10x3=30

Not that long ago, reigning MVP Josh Hamilton signed for 2 years and $12 mill per year after leading a team to its first WS Series appearance. The lack of leverage makes it a different ballgame. The arbitration guys get paid well. They don't don't get paid full UFA market well.

[This message has been edited by DannyDuberstein (edited 3/30/2014 10:46a).]

He just nabbed himself the 12th most lucrative contract by annual value ever, and he's within 1.1 million of the 6th most lucrative contract ever by annual value (A-Rod's contract with the Rangers in 2001).

Isolate his 3 free agent years and he's got the most lucrative contract by annual value in the history of baseball (by a couple of million over Miggy's new deal).

Speaking of a contract from 2001 still sitting so high on the list, that also includes Roger Clemens' 1 year, 28 million deal in 2007 (3rd highest ever by AAV) and A-Rod's 2008 deal (4th highest ever by AAV). My point being that yes, contracts are up, but when you're at the stratosphere level, its not a hard line of rising contracts. Its a bumpier market and you can't neccesarily extrapolate out a $52 million dollar salary for Trout or whatever stupid number fangraphs thinks he's worth.

Maybe he gave up some money in the immediate, but again, he just partially set a new ceiling by getting 33+ million over those 3 "free agent years". He stays healthy, he'll blow through the ceiling when he's a free agent or close to free agency.

(didn't do the math on Kershaw post-arb, it'll be close, but y'all understand my point, I hope?

[This message has been edited by TXAggie2011 (edited 3/30/2014 11:00a).]

quote:

---

10x3=30

---

I was confused if you meant $30 million total after that last post. But then I continued to be confused since he just signed on to make $40 million during the next 3 years.

quote:

---

quote:

---

10x3=30

---

I was confused if you meant $30 million total after that last post. But then I continued to be confused since he just signed on to make $40 million during the next 3 years.

---

My point was absolutely minimum. I said he likely makes $60 going to arc (15/20/25), which would mean he settled for 3/84 when on current open market he could have gotten ~3/120 or 10/350.

He left a ton on the table. Dude still is filthy rich and gets an opportunity to blow this contract away.

Still wanting some evidence.

"It doesn't matter what other contracts are" isn't evidence, and come on, you know that's not how the system works.

Evidence of what?

All the money he just lost.

He stays healthy and his performance continues, sure, he lost at least some money.

quote:

---

or 10/350

---

If he performs, he'll make more than that in his first 10 years. 33+ million over the first 3 isn't going to constrict his AAV over the next 7 so that 10/350 isn't reachable.

[This message has been edited by TXAggie2011 (edited 3/30/2014 11:11a).]

Arbitration - 15/20/25 = 60
3 years at min 35 = 110 (although likely signs monster 8-10 year deal)

Has there ever been a deal everyone said was outstanding for a team that the player didn't leave money on the table?

trout was smart to take that deal. He gets 33M his last few years of that deal. That will go well for the AAV of his next contract, provided he doesn't turn into grady sizemore brittle man

Kidding aside, you should call up Trout and tell him how much money he left on the table. He'd be dumb not to hire you as his agent with the deal you could have gotten.

token gets it.

In business it's pretty rare that contracts over an extended term are based on the best case scenario over that term panning out perfectly. Thats what the fangraphs talking points seem to eiter ignore or not understand.

In the end Trout traded some of his best case scenario upside for long term security, something I don't see the internet GM's acknowledge as much as they should.

lol i know, right? he didn't leave anything off the table by signing now. He was smart not to bank on some random arbitrator who isn't always siding with players to give him 30MM salary. Get your money now and reset the clock on FA earlier

He left money on the table if you look at those three free agency years he's giving up. If he stayed the course he's on, he could have done those 3 years at $30 million plus. Instead, he'll be doing them at $24. I don't think the arbitration would have screwed him by that much and $18 million is an expensive insurance policy.

There's absolutely no doubt he left money on the table.

It's not the steal of the century or anything like that, but even the most conservative of arb #'s show that he left money on the table.

The assumption is Trout just wanted to get this done before the season started.

quote:

---

He left money on the table if you look at those three free agency years he's giving up. If he stayed the course he's on, he could have done those 3 years at $30 million plus. Instead, he'll be doing them at $24. I don't think the arbitration would have screwed him by that much and $18 million is an expensive insurance policy.

---

He'll make over 33 million a year those three years of "free agency." As I said earlier, that would be/will be/is the highest AAV of any contract ever.

Average value is 24 million, and that's the normal way I'd look at a contract, but its a different situation when you're bringing in arbitration- especially 3 years of arbitration.

quote:

---

The assumption is Trout just wanted to get this done before the season started.

---

If the money wasn't right, they could have waited until next off-season. Trout would be in a more advantageous situation, with his arbitration hearing looming.

I think the primary assumption is he just wanted security.

Yeah I wouldn't say that's the assumption...the assumption is that Trout wanted the security of 150 million.

If it was primarily about security, it would be longer than a 6 year contract. Angels would certainly have been willing to go more.

But he probably wasnt; he wanted FA before 30.

quote:

---

But he probably wasnt; he wanted FA before 30.

---

Exactly. Timing is the key to this. He gets the security of the $150mm but will see FA again with a chance to hit a massive retirement contract from the prime of his career (if he stays healthy) that will probably push him up near $500mm for his career.

quote:

---

But he probably wasnt; he wanted FA before 30.

---

Right.

Guy just guaranteed himself $100 million in his first three years of free agency. He didn't want to lock himself in for a super long time, but he did want to guarantee himself $100 million in his first 3 years of free agency.

I'm sure the Angels used his desire for security to get some concessions in the short term. Also, his FA years correspond neatly with the end of Hamilton's contract, and I wouldn't be shocked if Angels played a little "chicken" in saying if the player pushed for too much in the short term, a deal may be off the table.

And FWIW, the Angels have the guy under contract for the next 7 seasons now. They're not exactly going super short on the years.

He guaranteed himself 144 million and gave himself a shot at 500 million for his career. I think he did pretty dam well.

He guaranteed himself "XX million" doesn't in any way change that the contract was undervalue.

There getting you more on the "security"thing than the undervalue thing, now, I do believe.

And it was absolutely about 'security' and getting a whole helluva lot of money locked up.