Do they want opt out years as well? If yes, I would pass. Would suck to sign 1 of the players attached to a qualifying offer and have him leave after 1 season. Maybe I would consider a 3 year deal with his only opt out for the 3rd year. Also be greedy. If he gets a opt out clause, Houston gets a buyout clause for the final year.
I think virtually every guy who's gotten a giant deal has been a superstar of some sort - but it's not always about on the field. Correa never developed into the A-Rod type player many expected, has an endless series of injury concerns, and got $300MM before the last injury issue - I don't think it was entirely the result of on-field results. Meanwhile, Bregman is arguably a better and healthier player but can't seem to get anything close. I'd argue Ohtani got his deal in part because he's awesome, but also in part because it pays for itself due to his off-field value. And I think it makes sense for a team to take that into account. If a player is going to bring in tens or hundreds of million in revenues, that makes him more valuable and worth paying more for. I don't think Juan Soto gets the contract he got if he's kind of a ho-hum under the radar guy. Tucker's a few years older but a similar WAR player over the last 4 years (when healthy) - but even taking 2 of years off the backend, I don't think Tucker's getting anywhere near 13 years and $550+MM from anyone. Soto got that in part for his marketing power. But look at how that worked out. I think teams are getting more selective in those types of contracts in part because so many have been flops in the backends of those deals. But obviously it's just a theory on my part at this point - we'll see next year. Tucker, though, is sort of an anomaly. There aren't that many players that I can think of that are that good but also kind of that anonymous. It could be that he was just overshadowed by all the other stars in the Astros lineup and he's more marketable or noteworthy on the Cubs.
Seager, Boegarts, Devers and Trae Turner weren't anything resembling superstars and Tucker is better than all of them. I agree he's not getting 400+ unless he has a monster season. However if he has another season in line with the last 2 he is 100% getting a 300 million contract given the deals handed out the last few seasons.
Bregman was/is 3 years older than Correa at the time of their intended respective FA’s…. And since Bregman signed the extension, he’s 2 years behind that. That alone is enough to take away those 10+ year deals, but add the positional difference and it isn’t hard to see why CC got better initial offers after his age 25-26 season vs. Bregman’s 29-30 season. Tucker has a higher floor than most players, with his ceiling being very good as well but also not necessarily as sexy as others. He also plays GG caliber defense, doesn’t seem to be a locker room negative (is he a positive?), and doesn’t seem like somebody who will create unnecessary distractions for his team. Trea Turner, Boegarts, Devers all very similar as “guys”. The biggest issue in baseball is that all teams are literally printing/minting money hand over fist (even the small market ones) and there is still no structure in place telling them how they must spend. While big market teams can lap the field in spending, when all small market teams refuse to even consider it (because they don’t have to), it is stifling average contracts both in length and amounts for all players compared to how salaries are organically growing in other sports (or even in NCAA signings). Eventually the players union may see this… even more so when guys like Soto/Ohtani may not necessarily be the most vocal or head of the table on union-type issues.
I think Tucker gets $400MM. Analytically inclined teams will pay him his money. I could see Boston going big on Tucker.
I don't think the draw power matters to the Dodgers, Mets, or Yankees that can spend as much money as they want. If Tucker has a season like he had before the injury last year he will get his 10 year contract at 350m from one of them or another team that is flush. Might even be the Angels, Boston, or other teams with huge TV deals or owners that have so much money that baseball is just their hobby. Elon doesn't seem like the baseball type to me, but I'd love for him to buy the Astros as a toy.
90% kidding. Or, the next guy on the market likes that you offered $1.00 more than his other best offer and signs with you anyway. There’s a lot of nuance involved like with anything.
I think it's as simple as he's a soon to be 31year old player coming off a .768 OPS season who thinks he deserves a 9 year contract.
He had off-season surgery (well known), and the Astros still offered him a 6 year deal knowing his medicals better than anybody. At this point, its simply a lack of interest/market. You have Detroit.... and maybe Washington? Hard to drive up a bidding war between those two markets. Its a risk, but if I was Alex I'd be prepared to do what Chapman did and presume there will be more interested teams next year. I also see some other mid-tier FA's possibly considering that route. Baseball has an upper middle-class player problem.... and the players have full control on how to fix that. Will they? 2026 negotiations are looming.
The fact that he scoffed at a 6 year deal that was more than fair probably scared teams off and encouraged them to try to negotiate with less delusional players.
I would bet so . He gets a decent chunk of value for defense ... His injury towards to end of this season with his elbow is probably scaring teams. If he needs surgery and misses some or a good chunk of next year then that messes up what should be one his more valuable years You think bregman should age gracefully because of his eye and overall skills , but if he loses his defensive edge and some of his power at the plate then he will not be a good player . I can understand not wanting to take the risk. If you're the Astros , do you even do 2-60 or 3-90 ?
