That’s a laughably bad offer.
Why? AAV is comparable to other big contracts given recently to left-side infielders (Rendon $35M, Lindor $34M, Arenado $32.5M, Machado $30M). It takes him to age 31 where he can hit free agency again. Seems like a more than reasonable jumping off point, unless the Astros are supposed to offer nothing less than 10-12 years in the opening bid.That’s a laughably bad offer.
Yeah, it's one thing to say that it isn't an offer that Correa will take. But it's not "laughably bad"Why? AAV is comparable to other big contracts given recently to left-side infielders (Rendon $35M, Lindor $34M, Arenado $32.5M, Machado $30M). It takes him to age 31 where he can hit free agency again. Seems like a more than reasonable jumping off point, unless the Astros are supposed to offer nothing less than 10-12 years in the opening bid.
Of course it's an offer the Astros know he won't take. That doesn't mean it's their only/final offer or that they have no desire to keep him. It's a negotiation. When he starts getting offers from elsewhere, they'll see where they stand and adjust accordingly.He’s 26 years old. He led position players in WAR this year. He will get a contract far longer than 5 years and an AAV in the $40 million range, I’d suspect. Even if the AAV is in the same range, those guys all singed longer contracts. I don’t see an incentive for him to sing for “only” 5 years. This is an offer the Astros know he won’t take and it’s an obvious attempt to placate their fans by saying they tried to keep him.
Disagree, Lindor signed for 10/341 this spring and (arguably) is worse than Correa. I wouldn't have said 'laughably bad' myself but it is certainly an offer which they know Correa has zero chance of accepting, especially since he recently (re-)hired Boras as his agent.Yeah, it's one thing to say that it isn't an offer that Correa will take. But it's not "laughably bad"
This makes sense in the abstract but HOU has never operated this way. They have never offered a FA more than 5 years and I would say there is close to no chance they will get anywhere near the top bids on Correa. Which doesn't make them wrong, I would guess 60-70 percent of big money deals in the last 10-15 years end up hurting the team who signs them.Of course it's an offer the Astros know he won't take. That doesn't mean it's their only/final offer or that they have no desire to keep him. It's a negotiation. When he starts getting offers from elsewhere, they'll see where they stand and adjust accordingly.
So, you agreed with me completely. It's an offer Correa won't take, but you wouldn't use the term "laughably bad" to describe it.Disagree, Lindor signed for 10/341 this spring and (arguably) is worse than Correa. I wouldn't have said 'laughably bad' myself but it is certainly an offer which they know Correa has zero chance of accepting, especially since he recently (re-)hired Boras as his agent.
Because I think it’s a dumb term but if you asked me ‘is that a laughably bad offer or not for Correa under the circumstances?’, I would have to say yes. It’s not a bargaining position even, it’s way way low.So, you agreed with me completely. It's an offer Correa won't take, but you wouldn't use the term "laughably bad" to describe it.
It's a way of saying "we offered him 'more' than Altuve," while also telling him they don't value him enough to make a preemptive strike. Yankees will double it, easilyBecause I think it’s a dumb term but if you asked me ‘is that a laughably bad offer or not for Correa under the circumstances?’, I would have to say yes. It’s not a bargaining position even, it’s way way low.
Altuve’s deal was an extension when he still had two years to go, so not really the same thing.It's a way of saying "we offered him 'more' than Altuve," while also telling him they don't value him enough to make a preemptive strike. Yankees will double it, easily
Nothing is ever exactly the same as the other.Altuve’s deal was an extension when he still had two years to go, so not really the same thing.
So because the (desperate, dysfunctional) Mets signed a guy to a team-killing contract that sets the market?Disagree, Lindor signed for 10/341 this spring and (arguably) is worse than Correa. I wouldn't have said 'laughably bad' myself but it is certainly an offer which they know Correa has zero chance of accepting, especially since he recently (re-)hired Boras as his agent.
Good point about the CBA. Do we think that Correa or any of the top free agents are signing before there's a new CBA? Or more accurately, do we think any team is going to be signing a huge contract before the CBA? I would think they'd want to know where the luxury tax threshold/salary cap is going to fall before they over-commit to a potential cap-killer.So because the (desperate, dysfunctional) Mets signed a guy to a team-killing contract that sets the market?
Good for the Astro’s for not playing along. Sure, he may go elsewhere. C’est la vie. I appreciate them holding the line.
Paying one guy more than 1/7 of your annual salary budget (assuming you’ll go up to the luxury tax) when you have 25 other guys to pay is not the way to build a winning team. And to lock that in for 10 years? There’s no way that works out for the team.
And to do so when you don’t even know what the new CBA will look like? Fuggetaboutit.
I’d definitely let some other team eat that contract.
Glad it wasn’t us. Wanted no part of him.Javy Baez to the Tiggers for 6/$140.
https://www.yahoo.com/now/detroit-tigers-sign-shortstop-javier-142214324.html
This may not be written in stone yet. Many reports, probably all based on a Feinsand
tweet:View: https://twitter.com/Feinsand/status/1465678688280797184?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1465678688280797184%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fsports.yahoo.com%2Fmlb-tigers-ss-javier-baez-agree-to-6-year-140-million-contract-140955952.html