- This topic has 668 replies, 37 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 2 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
At best the Reds might jump from fifth to fourth in the NL Central. Anything beyond that I’m just not seeing it.
Jon Heyman mentioned on MLB TV last night that he thinks the Harper sweepstakes will come down to between the Dodgers and Cubs and at this point he gives the edge to the Cubs.
I wonder if anyone has any idea. I just read a Joel Sherman article in the NY Post in which he says he believes one of the two (Harper and Machado) will end up in Philly and the other on the White Sox.
https://nypost.com/2018/12/26/manny-machado-bryce-harper-are-staring-at-same-money-decision/
Here is the link I referred to earlier. Yes, it is a guessing game.
https://www.nbcsports.com/chicago/cubs/heyman-cubs-more-likely-dodgers-look-bryce-harper
I have this vivid vision of Joey, Suarez, Puig and Scooter wreaking absolute havoc on cub pitching in Wrigley this year.I would bet the ranch on Cincy besting the cubbies in head-to-head 2019 play.
Multiple sources have said that the Cubs are not going to spend what it would take to sign Harper because their ownership does not want to go that far past the luxury tax threshold. Could this story be a ploy by Boras to make the Dodgers nervous so that they meet his demands?
No telling, mud. One story out of Chicago had Theo asking Boras to give them time to clear salary to sign Harper.
Just my guess about this part, but the Cubs probably would not make all those moves unless Boras would agree ahead of time to their offer.
The Dodgers could do it like they did because they just dumped guys who were leaving next year anyway, and there are still other guys on the free agent market they could add instead of Harper. My guess is no matter which way the Dodgers go – Harper or not – they will have as good or better team in 2019.
Epstein is much more aggressive by nature than Friedman is, especially when it comes to big free agent contracts. It wouldn’t surprise me to see the Cubs swoop in and do this deal if Theo can convince the Ricketts family to pay for it.
They are really far over the tax due to signing bonus penalties. I have them at $205M in salary but the luxury tax hit is like $5M more + $16M in extra spending (40-man, benefits) for a total of $226M.
The thresholds are 206 – 226 – 246 so my initial guess is that the 226 is the “limit”. Any Harper deal, no matter the manipulations would affect the Lux tax hit the same as an AAV, which is looking like $35M/year most likely.
That would mean Theo/Hoyer would have to clear $35M to make it work under the $226M threshold.
I suppose the Cubs could move Zobrist ~14M (a mistake) and Quintana ~10.5M (also not a positive). Those two look like the best options at clearing salary. Everyone else on the roster looks difficult to move because they are worth way more than their salary (Contreras, Bryant, Rizzo) or are way over-payed (Heyward, Darvish, Chatwood). Those two plus dumping some bullpen pitchers like Cishek or Strop could work, but then, what’s the point?
They are really handicapped after paying Kinzler 5M, Duensing 3.5M, Chatwood 12.5M, and Morrow 9M and basically getting nothing of value there. At least Heyward can actually be put in the game.
Just a quick question for the Bryce Harper advocates.
Would you rather the Cards invest $175M on the next 5 years of Bryce Harper…
OR invest the same $175M on:
2 years of Andrew Miller ($25M) plus 5 years of Miles Mikolas ($85M) plus 5 years of Yusei Kikuchi ($65M)?
Based on the Cards’ current talent in the majors and minors in terms of pitchers and outfielders, I would personally much rather load up on the arms if given the choice.
Well like I said the other day, is a tax penalty of a few million $ that big of a deal to a company worth $3 Billion? I doubt it.
I think the CBT was put in place as a tool for the owners to try to implement some level of self imposed fiscal discipline. Which owner wants to be the one to dishonor the code so to speak? Will he be outcast for doing so? I know the Dodgers, Red Sox, Nats, and maybe a couple of others have gone over the line for a brief period of time but then ducked back under.
Bob, for me, it is a simple equation. Harper is worth between 4.5 and 5 wins.
Miller has averaged 2.4. Mikolas was 4.3 last year. Let’s estimate Kikuchi will be lower than both, 2.0. That would be 8.7 wins.
You’d have to subtract out the players they replace for a net result, but the math suggests spreading the risk is a wiser investment.
Bob, 5/85 on mikolas seems extremely club friendly. I like the topic though, very relevant.
It would be very easy to call Miles a one hit wonder, but, Corbins 6/140 signing isn’t based on a stellar track record. Two hit wonder?
No need to worry. The Cards would never sign a free agent to a long contract. Harper is a moot point. I already said many times why I prefer to sign Harper but I am a minority of one. They rather pay Goldy 5/150 at age 32. That’s their way. I am not going to stop being a fan of course not. But I am disappointed at the way they are going about constructing the team. I would love for it to work but I am skeptical of this approach. But nothing would make me happier than to be wrong and having Goldy thrive as the long term answer.
Robert:
As always your logic is flawless and you are probably right about taking the three pitchers over one outfielder but here’s a twist. If the Cardinals really want to get better and the Front Office has intimated that they do then let’s do both. Sigh Harper and all three pitchers. Let’s finally out a team on the field worth watching.
“Bob, for me, it is a simple equation. Harper is worth between 4.5 and 5 wins.”
I value Harper lower than this, based on Fangraphs and Baseball-Reference. The only way I can see to possibly value him as a 4.5 to 5 WAR player is to look at his collective last 4 seasons only. Not the last 3 or 5 or 6 or 2. Just 4 and only 4. (Over the last 3 seasons for example, he’s averaged a mere 2.5 at B-Ref and 3.8 at Fangraphs.)
For his seven year career, Harper has averaged 3.9 WAR at B-Ref and 4.4 per Fangraphs. If we remove his outlying worst and best season at each website, he’s averaged just 3.3 WAR at B-Ref and 4.0 at F-G. This does not look like a generational, transformational player to me. At best, he’s apparently a 4.4 WAR guy, and at worst a 3.3 talent. Again, that’s not ME talking. That’s the two most respected player valuation websites.
“Harper is a moot point. I already said many times why I prefer to sign Harper but I am a minority of one.”
No need to repeat your arguments for my sake. I just wanted to frame the discussion in a very specific either/or manner, to clarify the waters a bit. I’d take Harper in a vacuum, too. In fact I’d happily sign the guy for $22M a year, at up to 12 years. But he’s not signing for that.
“If the Cardinals really want to get better and the Front Office has intimated that they do then let’s do both.“
I cannot argue against accruing talent. But the point of the exercise was to choose, because every team, even the Yankees, Dodgers, and Cubs with their truly massive revenues, has to make choices. As the philosopher observed: you can’t have everything, where would you put it?
But okay, how about another Harperthetical. Would you rather invest $350M for 10 years of Bryce right now…or invest $500M for 10 years of Mike Trout, starting two years from now? Me, I prefer the latter, and it’s not remotely close.
Thanks so much for ALL of the responses, guys!
…and I could have but did not mention three other variables that favor the pitching troika over Bryce Harper.
1) Cards almost surely don’t have to offer opt-outs to the pitchers
2) No loss of draft pick/budget with hurlers
3) No commitment beyond the five years, with the twirlers
The third point might be the most important, as I just glanced at Harper’s Baseball-Reference page and noticed that his “most similar player by age” for each of the past three seasons has been Andruw Jones — who aged exceptionally poorly after age 30. Nearly 60 WAR in his 20’s and fewer than 5 WAR in his 30’s. Sure, it likely means nothing. But it doesn’t help.
But okay, how about another Harperthetical. Would you rather invest $350M for 10 years of Bryce right now…or invest $500M for 10 years of Mike Trout, starting two years from now? Me, I prefer the latter, and it’s not remotely close.
I agree. I’d also take Mookie Betts, who will also be a free agent then and 28 years old. Trout will be 29. Should be an interesting few offseasons.
Of course, maybe by then we will have a couple of our own hitting stars in the bigs or close (Montero, Gorman, Nunez, Carlson, Torres, etc).
Mike Trout’s career average wins above replacement – 9.1.
Bryce Harper’s career average wins above replacement – 4.4.One is a generational talent. The other is a very good player, but he is available now. Is the need today so great to risk overpaying today’s player for the next decade, potentially missing out on others later?
There are several legitimate reasons not to spend on Harper. Holding the powder dry to go after Mike Trout wouldn’t be one of them. That seems like a pipe dream. Every big market club imaginable will be in on those sweepstakes.
Let’s just get better for 2019 right now.
Brian Walton
Mike Trout’s career average wins above replacement – 9.1.
Bryce Harper’s career average wins above replacement – 4.4.One is a generational talent. The other is a very good player, but he is available now. Is the need today so great to risk overpaying today’s player for the next decade, potentially missing out on others later?
Harper has played less than Trout (about 85%), and his baserunning is a lot worse, and his defense is a lot worse, and his positional adjustment (for WAR purposes) is a lot worse. I was thinking that they are probably even, hitting-wise, but no. Harper is at 48% of the value that Trout adds with just his bat.
It does make one wonder what kind of contract Trout will eventually get, doesn’t it? Baseball’s first $50 million per year man, as Bob suggested, may not be crazy. Will MLB raise their self-imposed cap?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.