Kyle Tucker - What's that new contract going to look like?

Then he does not belong here. When his contract is over we will have to say good bye.

 

If the team receives sufficient value over the course of the contract to justify the expense, it's not unjustifiable. If the player is a discount/bargain in years 1-5 and is overpaid in years 6-10, that's fine, as long as the excess value on the front end is greater than the negative value on the back end.

It would make sense if baseball had contracts where the player was paid on those contracts a higher $ at the beginning, and a lower $ at the end... but the contracts in MLB count towards luxury tax etc. on an AAV level, so there's no team benefit to structuring contracts in that way.

 

You are not looking at the big picture.

10 year $250M contract:
Player averages 4.5 WAR the 1st 5 seasons
Player averages 1.5 WAR the last 5 seasons.
Team wins 2 World Series in the 1st 5 seasons.

Team has no chance to sign this player for any shorter or less money deal.

Is it a bad contract?

 

Of course it is a bad contract. The big picture is the last half of that contract is a rotting stinking albatross. If you can't figure out a way to win without cutting your own throat for 5 seasons you where probably never going to win anyhow.

Plan to win every season and you might succeed. Plan to lose for 5 straight seasons and you will surely succeed.

 

Ok I take it back.

You ARE looking at the big picture and just have a different view.

You must be the guy who pays for everything the day you get it.

Hospital bill for an ER visit 6 months ago? That's terrible why are you paying now for something you received 6 months ago - what a waste of money.

Last year of a car payment? This car is old and beat up. Why am I paying $400 per month?

Credit card bill?

Life revolves around spending after something is used or worth its cost. Because you previously paid much less than it was worth and now must correct that balance.

 

Truth is, I am the guy who pays for everything the day I get it. It just never occurred to me that was so unusual. I built my home of the last fourteen years myself with tools and materials I paid cash for. The house I lived in the seventeen years before this one was built the same way. Before that I rented because my job required that I move often. I have not paid a car payment in over forty years. I would pay for medical care the same way but my wife insisted we carry insurance before we got old enough to get shoved onto medicare. I do not use credit cards but my wife keeps one active for travel. There has never been a balance carried forward on it, nor has there ever been any interest due.
So that may explain why we see things differently. I promise I am not alone in my financial thinking but I am aware that you are not either.

 

We understand each other.

FWIW I wish I could be more like you lol

 

I think Rangers took a huge chance by signing their big deals when they did, but they made it work. God dammit. I'm in a bad mood now thinking about how the Rangers are the reigning champs. F#$%

 

I would bet a lot of money that you are very successful financially (meaning you don’t have to worry about money, even if you don’t live lavishly) and the type of person other people count on.

 

same. They'll always serve as an example of the one time it "worked"... both signing huge FA deals as well as trading a **** ton of prospects for rentals or aging/injury prone players at the deadline.

Maybe Cole Ragans goes on to become one of the best pitchers of all time... and he becomes the Rangers version of Red Sox Bagwell or Dodgers Yordan.

 

Looks like he put on some muscle

 

.

Let's pray the rosary tonight my brother in Christ. We will win the WS this year. Do not fear.

 

I’ve already mentally let go of the guy because he’s gonna command something like 12 years 300 million. If they’re not going to do that contract, which I’m not sure they should, I hope they look to move him next off-season for high level prospects.

 

It's either unfortunate or not, depending on your viewpoint but the Astros will just let Tucker walk for just the QO compensation if the team projects to contend in 2025.

And w/ only Bregman expected to because free agent, it's very unlikely they aren't projected to be among best teams in the AL again.

Just them signing Hader shows they are not interested in rebuilding or even retooling over a single season.

That really only changes if JV and Pressly leave because they don't hit the IPs to vest the options, and a major player like Yordan or Framber isn't healthy and expected to miss major time in 2025.

Otherwise this team still has enough talent to be contenders in 2025 which keeps Tucker here.

 

I believe Tucker should get 8+ years @$25M+ based on all factors and I think he will get at least 25 WAR and possibly as much as 40 WAR in that time period (excepting major injury which is not a concern outside of all players' concern)

He just finished his age 26 season and has 4 consecutive 5+ bWAR seasons or 5+ pace (1.9 in 2020 projects to 5.1 over 162 g)

He is about as safe a bet as there is to have 3+ WAR each of the next 10 years.

He has 18.3 bWAR in 3 full seasons and parts of 3 others.

Even ignoring that, I would take a bet with any of you that from 2024 on, Tucker finishes with more bWAR than any current Astros OF prospect.

 

Who gets more WAR over the next 10 years: Kyle Tucker or Melton, Baez, Leon, Corona, and Barber combined?

 

Let's say:

Melton comps to Richard Hidalgo: 19.2 WAR ages 23-32

Baez comps to Jose Bautista: 6.8 WAR ages 20-29

Leon comps to Raul Mondesi: 18.0 WAR ages 26-35

Corona comps to Gary Pettis: 21.0 WAR ages 24-33

Barber comps to Eric Byrnes: 10.8 WAR ages 23-32.

None of they are half the player Tucker is.

 

Who gives a ****? Let's move on when it happens. Until then....

 

Exactly. People started worrying about this TWO years ago... and yet if a corresponding player signed a 3 year deal now, nobody would be clamoring/worrying about what an extension would possibly look like.