Jump to content

Offseason Rumors and Deals Around MLB


neveradoubt

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I think in order for the "value" math to work out Price has to do something like

4.5

4.0

3.5

3.0

2.5

2.0

1.5

with FA prices continuing to climb at the same rate. Not impossible, but assumes health and no steep decline period (which is probably not a safe bet, in my opinion). Factoring in those risks and you probably come close to around a $160-175 MM deal over seven years (ballpark)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think in order for the "value" math to work out Price has to do something like

4.5

4.0

3.5

3.0

2.5

2.0

1.5

with FA prices continuing to climb at the same rate. Not impossible, but assumes health and no steep decline period (which is probably not a safe bet, in my opinion). Factoring in those risks and you probably come close to around a $160-175 MM deal over seven years (ballpark)?

Just going with that fellow's math. Never looked at it myself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think in order for the "value" math to work out Price has to do something like

4.5

4.0

3.5

3.0

2.5

2.0

1.5

with FA prices continuing to climb at the same rate. Not impossible, but assumes health and no steep decline period (which is probably not a safe bet, in my opinion). Factoring in those risks and you probably come close to around a $160-175 MM deal over seven years (ballpark)?

And it makes sense. Boston outbid St Louis by at least 30 million.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And it makes sense. Boston outbid St Louis by at least 30 million.

I'm sure whatever STL/BOS are using to calculate are more accurate (and at a minimum better informed). I was just doing back-of-napkin scratching. But, yeah, I think it gets in the ballpark.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Report: Ben Zobrist’s price tag is currently four years, $60*million <a href="https://t.co/ioSi5dDvjT">https://t.co/ioSi5dDvjT</a></p>— HardballTalk (@HardballTalk) <a href="

">December 2, 2015</a></blockquote>

<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Report: Ben Zobrist’s price tag is currently four years, $60*million <a href="https://t.co/ioSi5dDvjT">https://t.co/ioSi5dDvjT</a></p>— HardballTalk (@HardballTalk) <a href="
">December 2, 2015</a></blockquote>

<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

I said he was going to get a huge overpay.

Now can folks stop suggesting him?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Report: Ben Zobrist?s price tag is currently four years, $60*million <a href="https://t.co/ioSi5dDvjT">https://t.co/ioSi5dDvjT</a></p>? HardballTalk (@HardballTalk) <a href="
">December 2, 2015</a></blockquote>

<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

No way I give that guy four years. Let some other sucker do it. 3/45 is still an overpay, but potentially not too bad.

The more and more I see these ridiculous numbers thrown around the more I think Davis is going to be a 6/150 guy. Rather give Alex Gordon 4/88.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I said he was going to get a huge overpay.

Now can folks stop suggesting him?

Not my money. Plus, he's the kind of gamer who I can see just not declining or even bouncing back big in his late 30s. Guess we'll see if the Orioles are really committed to going for it by signing guys who know how to win or if they're going to dumpster dive again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not my money. Plus, he's the kind of gamer who I can see just not declining or even bouncing back big in his late 30s. Guess we'll see if the Orioles are really committed to going for it by signing guys who know how to win or if they're going to dumpster dive again.

Uh, Drungo?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I deserve a championship, and it's time for Angelos to let loose of all of that cash he's been hoarding. Sometimes you have to lock the door to mom's basement, put away the spreadsheets, and just sign all the guys who feel right.

Preach, brother, preach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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




  • Posts

    • Not that I am in any way full agreement, but this is a classic post.  Doesn't Machado play chess?  Maybe we could get some chess boards in the clubhouse and junk all the legos.  Not all great baseball men are John McGraw bad asses.  Some can be Christy Mathewsons as well, I suppose.  Not that I imagine today's young players much resembling McGraw or Mathewson, but they are the first two contrasting old school types that come to mind.  I will say just based on his postseason alone I'd much rather have Tatis over Machado.
    • Well I refuse to believe that only the O's have no players that want extensions.
    • Customer advocate groups have tried for decades to force the cable companies to allow channel by channel (a la carte) subscriptions, but the cable companies fought this because it would result in far less revenue (than forcing us to pay for a hundred channels we don't watch).  The government refused to intervene, so we've been stuck with the existing business model for all this time.  Streaming is forcing the change because streaming -- for now -- is an a la carte model.   MLB's fear must be this: if the regional sports network cable channel model goes away, will most users pay anywhere close to what these channels made as part of a cable bundle for just one streaming channel where all you watch are Orioles games (or maybe Orioles and Nats games -- whatever the case may be)?  So if you pay $100/month for cable with MASN, you are probably watching at least a few other channels too.  But will you pay $15/month (or whatever the price may be) just to watch the Orioles -- even during the months when there is no baseball?  The existing basic cable model has been quite stable because people tend to watch at least 5 or 6 channels.  They're reluctant to cancel their whole cable package just because baseball season is over -- or they've been too busy to watch many games this season.  But with a single streaming channel of just baseball there is bound to be a far more unstable revenue base.  All the streaming channels are already dealing with this problem.  I think MLB is maybe reluctant to go all in on streaming for this reason.  Perhaps they're looking for new different model that could allow them to bundle individual team channels with Netflix, or Prime, or maybe with your cell phone plan or something else.  This could give them some stability, but it could also be a turn off for the more hardcore fans who just want the Orioles and little else.  It will be interesting to see how this all shakes out and if MLB, and the Orioles, will prosper or suffer as a result.
    • What if they don’t want to be extended?
    • I don't want the O's to lose much, but I do want there to be a massive streaming deal with Amazon or some other company the O's are left out of.  This blackout nonsense is bullsh!t. 🤬
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...