Jump to content

Davis Signs With Baltimore (7/$161M, incl $42M deferred)


TonySoprano

Recommended Posts

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">tigers are interesting in that they seriously considered davis before he went back to baltimore & owner ilitch is in to win</p>— Jon Heyman (@JonHeyman) <a href="

">January 18, 2016</a></blockquote>

<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">part of the tigers' hierarchy actually favored signing davis, but ultimately there were future luxury-tax concerns</p>— Jon Heyman (@JonHeyman) <a href="

">January 18, 2016</a></blockquote>

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
I think we all just need to be happy that the team made significant free agent signings. I am not privy to the negotiations so I have no idea if the overpaid or not. I am happy that they are spending money....its DD job to determine what's best for the team. I preferred Upton to everyone but I'm not a professional talent evaluator.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Me either. I think we're in the minority here. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">tigers are interesting in that they seriously considered davis before he went back to baltimore & owner ilitch is in to win</p>— Jon Heyman (@JonHeyman) <a href="
">January 18, 2016</a></blockquote>

<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">part of the tigers' hierarchy actually favored signing davis, but ultimately there were future luxury-tax concerns</p>— Jon Heyman (@JonHeyman) <a href="

">January 18, 2016</a></blockquote>

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

Curious as to who all else was considering Davis in the final days. I was kind of annoyed with the fact that it looks like we bid against ourselves but it's nice to know that the FO got it done.

I've been just trying to think positive about this deal since it's been announced. I think we can all agree that this will probably be pretty bad for the last 3-4 years but the REAL fear is that he just sucks the whole time through.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Curious as to who all else was considering Davis in the final days. I was kind of annoyed with the fact that it looks like we bid against ourselves but it's nice to know that the FO got it done.

I've been just trying to think positive about this deal since it's been announced. I think we can all agree that this will probably be pretty bad for the last 3-4 years but the REAL fear is that he just sucks the whole time through.

FO got their pound of flesh on the deferred money. At 7/150 it was 4 million deferred. Now it's 42 mill? CMIIW. Here's an extra million per year. 161

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll take it because more free agents are likely to sign here in the future. They paid Davis money, they pay Machado (fingers crossed), other will come knocking

I think that problem was solved well before Davis signed. The Orioles became enticing several years ago when the culture was changed. At least for hitters anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All the deferred money definitely makes me hate it less. It's still a super risky contract for a guy I think has a significant chance of being completely finished by 33/34. His offensive profile is still volatile and a 7 year deal is scary. Yeah 17 a year isn't as bad as 23, but 17 is still a lot of coin if you're getting nothing for it for 3 or 4 years of the deal.

This is my take as well. It's a good deal for a while and then it's a bad deal. All in, still a bad deal, but less awful due to the deferrals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

M

That's how it was reported but no one really knows how much money was deferred in that first offer. Just like a lot of details were reported wrong, initially, yesterday. Angelos loves deferrals. Wouldn't be surprised to hear the first offer had a lot of deferred money as well. Knowing the true details of that first offer kind of tells the story of which offer was actually better and if Boras had to take less now.

If you want my guess, the $1.4 mm/yr from 2032-36 was added in the final negotiation. That adds up to $7 mm and is the difference between $154 mm and $161 mm but since it is deferred for 16-20 years it's worth about half of that, depending on the discount rate you use.

Whether that was a pure concession by Angelos, or was traded for more deferrals on the original $154 mm, is anybody's guess.

I take issue with the idea by some posters that having $3.5 mm/yr committed from 2022-31 and $1.4 mm/yr in 2032-36 is so small that won't be felt at the time it's paid. The impact is less than if it was paid now, but it's still the kind of money that could get you a useful player or two in any given season. But with salary inflation being what it is, those sums won't buy as much by then as they do today (Kim and Flaherty, basically).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Optimistically, yes. I hope he is an exception and not the rule but I fully expect him to provide little to no value the last 3-4 years of the deal. I also can't really be confident about the first few either, since he has only been worth the 17 million he will be paid twice in his career, and that was in his prime. Davis is really risky, if you ask me.

Fair, however, a few points:

1) The "first few" years of the deal will still be in his prime, using the standard 28 - 32 prime often referred to.

2) In the two years where he passed that $17M number he provided a lot of excess value (BBref has him at 7.1 WAR in 2013 and 5.1 in 2015). We all know 2014 was not a good season (that said, both BBref and Fangraphs have it as above replacement, FWIW), but 2012 WAR is hard to judge because of him playing all over the place, so the defensive numbers may be a bit wonky.

3) I am not arguing that it's not a risk, but considering the deferred money, I think it's a good one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there any hope that he fails the physical

Perhaps they do a tox screen and his levels of nicotine and Aderall come back so high that the Dr's recommend that the O's back out of the deal

Hey, I can dream can't I?

CD is not on adderall, not sure why you continue to ignore this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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




×
×
  • Create New...