Strasburg off the market, 7 years - $175 million

[TURBO]

Stephen Strasburg - S - Nationals

 

According to Chelsea Janes of the Washington Post, the Nationals and right-hander Stephen Strasburg have agreed to a "significant long-term extension."

 

MLB Network's Jon Heyman reports that a seven-year deal worth $175 million. The deal also includes opt-outs. It's pretty shocking news, as Strasburg is represented by Scott Boras and was set to be the biggest name in a very weak class for free agent starting pitchers this winter. He likely could have fetched a bigger deal with a strong walk year, but the Nationals apparently did enough to keep him off the market. An official announcement is expected Tuesday.

 

Source: Chelsea Janes on TwitterMay 9 - 8:09 PM

[brewcrewdue80]

Oh Wow.

[SRB]

Good for him, glad to see guys staying with a single franchise.

 

When you're a pitcher with an injury history, it's hard to argue with the "safe" option of taking a $175,000,000 payday.

[TURBO]

Good for him, glad to see guys staying with a single franchise.

 

When you're a pitcher with an injury history, it's hard to argue with the "safe" option of taking a $175,000,000 payday.

 

agreed, which is why I'd like to see Braun retire a Brewer...

[MrTPlush]

Good for him, glad to see guys staying with a single franchise.

 

When you're a pitcher with an injury history, it's hard to argue with the "safe" option of taking a $175,000,000 payday.

 

agreed, which is why I'd like to see Braun retire a Brewer...

 

Which, if he plays out his contract, will be hard to do. We will hopefully be hitting our stride with no room in the outfield when we reach the end of his contract and we all know he isn't the best infielder.

 

I think it would happen more if teams could reason keeping aging players around. However usually younger options become available and the older players are left to find a desperate team with a big hole.

[brwrsfan]

Good for him, glad to see guys staying with a single franchise.

 

When you're a pitcher with an injury history, it's hard to argue with the "safe" option of taking a $175,000,000 payday.

 

agreed, which is why I'd like to see Braun retire a Brewer...

 

Which, if he plays out his contract, will be hard to do. We will hopefully be hitting our stride with no room in the outfield when we reach the end of his contract and we all know he isn't the best infielder.

 

I think it would happen more if teams could reason keeping aging players around. However usually younger options become available and the older players are left to find a desperate team with a big hole.

 

I think there's a very real chance that the DH is in the National League before his contract expires. If he's still hitting it's certainly a possibilityy that the Brewers shift him there and keep him for awhile. There's a lot of "ifs" in there, but I think it's certainly a realistic scenario.

[torts]

there could be a DH in this next labor negotiations this off-season

[jerichoholicninja]

Playing video game GM here but after locking up Strasburg it certainly makes Giolito a little more up for discussion. The Angels are trash top to bottom and this season is already pretty much over for them. How about a blockbuster that sends Trout to Washington for Giolito, Turner, and Robles.

[danzig6767]

Playing video game GM here but after locking up Strasburg it certainly makes Giolito a little more up for discussion. The Angels are trash top to bottom and this season is already pretty much over for them. How about a blockbuster that sends Trout to Washington for Giolito, Turner, and Robles.

I'd never trade a player like Trout with four years still left on his deal. The Angels could wait say two more years to see where things are and still get a ton for him.

[jerichoholicninja]

Playing video game GM here but after locking up Strasburg it certainly makes Giolito a little more up for discussion. The Angels are trash top to bottom and this season is already pretty much over for them. How about a blockbuster that sends Trout to Washington for Giolito, Turner, and Robles.

I'd never trade a player like Trout with four years still left on his deal. The Angels could wait say two more years to see where things are and still get a ton for him.

 

They could wait two more years and still have a terrible farm system, lots of money on the books preventing them from signing anyone worthwhile, and a below mediocre team that is only competitive because of one player. Even when they were healthy, they still didn't have a good team. Trouts value can only go down from here. It would totally suck as an Angels fan but that organization's future is as dim as it gets.

[MrTPlush]

Playing video game GM here but after locking up Strasburg it certainly makes Giolito a little more up for discussion. The Angels are trash top to bottom and this season is already pretty much over for them. How about a blockbuster that sends Trout to Washington for Giolito, Turner, and Robles.

 

Washington hangs up the phone. Trout is a great player, but all three of those players have seriously high ceilings. They are just prospects, but I will take the risk. All three of those players have the chance to be one of the best at their respective position. Nationals are a great team for the long haul and they, in my opinion, haven't even peaked. Trout would be a massive hit to their farm system and a lot of money added to the payroll.

 

Also could the Nationals even afford to pay Trout? They just had to pay Strasburg $70mil in deferred money to make his contract work.

[DHonks]

If I were the Nats and I could add Trout, I'd bet the farm to do so. You'd have 2 OF spots locked up with the best 2 players in the game both now AND likely still in 6-10 years.

 

Why can't the Nats pay Trout? They have the wealthiest owner in the game

[pacopete4]

Trade for Trout and Braun. Make the greatest OF the game has ever seen!

[superfly]

Maybe in Monopoly money.

[brewcrewdue80]

Well, looking at their payroll. They could fit in Trout's contract. But you wonder how that works with Harper. If the Nats traded for Trout. Do you go with Harper to Free Agency or just this year and next and trade him in the 2017/18 offseason? Getting back some of the value you lost in acquiring Trout. How do you even bat those two? Trout 2, Harper 4? It would seem like a waste to me to bat them b2b when they are going to hit 40+HRs each. B2Bs equal solo on 2nd HR.

 

In one respect, you get one of the 2 best hitters in the game longer for cheaper should you get Trout and trade Harper in 2seasons who's FA $ amount likely exceeds 35mil Trout is paid. So rather than lose that after 2018. You get it through 2020.

 

I will say, trade offer of Giolito, Turner, and Robles would be tough if I'm the Angels to turn down. Turner looks to be the Nationals future SS so it would be hard to see them trade him. They'd have a hole at SS. Certainly nothing coming up in the minors after Turner. That would require a FA signing. It'd be pretty crazy to watch 2 10WAR talents on the same team and not even in their prime age.

[MrTPlush]

Why can't the Nats pay Trout? They have the wealthiest owner in the game

 

Because baseball is a business...and you want to make money at the end of the day. Paying $30mil to Trout is a pretty big hit to the bottom line. An owner being rich means absolutely nothing.

 

Just simple calculations they already have guaranteed contracts equaling $132mil for just SIX players in 2018(Gave Harper $20mil) if they added Trout. Their highest payroll was in 2015 at $169mil and that was them maxing out. I know at the deadline they were really reluctant to add too much payroll.

 

It would be a tight fit and in my opinion really risky. If you end up with a few black holes in 2017 or 2018 and you may run into a big problem. Payroll would be maxed out and they would have no money to fix the problems. Dare I say having to plug in a Yuniesky Betancourt type player to fill the roster.

 

I think the Nationals need to add someone, but just not that big of a splash. It is too costly to their payroll and to their farm system. I think Ryan Braun would be a much better fit if the Brewers pick up some of the contract.

[FVBrewerFan]

Why can't the Nats pay Trout? They have the wealthiest owner in the game

 

Because baseball is a business...and you want to make money at the end of the day. Paying $30mil to Trout is a pretty big hit to the bottom line. An owner being rich means absolutely nothing.

 

 

It is a business, but it's also a hobby to many of these owners. An owner being rich means a lot. It means they don't need to be profitable every year, or any year for that matter. The biggest financial gain comes from selling the team, since the price tag keeps going up pretty substantially.

 

So many owners are willing to takes short term losses if it means winning a title. Heck, our very own owner has hinted he would be open to that.

[Baldkin]

If I were the Nats and I could add Trout, I'd bet the farm to do so. You'd have 2 OF spots locked up with the best 2 players in the game both now AND likely still in 6-10 years.

 

Why can't the Nats pay Trout? They have the wealthiest owner in the game

 

The Nats are actually being hosed in their TV deal, because the local TV network is owned by the..... Baltimore Orioles.

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/instagraphs/new-york-court-hands-orioles-early-victory-in-masn-dispute/