Jump to content

Miguel Cabrera new deal gets him 30m a year


Greg

Recommended Posts

They played past their prime. In their time, they would play as long as someone would pay them because salaries were ridiculously low. I'm not saying guys can't perform from 35-40, I'm saying they aren't worth 30 million.
Excuse me. They played past their prime? Aaron had his career year at age 37 and was .274 .370 .517 .887 145 with an average of 27 HR and 76 RBI from 37-42 Williams hit .388 in his age 38 year and had his second highest OPS+. From 38-41 he averaged: .329 .461 .609 1.071 185. Musial had his best year at age 36 in terms of OPS and from 36-42 he averaged: .305 .388 .503 .890 132 Nobody was holding on to them because they were cheap. Nobody today could put up those numbers at that age.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 144
  • Created
  • Last Reply
They played past their prime. In their time, they would play as long as someone would pay them because salaries were ridiculously low. I'm not saying guys can't perform from 35-40, I'm saying they aren't worth 30 million.

And I would agree with you. But let's say you have a guy who is going to be worth $40 mm in year 1 and $20 mm in year 10 and will be worth an average of $30 mm/yr over 10 years. I have no problem paying him the 10/$300 mm even if ge'll be overpaid in the final 5 years, so long as he's being underpaid in the first 5. I'd rather do that than pay the guy his full value in the first five years of the deal and then dump him, so long as I think he'll still be a solid contributor in the back part of the deal.

My initial posts in this thread were about the significant value gap between Cabrera and Davis, and I hold to that point. However, as I've looked at this, I do think the extension is going to bite the Tigers very hard in the end. I think the overpayment in the back years will outweigh the excess value in the earlier years, especially when you consider that the Tigers already had Cabrera under contract for the next two years at $22 mm per. We shouldn't look at this as a 10 year, $292 mm deal that begins at age 31, but as an 8 year, $250 mm deal that begins at age 33 and where the Tigers have taken on all the risk that something happens in the next two years that significantly hurts Cabrera's long term value. Their previous extension of Cabrera (8/$152 mm) was genius, but this time they've overpaid significantly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Excuse me. They played past their prime? Aaron had his career year at age 37 and was .274 .370 .517 .887 145 with an average of 27 HR and 76 RBI from 37-42 Williams hit .388 in his age 38 year and had his second highest OPS+. From 38-41 he averaged: .329 .461 .609 1.071 185. Musial had his best year at age 36 in terms of OPS and from 36-42 he averaged: .305 .388 .503 .890 132 Nobody was holding on to them because they were cheap. Nobody today could put up those numbers at that age.

All those guys are smaller framed men whose bodies wont deteriorate as easily as Miggys. in three years Miggy wont be hitting 35+ homers but could still maintain the average. His body will start ro break down. Miggy was hurt all of last year I believe, even though he played through it. At somepoint in this contract Detroit will regret it like the Angels are doing with Pujols and Hamilton.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And I would agree with you. But let's say you have a guy who is going to be worth $40 mm in year 1 and $20 mm in year 10 and will be worth an average of $30 mm/yr over 10 years. I have no problem paying him the 10/$300 mm even if ge'll be overpaid in the final 5 years, so long as he's being underpaid in the first 5.

You wouldnt feel that way if you were the owner. Obviously your reasoning is why they ultimately gave him the deal. But they won't be happy about the deal in 4 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You wouldnt feel that way if you were the owner. Obviously your reasoning is why they ultimately gave him the deal. But they won't be happy about the deal in 4 years.

Sure I would. I care about the overall value of the deal, not whether one particular part of the contract was good or bad. If anything, I'd rather backload it due to the time value of money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Barring injury that causes him to miss a large portion of any of the next three or so seasons, I find it hard to believe his overall production won't exceed the cost. He'll get overpaid on the back end (likely) but will be worth more than $30 MM a year for at least a few more years, I'd imagine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Baseball is just his field of entertainment. Think of it in terms of dollars per viewer/spectator.

Last year, Bruce Springsteen made an estimated 1.5 million net for himself per concert date, after all expenses paid. At 30 songs, that would be 50,000 per song...same as a Miggy strikeout or popup or hit. I think Bruce is underpaid..lol.[video=youtube_share;L-Ds-FXGGQg]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Frobby has the right analysis. No convincing reason to think this is anything but a solid deal for Detroit. He's a stud on an historic level.

But will he be 10 years from now? 5 years from now? Much rather invest in Scherzer in his prime.

Pujols, Hamilton, A-Rod, Texeira...all of these deals look like market value at the time for the best player in the game but turn out to be epic mistakes 4-5 years into the contract.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Frobby has the right analysis. No convincing reason to think this is anything but a solid deal for Detroit. He's a stud on an historic level.

Except that I changed my mind overnight about the merits of this deal. He's still a stud on a historic level, but I don't think he produces $250 mm in value at ages 33-40, even if you assume a good bit of salary inflation. He'd need to produce about 35-40 WAR in those 8 years for the deal to make sense. I just don't see it at those ages. If he hadn't already been under contract for the next two seasons at a pretty cheap price (considering his current levels of production, I might have felt differently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, I should have left out the "Frobby" part of the quote. I saw you clarified your take. I was responding directly to Stotle.

No problem. It's an interesting question. Hank Aaron was worth 46 WAR from ages 33-40. At today's prices, he'd be worth the 8/$250 mm extension. But Frank Robinson was worth 27 WAR -- not worth it. Carl Yasrtzemski was worth 25 WAR -- not worth it. Stan Musial was worth 34 WAR -- not quite worth it. Ted Williams was worth 36 WAR -- borderline worth it. These are all guys you think of as having remained very good players up through age 40. For every one of them, there are probably three guys who were really good at age 30 and then fizzled. The Cabrera deal could work out, but it seems very risky.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No problem. It's an interesting question. Hank Aaron was worth 46 WAR from ages 33-40. At today's prices, he'd be worth the 8/$250 mm extension. But Frank Robinson was worth 27 WAR -- not worth it. Carl Yasrtzemski was worth 25 WAR -- not worth it. Stan Musial was worth 34 WAR -- not quite worth it. Ted Williams was worth 36 WAR -- borderline worth it. These are all guys you think of as having remained very good players up through age 40. For every one of them, there are probably three guys who were really good at age 30 and then fizzled. The Cabrera deal could work out, but it seems very risky.

Thanks...agreed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No problem. It's an interesting question. Hank Aaron was worth 46 WAR from ages 33-40. At today's prices, he'd be worth the 8/$250 mm extension. But Frank Robinson was worth 27 WAR -- not worth it. Carl Yasrtzemski was worth 25 WAR -- not worth it. Stan Musial was worth 34 WAR -- not quite worth it. Ted Williams was worth 36 WAR -- borderline worth it. These are all guys you think of as having remained very good players up through age 40. For every one of them, there are probably three guys who were really good at age 30 and then fizzled. The Cabrera deal could work out, but it seems very risky.

Aaron also had a spike in production that would not look out of place in the late 90's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...