Quote:
Originally Posted by SackAttack
And this is where I point out that while the clueless pundits will claim that the Harper and Machado contracts mean free agency isn't broken after all, one of the greatest players of all time just signed what probably amounts to a lifetime contract rather than deal with the fuckery of teams going "nah, I don't really need one of the best players in the game unless they're willing to play for below market value."
Harper and Machado got theirs, eventually, but this was after industry talk about them potentially being $400 million players turned into "well they won't even get $300 million unless they're willing to play in San Diego and Philadelphia."
Trout's been breathlessly talked about as a $500 million guy for a few years now, and while this deal might just mean that playing in Anaheim > playing "at home" on a comfort level, it might also be Trout and his representation going "hey it's still the largest extension in baseball history, let's not risk teams engaging in a third (or fourth?) offseason of fuckery in two years."
|
MLB FA is clearly broken, but I don't think Machado and Harper are the best examples. Both were demanding outrageous $$$ and had pretty big warts. Trout and (unfortunately for Red Sox fans) Mookie Betts seem like much safer bets. Harper has 5+ WAR in only one of his seven seasons, Trout has put up 6.9 in all 7 of his, and 8.3+ in 6 of those. Machado is 5+ in 4 of his 6, but tops out at 6.6 which isn't in the stratosphere Trout and recently Betts are living in, plus he had his pretty disturbing comments during the playoffs that would give me a lot of pause if I was guaranteeing him money 10 years down the line.
If you compare baseball to basketball, DeMarcus Cousins saw money drying up and signed a 1 year prove it deal with a team he wanted to play for instead of sitting out through preseason and yelling why isn't anyone paying me X per year like Craig Kimbrel is doing. No question the teams are taking advantage of arbitration rules, but so many of these players also aren't adjusting their salary demands to what the market is saying. A max number of years (5?) per contract would seem to make a lot of sense next CBA as part of the concession for having less arb control and letting players reach FA earlier - either way there will be a section of players who kind of get screwed because they don't get to the market earlier and a glut of younger players show up when they do hit FA.