At this point, his only options have been a likely-ludicrous discount offer from the Astros and some possible unknown offer from the Cubs. Until he goes to free agency, we have no idea what his objectives are. Maybe he signs for a bajillion dollars with the Dodgers and gets his money and makes the playoffs every year. Seems silly to criticize a guy for making a decision he hasn't actually made yet. As far as missing the extra money, I think a decade ago, I would have agreed. At the time, players seemed to just retire and disappear for the most part. But so many players today are getting involved in sports team ownership groups/etc and other big investment projects (Mahomes, Brady, Durant, and on). That extra $5MM/yr over 10 years actually can make a difference to their future endeavors now.
Tucker has been dead set on getting to free agency and getting bids his whole career. He will be a yankee, dodger, or met for 350-400mil I think he would give tampa a small discount but they still won’t be able to go there.
I think he gets no more than $350. $325 tops I think teams know he doesn't have the leadership capabilities and playoff record as Correa. 30 HRs and .270 avg isn't that abnormal, only that he's a lefty.
He was a beast last year and coming into his peak as a hitter. He will tear it up for the next 8 years or so.
He was in line to get $300-400M BEFORE the Soto deal. I wouldn't be a bit surprised to see someone throw 11-12 years / $450M at him if he goes out and performs at the same pace before his injury last year.
I don't think he'll get as much as people are thinking. Unfortunately for him, he's not a marketable star - he's not Harper, Soto, Machado, Correa, Betts, etc when they signed their contracts. He's a great player who's not particularly exciting or memorable in terms of his style of play or his personality. And right or wrong, face-of-franchise players earn extra money. I think he'll get paid a lot but I think it'll be a shorter and smaller deal than people are throwing out there now. There's no need for anyone to give him a long, long deal since they aren't going to market their franchise around him.
Exactly. Plus, I also feel these crazy long term contracts are going to tighten soon, or be less abundant.
With the crazy money these contracts are I don’t know how 2 or 3 million in savings is worth alienating your players. If I were the cubs I'd come back and offer him 20 as a good faith gesture to help future negotiations.
There’s nothing wrong with him wanting to get a bag. I’d do the same thing if I were in that position.
Not really going to help anything with future negotiations. He's taking the most money offer to him, if the Cubs offers him the most during FA... he'll re-sign.
The Astros were not going to market their franchise around him. I disagree with the idea that he's not marketable. The Giants could certainly market their team around him. The Cubs, the Tigers, the Blue Jays, lots of teams would make him the face of their franchise. 30-30 guy who plays gold glove defense? He's a 5 tool guy. The Angels marketed Trout when he was great. The Astros market Altuve. You don't have to have an outgoing personality to be the face of a franchise. In the end, he's going to get whatever the market will support. If he's the biggest name out there, he's going to get the $350m+ deal. Lots of teams would love to make a 28-year-old who comps to Larry Walker the face of their franchise, and lock him up on a long term contract.
I think Tucker is very likable in the right city (and agree SF would be a great fit for him much like it was for Pence), but I don’t know if he has the kind of persona that draws fans like Altuve, Judge, Trout, Ohtani do. That’s not to say he can’t be the best player on a contending team or that he can’t be the “face” of a franchise, and certainly not to say he won’t get $300M+. But he’s not a dynamic personality; his value to generate revenue comes almost exclusively from his play on the field.
Xander Bogaerts got a 280 million dollar contract. He isn't a face of the franchise type player. Tucker will get paid a ton of money because he is really good at baseball.
Obviously we won't know for another year, but I disagree. Trout was marketable as being on pace to be possibly the greatest player of all time - that's easy to market even without much personality. But even then, he was a highlight reel waiting to happen. Tucker has the numbers - he just does it without the accompanying excitement you expect of superstars. He's very good and consistent at everything, but he's not overwhelming at anything - he's not a 50 HR guy, he doesn't make a ton of highlight reel plays, etc. I think 10 yrs / $300MM is his ceiling for both numbers. He might get a slightly higher AAV with fewer years or something like that, but I'd guess that's overall his max. He's not a generational "we need him for life" 12-yr contract type guy. There's only a handful of players who've gotten more than $300MM, and I don't think he'll join that club. That said, he could easily perform well for 8 or 10 years or whatnot and not be a drag on whatever teams signs him (unlike some of the big face-of-the-franchise contracts). As Snake said, I think 100% of his value comes from on-the-field unlike a lot of the other giant contracts in baseball.
Well there have been only like 15 contracts of that size, all over the past five seasons. So there’s not much sample size. But what you suggest is interesting, that a guy could have a lower market value because of his boring personality. I don’t think that’s ever happened that I can recall. Is there a comparable player situation that you can think of that had that result? I think if it takes “personality” to convince a team to sign him to the big deal, his agent will give him the right words. Rendon got big bucks and wasn’t the player Tuck is. And he’s a guy who seems like he could care less about baseball.
https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6054714/2025/01/11/pete-alonso-contract-marcus-stroman-trade/ Now that first baseman Pete Alonso’s camp has told the New York Mets he is willing to accept a three-year contract with opt-outs, other prominent free agents are contemplating whether to follow suit. At least two — right-hander Jack Flaherty and outfielder Anthony Santander — are open to considering short-term deals with high average annual values, according to league sources briefed on their discussions. Spring training camps open in less than a month. A free agent such as Flaherty or Santander probably would not settle for a shorter deal before exhausting other alternatives. But with certain players, a pivot such as the kind made by four Scott Boras clients last offseason eventually might be appealing.
