There was an article on FG that included his projection over the next 10 years. The conclusion was that he was worth about 20 WAR and $170 mil. That sounded really, really low on both counts and it appears the Padres agree.

When they signed Bogaerts, I had sort of assumed it was in preparation for Machado leaving, but I guess not. 11/350 is an extension of 10/315 beyond what he was owed for 2023, which I guess sounds about right in the context of the Turner and Bogaerts deals. I imagine Arenado is now thinking he may have sold himself short by opting in to 5/$144 mil (some deferred) earlier in the offseason.

I don't know what the left side of San Diego's infield will look like in, say, seven years. What are chances both Bogaerts and Machado are on the team, and playing SS and 3B, in 2030? You could see them on SD playing different positions by then (OF and 1B or something), but whatever - if I was a Padres fan, I'd be very excited to know those guys are locked in for the rest of the decade now. They are a fun team to watch...

Sorry Nate Colbert fans. That sacred team HR record is toast now.

I think we now know who will be the first Padres HoFer, sometime around 2040.

I think we now know who will be the first Padres HoFer, sometime around 2040.

Tony Gwynn's ghost?

#4 - You mean other than Winfield, Gwynn, and Hoffman?

So with the extension, this becomes a 15 year, $500 million contract - the first half a billion dollar contract in the sport's history

So with the extension, this becomes a 15 year, $500 million contract - the first half a billion dollar contract in the sport's history

In current dollars, ARod's was higher.

This seems a bit high, less so if the 11 years includes this year. Still, assuming it does, this is Bogaerts plus $70 M. I like Machado but I'm not sure he's 1 win a year better than Bogaerts. Based on what I posed in the other thread I guess I'm prejecting Manny to about 30-35 WAR from here on out. All told this is $40-50 more than I guesstimated in the other thread (assuming this year is included).

It pays to be good at baseball.

Not only do they have the question of where will X and MM be playing in 6-10 years, there's the question of where Tatis will be playing now. Does X slide to 2B with Cronenworth to 1B? Or is the move of Tatis to the OF to hopefully preserve him official now? Nice problem to have in the short-term unless Tatis continues to be a knucklehead or can't hit without PEDs.

5 / 6, sorry, sorry, brain cramp.

I was thinking of the Diamondbacks for some reason.

So with the extension, this becomes a 15 year, $500 million contract - the first half a billion dollar contract in the sport's history

But it's two contracts.

#10 - The Big Unit has a D-Backs cap on his plaque. ;-)

Aren't the Florida teams the only ones
left without a HOFer?

Edit: Unless you consider the Nats a separate team than the 'Spos...

Aren't the Florida teams the only ones
left without a HOFer?

I think that's right. In addition to them, the following teams do not have a HOFer who spent their entire career with them:

A's - best career A is Eddie Rommell
Angels - Trout is an obvious HOFer, but it remains to be seen if he plays anywhere else.
D'Backs
Rockies - They have an excellent chance with Helton.
Rangers
Blue Jays - Way, way too early with Vlad, but at least he's a prospect, unlike some other teams.
Mets - maybe Wright?
Nats - After 2019 Strasburg was a prospect, but not any more.

I hope Juan Soto will be happy in Flushing.

But it's two contracts

I guess. But I always feel like an extension of a contract is exactly that - an extension, not a new one.

Blue Jays - Way, way too early with Vlad, but at least he's a prospect, unlike some other teams.

The Rays are the only team with a worse best franchise-only player (Toronto's is either Luis Leal or Ricky Romero. Tampa's best is Jeff Niemann).

I believe that once deGrom and Lugo debut with their new teams in April, the Mets' all-time "only pitched for the Mets" WAR leader yet again reverts to Bob Apodaca with 5.5 (reliever, 1973-77).

there are 41 Mets pitchers ahead of him, but all committed the sin of wearing another uniform (or soon will do so).

Look at the glass as half full…probably a 20 percent chance DeGrom permanently blows out his arm before the regular season and keeps the record intact!

The A's "only played for them" team is way worse than you would expect from a team with their historical success (Connie Mack explains a lot of it), but their "didn't play for them until after age 35" team is astonishing:

C Mike Piazza, Mike Stanley
1B Willie McCovey, Dick Allen
2B Joe Morgan, Willie Randolph
SS Nomar Garciaparra, Terry Turner
3B Ron Cey, Ray Boone
LF Tim Raines, Billy Williams, Zack Wheat
CF Ty Cobb, Tris Speaker
RF Enos Slaughter, Felipe Alou
P Satchel Paige, Don Sutton, Tommy John, Bartolo Colon, Jack Quinn, Bobo Newsom, Virgil Trucks, Tom Candiotti, Jim Perry
RP Rich Gossage, Dave Righetti, Doug Jones, Don Mossi, Gerry Staley

You left out DH, where they have Frank Thomas, Dave Parker and Don Baylor.

I totally did, just forgot to add it in! Cepeda just misses too (age 34 season) and I also forgot Jimmy Collins at third, a 14th Hall of Famer.

I suspect they'd find some way to get Cobb and Speaker both in the lineup. And Willie Wilson deserves a tip of the cap, even if there's no room for him on the roster.

This is just because they didn't have the guts to sign Soto to what he's actually worth over the next 16 years and actually have the first 6/10th of a billion contract (its insane, but, under current MLB money, this is about what you have to think Soto is going to get). I think Soto and Boras would settle for $37.5M over 16 years, possibly without even insisting on an opt out.

So, who signs Soto now or do the Padres do something to get rid of Tatis and then sign Soto to a deal like that?

The ol' 6/10th of a billion threshold! :)

Soto is great. But he hit .242/.401/.452 last year and was worth 3.8 WAR. I'm not eager to sign him to by far the biggest contract in MLB history at this moment, especially if I have him for 2 more years.

Yeah, you sign Soto now if you can get him for Harper money. But if he's going to demand top dollar after a merely good season, let him play out a year or two and prove that he's worth it.

Was anyone in the Rockies front office available for comment?

A quick reality check on Soto, based strictly on Fangraphs WAR: through age 23, his highest WAR total was 7.0. Mookie's was 8.2, Trout's 10.2. He's closer to Machado who was 6.6 and Lindor who was 6.1.

Harper also had a 9.3 at age 22, but was far less consistent.

Soto’s 2022 off-year was still pretty good, a 130 OPS+. If he bounces back to his prior form this season, he’ll clean up in his 2024 final arbitration year and again be in line for a record-setting free agent contract. However, if 2023 disappoints, a lot would be riding on 2024, and Soto might end up as just fabulously wealthy without setting any records.

#28 - It was even better than that; that 130 OPS+ was just in his 52 games with the Pads. His full season OPS+ was 149, fueled by those 135 walks, which led to a .401 OBP despite a .242 BA.

He had 5.6 BREF WAR, made the All Star team, and won a silver slugger. If that's an off year (and it was for him), I wouldn't worry too much about his future.

To be clear, I'm not worried. I'm saying that Soto's overall track may not have separated him from other stars, who signed for a measly $300-400 million.

I guess there's an argument to be made that both Trout and Machado have surpassed $500 million over the course of multiple contracts. But they both had to remain great into their late 20s at least to get that second deal.

Do you sign Soto for 16/$600? Probably not. Do you sign him for 16/$500? Probably so.** Ideally a team would like to sign him right now for something like 6 or 8 years (and gargantuan money) with the notion of giving him the rest of those 16 years as an extension if everything works out. Would Soto accept a 6 or 8 year deal at this point -- probably not (there's always a $ value where the answer becomes yes). So he plays the next 2 years then gets his 13-14 year deal a la Harper/Betts.

** Not necessarily the Padres. I don't know how they juggle all these super long-term contracts already so they may not be in a position to offer Soto that many years. Tatis doesn't really make "big" money until 2029 by which time $36 M may not be that big ... or will be worth 4 local streaming deals. :-)

Maybe you could get him for 16/500, with an opt-out partway through. E.g. 6/200 guaranteed followed by a 10/300 player option if he wants it. The decision point comes before his age 30 season so if he's still raking he can opt out and get a Judge-level contract.

Do you sign him for 16/$500?

That is a really tough one. I maybe do? Would he sign? Didn't he turn down $450 mil from the Nationals?

Would Soto accept a 6 or 8 year deal at this point -- probably not (there's always a $ value where the answer becomes yes). So he plays the next 2 years then gets his 13-14 year deal a la Harper/Betts.

Another interesting question and I think you're right that he wouldn't want to do 6-8 years. Probably more likely that he gets an opt out in that time range. Maybe 12/$420 mil with an opt out after 6/$240 mil or something? Maybe that's too low.

I guess I'd have a hard time turning down the chance to make $400 mil the floor of my future earnings.

Didn't he turn down $450 mil from the Nationals?

$440M, I think, but that offer was reportedly heavily deferred, although I’m not sure the precise details became public.

You left out DH, where they have Frank Thomas, Dave Parker and Don Baylor.

And Dave Kingman.

Zips has a terrible projection up for Machado. Yikes. Given the need to spread out AAV I can only conclude that cost per year has really skyrocketed. Gotta think ohtani could get something like 50-75 million per year, but they will spread it out to some silly 12 year deal.

Agreed that the super-long deal with an option after year 6 or 7 might work for both but at this point Soto is just 2 years away at which point it seems very likely he'll get that 13+ year deal to cover the rest of his career (RSN collapse aside). But also agreed that turning down $400+ M guaranteed with an option for more is easier said than done. (I think we are all agreed he doesn't accept $400 M if he doesn't have an option. If the team doesn't want to give an option in the middle of the 15 years then $450-500 would seem to be the minimum.)

By the way, our talk of Soto and how "disappointing" his 2022 was is reminiscent of things we said about Harper back in the day too. Harper's 2016 and 2018 were quite ordinary (but also quite full) seasons with declining defense. His 2014 and 2017 were injury-plagued. Many here seriously questioned whether he'd get a super-long deal and his deal wasn't exactly historic. But he got double digits in years and the first number in the total $ was still a 3. Even an "ordinary" Soto entering the FA market after his age 25 season will get double-digit years and a total that starts with a 4, quite possibly with an option in the middle somewhere. (Unless possibly he'd prefer 5/$280 and finds somebody will give it to him.)

Still assuming league-wide broadcast revenue doesn't drop by $1.5 B in the interim. I'd be very open to an insanely long, insanely rich deal right now if I were him, especially if it has an option in the middle.

I have expressed all too often here over the years on the mentality of hyper-competitive professional athletes - which is kind of all of them.

it's never about the amount of money, really. it's about whether they can get more than the similar guy who they consider themselves a little bit better than.

it was one thing for this 30 years ago, when the better contract might benefit your immediate family if you blew a lot of the main portion of funds on hookers and blow.

but today's athletes mostly don't focus on that stuff nearly as much (at least during the season), because their rivals don't - so they don't want to lose a competitive disadvantage.

but turning down a $400M contract because of the chance of getting a $500M deal is bat #### crazy.

especially if coming from a family of modest means, it's basically trying to maximize the f-you money you leave to your great-granddaughter Paris Hilton's doppelganger.

still, athletes gonna athlete.

I'm surprised how pessimistic ZiPS is. I can see the point that if the defensive decline is for real, then that's a red flag. But it's also interesting to look at that historical list. Note the top 5 are all 2B/SS/3B with plenty more towards the top of that list. I don't always know the position of the old-timers but I tend to ignore them anyway. The more modern list, limited to the IFs in that list:

Schmidt 57
Morgan 55
Boggs 45
Brett 34
Rolen 22 (fragile, that's a huge gap betwee Brett and Rolen)
Yount 22 (injury forced off IF)
Trammell 21
Bourdreau 18
Banks 17 (it all came apart at Manny's age -- age 30 was his last full SS season)
Wright 8 (serious chronic problem discovered at 31 I think)
Fregosi (serious injury at 29)

We could add a couple of others in here that didn't make Dan's cut -- Beltre 52 WAR, 42 oWAR; Brooks 40/24 ... but we could add Santo, Boyer and Hack too I suppose ... but we could also add Ripken (39 WAR), Larkin (30 WAR) and Jeter (46 oWAR) ... I'm not sure why Ripken's not in Dan's list, did I miss him?

It's a given that if Machado turns up lame over the next 2 years like Yount, Banks, Wright and Fregosi that this is a disaster or a very bad deal at best. Otherwise we have a realistic downside around 20 and a realistic upside around 45-50. I think this deal is too much by $30-40 ... i.e. he's probably a bit better than Turner ... but that wouldn't be disaster land. 20 WAR for $350 is pretty close to disaster land so that's not good.

Anyway if he's just an average 3B now and getting worse then this is bad. Possibly it's early enough to say he's not Schmidt, Brooks, Beltre with the glove in his 30s. But then again, Molitor had 45 WAR, Edgar 50. Manny's had a 138 OPS+ over the last 5 years, I'm curious what the projection looks like for that sort of hitter with at least average defense at 30?

#40 ... sure. But tied to that is that Boras knows that $400 would be a bargain (for anything over 10 years, maybe 11 given 2 are arb years). And Soto has $50 M already with a virtual guarantee of at least another $25 next year (even if he gets hurt this year) and a near certainty of another $50-75 M after that unless he gets really hurt. Baseball is a world where Cody Bellinger parlayed one awesome year into $64 M even though he's had some pathetic performance since then and he hasn't even reached (real) FA yet. Juan Soto's grandchildren are financially covered, what else is there at this point but FU money?

I've also noted in other threads that these deals seem priced as if a guy is expected to repeat ages 25-29 for ages 30-34 (or thereabouts). I don't think that's ever been true but it sure seems like teams think it will be (or $/WAR has really skyrocketed). For Manny that would be 24 WAR (plus a 2020 pro-rated bonus ... maybe compensating for less durability). Presumably 24 WAR these days costs something like $225-240 ... $125 for the last 5 years of Manny probably isn't good but if he pulls off the first part, he should still be about a 2.5-3 WAR player at 35 which would be OK.

Anyway if he's just an average 3B now and getting worse then this is bad. Possibly it's early enough to say he's not Schmidt, Brooks, Beltre with the glove in his 30s. But then again, Molitor had 45 WAR, Edgar 50. Manny's had a 138 OPS+ over the last 5 years, I'm curious what the projection looks like for that sort of hitter with at least average defense at 30?

It's even better in the past three seasons: 147. Dan seems convinced that his defense has dropped off but his OAA the past 3 years: 4 (in 60 games), 3, 9 (95th percentile). That's darn good. And it would be odd if defense is what's holding down his projection, since Bogaerts projects much better according to ZIPS:

Bogaerts 31-40: 26.7 WAR
Machado 31-40: 19.9 WAR
Bogearts age 31: 119 OPS+, 4.5 WAR
Machado age 31: 129 OPS+, 4.5 WAR
Bogearts age 35: 103 OPS+, 2.7 WAR
Machado age 35: 104 OPS+, 1.7 WAR

By age 35, they're essential equal hitters, with Bogaerts being a whole win better due to defense, playing time, and maybe some base running. That doesn't make sense to me from the outside. It almost seems like ZIPS looks at Machado and sees 3B, looks at Bogaerts and sees SS, and decides Machado will age worse. So all of this is to say that I too will take the over on his projection.

By the way, our talk of Soto and how "disappointing" his 2022 was is reminiscent of things we said about Harper back in the day too. Harper's 2016 and 2018 were quite ordinary (but also quite full) seasons with declining defense. His 2014 and 2017 were injury-plagued. Many here seriously questioned whether he'd get a super-long deal and his deal wasn't exactly historic. But he got double digits in years and the first number in the total $ was still a 3. Even an "ordinary" Soto entering the FA market after his age 25 season will get double-digit years and a total that starts with a 4, quite possibly with an option in the middle somewhere. (Unless possibly he'd prefer 5/$280 and finds somebody will give it to him.)

Yeah, you could certainly be right. I was certainly surprised that Harper still got the $300 mil+ deal that he did. But wasn't there talk of him getting $400 mil+ at one point (don't really remember).

On a more general note about this big, long contracts, didn't Ben Clemens at FG make a good case that the high interest rates are playing a role? I forget the exact specifics.

Agreed that the super-long deal with an option after year 6 or 7 might work for both but at this point Soto is just 2 years away at which point it seems very likely he'll get that 13+ year deal to cover the rest of his career (RSN collapse aside).

Two years away where he has to stay healthy and perform well, though. Or at least pretty well. But to what end? Is he turning down 12/420 with an opt out after 6 in hopes of getting 13/500 (after earning ~$60 mil in 2 years)? 14/600? I can't really say what he'll find more appealing, but I see a lot in favor of taking the deal with the opt out. Especially in light of your point that the broadcast revenue is in question.

The ol' 6/10th of a billion threshold! :)

Back in the nineties I predicted that baseball would see its first billion-dollar contract by 2020. Hasn't happened...yet.

Back in the nineties I predicted that baseball would see its first billion-dollar contract by 2020

Not sure I'd make that prediction until after A-Rod's contract, at the earliest. But the only way to get to a billion dollar contract is with a 20 year deal - that's still an AAV of $50 million. If you offered this contract after age 20 seasons, the player would need 7.5 fWAR to make it "worth it" - That would be Ott, Cobb, Kaline, Mantle, Griffey plus Harper and Soto. But the owner would be giving up their three cheap pre-arb years. Are they giving the same 20/$1B contract after a players age 22 season (through 42)? At a 19 fWAR minimum through age 22, you'd add Trout, Ted Williams, Foxx, A-Rod, Hornsby, Sherry Magee, Shoeless Joe, Willie Wells, and Eddie Mathews. The median post-22 fWAR for this group of non-active players is 82.4. You can argue Wells, Willams, and Jackson are missing some value due to racism/war/gambling, so maybe the median should be more around 90. That would be just over $11 million per remaining fWAR, which is high but not unreasonable. Worse case is through gambling/age/injury/short leash, they end up in the Magee/Griffey/Jackson group. Otherwise they're likely to be worth it.

But wasn't there talk of him getting $400 mil+ at one point (don't really remember).

There was (or such is my memory) following that monster year although I don't recall how seriously we treated that. But that's like now there's talk of Soto getting $500 M. If he continues to "disappoint" he won't get $500 (and maybe not even with some big years) but I think it likely he'll hold onto $400.

#48 ... that was back in the day when, if trands continued, by now the entire world economy would be nothing but baseball, healthcare and cafes. Instead it's nothing but vastly inflated real estate, healthcare and cafes.

45. Yeah, it's the NPV arguement that if you discount that contract at expected rates today vs discounting back four years ago the NPVs might be similar. That is, 10 million ten years from now is a lot less than everyone thought $10 million would be a few years back. I don't find this math to be super logical when you don't have a predictable long term environment. We've gone from deflation to super inflation in a matter of two years - we could easily be back to low rate/inflation again sooner than one thinks.

For Manny that would be 24 WAR (plus a 2020 pro-rated bonus ... maybe compensating for less durability). Presumably 24 WAR these days costs something like $225-240 ... $125 for the last 5 years of Manny probably isn't good but if he pulls off the first part, he should still be about a 2.5-3 WAR player at 35 which would be OK.

Hi Walt. I want to revisit this to double check the numbers and to ask a question about price of WAR. From the fangraphs link here, I see a projection of: 20.6 WAR for the contract:

https://external-preview.redd.it/z6EsFr7970WcX_shNl-17q7idp_d2LxqHNOZWEF4I4E.jpg?auto=webp&v=enabled&s=9a323346b695ecb1e1abfce5aa319a156681076b

From a cursory reading of free agent signings this winter I think the price is somewhere about $10/WAR. BUT that is for the optomistic projection. As I understand (and the discussion we had a few weeks ago) FG WAR pre season adds up to 1200 WAR for the league but reality is some of that (approx 16% will be lost due to injury, lack of PT, etc). So its more like 10M per 0.84 WAR or closer to $12M/(realistic WAR).

SO a huge overpay. Or am I missing something? I probably am, looking for your thoughts.

but today's athletes mostly don't focus on that stuff nearly as much (at least during the season), because their rivals don't - so they don't want to lose a competitive disadvantage.

Hi HOwie: I am having trouble following the reasoning. YOu are saying that if our theoretical athlete were to try to get the highest contract possible he would be putting himself at a competitive disadvantage? How so? That's the only way I read the sentence but maybe I am missing it.

An a Soto fantasy owner....he was disappointing from a fantasy standpoint because he didn't get pitched to all year. I recall an article about his increased chase rate, maybe out of boredom*. Here's hoping he gets more chances to hit this year in a (much) better lineup.

*here's my fact check: his chase rate in 2022 was about his career average, although significantly higher (19.9%) than in 2021 (15.1%).

Hi HOwie: I am having trouble following the reasoning. YOu are saying that if our theoretical athlete were to try to get the highest contract possible he would be putting himself at a competitive disadvantage? How so? That's the only way I read the sentence but maybe I am missing it.

yes, the sentence above the excerpt mentioned "hookers and blow."

back in the 1970s, for example, young athletes had much different lifestyles, and they could get away with it because so did so many of their competitors. once a critical mass of players put more of an emphasis on optimizing their physical fitness (especially during the season), others followed suit - otherwise, they would be at a competitive disadvantage.

Chris Evert was basically a ball returner when she reached No. 1.
then along came Martina Navratilova, who revolutionized the sport by focusing on increasing her body's strength to an unprecedented degree.

Evert knew she had to adapt, or her career would die. and being the competitor that she was, she did. then the other women had to follow suit, or else.