Jump to content
Yoda

2014-15 Off-season Thread

Recommended Posts

I'm not worried because they can trade one of them in the future if necessary. There is always a market for pitchers. The key is trading them at the right time.

There's barely a market for Scherzer to be signed outright. This seems extreme

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BetMGM Michigan $600 Risk-Free bet

BetMGM Michigan Sports Betting
Michigan online sports betting is now available! Start betting at BetMGM Michigan now and get a $600 risk-free bet bonus at their online sportsbook & casino.

Claim $600 risk-free bet at BetMGM Michigan Now

There's barely a market for Scherzer to be signed outright. This seems extreme

There's a huge market to sign Scherzer. There's just not a big market to sign him to a $200 million deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
..... death nail for the organization ...

I had to ring the death knell for the spell checker on my iphone over this kind of thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There's barely a market for Scherzer to be signed outright. This seems extreme

Just like there was no market for Prince Fielder?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just like there was no market for Prince Fielder?

Point, but OTOH, if you have only moved a guy by virtue of picking up part of his salary plus taking back another contract most other teams wouldn't want, you might have moved him but you haven't actually cleared his cost from your budget or avoided taking a big net value loss on the signing, which is the basic issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Point, but OTOH, if you have only moved a guy by virtue of picking up part of his salary plus taking back another contract most other teams wouldn't want, you might have moved him but you haven't actually cleared his cost from your budget or avoided taking a big net value loss on the signing, which is the basic issue.

But the Tigers are not the Athletics or Rays. They can move money around like that without hurting the organization. I'm not even saying they should sign him. I'm saying if they did sign him, it would be an indication that there payroll should continue to be high for the foreseeable future. Thus, I wouldn't be concerned about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There's a huge market to sign Scherzer. There's just not a big market to sign him to a $200 million deal.

Which is the deal you'd be looking to trade. So what's your point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just like there was no market for Prince Fielder?

I don't read me saying the words "no market" in my post. I don't think its a very similar situation myself though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But the Tigers are not the Athletics or Rays. They can move money around like that without hurting the organization. I'm not even saying they should sign him. I'm saying if they did sign him, it would be an indication that there payroll should continue to be high for the foreseeable future. Thus, I wouldn't be concerned about it.

I agree with the view that I don't care what the org spends - with a few caveats: for instance that they don't turn into the Yankees and price the fans out of the stadium; and of course if they run into the luxury tax, then the may reach a point where previous spending does start to impact their ability to put a winner on the field. I think the product, even for a rich org, will eventually suffer if you make enough signings that destoy big value.

And I don't know if signing Max would be a value destroying move, but it might be so it's a good discussion.

Edited by Gehringer_2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Which is the deal you'd be looking to trade. So what's your point?

They aren't going to sign him and then trade him the next day. The deal might look different in three or four years when there are fewer years left on the deal and average salaries are even higher.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They aren't going to sign him and then trade him the next day. The deal might look different in three or four years when there are fewer years left on the deal and average salaries are even higher.

Really, that's your selling point? Scherzer is going to become MORE desirable down the line? You're pulling out all the stops today.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree with the view that I don't care what the org spends - with a few caveats: for instance that they don't turn into the Yankees and price the fans out of the stadium; and of course if they run into the luxury tax, then the may reach a point where previous spending does start to impact their ability to put a winner on the field.

I think they'll raise ticket prices if the team is good and the fans are willing to pay regardless of payroll. I do understand that there has to be a limit to how much they can spend, but I don't know what that limit is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Odds are there are two scenarios

1.Scherzer continues to pitch well. In that case, he's looked at like a Cole Hamels and does have some trade value, or at the very least the ability to be dumped as a contract. My point here is that I don't expect Scherzer to be traded if this is the situation.

2. Scherzer either suffers a drop in quality of play or health. Pitchers IMO, tend to get viewed as tainted when this happens, especially post 30. Unlike Fielder where it wasn't difficult to think he might return to being a premium hitter, despite whatever other flaws he possessed. Maybe I'm wrong, but I can't remember many if any pitchers being traded in this scenario.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Really, that's your selling point? Scherzer is going to become MORE desirable down the line? You're pulling out all the stops today.....

Huh?

No. He's saying that while almost no one would trade for a $175m, 7 year contract for a pitcher on the wrong side of 30, it's entirely possible that someone would trade for a $100m, 4 year contract for a still-effective 35 year old pitcher in 2017, when folks named Kershaw, Strasburg, Harvey, and Fernandez are pulling down $35m a year.

The point is that the top of the market goes way up every year or two, and in a few years, $25m a year for a #2-3 quality starter like Scherzer will probably be by age 35 might be reasonable. Remember when Johan broke $20m a year in his prime? Now James Shields is staring down more than that. Not that Shields is a bad pitcher, but Johan was the best of his half-generation.

Inflation is real and it's terrifying, but it's also not my money.

Edited by Eric Cioe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Really, that's your selling point? Scherzer is going to become MORE desirable down the line? You're pulling out all the stops today.....

Not more desirable. More affordable for teams that can't afford to commit long term. I'm not trying to sell anything as I don't know enough about the Tigers financial situation or the state of baseball as an industry to know whether they should sign him. They question was how I would react if they actually did sign him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Huh?

No. He's saying that while almost no one would trade for a $175m, 7 year contract for a pitcher on the wrong side of 30, it's entirely possible that someone would trade for a $100m, 4 year contract for a still-effective 35 year old pitcher in 2017, when folks named Kershaw, Strasburg, Harvey, and Fernandez are pulling down $35m a year.

The point is that the top of the market goes way up every year or two, and in a few years, $25m a year for a #2-3 quality starter like Scherzer will probably be by age 35 might be reasonable. Remember when Johan broke $20m a year in his prime? Now James Shields is staring down more than that. Not that Shields is a bad pitcher, but Johan was the best of his half-generation.

Inflation is real and it's terrifying, but it's also not my money.

and I terribly disagree. I don't think a 34ish year old Max making 23-27 mil is going to have more of a market than he has right now by any means.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not more desirable. More affordable for teams that can't afford to commit long term. I'm not trying to sell anything as I don't know enough about the Tigers financial situation or the state of baseball as an industry to know whether they should sign him. They question was how I would react if they actually did sign him.

Hey I'm with you in terms of reaction. If Illitch wants to pay, then in the end that's all that matters and we have him and enjoy it while its good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would DD really sign Scherzer and trade Price? Cardinals still have a lot of talent and they'd have to part with some good ones to make this worth Detroit's while.

Even if DD does sign Max, having a full year of Price helps the team's World Series aspirations a lot and there will be a draft pick coming back when he walks. Of course, it's entirely possible that Illitch won't pay for both, so signing Max and getting back a good young SP and OF for Price could be a good play.

Tim McKernan @tmckernan · 1h 1 hour ago

From @dgoold on @TMASTL on the @Ken_Rosenthal Price/Scherzer/Hamels' report: The one the Cardinals have the most interest in is David Price.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be interesting to see what they'd offer for Price. I'd probably rather have him for the year and take the 1st. Signing Max is about competing now and trading Price doesn't help that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But the Tigers are not the Athletics or Rays. They can move money around like that without hurting the organization. I'm not even saying they should sign him. I'm saying if they did sign him, it would be an indication that there payroll should continue to be high for the foreseeable future. Thus, I wouldn't be concerned about it.

Well, I'm not sure about that. At some point the numbers on the paper become real and they stop being just journal entries. I don't know how much money Illitch has, but paying out 30 million just to move a guy off your payroll as a continuing business model isn't the key to success

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think anybody is suggesting it is a key to success.

I think the suggestion is if the Tigers sign Scherzer then Mike is aware of the long-term financial implications of the move and is ok with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think anybody is suggesting it is a key to success.

I think the suggestion is if the Tigers sign Scherzer then Mike is aware of the long-term financial implications of the move and is ok with it.

This is what I am thinking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, I'm not sure about that. At some point the numbers on the paper become real and they stop being just journal entries. I don't know how much money Illitch has, but paying out 30 million just to move a guy off your payroll as a continuing business model isn't the key to success

When did we ever pay $30 M JUST to move a guy off of payroll? I would say that Kinsler has brought a fair amount of value to the team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


Michigan Sports Betting Offer

Michigan launched online sports betting and casino apps on Friday, January 22, 2021. We have selected the top Michigan sportsbooks and casinos that offer excellent bonus offers. Terms and conditions apply.

BetRivers Michigan - Get a 100% up to $250 deposit bonus at their online sportsbook & casino.

Click Here to claim $250 deposit bonus at BetRivers Michigan For Signing Up Now

FanDuel Michigan - Get a $1,000 risk-free bet at FanDuel Michigan on your first bet.

Click Here to claim $1,000 Risk-Free Bet at FanDuel Michigan

BetMGM Michigan - Get a $600 risk-free bet at the BetMGM online casino & sportsbook

Click Here to claim $600 risk-free bet at BetMGM Michigan

   


×
×
  • Create New...