It's his third six-year contract, although this one apparently replaces the last year of the previous deal. Probably record, until he signs his fourth one in 2028.

Most similar careers to Darvish by ERA+ and Games Started, through the first ten years of a career:



Provided by Stathead.com: View Stathead Tool Used
Generated 2/9/2023.

The deal, which contains a full no-trade provision, starts this season and runs through 2028, when Darvish, 36, will be 42 years old. The average annual value of the deal is $18 million, which is $3 million less than he previously earned annually. The structure helps the Padres, who have the third-highest payroll in baseball, against the luxury tax.

It’s actually even a bit better for the Padres. The contract is reportedly front-loaded - the 1st season $30M & $78M over the remaining 5 years. I hadn’t seen it previously reported (or have already forgotten it), but another article on this deal says the new CBA provides that when a player is traded, only the remainder of his contract now counts toward the new team’s luxury tax. That would make Darvish more tradable on the backend of the contract, although there would still be the matter of the no-trade provision mentioned in the excerpt. However, this article contains no mention of a no-trade clause, while noting that his 10 & 5 no-trade rights would kick in after 2025.

I hadn’t seen it previously reported (or have already forgotten it), but another article on this deal says the new CBA provides that when a player is traded, only the remainder of his contract now counts toward the new team’s luxury tax.

The 'Hosmer Rule' - dropped his AAV from $18M per to $15M when the Sox acquired him, and he would have dropped further to $13M per if the Padres had held him through 2022.

I hadn’t seen it previously reported (or have already forgotten it), but another article on this deal says the new CBA provides that when a player is traded, only the remainder of his contract now counts toward the new team’s luxury tax.

Interesting (thanks #4) ... but does the old team get charged for the difference? If the Padres are paying a CBT based on $18 AAV for Darvish then trade him and the new team pays based on $15 AAV, do the Padres get charged the $3 difference? Anyway, some incentive to frontload deals a bit more than before.

This is a funny deal. Darvish is still very good but what sort of deal would he get as a 36-yo FA? I can't imagine he projects to more than 600 innings over the next 4 years (even that seems a stretch), probably about 8-10 WAR (even no decline would be about 12 WAR). I guess that might still be 4/$75-80, so another 2/$28 on top of that isn't extreme but it seems unnecessary. And after missing all of 2015, half of 2016 and most of 2018, he's not the guy I'd expect to see on the mound at 41.

He didn't come to the US until age 25. Still, not breaking through as a SP until 25 is fairly common. Even if he does pitch through this contract, he'll be lucky to reach 2500 career IP and 150 wins. His win totals seem particularly odd -- his 16 in 2022 match his career high from way back in 2012. He has a 13-win season and a 10-win season. Four double-figure seasons in 11 years (2+ missed). His 4.4 bWAR in 2022 was also the 2nd-highest of his career.

Anyway, good pitcher, liked him when he was on the Cubs, good for him, I hope he's worth this contract and more.

Padres are spending like they actually want to be contenders. This is refreshing from a mid-market club imho. I'm much happier with the Padres pushing the limits of what they can than the other NY team doing it, precisely because most MLB teams could spend like the Padres if they wanted to, at least during a competitive cycle (and pay off debt during a down cycle when rebuilding in the almost necessary tanking phase for non-major markets -- except Tampa which is just....yeah....)

does the old team get charged for the difference? If the Padres are paying a CBT based on $18 AAV for Darvish then trade him and the new team pays based on $15 AAV, do the Padres get charged the $3 difference? Anyway, some incentive to frontload deals a bit more than before.

Don't believe so, the recalculation occurs only when a player is traded, there are no retro-active charges to the previous team. Hosmer is only listed as a $12.28M tax hit to the Padres on both Spotrac and Cots for 2023, which I think makes sense, because his contract would reset again when the Sox released him - meaning the AAV was $13M. I believe the Sox are on the hook for a few million as well, $15M AAV when he was traded to the Sox, minus the $12.26 from the Padres to cover his $13M contract minus the league minimum Boston was paying him. And I think the Cubs signing Hosmer dropped Boston's portion of that AAV by the league min as well, which Spotrac lists as a $1.75M hit for the Sox this year, increasing back to $2.5 in '24 & 25' if he is not signed either one of those years. The one thing I am really confused about is Spotrac still shows Boston paying the league min to Hosmer this year + league min from the Cubs + $12.28 from the Padres, meaning he would be getting paid $13.72M this year. I'd think the Boston portion goes away with the Cubs signing him, maybe his contract info just hasn't been updated...

This is what it looks like to build a World Series team. They might fall short but at least they are trying to load up for their 2-3 year window. The deal does a couple of things.

1. They are hoping to get 6-9 WAR and are paying $108 million for it. Not a horrible bet. ZIPs say so it's a horrible bet though
2. Front load the deal and if you have to abandon ship early, he might be movable
3. Most importantly it's a signal to machado and Soto that they intend to spend whatever it takes to put a World Series contender on the field.

Front load the deal and if you have to abandon ship early, he might be movable

Immaterial. Whether he's paid $12 or $15 or $18 in years 5+, if he's worth $12 the only difference is how much money the Padres have to put in the deal. He's no more or less "movable" at $12 than he is at $18. (OK, he's more movable at $12 than $18 if he's actually worth more than $12 but then there's no reason to move him.) And, financially (CBT aside), the Padres would rather pay an extra $6 M in 2027 than in 2022.

However, assuming #4 is correct, there are some CBT advantages. Padres get charged $18 for the effective period then later, even if they have to eat part of his $12-15 salary, their CBT hit is reduced if he can be traded. If I understand it right, the Padres might end up paying, say, $96 of the $108 M but get a CBT hit for only $84 (and the new team getting a CBT hit of $6 and $12 M of the CBT hit just disappearing).

This seems like a bad bet for the Padres. Not Hosmer-level bad, but not a commitment you’d want to see your team making.

This seems really fishy. It seems very unlikely to me that the Padres are interested in paying Darvish to pitch for them beyond year 4 (maybe even year 3). They are simply deferring some of the money to later years. I wonder how egregious it will have to be for one of these contracts to get called into question by MLB.