|
|
Post by Red Sox GM on Dec 10, 2021 16:01:26 GMT -5
I get your point Oakland about 30m contracts, that is why we usually offer one free drop to every new owner so they can make that decision to keep or release someone that they truly don’t want that may be overpriced.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dodgers GM on Dec 10, 2021 22:31:48 GMT -5
Argh, I do see the point. But I also see it as new owners have the high likelihood of inheriting bad contracts that were signed in free agency and extensions. Sorry, but if we were to use that logic on everything how can we allow 6 year, $30M a year (almost 1/4 of a teams cap before any sort of penalties) contracts to be given out? (This is not suppose to be a butthurt tone, just down for some good discussion!) Thank you to everyone that replied, I truly appreciate it! My counter to that would be that pretty much any contract can be moved and many others can be worked around. I signed Chris Sale to a 6 year 30 mill deal 4 years ago and he's gone through 3 teams to get back to me with 2 years left lol. In addition we've had very few max contracts like that given out, I think they were all handed out in the last few offseasons. Luis Castillo, Trout, Kershaw, Sale are the few that I can remember (and Trout may only be 5 years not 6). Lots of 30 mill for a year or two or three but those aren't un-moveable either. I do agree that for new owners taking on old contracts can be a pain to deal with but that's the biggest part of why I was against the idea, mainly to avoid backloading and creating more of those bad contracts. I wouldn't want a 6 year max deal ending at 35 mill for example. |
|
|
|
Post by Padres Alan GM on Dec 11, 2021 9:50:36 GMT -5
Argh, I do see the point. But I also see it as new owners have the high likelihood of inheriting bad contracts that were signed in free agency and extensions. Sorry, but if we were to use that logic on everything how can we allow 6 year, $30M a year (almost 1/4 of a teams cap before any sort of penalties) contracts to be given out? (This is not suppose to be a butthurt tone, just down for some good discussion!) Thank you to everyone that replied, I truly appreciate it! My counter to that would be that pretty much any contract can be moved and many others can be worked around. I signed Chris Sale to a 6 year 30 mill deal 4 years ago and he's gone through 3 teams to get back to me with 2 years left lol. In addition we've had very few max contracts like that given out, I think they were all handed out in the last few offseasons. Luis Castillo, Trout, Kershaw, Sale are the few that I can remember (and Trout may only be 5 years not 6). Lots of 30 mill for a year or two or three but those aren't un-moveable either. I do agree that for new owners taking on old contracts can be a pain to deal with but that's the biggest part of why I was against the idea, mainly to avoid backloading and creating more of those bad contracts. I wouldn't want a 6 year max deal ending at 35 mill for example. I understand your point but this can be fixed……for example 1. Within 24 hours of a winning bid in free agency, a team must post their chosen salary structure. If no posting within 24 hours the average AAV will be accepted for all years. 2. A max variance for contracts is as follows: AAV between 10M-15M - max variance of 2M (i.e. 8M min to 17M max) Example Contract: 3 years 10M - 8M / 10M / 12M / vice versa 3. Teams are limited to signing 3 contracts with variance. 4. If a player's contract is extended, they are extended using the AAV of the contract ……max variance of 2M is not going to hurt any new owner…….put it on the front end that way the owner will Take on the variance not the new owner |
|
