Bryce Harper to Phillies; 13 years, $330M

[tmwiese55]

Yup, the NL is gonna be brutal this year. I don't what happened with WAS last year, but it's not like they shouldn't be a contender still with their pitching and still solid lineup.

[StearnsFTW]

I mean $25mil a year is not bad at all especially when $25mil really won't seem like a lot in 10 years.

 

Think about it. We gave Braun $20mil a year at the age of 30 years old (when that extension started, I think?). For $5mil more a year we could have had Bryce Harper starting at an age just entering his prime (26).

 

Considering how irrelevant $25mil will look in 10 years the back end probably won't even be that crippling and it won't even go to 40 years old. The grave amount of risk if he suddenly declines at 30 years old or becomes a Braun-like cripple is terrifying. But if he ages normally and stays healthy this seems like a phenomenal price to get him at. Don't forget the DH will surely be here way before he isn't good in the OF.

 

Don't disagree a lot with your post, but as to the last line, it's too late. He's already not good.

[brewcrewdue80]

We'll see what final numbers/details are. But my gut is 13/330 with no opt outs seems a bit odd. Why wouldn't he take more annual with some opts outs, or just take 10/305 if he needed to be MM. I mean, if the WAS 10/300 offer was there from the beginning (and still is) I'd have done that over this one. Guess it's best to give it a few more hours and see what comes out.

 

Agree with Plush's take. It's kind of like those last 3 years are similar to deferred payments in a way, keeps the AAV down and he just gets it later.

 

That depends on whether he thinks he'll be able to sign a 3-year / $30M contract when he's 36 in ten years. He's guaranteeing himself $30M more dollars with this deal, regardless of health or performance.

 

10/300 is way better than 13/330. That is 30per vs 25.5 per hes getting. Simply investing 4.5mil per year the next 10years he'll have earned quite an amount that he wouldnt need 30mil in those 3 years to equal what he took.

[FVBrewerFan]

bWAR last 3 seasons:

 

Harper: 7.5

Cain: 15.2

 

Wow did the Brewers get a way better deal. Yea, I know Cain was 5-6 years older when he signed, but they'll get the end of his prime years and probably a couple decent years at the end. Phils paying way more for less production, with a huge risk attached if Harper falls off drastically early.

[young guns]

Huh. I was just reading an article from bob nightingale about how the harper negotiations are entering the final stages and the phillies might not even be the favorites anymore.

[anglotiger]

I would take 13/330 as well. He could have signed 10/300 but even with inflation and skyrocket salaries I certainly wouldn't bet that Harper will be good enough at age 36-38 to get $10 million a year.

 

By 2029, that will probably get you less than a replacement level player.

 

You're joking, but that thought went through my head too.

 

What surprised me wasn't that he took the offer, it's that he didn't do "better". I was expecting 10 years and about $310M with an opt out - just a little higher than MM and saving face over having turned down the Nationals' offer.

 

Of course, the other difference between the two offers may have been that he trusted the Phillies to be a consistent contender, and didn't trust the Nationals to do the same - so you can debate the years and money, but maybe they were close enough that the chance to contend regularly became a factor.

[Fear The Chorizo]

I've heard the Nats' offer included a heap of deferred money until Harper would've been a senior citizen, like 1/3rd of the deal's purported $300M value. It was an offer the Nats knew they could make and have Harper/Boras decline it outright so they could say "hey, we tried!".

 

That being said, couldn't he have signed this deal like 4 months ago?

[tmwiese55]

We'll see what final numbers/details are. But my gut is 13/330 with no opt outs seems a bit odd. Why wouldn't he take more annual with some opts outs, or just take 10/305 if he needed to be MM. I mean, if the WAS 10/300 offer was there from the beginning (and still is) I'd have done that over this one. Guess it's best to give it a few more hours and see what comes out.

 

Agree with Plush's take. It's kind of like those last 3 years are similar to deferred payments in a way, keeps the AAV down and he just gets it later.

 

That depends on whether he thinks he'll be able to sign a 3-year / $30M contract when he's 36 in ten years. He's guaranteeing himself $30M more dollars with this deal, regardless of health or performance.

 

10/300 is way better than 13/330. That is 30per vs 25.5 per hes getting. Simply investing 4.5mil per year the next 10years he'll have earned quite an amount that he wouldnt need 30mil in those 3 years to equal what he took.

 

Plus, 3 less years of 'work' to get it. he has to show up those last 3 years to get that money.

[Outlander]

Not necessarily, just see David Wright or Prince Fielder.

[reillymcshane]

As for what's better - the 10-year $300M deal or 13 year $330M deal - I look at this as a 10-year, $300M deal for his age 26-35 season. Plus an extra 3-year, $30M deal for his ages 36-38 seasons.

 

Now, is signing away your ages 36-38 seasons away for $30M a bad idea? I doubt it, but you never know.

 

PS - this doesn't mean they'll actually pay Harper $10M a year in the final three years - I'm just framing it in that context.

[KeithStone53151]

I would take 13/330 as well. He could have signed 10/300 but even with inflation and skyrocket salaries I certainly wouldn't bet that Harper will be good enough at age 36-38 to get $10 million a year.

 

By 2029, that will probably get you less than a replacement level player.

 

You're joking, but that thought went through my head too.

 

What surprised me wasn't that he took the offer, it's that he didn't do "better". I was expecting 10 years and about $310M with an opt out - just a little higher than MM and saving face over having turned down the Nationals' offer.

 

Of course, the other difference between the two offers may have been that he trusted the Phillies to be a consistent contender, and didn't trust the Nationals to do the same - so you can debate the years and money, but maybe they were close enough that the chance to contend regularly became a factor.

 

All I've seen from Boras and Harper is that he wanted the biggest possible deal and that he wanted stability, 0 chance of changing teams unless he waived his no trade clause. I don't think the contender stuff is part of it.

 

As for the $30 million at the end, yeah I was joking. Min salary will probably be over $1 million at that point, but less than $2 million. I will say I highly doubt Machado is worth $30 million after his deal is up, I'm actually expecting him to be sitting on the couch for the last year of his deal...I think he'll be out of baseball. Harper I think is a good enough hitter that he can be 1b or DH for someone those last 3 years and potentially could have gotten over $30 million for those 3 years. I can understand him just wanting to take the biggest possible money and simply be done with it though. The guy never ever has to worry about a contract negotiation again if he wants, which seriously must be nice. Ask Mike Moustakas how much fun it is worrying about his contract. Harper will have made $378 million by the time his contract expires, and that's not counting other marketing opportunities.

[tmwiese55]

Not necessarily, just see David Wright or Prince Fielder.

 

Well yea of course if injured it's different but no one is planning on that. Barring major injury he has to show up every year like Pujols has to do for like 3 more years. Sorry to have started this 10 vs 13 debate, I was merely commenting that it was very surprising no opt outs since it's become so common and the other two big contracts just got them and that i'd have gambled that 30 extra mil for the opt outs if that was an option. And of course, the option out at least in the first 5 years since no way he'd want to hit FA at 35ish.

[KeithStone53151]

As for what's better - the 10-year $300M deal or 13 year $330M deal - I look at this as a 10-year, $300M deal for his age 26-35 season. Plus an extra 3-year, $30M deal for his ages 36-38 seasons.

 

Now, is signing away your ages 36-38 seasons away for $30M a bad idea? I doubt it, but you never know.

 

PS - this doesn't mean they'll actually pay Harper $10M a year in the final three years - I'm just framing it in that context.

 

I look at it the exact same way personally. Baseball reference has him at 11.5 in 2019, 27.5 through 2028, and 23.5 the last 3 years. Not sure where they got those numbers.

[tmwiese55]

That's actually how my brain immediately started thinking about it too, I guess because of the MM comp. So I've kind of been almost viewing it as a deferred money type of situation on those last 3 years but they put years with it instead to help with tax bills in the future. Just surprised he kept it this simple, maybe he really hate the BS/drama and just wants to play and not go through this crap again, good for him.

[Cirilloing]

Lol 13 years. Hes gonna be a burden in 7.

[TURBO]

COLLUSION!

[homer]

I've heard the Nats' offer included a heap of deferred money until Harper would've been a senior citizen, like 1/3rd of the deal's purported $300M value. It was an offer the Nats knew they could make and have Harper/Boras decline it outright so they could say "hey, we tried!".

 

That being said, couldn't he have signed this deal like 4 months ago?

 

That was like the Brewers offers to Sabathia and Fielder. They knew they would never come close but had to do something.

[Thurston Fluff]

Guess collusion talk can be put away for a while.

[homer]

Compare Robinson Cano's deal to this one. Cano got $24 million a year for 10 years - deal signed in 2013 and he was 31. Harper will get $27.5 million per year for 13 years and he is 26. With inflation, Cano would be averaging around $26.5 million per year if he signed that deal today.

[MrTPlush]

Guess collusion talk can be put away for a while.

 

Why? This is an absolutely horrendous deal compared to what players have gotten before the last year or two. He is going into his age 26(!) season. The likes of Greinke/Pujols got way higher averages and they were ancient and past their primes (30+). Not to mention Pujols commanded a deal to take him into his 40+ years.

 

This just further proves the problem going on here. Harper and Machado both should have commanded a deal absolutely way higher than they did. The value of getting Harper for his 26-30 age seasons should have skyrocketed his price to levels no one has ever gotten close to touching.

 

Teams don’t want to pay for 35+ year old seasons and that is a big issue because the current system makes guys hit FA at 29 at best under most circumstances. That doesn’t leave a lot of room to make the real money. Heck a super stars career is dang near already half over before they even have a chance to find FA...let alone a normal player who maybe sees an all star game once.

 

3-5 years ago hitting FA at 26 would have meant unreal money and way more than this. If teams don’t want to pay big bucks for 33+ year old guys, great, probably a good idea. But then that means the system needs to change. Harper was suppose to be a $400 mil man. While his struggles this year might have altered that I think the change of FA is a bigger factor here.

[reillymcshane]

Imagine what Trout gets in two years (assuming he stays healthy and keeps producing a 1.000 OPS).

[homer]

Imagine what Trout gets in two years (assuming he stays healthy and keeps producing a 1.000 OPS).

 

yeah we were talking about that in the Machado thread I think. He's making $34 million a year right now. I doubt he takes a yearly pay cut.

[Eye Black]

Imagine what Trout gets in two years (assuming he stays healthy and keeps producing a 1.000 OPS).

 

yeah we were talking about that in the Machado thread I think. He's making $34 million a year right now. I doubt he takes a year pay cut.

I’ll start the bidding (guessing) at 11 years and $440 million.

[Eye Black]

From Travis Sawchik, Bryce Harper May Already Be Past His Prime.

 

Also, the reported offers for Harper per Bob Nightengale:

 

Bryce Harper’s final offers from 3 Finalists:

 

#Dodgers: 3 years, $135 million or 4 years, $168 million.

 

#SFGiants: 12 years, $310 million.

 

#Phillies: 13 years, $330 million. No opt out. Full no trade. No deferred money

[Ennder]

I think people are missing some pretty big factors in these two deals. Machado is highly unlikely to make $30M after this contract assuming he goes the full 10 years. The way contracts are going these days for older players and the fact he isn't likely to age well means it is highly unlikely he gets another deal after this. This is a straight up $30M bonus to Harper. Harper actively wanted to stay in one spot for the rest of his career, that means the opt out isn't the big deal people think it is. He wants to move his family somewhere and know that they are set there for the long term. Machado has a very limited no trade clause while Harper has a complete no trade clause. That alone is worth something like $50M in value. Machado barely controls his own fate while Harper has complete control. Harper is also going to a team that is competitive immediately and Machado may never reach the playoffs. That is a big bonus monetarily for Harper. The cost of living in San Diego is almost 50% higher than in Philadelphia, that adds up big time over a 13 year period.

 

Harper got a much better deal than Machado here, it isn't really close. He did it while most likely being slightly lesser of a player as well. There is no way Harper would ever trade this contract for Machado's.