Blowout Cards Forums
super sox

Go Back   Blowout Cards Forums > BLOWOUTS HOBBY TALK > BASEBALL


BASEBALL Post your Baseball Cards Hobby Talk

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-21-2017, 01:56 PM   #101 (permalink)
Member
 
centereacan06's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Long Island
Posts: 18,212
Default

To be honest, I wouldn't even know what to do with the extra $50 million on top of $100 million. This is set-for-life money we're talking about. He better pray nothing happens to him.
centereacan06 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2017, 02:00 PM   #102 (permalink)
Member
 
JustinVerlander07's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: michigan
Posts: 8,184
Default

Also, the idea he's turning down only a potential $25 mil or so extra is absurd. The way contracts are headed if he's as good now as he is when he's in his mid-late 20s, he's getting a monster contract (like Harper, Machado, Trout, Bryant etc) are going to get.
__________________
Dan LeFevour PC 192/283
JustinVerlander07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2017, 02:01 PM   #103 (permalink)
Member
 
callou2131's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Centreville, Md
Posts: 3,459
Default

If we are bringing pitchers into the mix, do you think Ubaldo Jiminez regrets signing that 50 million contract with the Orioles. As was said, anything can happen. Lets also remember, he is basically a kid, and taking advice from someone who he trusts is smarter business wise than himself.
__________________
FAKE YOUR MOUTH! I LIFT BRO!
callou2131 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2017, 02:02 PM   #104 (permalink)
Member
 
RossOK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: NW Arkansas
Posts: 1,081
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedChapmans View Post
The perfect question, and no, none. (I was going to bring up Bumgarner because it's the best example of "regret" one could find, but I'm a Bumgarner homer so I usually try to stay away).

Why should he regret it? He's likely to sign a $300MM deal this year or next with SanFrancisco, and at the time he signed the contract, there was no guarantee he'd be worth anything in 2018. He decided to take $35MM (and two club year options) to secure his future, which he did. Then he went out, and crushed baseball for a handful of years and now he'll sign a big contract.

So he likely cost himself $50MM with his actions. Is there a difference between earning $400MM over the course of your career and $350MM? Again, the divide between those two amounts and $50MM and $100MM is astronomical. And we're talking about a Bumgarner contract worth HALF of what Lindor is likely to receive.
Not saying he regrets it or should, but don't you think he saw the contract Samardzija signed and thought "man, could you imagine what I'd be getting if I were a free agent this year?" Yes, he's very comfortable and did well for himself and is gonna end up ok because he performed very well. He didn't make the "wrong" decision because there is no right or wrong decision objectively speaking.

This all boils down to you being CERTAIN which is the "right" decision and anybody that doesn't share your insights is a moron.

Also, you shrugging off the difference between $400MM and $350MM like it's no big deal is comical.
__________________
Brandons, Buster and Bum
RossOK is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2017, 02:03 PM   #105 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Siesta Key, FL
Posts: 1,641
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RossOK View Post
Not saying he regrets it or should, but don't you think he saw the contract Samardzija signed and thought "man, could you imagine what I'd be getting if I were a free agent this year?" Yes, he's very comfortable and did well for himself and is gonna end up ok because he performed very well. He didn't make the "wrong" decision because there is no right or wrong decision objectively speaking.

This all boils down to you being CERTAIN which is the "right" decision and anybody that doesn't share your insights is a moron.

Also, you shrugging off the difference between $400MM and $350MM like it's no big deal is comical.
Also, I'm still waiting to see the confirmed details of this deal that Lindor supposedly botched.
coachnip13 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2017, 02:03 PM   #106 (permalink)
Member
 
callou2131's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Centreville, Md
Posts: 3,459
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by afrobandit View Post
So shocking that anybody would want to leave The Cleve.

https://youtu.be/ysmLA5TqbIY
Lmao! I just spent 4 days in cleveland, and I gotta say it was great. It was like a clean Baltimore but, without all the crime. Really enjoyed my time there.
__________________
FAKE YOUR MOUTH! I LIFT BRO!
callou2131 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2017, 02:08 PM   #107 (permalink)
Member
 
NeedChapmans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 17,102
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustinVerlander07 View Post
Also, the idea he's turning down only a potential $25 mil or so extra is absurd. The way contracts are headed if he's as good now as he is when he's in his mid-late 20s, he's getting a monster contract (like Harper, Machado, Trout, Bryant etc) are going to get.
?

If Lindor signed a 7/$100 today, he'd earn $21MM and $25MM the two years of FA Cleveland bought from him, while earning $54MM before hand.

Do you think Lindor is worth $50MM a year or something? What is it you think this guy would be paid in the two years he's losing FA access?
__________________
Addison - "Harry Potter isn't real, so how can I trust this video?"
NeedChapmans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2017, 02:09 PM   #108 (permalink)
Member
 
RossOK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: NW Arkansas
Posts: 1,081
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustinVerlander07 View Post
I would rip Lindor, but why should he take less than market value? So the owners can make more money? Nah
Exactly. Every early extension offer is a team hedging its bets, hoping to get a really good discount on a valuable player. So when a guy thinks he's worth more than they're offering, he's labeled a moron? It boggles my mind how many fans side with ownership over players, like the owners goal isn't to use as few resources as possible to maximize their profit.
__________________
Brandons, Buster and Bum
RossOK is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2017, 02:10 PM   #109 (permalink)
Member
 
JustinVerlander07's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: michigan
Posts: 8,184
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedChapmans View Post
?

If Lindor signed a 7/$100 today, he'd earn $21MM and $25MM the two years of FA Cleveland bought from him, while earning $54MM before hand.

Do you think Lindor is worth $50MM a year or something? What is it you think this guy would be paid in the two years he's losing FA access?
Early extensions are never suppose to end up even close to market value, I think they wanted more than 7 years.
__________________
Dan LeFevour PC 192/283
JustinVerlander07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2017, 02:13 PM   #110 (permalink)
Member
 
NeedChapmans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 17,102
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RossOK View Post
Not saying he regrets it or should, but don't you think he saw the contract Samardzija signed and thought "man, could you imagine what I'd be getting if I were a free agent this year?" Yes, he's very comfortable and did well for himself and is gonna end up ok because he performed very well. He didn't make the "wrong" decision because there is no right or wrong decision objectively speaking.

This all boils down to you being CERTAIN which is the "right" decision and anybody that doesn't share your insights is a moron.

Also, you shrugging off the difference between $400MM and $350MM like it's no big deal is comical.
Correct. Someone who risks $50MM - $75MM in earnings while their young, in order to secure an additional $50MM - $75MM after they've already become filthy rich is a moron. Undisputed. Well said.

With regard to Bumgarner, why should he care what Shark signed? Bumgarner would be in his last year of arbitration this year had he not signed the early deal, and the outcome is likely exactly the same. He's going to sign a $200MM+ deal this year or next, and he still signed a $35MM deal as a kid for security. So he loses $10M a season next year, and the year after (maybe, probably won't lose anything because SF will restructure) ... San Francisco offered him guaranteed life changing money knowing the odds of success for him were small, he took it, and will have risked very little to do so (if anything).
__________________
Addison - "Harry Potter isn't real, so how can I trust this video?"
NeedChapmans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2017, 02:14 PM   #111 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 31,242
Send a message via MSN to asujbl
Default

This thread is the literal definition of why they tell you to never mess with another man's money.
__________________
https://ohiosundevils.smugmug.com/
Browns/Cavs/Tribe/Buckeyes/Jackets/Devils
asujbl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2017, 02:17 PM   #112 (permalink)
Member
 
NeedChapmans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 17,102
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustinVerlander07 View Post
Early extensions are never suppose to end up even close to market value, I think they wanted more than 7 years.
I have yet to see any team buy more than 3 years of FA, and almost all of them buy 2. It's unreasonable for me to think Cleveland offered something outlandish, and then leaked that he rejected it knowing it wouldn't make them look good. 7/8 years is what this has to be IMHO.
__________________
Addison - "Harry Potter isn't real, so how can I trust this video?"
NeedChapmans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2017, 02:19 PM   #113 (permalink)
Member
 
JustinVerlander07's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: michigan
Posts: 8,184
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedChapmans View Post
I have yet to see any team buy more than 3 years of FA, and almost all of them buy 2. It's unreasonable for me to think Cleveland offered something outlandish, and then leaked that he rejected it knowing it wouldn't make them look good. 7/8 years is what this has to be IMHO.
We'll probably never know, I just think it's foolish to bash the player because the team is trying to save money.
__________________
Dan LeFevour PC 192/283
JustinVerlander07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2017, 02:23 PM   #114 (permalink)
Member
 
RossOK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: NW Arkansas
Posts: 1,081
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedChapmans View Post
Correct. Someone who risks $50MM - $75MM in earnings while their young, in order to secure an additional $50MM - $75MM after they've already become filthy rich is a moron. Undisputed. Well said.
Let me grab you some Tums. It must hurt to be so full of yourself.
__________________
Brandons, Buster and Bum
RossOK is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2017, 02:25 PM   #115 (permalink)
Member
 
NeedChapmans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 17,102
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustinVerlander07 View Post
We'll probably never know, I just think it's foolish to bash the player because the team is trying to save money.
Because the team has the leverage, and rightfully so. They're offering a contract for $100M guaranteed no matter the player that Lindor becomes. They should be given a discount for that kind of investment. When someone offers you hundreds of millions of dollars, regardless of performance, I would hope they're entitled to a little discount off current market value.

Cleveland is the one taking the risk here by offering the contract to Lindor. They're on the hook to pay him only another $1.3MM over the next two years if he loses it, gets hurt ... whatever. They're willing to take a 5 year / $98.7MM risk to secure a couple extra years of his future (and likely be in his good graces to sign him after that).
__________________
Addison - "Harry Potter isn't real, so how can I trust this video?"
NeedChapmans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2017, 02:27 PM   #116 (permalink)
Member
 
JustinVerlander07's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: michigan
Posts: 8,184
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedChapmans View Post
Because the team has the leverage, and rightfully so. They're offering a contract for $100M guaranteed no matter the player that Lindor becomes. They should be given a discount for that kind of investment. When someone offers you hundreds of millions of dollars, regardless of performance, I would hope they're entitled to a little discount off current market value.

Cleveland is the one taking the risk here by offering the contract to Lindor. They're on the hook to pay him only another $1.3MM over the next two years if he loses it, gets hurt ... whatever. They're willing to take a 5 year / $98.7MM risk to secure a couple extra years of his future (and likely be in his good graces to sign him after that).
Again, it's foolish to bash the player for not accepting a below market deal.
__________________
Dan LeFevour PC 192/283
JustinVerlander07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2017, 02:27 PM   #117 (permalink)
Member
 
NeedChapmans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 17,102
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RossOK View Post
Let me grab you some Tums. It must hurt to be so full of yourself.
Isn't that what he's doing? Signing no contract, the max amount of money he can make over the next five years is around $40MM. The least amount of money he can make is $1.3MM. He's risking a large amount of early money, to secure a (not as large) amount of late money.

Right?
__________________
Addison - "Harry Potter isn't real, so how can I trust this video?"
NeedChapmans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2017, 02:28 PM   #118 (permalink)
Member
 
NeedChapmans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 17,102
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustinVerlander07 View Post
Again, it's foolish to bash the player for not accepting a below market deal.
You say below market, but show me a single contract better for someone w/ his age and service level.
__________________
Addison - "Harry Potter isn't real, so how can I trust this video?"
NeedChapmans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2017, 02:48 PM   #119 (permalink)
Member
 
RossOK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: NW Arkansas
Posts: 1,081
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedChapmans View Post
Because the team has the leverage, and rightfully so. They're offering a contract for $100M guaranteed no matter the player that Lindor becomes. They should be given a discount for that kind of investment. When someone offers you hundreds of millions of dollars, regardless of performance, I would hope they're entitled to a little discount off current market value.

Cleveland is the one taking the risk here by offering the contract to Lindor. They're on the hook to pay him only another $1.3MM over the next two years if he loses it, gets hurt ... whatever. They're willing to take a 5 year / $98.7MM risk to secure a couple extra years of his future (and likely be in his good graces to sign him after that).
This is such flawed way to look at it. They already have the upper hand with MLB's messed up service time rules that benefit ownership exclusively. And you want to give them credit for offering to pay him closer to what he's worth (but still not what he's actually worth) because it'll save them money in the long run at HIS expense. They're not taking a $100MM risk because they've already gotten his performance at a SEVERELY discounted rate.

Your perspective is that owners are benevolent guardians doling out charitable allowances for players being good little children, ignoring the fact that the players themselves are the ones generating the revenue in the first place.
__________________
Brandons, Buster and Bum
RossOK is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2017, 02:53 PM   #120 (permalink)
Member
 
jmscoggin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: TX
Posts: 19,419
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RossOK View Post
You don't think Bumgarner ever has a second thought about signing his early extension?
Evan Longoria says hi.
__________________
I would ban you but I have no sway or pull here.

"That cat looks like a pillar of justice, a beacon of freedom, a symbol of equality. It is just fantastic".
jmscoggin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2017, 02:57 PM   #121 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 1,094
Send a message via MSN to jcmel323
Default

no way i will sign a contract knowing bryce harper and machado will change the market value in a few years. Both will have easily a 365-425 million contract.

In fact jason heyward sign a 8/184 million contract.

If indians are desperate, then send me a 6 year/120m. I'll sign that in a heartbeat...
jcmel323 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2017, 03:03 PM   #122 (permalink)
Member
 
jmscoggin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: TX
Posts: 19,419
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RossOK View Post
Your perspective is that owners are benevolent guardians doling out charitable allowances for players being good little children, ignoring the fact that the players themselves are the ones generating the revenue in the first place.
Funny that you call out his perspective while yours is equally fallible. Take Lindor off the Indians, imagine a scenario where no team signs him. How much revenue is he then capable of generating for MLB? The Indians though will still be generating plenty.

Without the owners having and running teams, there is no sport for the players to participate in. There will always be players. True, we want to see the best of the best and I'd rather watch someone like a Trout, Kershaw or Lindor than a guy they grabbed off the street but the players need the owners more than the owners need the players.

In truth, they are both better off together and we benefit from it. However, as much as the owners aren't "benevolent guardians doling out charitable allowances for players being good little children", the players aren't any more benevolent to use your excellent word. They get paid handsomely to hit a ball with a stick or to throw it through a strike zone. Few if any are willing to play at a discount for the greater good of the team.

As for the thread topic at hand, good on Lindor for betting on himself but I think he's being foolish. An extra $50 million for a person that already has $100 million isn't as life changing as having a few hundred thousand and getting $100 million. Ask Jose Fernandez' estate which they'd rather have.
__________________
I would ban you but I have no sway or pull here.

"That cat looks like a pillar of justice, a beacon of freedom, a symbol of equality. It is just fantastic".
jmscoggin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2017, 03:04 PM   #123 (permalink)
Member
 
NeedChapmans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 17,102
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RossOK View Post
This is such flawed way to look at it. They already have the upper hand with MLB's messed up service time rules that benefit ownership exclusively. And you want to give them credit for offering to pay him closer to what he's worth (but still not what he's actually worth) because it'll save them money in the long run at HIS expense. They're not taking a $100MM risk because they've already gotten his performance at a SEVERELY discounted rate.

Your perspective is that owners are benevolent guardians doling out charitable allowances for players being good little children, ignoring the fact that the players themselves are the ones generating the revenue in the first place.
My perspective is that of owner / employee relationship. If you want to fight the good fight for the employee; great. But that means nothing in this instance, because in few jobs in this country is a salary guaranteed 10 years down the road. But it is in baseball.

I could point to hundreds of different contracts in baseball that are awful for the owner, and I could point to a dozens of contracts beneficial to the owner; that's going to happen when you sign long-term guaranteed contracts. Some are worth the value, many aren't but they're all at the risk of the owner. All of 'em. Otherwise, the FA market would be open to every play, every year, and owners could just pay players 1 year salaries for what they think they're worth. That would be really run.

Lindor signed a contract w/ Cleveland when drafted. He has the chance to sign another one now. Any suggestion that Cleveland is taking advantage of him seems futile to me; they're offering him security now, to buy a small discount for two years later. That's reasonable to me.

What's unreasonable to me is Lindor (or any young athlete in the same situation) saying "no, I'll take my chances". I've yet to see one argument from anyone on here, supported with numbers to suggest the idea of passing up $100M now for the chance to make $50MM extra down the road. The only rebuttal is "you don't know him, you don't know his situation" and I'm of the belief that there is no argument good enough, no situation possible where the idea to pass on a 7/$100M contract make sense.

Unless someone can present one of course.
__________________
Addison - "Harry Potter isn't real, so how can I trust this video?"
NeedChapmans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2017, 03:38 PM   #124 (permalink)
Member
 
RossOK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: NW Arkansas
Posts: 1,081
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmscoggin View Post
Funny that you call out his perspective while yours is equally fallible. Take Lindor off the Indians, imagine a scenario where no team signs him. How much revenue is he then capable of generating for MLB? The Indians though will still be generating plenty.

Without the owners having and running teams, there is no sport for the players to participate in. There will always be players. True, we want to see the best of the best and I'd rather watch someone like a Trout, Kershaw or Lindor than a guy they grabbed off the street but the players need the owners more than the owners need the players.

In truth, they are both better off together and we benefit from it. However, as much as the owners aren't "benevolent guardians doling out charitable allowances for players being good little children", the players aren't any more benevolent to use your excellent word. They get paid handsomely to hit a ball with a stick or to throw it through a strike zone. Few if any are willing to play at a discount for the greater good of the team.
It's a symbiotic venture for all involved where both sides help the other grow the league and revenue to be shared for all. NC was coming at it that Indians were doing a Lindor a favor and he was "a moron" to turn it down so much money. To pat a team on the back for trying to maximize it's profit while castigating a player for doing the exact same thing is disingenuous.

And the whole "getting paid millions to hit a ball" thing is tired and overplayed. Is it their fault there are so many idiots like us that like to follow the sport? The money gets spent and has to end up somewhere. Yet so many fans hold it against the players if they have the audacity to want more than ownership's offer. Hell, even when club's overpay for guys, it's the player that gets saddle with the "greedy" label. Again, it just amazes me how many people side with ownership. I guess it's because it's easier for us to fathom somehow becoming a part of a front office than a player.
__________________
Brandons, Buster and Bum
RossOK is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2017, 03:44 PM   #125 (permalink)
Member
 
RossOK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: NW Arkansas
Posts: 1,081
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedChapmans View Post
The only rebuttal is "you don't know him, you don't know his situation" and I'm of the belief that there is no argument good enough, no situation possible where the idea to pass on a 7/$100M contract make sense.
Several people have said that maybe he doesn't want to be in Cleveland. That seems like a reasonable enough argument for me. Or maybe he turns it down and gets a 7/$120M offer. There's room for something besides "accept offer (good), reject offer (moron)" that you don't seem to be willing to entertain.
__________________
Brandons, Buster and Bum
RossOK is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:31 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO
Copyright 2013, Blowout Cards Inc.