Machado to Padres for 10 years, 300M, opt-out halfway through

YTF

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
$30 million a year is less than David Price signed for 4 years ago and it will likely be less than what Harper signs for. remove the attitude and Machado would be worth much more than Harper, who appears to have peaked 4 years ago and is already a defensive liability.
Not trying to pile on but seriously asking, to who? Also, we have no idea what Harper is going to get in terms of years or money.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
41,849
One thing about Machado that seems to get overlooked a lot is that he has a reasonably big split between his OPS at Camden Yards (.888) and his OPS everywhere else (.761). Neither he nor Harper are top 10 players in the game right now, MLBN just ranked them #14 and #15 respectively (https://www.mlb.com/news/top-100-mlb-players-for-2019/c-303970816).

Their hitting FA so young helps counterbalance that some, but they both could have helped their FA case last year a lot more than they did (Harper by not taking the full season off on defense while his team fought for a playoff spot, Machado by not spiking guys for no reason and not consistently hustling in the FREAKING POSTSEASON). Given those issues, it's no wonder that both have had to wait so long for contracts they're happy with, it's a bit surprising they got them in the end but it only takes one team.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
8,725
Machado received the most money an athlete ever got in American sports. How much did his attitude hold him back? It's not like he "settled" for 10/$200M. In a depressed (and you can argue the causes of this depression) market, where a lot of big players were out of the running (no Boston, no NY Mets or Dodgers or Angels, and really, the Yankees didn't "need" him) he still got a bunch of cash from a team that hasn't made this big of a free agent acquisition since Bruce Hurst and Jack Clark in 1989.

The Padres were bidding against the White Sox, who again, offered Machado slightly more than he received from San Diego. I'm not sure how he left money on the table.
The fact that he received the biggest contract in sports history (likely for a very brief time) doesn’t mean he wouldn’t have gotten more with a different attitude.

I don’t think anyone is saying he got killed for it, but I have a hard time believing that if everything was identical about Machado’s profile but he had Mookie’s attitude/off-field reputation, everything would have ended up exactly the same.

I think more teams would have talked themselves into bidding and there is at least a reasonable chance the ultimate numbers may have been a bit (5-10%?) higher.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
41,849
It doesn't matter that much, but Stanton's deal was bigger ($325M), Machado's is the biggest FA deal ever (soon to be 2nd).
 

YTF

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
I sort of get the talk about Machado's attitude, but I'm still asking who would have paid him MORE. The big payroll teams weren't in on him. Boston, the Yankees and the Cubs were never seriously linked to him and the Dodgers clearly didn't want him back. There are probably at least 1/3 to 1/2 of the teams in MLB that Machado at $300 million for ten years makes no sense. IMO there is so much good young talent in baseball right now that teams are looking toward spending money to try to lock some of these guys up before the hit free agency. There has been a shift in the game.
 

Hank Scorpio

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 1, 2013
5,131
I sort of get the talk about Machado's attitude, but I'm still asking who would have paid him MORE. The big payroll teams weren't in on him. Boston, the Yankees and the Cubs were never seriously linked to him and the Dodgers clearly didn't want him back. There are probably at least 1/3 to 1/2 of the teams in MLB that Machado at $300 million for ten years makes no sense. IMO there is so much good young talent in baseball right now that teams are looking toward spending money to try to lock some of these guys up before the hit free agency. There has been a shift in the game.
Maybe if his attitude wasn’t so shitty, the Yankees or Dodgers would have been more inclined to offer him something like 10/320 or whatever? Would he not be more desirable if he had the personal makeup of a guy like Mookie Betts?

Maybe teams like the Yankees thought his attitude and lack of hustle made him a risk to the development of their younger players.
 

Lowrielicious

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 19, 2011
3,818
I sort of get the talk about Machado's attitude, but I'm still asking who would have paid him MORE. The big payroll teams weren't in on him. Boston, the Yankees and the Cubs were never seriously linked to him and the Dodgers clearly didn't want him back.
The question really is WHY weren’t they in on him.
Boston was never going to be given devers and payroll, but the others not necessarily.
It’s not that hard to imagine that at least one of them ruled him out on attitude/character grounds.
Obviously it may not be the case, but it’s certainly possible and we (ie the public) will likely never know for sure.
 

YTF

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Maybe if his attitude wasn’t so shitty, the Yankees or Dodgers would have been more inclined to offer him something like 10/320 or whatever? Would he not be more desirable if he had the personal makeup of a guy like Mookie Betts?

Maybe teams like the Yankees thought his attitude and lack of hustle made him a risk to the development of their younger players.
I've no doubt there are certain teams that prefer he wasn't around some of their young core, but teams like the Yankees that aren't lacking in offense seem to be choosing to spend on multiple areas of need. Paxton, Happ, Sabathia, Britton, Ottavino and LeMahiue all fill greater needs.
 

crow216

Dragon Wangler
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,975
Astoria
I wouldn't totally discount his attitude factoring into the eventual contract here. I'm not saying it makes sense or should play a role, but in the right situation it can.

By all accounts the Yankees were essentially out on Machado largely because of Steinbrenner. Wasn't this at least in part attitude related? Even if 10/300 is "market value", the fact that the Yankees (or another team potentially) didn't jump in and try to beat that seems relevant in this case.
By literally no accounts, except fans, were they out because of Steinbrenner.
 

crow216

Dragon Wangler
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,975
Astoria
Maybe if his attitude wasn’t so shitty, the Yankees or Dodgers would have been more inclined to offer him something like 10/320 or whatever? Would he not be more desirable if he had the personal makeup of a guy like Mookie Betts?

Maybe teams like the Yankees thought his attitude and lack of hustle made him a risk to the development of their younger players.
I think Jon and I differ in opinion on this but I believe Cashman and Steinbrenner view the Yankees as a nearly finished product. Adding finishing touches might include an extra arm or a defensive third baseman but I just don’t think the value Machado has to most teams was the same that he might have had for the Yankees. So, with potential attitude issues, why risk a mostly finished product at $300m? With that in mind, they could either let Machado come to them or move on and re-assess the Arenado market. If Andujar is most of the offensive player he was last year and improves his defense, he’s either an unbelievable trade asset or our problem solves itself.
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
35,059
Doesn’t all this attitude talk not take into account the fact that Machado’s attitude could conceivably affect his on field play unlike guys like Chapman’s attitude which only affects how they treat women?
 

Ford Frick's Asterisk

Member
SoSH Member
May 5, 2017
456
Really? Last I checked, MLB doesn't hand out 30-game suspensions for spiking a player or failing to hustle to first base. If Chapman has another occurrence of "attitude", his team will probably be without his services for a half-season.

*
 

edoug

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
1,996
Really? Last I checked, MLB doesn't hand out 30-game suspensions for spiking a player or failing to hustle to first base. If Chapman has another occurrence of "attitude", his team will probably be without his services for a half-season.

*
He should get some punishment. Obviously not as long as the penalties for violence towards women would get but something.
 

JohntheBaptist

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 13, 2005
11,382
Yoknapatawpha County
I think any potential issue is less the perceived "attitude" and more a propensity for really losing his cool on the field and doing embarrassing and uncommonly violent things with relatively minor provocation. He threw a bat at a player, spiked a guy for no good reason in the playoffs, (debatably) tried to injure Pedroia. If NY thought "we're willing to deal with the risks on that for X but not Y" and he wanted Y so they just moved on, I don't think it was because he was a pinhead and admitted he didn't hustle instead of just talking around it and continuing on like 70% of the league not running hard on sure outs.

The "attitude" didn't cost him a dime, the blatantly dirty approach maybe means the highest bid was more likely to come from a team further down his list.
 

Flunky

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 3, 2009
1,649
CT
Doesn’t all this attitude talk not take into account the fact that Machado’s attitude could conceivably affect his on field play unlike guys like Chapman’s attitude which only affects how they treat women?
this is a thing of beauty. thank you!
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
17,257
Newton
Actually we know pretty much exactly what happened here, NY said publicly in Dec before meeting with Machado that they weren't going to $300M, they offered him/Lozano something around $220M at the meeting in Dec (not a 'formal offer' but they were ready to move right then according to reports), and when Machado wasn't interested and made it clear that he was going to the highest bidder, NY basically moved on while keeping a toe in the water in case he changed his mind or his market fell apart.
Tony Mazz will never accept this excuse.