OT: Machado to the Padres 10 Yr/$300M

[Danzz]

I would love to see a SS come from down under and nail that punk in the head.

 

[Towney007]

I'm not sure how my comment would translate to Manny Machado sexually molesting me?

It's a pretty clear point. Why believe your post when you fought even harder that Sandoval's weight wasn't an issue and that he'd make a comeback?

You don’t have to believe anything you don’t want to believe. It’s the internet.

As for Pablo - my point was that he wasn’t bad *because* he was fat. He lost a lot of weight not too long after that. And guess what! He still sucked!

 

[Deepster]

You don’t have to believe anything you don’t want to believe. It’s the internet.

As for Pablo - my point was that he wasn’t bad *because* he was fat. He lost a lot of weight not too long after that. And guess what! He still sucked!

I also don't have to believe your post is enough explanation for giving 300,000,000 dollars to a guy with 1 season hitting .300 or more and one season of 100+ RBI's.

 

[the Q]

You don’t have to believe anything you don’t want to believe. It’s the internet.

As for Pablo - my point was that he wasn’t bad *because* he was fat. He lost a lot of weight not too long after that. And guess what! He still sucked!

Guys with his mass and weight had awful aging track records. Fangraphs has an awesome article about it after he signed

 

[whaler11]

What's dumb about it? Because it's long? Or a lot of money?

This isn't a contract that you're giving to a guy at 30 and Davis was like... 30/31 with a sky high K% to boot.

He's going to be in the prime of his career for literally half of the deal. He's younger than Aaron Judge and Kris Bryant. He's roughly going to be the 10th best position player in baseball this coming year according to Steamer - which plops him right between Yelich and Bregman.

When you look at the numbers and his projections, he should be worth about 38-39 WAR over the course of the deal, which makes him worth it AND he'll be 36 when it's finally up.

IF you look at the downside of the deal and look at everyone comparable to Machado since 1950... and they average around 30 WAR or so. Great players usually tend to stay great for a while and Machado is a really great player. His historical comps are Adrian Beltre, Ron Santo and Andruw Jones. Ken Griffey Jr, Cal Ripken and Bryce Harper are also in his top 10. Josh Donaldson and Nolan Arenado are both his most comparable bats and they're older.

He's at a position that's got less positional depth than any other in baseball currently, so there's a premium to that.

Plus the Padres have a good farm system full of club-controlled guys who are likely to perform at a high level without cost much. This gives them the flexiblity to invest in other areas of their team.
Plus there's an opt out after year 5, so there's a good chance he's not in town past that.

So it puts them into contention for the forseeable future, with an escape hatch after 5 years if everyone holds up their end of the deal and even if he opts in, Hosmer's salary goes from $21 million to $13 million and Myers' money is off the books entirely by then. That money basically pays off the back end of the contract, assuming its not front loaded.

It's a great deal.

in theory the value of a marginal win increases over the decade as well - but that may not be the case anymore since anyone past arb is required to retire it looks like

 

[Towney007]

Guys with his mass and weight had awful aging track records. Fangraphs has an awesome article about it after he signed

You’re not wrong.

But, Pablo wasn’t bad because of that. He was bad because he was bad. Also, I don’t think anyone even Pablo pessimists could have seen Pablo being *as bad* as he ended up being especially in year one - which was historically bad. And at like 28 years old. Like aging curves and all - but he was 2 years from 30. Expecting a bounce back in year two isn’t crazy (and by bounce back I don’t mean being good - I mean being not atrocious), especially when there was literally nowhere to else for him to go but up.

But alas just when you think you’ve seen everything... lol

 

[Guapo]

in theory the value of a marginal win increases over the decade as well - but that may not be the case anymore since anyone past arb is required to retire it looks like

We need to expand our thinking when it comes to an athlete’s value in contract discussions. This is not just about WAR or marginal wins or any other on the field performance.

It is also about what an athlete is worth to the franchise. What does a Harper or Machado do for a team’s TV ad revenue, franchise value and brand equity (and the brand equity of the team’s sponsors)?

 

[methodology]

Not sure even Machado or Harper will help merchandise sales when they return to brown unis in 2020

 

[Towney007]

I also don't have to believe your post is enough explanation for giving 300,000,000 dollars to a guy with 1 season hitting .300 or more and one season of 100+ RBI's.

It’s because through his age 25 season, there’s only been 30 players who’ve ever played the game through that age who’ve generated more WAR.

Also hard to knock in a ton of RBIs when you play for the Orioles and hit .300 when people pitch around you constantly becaose everyone else in the lineup is terrible.

 

[Towney007]

We need to expand our thinking when it comes to an athlete’s value in contract discussions. This is not just about WAR or marginal wins or any other on the field performance.

It is also about what an athlete is worth to the franchise. What does a Harper or Machado do for a team’s TV ad revenue, franchise value and brand equity (and the brand equity of the team’s sponsors)?

FWIW I’m pretty sure the Padres just re upped their TV deal.

 

[ConnHuskBask]

That really wasn't a good piece in favor of those long monster contracts.

Which deals are you going to argue against?

Besides Ellsbury and the latter part of Arod part II (which nobody would have foresaw the steroid suspension). They were all very good to great deals.

 

[storrsroars]

That really wasn't a good piece in favor of those long monster contracts.

In looking at monster contracts signed in the 2000s, it appears to me that there was decent value to be had in the first decade of this century, but these past 10 years have been mostly horrible for long term deals with AAVs of $20mill+.

If you look at some of the ones from the early 2000s, a number of them paid off handsomely: Randy Johnson, Barry Bonds, Chipper Jones, Carlos Delgado, Carlos Beltran, Gary Sheffield, Greg Maddux and Ichiro all delivered substantial surplus value >40% of their largest contract deals (Big Unit delivered 137% return). The only significant busts I can think of were Griffey Jr., Johan Santana, and Pedro's 2005 deal.

It seems GMs are simply making worse choices on who to extend and how much to pay. Or players are declining a lot faster than they used to.

 

[storrsroars]

Which deals are you going to argue against?

Besides Ellsbury and the latter part of Arod part II (which nobody would have foresaw the steroid suspension). They were all very good to great deals.

In putting pieces together for what's already a championship-level team, sure, you can make that case. In a vacuum, not so much. A small market team that wasn't already set up to seriously compete for a championship would not have benefited as much from signing most of those guys at the money they got from the Yankees.

 

[FlippinCrazy!]

I also don't have to believe your post is enough explanation for giving 300,000,000 dollars to a guy with 1 season hitting .300 or more and one season of 100+ RBI's.

$300M to probably the best combination of age/talent to come around in free agency in a very long time. Granted, there will be more like him with all the young players coming up these days, but I think this a great deal. In 2 the years, when there is no luxury tax, how much money do you think a Machado caliber player will be getting? Also don’t have to give up a compensation pick for him like you would with Harper.

And yes he’s only had one season batting 300 and one with 100 rbis. That’s completely irrelevant. He’s batted close to 300 and 100 rbis almost every year in a bad lineup and now he’s entering his prime. Talent wise, teams see him as at least a consistent 300, 30 home run, and 100 rbi player with plus defense, and really that’s his floor.

 

[ConnHuskBask]

In putting pieces together for what's already a championship-level team, sure, you can make that case. In a vacuum, not so much. A small market team that wasn't already set up to seriously compete for a championship would not have benefited as much from signing most of those guys at the money they got from the Yankees.

Whether the team should have signed the player isn't really pertinent to whether the individual performed at foreseeable levels throughout the deal. The point was that signing players to long term contracts usually ends up poorly due to performance, injuries, etc. and I think that's generally a misnomer.

Sure, you have horrible deals like the Albert Pujols deal, Chris Davis, etc., but there are also a lot more examples of where signing a player to 6+ years at huge money was a great team for the team.

 

[Deepster]

$300M to probably the best combination of age/talent to come around in free agency in a very long time. Granted, there will be more like him with all the young players coming up these days, but I think this a great deal. In 2 the years, when there is no luxury tax, how much money do you think a Machado caliber player will be getting? Also don’t have to give up a compensation pick for him like you would with Harper.

And yes he’s only had one season batting 300 and one with 100 rbis. That’s completely irrelevant. He’s batted close to 300 and 100 rbis almost every year in a bad lineup and now he’s entering his prime. Talent wise, teams see him as at least a consistent 300, 30 home run, and 100 rbi player with plus defense, and really that’s his floor.

And you assume the Padres lineup will be good enough to protect him the next 3-5 years.

 

[methodology]

In looking at monster contracts signed in the 2000s, it appears to me that there was decent value to be had in the first decade of this century, but these past 10 years have been mostly horrible for long term deals with AAVs of $20mill+.

If you look at some of the ones from the early 2000s, a number of them paid off handsomely: Randy Johnson, Barry Bonds, Chipper Jones, Carlos Delgado, Carlos Beltran, Gary Sheffield, Greg Maddux and Ichiro all delivered substantial surplus value >40% of their largest contract deals (Big Unit delivered 137% return). The only significant busts I can think of were Griffey Jr., Johan Santana, and Pedro's 2005 deal.

It seems GMs are simply making worse choices on who to extend and how much to pay. Or players are declining a lot faster than they used to.

You left off mike Hampton

 

[methodology]

And you assume the Padres lineup will be good enough to protect him the next 3-5 years.

Absolutely. They have a nice core with help in the very near future

 

[FlippinCrazy!]

And you assume the Padres lineup will be good enough to protect him the next 3-5 years.

Yup, Padres are close to a playoff team this year and will be very good the following years. Machado is the perfect signing for the Padres right now

 

[storrsroars]

You left off mike Hampton

He should've switched to become a position player.

Yeah, I was working off top of my head when thinking about that... there are others for sure - Vernon Wells, Carl Crawford, Josh Hamilton, Barry Zito... I'm working on compiling as many $100 mill+ contract players as I can find to look for trends.

Fun fact - Kobe Bryant's largest contract was only $600K more than Alfonso Soriano's.

 

[Deepster]

Yup, Padres are close to a playoff team this year and will be very good the following years. Machado is the perfect signing for the Padres right now

I really don't care either way whether they do or they don't. To me, it seems like they're banking on their farm system blossoming successfully and quickly. And, I'm admittedly against these monster contracts so I'm just not sure I'd tie myself in on him for the length and amount. We will certainly see.

One thing is for sure. He's in the right market if he doesn't feel like hustling up the line here or there.

 

[Dream Jobbed 2.0]

Can’t believe Pujols is still farting around on his massive deal. Dude can barely walk.

 

[FlippinCrazy!]

I really don't care either way whether they do or they don't. To me, it seems like they're banking on their farm system blossoming successfully and quickly. And, I'm admittedly against these monster contracts so I'm just not sure I'd tie myself in on him for the length and amount. We will certainly see.

One thing is for sure. He's in the right market if he doesn't feel like hustling up the line here or there.

Well I mean they have the number 1 farm system headlined by an almost sure fire star in tatis jr. And when you sign Machado to at least 5 years guaranteed, they’re not exactly rushing anyone.

How else would you expect a team to get good? Sign a bunch of mediocre free agents? That sure panned out well for the Mets and giants these past few years

 

[Towney007]

Whether the team should have signed the player isn't really pertinent to whether the individual performed at foreseeable levels throughout the deal. The point was that signing players to long term contracts usually ends up poorly due to performance, injuries, etc. and I think that's generally a misnomer.

Sure, you have horrible deals like the Albert Pujols deal, Chris Davis, etc., but there are also a lot more examples of where signing a player to 6+ years at huge money was a great team for the team.

The big difference here though - is Machado is 26. Most players don't play MLB until they're 26. He's been kicking around for a while now.

The majority of big money deals are usually dolled out to old farts. Pujols was 32. Davis - given his actual profile - should NEVER have been given that deal. Ever. High K% guys almost universally fall off a cliff at 32/33 (Hamilton, etc). They signed him at 30. Robinson Cano got his deal with the Mariners at 31. Price got his at 30.

So for a frame of reference, Machado's opt out is at that age after 5 years.

It's literally a completely different context. This would be like someone giving Cano 5/$150 (or less) in his walk year. And everyone would have been fine with that.

 

[navery12]

Are Machado and Harper really 2 of the best 5 players in baseball? They are lifetime .280 hitters.

Maybe not top 5 locks, but absolutely top 10 and in consideration with the guys for top 5