Andre Ethier - Contract Extension 5 Years, $85 million

[reillymcshane]

Looks like a overpay. Plus there's a sixth year option of some kind.

 

The guy is solid, but he's not great - which is what you expect for $17 million a year. He's 30, meaning he's not likely to suddenly get better. If anything, he's likely to get worse over the length of the contract.

 

Perhaps I'm wrong, and maybe not taking into account anticipated revenue growth. But This seems like an overpay by $5 milliion a year or so.

 

 

I guess better the Dodgers than us for a deal like this. They can probably afford the deal.

[HiAndTight]

Looks like a overpay. Plus there's a sixth year option of some kind.

 

The guy is solid, but he's not great - which is what you expect for $17 million a year. He's 30, meaning he's not likely to suddenly get better. If anything, he's likely to get worse over the length of the contract.

 

Perhaps I'm wrong, and maybe not taking into account anticipated revenue growth. But This seems like an overpay by $5 milliion a year or so.

 

 

I guess better the Dodgers than us for a deal like this. They can probably afford the deal.

 

 

 

I was fully prepared to come in here and argue with you...until looking at his numbers. Hell, he's not even as good as Corey Hart. He's consistently a very solid player. Roughly a 3 war type player, but I don't know why, call it my ignorance, but you hear so often about these absurd hot streaks he goes on and the hitting streaks and you just simply expect more out of him.

 

So...yeah, terrible deal. And I don't think the Dodgers CAN afford these deals. Yeah, maybe some of those who initially thought the ownership group overpaid by about 1 billion, especially without exclusive parking rights may end up being wrong, but they're really extended right now, and a bad deal is a bad deal.

 

They're either going to be that ownership group who's going to way overspend early and then have to cut back until everything straightens out, or maybe they just like their guys that much they want to keep them together.

 

I thought Greinke was a strong possibility in LA. Not for the trade deadline per say as I don't see that elite prospect(Evoldi..Lee..Webster..meh, not for Greinke IMO). But I wonder just how much they'll spend. They'll have a LOT of money tied up with Kemp, Bills, Ethier, and Kershaw, they're financial issues prior to buying the team and now all the ownership group has put into the team.

 

 

By the way, is it just me, or does anyone else think Corey Hart's value just keeps going up with these players who are at WORST slightly better than him get massive deals?

[Outlander]

By the way, is it just me, or does anyone else think Corey Hart's value just keeps going up with these players who are at WORST slightly better than him get massive deals?

 

I don't know if his value goes up but considering the Ethier contract and being compared to Werth and Crawford at the time, it was a great signing.

[monty57]

Hart's trade value has to go up when deals like this are signed:

 

1) Any GM looking at options for upgrading RF/1B, will realize that they can either pay 5 years / $85MM on the open market or they could trade for Hart at a much cheaper rate.

2) There's depletion as other good RF's are signed to long-term deals there is a smaller supply of RF's available for an "upgrade."

 

However, every day that goes by Hart's value goes down as that's one less day he could be on the receiving team's roster. By the time we're may to "shop" Hart (this offseason), he will only have one year of service time remaining and there will be new names added to the supply.

 

Ethier's deal shows how much inflation we've seen in baseball in a relatively short period. This deal is pretty much par for the course in today's market, but it makes Hart's deal look like an absolute steal. It's also why guys like Greinke are licking their chops about how much they'll get in free agency.

[Baldkin]

Ethier's deal shows how much inflation we've seen in baseball in a relatively short period. This deal is pretty much par for the course in today's market, but it makes Hart's deal look like an absolute steal. It's also why guys like Greinke are licking their chops about how much they'll get in free agency.

 

I really feel like this off season is going to mimick the 2008 off-season and there will be a TON of horrible contracts put out there.

 

I really hope DM avoids the mid level dregs and only goes after the high end guys.

[nate82]

Hart's trade value has to go up when deals like this are signed:

 

1) Any GM looking at options for upgrading RF/1B, will realize that they can either pay 5 years / $85MM on the open market or they could trade for Hart at a much cheaper rate.

2) There's depletion as other good RF's are signed to long-term deals there is a smaller supply of RF's available for an "upgrade."

 

However, every day that goes by Hart's value goes down as that's one less day he could be on the receiving team's roster. By the time we're may to "shop" Hart (this offseason), he will only have one year of service time remaining and there will be new names added to the supply.

 

Yes his trade value does go up but then it comes right back down. Hart has a limited no trade clause and he can block deals to 15 clubs. I believe all of the 15 clubs Hart can block a trade to are teams that have their spring training facilities in Florida. That limited no trade clause brings Hart's value down a lot as it limits the teams he can go to unless Hart waives his no trade clause and I highly doubt he will.

[umphrey]

Arent the Dodgers due for a big TV deal?

[umphrey]

double

[logan82]

Probably a better hitter than Hart.(his home stadium and in general the NL West stadiums are all pretty tough on hitters.) Seems like a bad contract for a guy who turned is already 30.

 

This contract also illustrates that even though we have a $100m payroll, we are still the have nots.

[reillymcshane]

Ethier's deal shows how much inflation we've seen in baseball in a relatively short period. This deal is pretty much par for the course in today's market, but it makes Hart's deal look like an absolute steal. It's also why guys like Greinke are licking their chops about how much they'll get in free agency.

 

I really feel like this off season is going to mimick the 2008 off-season and there will be a TON of horrible contracts put out there.

 

I really hope DM avoids the mid level dregs and only goes after the high end guys.

This is a good point. You just gotta wonder what sort of crazy money is going to be thrown around. Let's just hope we don't get caught up in it and make another Suppan signing.

[brains and braun]

I would be mad if the Brewers signed Ethier to this deal.

[HiAndTight]

Hart's trade value has to go up when deals like this are signed:

 

1) Any GM looking at options for upgrading RF/1B, will realize that they can either pay 5 years / $85MM on the open market or they could trade for Hart at a much cheaper rate.

2) There's depletion as other good RF's are signed to long-term deals there is a smaller supply of RF's available for an "upgrade."

 

However, every day that goes by Hart's value goes down as that's one less day he could be on the receiving team's roster. By the time we're may to "shop" Hart (this offseason), he will only have one year of service time remaining and there will be new names added to the supply.

Ethier's deal shows how much inflation we've seen in baseball in a relatively short period. This deal is pretty much par for the course in today's market, but it makes Hart's deal look like an absolute steal. It's also why guys like Greinke are licking their chops about how much they'll get in free agency.

 

Teams have always overpaid for players and they've always overpaid for their own players. I don't see this as a sign of this significant inflation nor do I think this impact Greinke at all other than the Dodgers have less money to sign him. People seem to forget 5-10 years ago and the Kevin Brown, Mo Vaugn, Driefort, Bagwell, Helton, Soriano, Park, Barry Zito, Tori Hunter, Vernon Wells, Kevin Millwood, Juan Guanzalez, Jason Giambi, AJ Burnett, Richie Sexson, Juilo Lugo, Gary Matthews Jr., Denny Neagle, Anduw Jones, and OF COURSE Mike Hampton and his 7 year 128 million dollar deal, and I could go on and on from the last 90's to the early 2000's before contracts for the top talents leveled out and may well have actually declined a touch relative to performance.

 

I think this concern over this newfound hyperinflation in baseball has been overstated for the last 15 years. You'll almost always see some inflation, but this has been a unique period. Pujols may be the greaetest hitter of the last 50 years and a top 5 of all time. Prince was an overpay, BUT was just 28 years old and the Tigers seemed to realize he was an over pay and their owner Illitch is just that desperate to sign win that world series. Weaver signed a below market deal, Cain signed a deal that I hardly think qualifies as alarming. So what you have, as ALWAYS is some isolated stupid signings. Now as a Dodger fan I could see why they'd be so high on Ethier. He's off to a huge year, he's a fan favorite when they need the fans back, and he is a pretty good player. Overpaid, absolutely. Much like Aaron Rowand. But in the end, I'm not see all this inflation. I do suspect we'll see some big salaries this off-season if several players aren't re-signed. You have a Cy Young pitcher on the market who MIGHT be the 3rd most sought after, an MVP and HUGE Media draw in Hamilton Brian McCann, arguably the best catcher in the game(though he may have a team option year..), David Wright(he DOES have a team option, but a very large one), and just an abnormally high number of quality pitchers.

 

So there have always been bad contracts handed out, especially to fan favorites for players to get overpaid. Either again was and is overpaid, but the Dodger sare trying to build around he and Kemp, Kershaw and Bills, and Ethier has been a guy who has routinely put up up very solid numbers, has an .844 OPS, and as much as anything, is having a BIG year leading the league in RBI's and helping to carry the Dodgers the alst month with Kemp out.

 

 

So that's my opinion. I don't believe we're seeing the start of this out of control absurd spending and it seems like ever 3-4 years this prediction is made and sometimes even does for a short time, and then it comes back to Earth. We've seen it time and time again. And I of course left out a ton of examples. Heck, Bobby Bonilla is getting payed about 1.25 million until he's like 60 years old(not sure exactly, but it was for like 25 years.

[HiAndTight]

Probably a better hitter than Hart.(his home stadium and in general the NL West stadiums are all pretty tough on hitters.) Seems like a bad contract for a guy who turned is already 30.

 

This contract also illustrates that even though we have a $100m payroll, we are still the have nots.

 

 

I don't see how this contract illustrates any such thing. We're in the top 10 in payroll, have a lot of money coming in, and it's LA.

[monty57]

We've just had three contracts valued over $200MM and had the most expensive contract ever for a RHP and there's no inflation? Yes there are always big contracts, but now they're bigger... that's inflation.

 

Inflation in baseball is much higher than the inflation normal folks deal with. Without doing any "scientific research," I think you're correct that baseball salaries seem to act in a "jump and then level" cycle. We're currently in a "jump" phase of the cycle, probably due to a lot of new TV and internet money being infused into the system. GM's and owners know the money will be coming, so they're busy spending it. Once that money's spent, salaries will probably level out until the next wave of new money enters the system.

 

If I were a GM, I'd try to do everything I could to obtain the one cost controlled asset out there, which is pre-arby players. I would then extend the good ones to "Lucroy-type" deals, which don't seem to have inflated too much yet. Once the "level" period starts, other GM's will realize they're stuck with bad contracts and GM's with financial flexibility will be able to steal some good players simply by agreeing to relieve the "stuck" GMs of a portion of the contract.

 

The Brewers are actually in a pretty good position to do this, but I doubt they will.

[Baldkin]

I was just looking at how average MLB Team salaries have escalated since 2000. Average of 55M in 2000. Now the average is 98M (92% increase) While the median salary (I took the average of 15th and 16th salaries) has gone from 56M in 2000 to 85M this season. (51% increase)

 

Top 3 teams salary average has gone from to 88M to 182M a whopping 106% increase.

 

So, the "Have's" are spending way more than they were in 2000 compared to other teams.

 

I can do a bit more analysis once I have some time later.

[logan82]

Probably a better hitter than Hart.(his home stadium and in general the NL West stadiums are all pretty tough on hitters.) Seems like a bad contract for a guy who turned is already 30.

 

This contract also illustrates that even though we have a $100m payroll, we are still the have nots.

 

 

I don't see how this contract illustrates any such thing. We're in the top 10 in payroll, have a lot of money coming in, and it's LA.

We couldn't and shouldn't extend a contract like this to a player of his level. Yes we are #10 right now but the next 6 teams are Chicago(both teams), Minnesota, Los Angeles, New York and Atlanta. Since we overextended ourselves for this year there is no way we keep up a payroll like we currently have so we will easily fall behind those guys by next year. I wouldn't be surprised to be passed up by Washington either. We have probably squeezed almost every single penny we can out of our market and the best we can hope for is a middle of the pack payroll in most years with a few break the budget years. This will nly get worse as we see more contracts like this and teams get bigger TV contracts. I have little doubt that within a few years we will be back to having one of the worst TV contracts in baseball. Until there is more revenue sharing we will continue to be the have nots.