- Oct 20, 2015
Depending on opt outs, this is a long term deal I have no problem with. He’s a bona fide franchise guy
I'm conflicted. In a vacuum, sure. But he's not even arb eligible until next year. What would those three years have cost otherwise?24M/year doesn’t seem bad at all
We will have to see the breakdown per year, but with the signing bonus, he's going to be making more up front. That is a major benefit as well.Assuming he stays himself (no injuries, no unexpected decline), this would have been how much he would have earned without this deal over the next 14 years:
Year 1: 0.55m
Year 2: 1st year arb: 12m
2nd year arb: 22m
3rd year arb: 30m
Year 5-14 (ages 26-35): 35m/year: total 350m
Arb estimates I added ~10% to Mookie’s.
So he traded a chance at ~420m for a guaranteed 340m today. IIRC fangraphs did a study that the discount rates for long-term deals are around 30-40% (can’t find the article), so it looks like Tatis came out ahead based on that.
I love Tatis Jr. but this was along the lines of my first thoughts upon reading about the contract. He's great. He should be great for a long time. But there's still a lot of risk for the Padres here. Hope it works out.
True, but to be fair, their bats were not nearly comparable to what Tatis, Jr. has accomplished already, so that should be added for perspective. He has another level of potential and ability than those two.
I know this talking point will endure forever, but the Red Sox tried to do a deal like this with Betts and he wasn't interested. Bogaerts was, and so they got it done. If Devers is interested, they'll get that done, too. Locking your young stars up to long-term deals as early in their careers as possible is different than paying market rate for impending free agents. Yada yada yada.Lol what a crazy contract. Meanwhile the Sox continue to lose the heart of their team while signing bit players to bit parts.
Not trying to pick on you, I've just seen it a lot on the board lately. Sorry if I was harsh. Someone else replied to my post too. So 2 of the previous 32 posts (all on this page) already referenced the same fact.Missed your post. Is self-flagellation pennace enough, or would you prefer I go for full-on self-immolation?
The numbers, raw and final, are impressive, and he's young enough for this to grab all of his prime years.His actual numbers were not just good, but his underlying numbers were incredible, too. I have questions about the Padres finances, but if the Red Sox had an opportunity for that contract, I'd do it 100 times out of 100.
He has been absolutely elite for 629 PA as a 20-21 year old in MLB. The 154 career OPS+ is incredible. Mookie Betts has only once surpassed that (his age 25, 2018 season: 186 OPS+, career 135 OPS+). I honestly think he has been so good that the sample size becomes less worrisome.The numbers, raw and final, are impressive, and he's young enough for this to grab all of his prime years.
That said, I'm not sure I do it.
He hit very well in the minors, but at the end of the day he's a guy who has played half a MLB season at age 20, and a Covid-truncated season at age 21. Total MLB games: 143. In 2019, he missed 30 days with a strained hamstring, and was shut down in August with a stress reaction in his lower back. He only played 88 games in the minors in 2018, so I wonder if there's an injury involved (but maybe not - he was only 19 in AA!)
Longoria? Initially signed a six year deal for $17.5M with three club options less than a week after he was first called up. With a year plus those options remaining, they picked up all the options ($30M) and added a six year extension for $100M with a club option for a seventh year ($13M). So all told, without sniffing arbitration or free agency, he got 15/147.5 with a possibility of it being 16/160.5. The Rays traded him after year 10 of that 15 year deal, right as the second extension kicked in and before his 10/5 rights kicked in (so he had no trade protections).I'm trying to think of examples of contracts like these (pre-arb long-term extensions) that have backfired spectacularly for the team. Most of the really bad contracts that come to mind are guys who had reached or neared free agency -- Cabrera, Heyward, Shin-Soo Choo. Rougned Odor might be a minor example. Ryan Braun? I wonder if Arenado qualifies as a bad contract -- but even if he does, it's only because of the opt-out that forced their hand in the trade.
Well, yeah, if you could guarantee above-market returns with no risk every single year, deferring payment on the money to invest it makes sense. The problem is that there is no such thing as guaranteed above-market returns with no risk and the Wilpons should have known better.The Bonilla thing is kind of funny but the idea that the Mets are still paying him for nothing totally wrong. And at the time the deferral made sense for the Mets. Deferred money isn't necessarily a bad thing. If Madoff didn't steal their money they would've made out bigly on the deal.