genre of teams offering a short term contract, which I think will be valuable only if harper does not see the high end long term money he is seeking.

edit: this is pure speculation on my part, I am not able to listen to what bernstein is saying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, fathom said:

I’m shocked :)

I still can’t believe that people think Theo signed Darvish, Chatwood and Hamels to only put himself in a position to not be a player in this market.

They certainly appear to have hardest financial road of the contenders that may buy. Their expected payroll is what, like 208 mill? This would likely push them to 240 ish range. Which, depending on the deal, could put them into huge taxes in years 2-3 of deal.

So it will be hard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Sockin said:

I honestly feel like the Cubs dont give a crap about the luxury tax and have a ton of money to spend. 

I think cubs will spend a lot while contenders, but when even the yankees, dodgers and red sox have shown that this latest luxury tax is a meaningful deterrent, I tend to believe no team is immune.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/16/2018 at 9:47 AM, Sockin said:

I honestly feel like the Cubs dont give a crap about the luxury tax and have a ton of money to spend. 

Ricketts has said he does not want to go into the Luxury Tax penalty. The only way they can do that and sign Harper is to get someone to take a number of their bad deals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

The Sox are like Iowa trying to recruit against Kentucky and Duke. They will be all polite and say they really love your program, and the direction it is going, but will never pick you.

Yet in this case, we have no evidence at all that Bryce and Manny even like the organization. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How many contracts do the Cubs have coming off the books in the next few years? Off the top of my head 1 more year of Zobrist and Q, 2 more years of Lester and Chatwood for sure. I think they move on from Russell personally saving a few million. Schwarber I also think is a trade candidate that will save a few mill. They may be willing to go over for a couple of years. Who knows.

Edited by soxfan2014
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...