Bauer to Dodgers - 3 years/$102 million (w/ opt outs)

[SRB]

Still less insane than giving him a 6/200 or something like that which has been commonplace in his position for the last 20 years or so-- where all those possibilities still exist except there are no negotiations for new circumstances (injury).

 

Not really, considering a one to two year injury is far more likely for a SP than a career ending injury. With a long term deal you are risking more overall, but you also have more opportunities to get a return on your investment.

 

The only reason this type of short-term deal works for the Dodgers is because it is better for luxury tax manipulation.

 

It's still going to be a disaster for them though.

[tmwiese55]

I'd disagree. If he has the same major injury (TJ or rotator cuff) you discuss happen in year 1 with this deal vs if in a 6/200 type deal. I'd almost guarantee the team would willingly opt out of the last 3-4 years of the deal if they could.

 

Especially with no sentimental connection to the player like here. Say it was Kershaw who'd already pitched for you from say age 21-30, yea maybe a bit different internal discussion but I still think they'd make the business decision to not be on the hook for a guy coming off major injury at 35 mil per year in his mid 30s.

[brewcrewdue80]

Its just insane to me a guy will take the mound at about 1.33 mil a start and its guaranteed even if he has elbow surgery during any of the 2 seasons. Bauer could go blow out his elbow preparing for the season and take TJ surgery and a nice 400day vacation. Then pitch maybe in August or Sept in 2022 showing any kind of promise. Opt out and plead his value is still 33+mil a season next contract.

 

Still less insane than giving him a 6/200 or something like that which has been commonplace in his position for the last 20 years or so-- where all those possibilities still exist except there are no negotiations for new circumstances (injury).

 

Youre looking at 35-36mil AAV contracts. Bauer's deal is 40/45mil with 27mil 3rd year but he can opt out unlike the other contracts. There should be some kind of protection for a team's payroll if he comes down with an Elbow injury. Like teams should have the ability to have contracts not count for total payroll spending on a given season with Pitchers. So if Bauer had TJ the Dodgers should be able to set aside 40 or 45mil away from payroll expense. Add Kershaw and its another 36mil. Maybe not full amount but say tiers of 40, 50, 60, and 70pct. (What a team feels will miss for the next season) So they could spend whatever money that they save that offseason on a FA. If it's a team in bottom 10 markets in baseball maybe their amount is comped in revenue sharing on what they ask.

[tmwiese55]

But again that's still way less risk than being on the hook for over 200 mil if that happens.

 

So you want to give big markets even more of an advantage? Give them free insurance on their mega contracts? No thanks.

[brewcrewdue80]

But again that's still way less risk than being on the hook for over 200 mil if that happens.

 

So you want to give big markets even more of an advantage? Give them free insurance on their mega contracts? No thanks.

 

Yes/no. I look at it as a positive to players in FA when teams would have more money to spend. From the smaller market view, you may see more give out higher extensions because the less risk they take spending 20ish mil 1 extra year.

 

The rule Id make is it only applies to injured players unable to complete that season into the following season. That a team files for payroll "immunity" and the % amount of immunity would also essentially rule that player out of MLB the following season until the pct filed past. 50pct= 81 games. 20mil contract gives the team 10mil to use for that offseason as a recoup loss. I suggest the bottom 10markets would actually get their 10mil from a competitive balance fund. The others would be deciding to spend 10mil more that season. Which some mid markets may not be able to do already being maxed for their threshold.

On a best case small market scenario. Lets take Woodruff. Who sadly goes down to elbow surgery during arb year 3 in early August. Guessing he would be on pace for 14mil year 4 of Arb. Milw would file for 70pct immunity saving nearly 10mil. They could turn Woodruffs remaining 4mil contract in to a trade availability that off-season. With the acquiring team only responsible for 4mil and payroll hit of only 4mil.

That would be a big return to see in trade. Instead of being stuck with the 14mil pricetag to hope returns to a team still in contention come mid-August and he performs well down that stretch. But you know without him starting for 70pct of season the team loses an additional 7games and he likely returns with Milw facing an uphill battle to make the post-season. Sure you could trade him near Aug 1st deadline. Its just current way he's cost the team 8? Mil. Money the team couldn't use to upgrade. And trying to trade him in the offseason hes tied to 14mil for maybe 8-9games to start upon return. That is shedding dead contract. My suggestion is saving 10mil, making a trade for a 4mil cost for that 8-9 stretch. Now Milw has new prospects and 14mil they could spend that offseason. Or do a mini rebuild.

[tmwiese55]

Interesting and creative idea, kudos for thinking outside the box a bit.

[SRB]

A hypothetical $200 million deal is not necessarily comparable though. Bauer is not that caliber of pitcher. The reason he got such a high AAV is because this is a short-term deal, if he was asking for a long-term deal his AAV would have been much lower.

 

Good (though riskier) deal for him. Terrible deal for a normal team. Doesn't matter for teams like the Dodgers or Yankees.

[Warning Track Power]

Bauer deal being announced today per Nightengale. Perhaps this makes the Turner market clearer.

[Jopal78]

If he opts out, does his agent get commission on the entire 100 million or just what he earned?

 

That lead me to a sub-question: when salaries were prorated last year, were the agent commissions also prorated?

[stalton]

If he opts out, does his agent get commission on the entire 100 million or just what he earned?

 

That lead me to a sub-question: when salaries were prorated last year, were the agent commissions also prorated?

 

Which leads me to another sub-question. Do agents lose money when their clients get suspended for PEDs?

[sveumrules]

If he opts out, does his agent get commission on the entire 100 million or just what he earned?

 

That lead me to a sub-question: when salaries were prorated last year, were the agent commissions also prorated?

 

Which leads me to another sub-question. Do agents lose money when their clients get suspended for PEDs?

 

Don't know for sure, but I would guess agents get their percentage taken out of every paycheck, so they probably don't get paid for years opted out of & their pay was likely also cut during the shortened season in proportion with their clients' salaries.

 

Likewise with PEDs I would imagine, though maybe suspended players still pay their agents out of pocket during that time as kind of a retainer or good faith gesture?

[Underachiever]

If he opts out, does his agent get commission on the entire 100 million or just what he earned?

 

That lead me to a sub-question: when salaries were prorated last year, were the agent commissions also prorated?

 

Which leads me to another sub-question. Do agents lose money when their clients get suspended for PEDs?

 

Don't know for sure, but I would guess agents get their percentage taken out of every paycheck, so they probably don't get paid for years opted out of & their pay was likely also cut during the shortened season in proportion with their clients' salaries.

 

Likewise with PEDs I would imagine, though maybe suspended players still pay their agents out of pocket during that time as kind of a retainer or good faith gesture?

I always assumed it was like entertainment industry agents. Warner Brothers or whoever sends the money to the agents for contracts they negotiate, agents take their cut and pass it on to the actors. Otherwise agents would be constantly chasing their money from actors who didn't give them their cut. I would imagine sports agents want their cut first, given how bad some athletes are with their money. SAG/AFTRA has rules about how quickly moneys need to be paid, and sometimes there is the step of the actor sending it to the actor's manager, but that's how it works there. So if an athlete doesn't get paid due to suspension, the agent wouldn't either. Would be very surprised if any "good faith" money is going out.

[Jopal78]

If he opts out, does his agent get commission on the entire 100 million or just what he earned?

 

That lead me to a sub-question: when salaries were prorated last year, were the agent commissions also prorated?

 

Which leads me to another sub-question. Do agents lose money when their clients get suspended for PEDs?

 

Don't know for sure, but I would guess agents get their percentage taken out of every paycheck, so they probably don't get paid for years opted out of & their pay was likely also cut during the shortened season in proportion with their clients' salaries.

 

Likewise with PEDs I would imagine, though maybe suspended players still pay their agents out of pocket during that time as kind of a retainer or good faith gesture?

 

It's interesting, I would think the agreement between player and agent calls for a percentage commission to be paid when the contract is entered into, so if the player gets suspended, opts out or the player's pay is pro-rated, the agent doesn't lose compensation. Otherwise, agents would have an incentive to advise their clients to not opt out

[reillymcshane]

My guess is that agents get their percentage of the money when the player does.

 

I mean, let's say a player gets a $100M deal -- is the player expected to fork over 6% or 10% or whatever of that $100M at that moment? He might not even make that much in his first year (especially true for pre-arbitration guys who sign long extensions). And then there's incentives and split contracts and opt outs. It seems to me the player only pays when he's been paid. I can't see how it would work otherwise.

[Jopal78]

My guess is that agents get their percentage of the money when the player does.

 

I mean, let's say a player gets a $100M deal -- is the player expected to fork over 6% or 10% or whatever of that $100M at that moment? He might not even make that much in his first year (especially true for pre-arbitration guys who sign long extensions). And then there's incentives and split contracts and opt outs. It seems to me the player only pays when he's been paid. I can't see how it would work otherwise.

 

Maybe teams withhold the commission money just like taxes and social

Security? I don’t think a bunch of lawyers would just allow players to “give their word” that they’ll pay the commissions they owe

[stalton]

I just realized this would have been a perfect question for Josh Kusnick (JJ's agent)