13 years?
It’s a ton — but also, that’s only a $26.9 AAV, which seems pretty manageable.That's a LOT of money and a LOT of years. Correa is extremely good but that's... wow.
Love him or hate him if you are baseball player he does his job as a agent.Boras is having some kind of off-season
This offer looks even more canny in retrospect, 11/350 vs the 13/350 he signed for plus some very generous opt-outs minus the no-trade, think he/Boras would have definitely gone for this if offered by BOS.3/$150 - then an opt out - 2/$80 - then an opt out - 6/$120
We get him for 3 years at $50mil, and he then gets to decide if he wants to opt into 8/$200
We then potentially get him for two more years at $40mil, before he has to decide if he wants to stick around for 6/$120.
Possibly get him for 11/$350, but maybe he’s here for three years at an insane AAV, puts up MVP numbers, and then leaves town just in time for Mayer to step in.
When the Correa contract ends, he will be 83 years old. That’s a lot of early bird dinnersBoras is having some kind of off-season
Fire Chaim, hire Hank!This offer looks even more canny in retrospect, 11/350 vs the 13/350 he signed for plus some very generous opt-outs minus the no-trade, think he/Boras would have definitely gone for this if offered by BOS.
Eh, in 10 years there will be 80 million a year contracts.$350M for Correa and his back is absolutely bonkers. Devers’ price keeps going up.
And I fear that AAV manipulation is creating a time bomb for the next two rounds of CBA negotiations. I know they are 5 and 10 years out, but I think it's going to be interesting to see the splits among owners, with one group swamped under a series of dead weight contracts and begging for CBT relief while another group is pissed at the way they've been effectively priced out of the free agent market. Getting 23 owners to agree on a CBA may be an impossible task of cat herding.We're officially in the age of AAV manipulation mega deals.
16 years ago, Alfonso Soriano (8/$136M) got the 3rd biggest FA contract in history, behind A-Rod (10/$252) and Manny (8/$160).Eh, in 10 years there will be 80 million a year contracts.
Just as easily could end up a relative bargain.
I mean $22 million AAV isn't that bad, but given that Swanson's 2021 is so far outside his career norm, I really hope the Sox don't bite.I'm so curious about where these SS deals will all stand in about 7 years. Next up Swanson at like 12/260?
No billionaire owner is priced out of the market, except by their own choice. That said, I’m curious if the cheapskate teams try and leverage this issue via Manfred before it gets to the CBA.And I fear that AAV manipulation is creating a time bomb for the next two rounds of CBA negotiations. I know they are 5 and 10 years out, but I think it's going to be interesting to see the splits among owners, with one group swamped under a series of dead weight contracts and begging for CBT relief while another group is pissed at the way they've been effectively priced out of the free agent market. Getting 23 owners to agree on a CBA may be an impossible task of cat herding.
I don't think a billion is infinitely divisible, even with New Math.No billionaire owner is priced out of the market, except by their own choice.
For a guy with a better history of health, maybe. I’m glad the Sox aren’t on the hook for this one.Eh, in 10 years there will be 80 million a year contracts.
Just as easily could end up a relative bargain.
Maybe just try dividing it by 26, for the number of players on the roster.I don't think a billion is infinitely divisible, even with New Math.
I suspect they know that. And now that there's actually young talent coming up, I also think we'll start to see it. More "Atlanta with more money" (or "dodgers with less") than the "Tampa Bay north" that some have described.I wonder if this ownership group will ever sign a top of the market deal again. They have no appetite for the years. I suspect they’d happily match or even exceed the AAV for much shorter term but given how much they’ve paid over the years to players not to play for us, it makes sense that they wouldn’t go for deals like this.
At some point though they need to start signing their young talent to big early extensions. Something to leverage their money into talent retention/acquisition.
Looks like we can expect to be TBN for a couple years until those players get here, at least in the free agent market.I suspect they know that. And now that there's actually young talent coming up, I also think we'll start to see it. More "Atlanta with more money" (or "dodgers with less") than the "Tampa Bay north" that some have described.
At least when it comes to players looking for 10+ year deals that extend to their 40s. (I dont think that's close to TBN, but that's a different discussion).Looks like we can expect to be TBN for a couple years until those players get here, at least in the free agent market.
So there is obviously precedent for this if you look at the not so distant past of the NHL - The long term / cap avoiding deals were retroactively punished and "recapture penalties" were created to prevent some of the more blatant shenanigans. The biggest difference is that there is a salary floor in the NHL so there is a market for trading those dead weight contracts that can be put on LTIR.And I fear that AAV manipulation is creating a time bomb for the next two rounds of CBA negotiations. I know they are 5 and 10 years out, but I think it's going to be interesting to see the splits among owners, with one group swamped under a series of dead weight contracts and begging for CBT relief while another group is pissed at the way they've been effectively priced out of the free agent market. Getting 23 owners to agree on a CBA may be an impossible task of cat herding.
Can the Sox make a trade with the Giants for Crawford?IGGY or Elvis Andrus starting to look like bargains now.
Theoretically. He is a 10/5 guy and may not be interested in joining the Sox, but can’t imagine he would cost a ton depending on if the Sox want a giants to take on salary; BTV has him a slightly negative value. Maybe someone like a Hernandez who is likely to get DFA’d?Can the Sox make a trade with the Giants for Crawford?
I think the Giants wouldn't do him like that, and then there is the 10-and-5. If they're interested in getting rid of Tommy La Stella or J.D. Davis, I'd be kind of interested there.Can the Sox make a trade with the Giants for Crawford?
This is a great point. There is a lot of competition for entertainment bucks but MLB is doing fine and as a cartel they control their territories. MLB has not expanded in almost 25 years and though they might add two teams soonish, they're not going to put another team in SF; in fact one could leave the Bay Area. So that's a huge wealthy market that the Giants have cornered for summer sports entertainment. Same thing with lots of other cities including Boston.Eh, in 10 years there will be 80 million a year contracts.
Just as easily could end up a relative bargain.
But that’s going to be every elite FA unless the market resets. Tampa Bay beat us out for Efflin, after all.At least when it comes to players looking for 10+ year deals that extend to their 40s. (I dont think that's close to TBN, but that's a different discussion).
I'm not exactly sure what the Giants would be doing to Crawford. With the 10 and 5 rights, they'd have to get his approval for a deal. If they tried to trade him, I would imagine it would be with his support. If he doesn't want to leave SF, he won't, and the Giants wouldn't be doing him like anything.I think the Giants wouldn't do him like that, and then there is the 10-and-5. If they're interested in getting rid of Tommy La Stella or J.D. Davis, I'd be kind of interested there.
They are moving him to 3B, not bench.Yes, 10/5 rights but headed for a bench role vs. opportunity to start for another team?
Roger, but how does Crawford feel about that move?They are moving him to 3B, not bench.