I’m a huge Tucker fan and not a Dana brown fan at all. However trading Tucker was the right thing to do and he absolutely nailed the return.
Good on Tucker for betting on himself. If this MVP season continues, he'll be north of $40 million AAV and for minimum 8 years. 8/340 9/380 Somewhere in that range. He'll be a Yankee.
If THIS continues, there is no way he gets less than $400M I think it's possible he gets less but I would bet the over on $400M now. And I have thought that way since Soto signed. Vladdy just reinforced it. If you are a top 10-20 player in all of MLB, there is just another tier of money for you.
How much did Soto and Vlad Jr. get? Tucker will be getting 10+ yrs with minimum being $450mil. Probably 12 yrs $540mil
Vlad junior isn’t that good, imo. I don’t have him as a top 10-20 player anyway. Plays shitty defense at an easy defensive position and doesn’t have the track record of a guy like Yordan. He’s had one great season and the rest of his seasons are merely good. That deal was insane to me.
I agree. So much of it is based on his name. But it's all about perception. And his contract absolutely cemented Tucker's value.
I agree that he’s been trading on his daddy’s name and his 5:00 light tower power for years. I was wrong though- he’s had two great seasons offensively and 4 merely good ones. Career 140 ops plus guy he plays a shitty first base. He brings very little on the basepaths. Maybe that’s ass end of the top 20 in majors but is certainly take considerably more than 20 guys before I took him.
Right, and if he got $500M, then that's where Tuck's market STARTS. If he wins MVP, don't be surprised if someone throws 12 years/ $500-550M at him
Difference makers in baseball are rare gems. There is a reason that when they come up in free agency team offer them the moon plus some. The Astros unfortunately do not have the revenue streams to substantiate such spending, even when they are winning. The baseball sign stealing scandal blighted the good guy image the Astros had strived for all those years. It sucks that Tucker and Bregman who were vital contributors where let go for nothing or for pennies on the dollar. But that’s baseball, and now the Astros ownership needs to go cry in its corner about how they are a mid market team.
Pressley got absolutely rocked today. Can’t believe they just let him keep pitching til he eventually gave up 9 runs. Yikes.
The Cubs have the revenue streams to afford him. Astros with their business model were out of their league spending wise….
Bregman's contract ended. He wasn't let go. I find it weird that people think a team should get something in addition to the service they paid the player for. I get that there are competitive balance things with free agency. On Tucker, Paredes and Cam Smith are almost matching his production. Considering the cost and length of the contract, the Astros will most likely get 2 dollars on the dollar for Tucker. The Astros problem is more that their offseason moves helped the future, but really didn't change how good the Astros are currently.
I understand your point but this is all about using assets and resources to maintain a strong and competitive organization. People (fans) expect to get something in addition to the service the team paid for because there are rules out there that can make it happen. As fans, we have watched the team trade away veterans for young players for decades. An organization must choose the best way to achieve the team goal - having the veteran on the roster, or gambling by letting some of his time and production go early in exchange for additional time of promise. But the rules allow this and it's absolutely the better option if a team is not likely to have a strong playoff performance. However if they do have a chance to make/win a World Series, then keeping the veteran production is usually the better option, as that production is more valuable to the team's goals. Going this route almost always has consequences, though, unless both your owner and the player are willing to choose to stay. Those consequences are a weaker team the next year. This is simply how the system works and is unavoidable. Rarely, you can trade away a pending free agent and the return improves the team both immediately AND in the future. The hardest path is to split the difference and try to thread the needle by trading some but holding on to others. You are splitting your bankroll, betting on 2 different pots, hoping to win them both, but each one is a weaker than the bet you could have made to win one. If the Astros don't make any more moves and they don't have a successful post season (is that an ALDS appearance? W S. appearance? W.S. win?) then they lost. They will have lost because holding on to Tucker may have made the difference in them accomplishing that, and they held on to Framber, Caratini, etc costing themselves in the future but didn't win anyway. Make a choice, be aggressive with one or the other. Not fully commiting to one goal usually ends in losing both.
The obvious choice is to maximize value in 2025, 2026, and maybe 2027. Trading Tucker for Paredes makes sense as the Astros are getting so much additional value in 2026 and 2027 and the loss of value in 2025 is small in relation. The Astros were trying to win last year, so keeping Bregman made sense. Trading him would have involved losing the service they got from him after the hypothetical trade. The Astros got that service so they didn't get nothing by not trading him. They got exactly what his contract was worth plus a pick I think. Fans expecting to get something don't change that his contract was over, and the Astros got great value out of it before it ended. The rules allow for the Astros to sign Bregman if they both agree to it. The perception that the Astros lost something by fans when a free agent leaves is erroneous. Keeping Caratini and Framber likely make sense unless they get Tucker-like deals for them (i.e., they get more value in 2025-2027 for very little loss). I'd burn the farm down to try to maximize this year, next, and maybe 2027.
