I had said 10/400, so just cut it in half then. 5/200.
My point being, huge payday, but not spread into years where it might not be beneficial. I just don't get the obsession with 10 year deals when they never work out.[/QUOTE
Because they work out exceptionally well for the player.
A five year contract makes him a free agent again at age 33. So unless he thinks that at age 33 there is a really high chance that he's gonna get more than 5/200 (again), he would likely prefer the guaranteed 10/400. And if he thought he could do better than 5/200 at age 33, I'm SURE he would negotiate for an optout then, which as we all know, would benefit the club.
The entire reason why clubs and players agree on these 10 year contracts is that the idea is that the club will potentially get some surplus value in the first half or so of the contract in exchange for paying more than the player is worth at the tail end of the contract. Ask any club if they would prefer to do 5/200 or 10/400 and I am sure that all of them (unless they were incredibly dumb/miraculously working with, say a player in his early 20's) would prefer the former. If the Sox thought Betts would sign an extension for 5/200, they would do it now.