Turn Off Ads?
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 19 of 19

Thread: Possible Kershaw Contract

  1. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    532

    Re: Possible Kershaw Contract

    Quote Originally Posted by RedlegJake View Post
    I'd rather see it spread it among all players than concentrated in the hands of a few players and hanging like a millstone around franchises, though. Stars should get a disproportionate share, sure - but such an outlandishly large amount? I think it ultimately hurts.
    I don't think the Free Agency market should be tinkered with. Players should be able to get any salary that a team would be willing to pay them.

    The real travesty in baseball contracts are how young players are paid in the early years of their contract, when they are arguably making the most value for their teams. Mike Trout... making barely over league minimum. Giancarlo Stanton same boat. Clayton Kershaw his breakout year of 2011? 500K. Thats 500K for a Cy Young Award winner, All-Star, Gold Glover. His 2012 Post Arbitration salary was 7.5 Mil... much cheaper than Bronson who by many milestones was less talented.

    Unfortunately fixing that means that you upset the competitive balance between the haves and have nots. Think the Reds would have been able to pick up Choo, lock up Votto/Philips to their contracts if they had to pay Bailey, Leake, and Chapman closer to what their actual value is? In the end you'd still end up with the same problem, but exacerbated. In the end Everyone that is not Boston, New York Yankees, Chicago, an LA Team, or San Francisco would have less money to lock up top free agency talent, because they would have to pay their younger and value building players more. Upset that balance and Oakland has a much harder time fielding a competitive team. As awful as the situation sounds... that's the trade off Major League baseball has made. Just one last example to illustrate that point... Albert Pujols, arguably the best hitter of the last decade was ROY, MVP top contender, GG, etc in 2001 when he made 200K. His company on that MVP list salaries were in the $10 Mil neighborhood.

    That leads to the question of Salary Caps. Again, me personally I'm against Salary Caps because players in their younger years are sometimes held to a lower salary than the actual value they yield their respective teams. Let the free market support what it will.

    I'm more in favor of the soft caps that MLB already has in place... but with some tweaks. The first soft cap is Revenue sharing. I believe competitive balance between the haves and have nots can be increased by tweaking the revenue sharing a bit more... the top ten teams can stand to lose a bit more to revenue sharing to pad the bottom ten. The other is the Salary Luxury tax, which in it's current format is totally ineffective. In it's current state it only targets the top two payroll teams. The Luxury tax thresh hold needs to be dropped to at least affect the top 5 teams, if not the top 10. Any proceeds in that pot goes back to revenue sharing.

    Of course the MLBPA and their agents would wholly fight against such moves, and Selig hasn't really been one to bring a whole lot of reform on this front. I believe if you put these things into play you'd see top salaries decline, and a more competitive free agent market.

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #17
    There's no Walt only Zuul villain612's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    746

    Re: Possible Kershaw Contract

    Quote Originally Posted by SporkLover View Post
    I'm more in favor of the soft caps that MLB already has in place... but with some tweaks. The first soft cap is Revenue sharing. I believe competitive balance between the haves and have nots can be increased by tweaking the revenue sharing a bit more... the top ten teams can stand to lose a bit more to revenue sharing to pad the bottom ten. The other is the Salary Luxury tax, which in it's current format is totally ineffective. In it's current state it only targets the top two payroll teams. The Luxury tax thresh hold needs to be dropped to at least affect the top 5 teams, if not the top 10. Any proceeds in that pot goes back to revenue sharing.
    I agree with this completely. I think the revenue sharing amongst NFL teams is partially responsible for the popularity of the league. Having more balanced competition is in the best interest of a vast majority of the league. I think the lack of revenue sharing is responsible for lack of attendance and fan interest.

    Back to Clayton Kershaw......the number of $300 million sounds ridiculous on its face. But hey, if one person in major league baseball was gonna get that contract, it should be him.
    "The key to winning baseball games is pitching, fundamentals, and three run homers."

  4. #18
    Where's my chair? REDREAD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Posts
    20,932

    Re: Possible Kershaw Contract

    Quote Originally Posted by RedlegJ View Post
    I can't bring myself to believe they offered him a 300 million dollar contract and he didn't accept. What would he be waiting on?
    I understand, the guy has a family to support. 300 million doesn't go as far as it used to.

    I agree with you, if I was Kershaw, I would've jumped on that. Every start is a risk your career might end. 300 million in the hand is worth it
    Thank you Walt and Bob for going for it in 2010-2014!

    Nov. 13, 2007: One of the greatest days in Reds history: John Allen gets the boot!

  5. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    532

    Re: Possible Kershaw Contract

    Quote Originally Posted by villain612 View Post
    Back to Clayton Kershaw......the number of $300 million sounds ridiculous on its face. But hey, if one person in major league baseball was gonna get that contract, it should be him.
    I think the most shocking bit is the fact that kind of money is being considered for a pitcher. The common school of thought is that a pitcher's arm ages faster than a position player, and it's typically not wise to commit long term to those guys. If the Dodgers are willing to do it at an outrageous price, I will certainly not hate on Kershaw.

    As said earlier, too much can go wrong with a pitchers arm, and that kind of a big contract is begging to be labeled albatross. I mean look at the New York Mets. Their highest paid player, Johan Santana, hasn't had a full season since they first signed him in 2008 and he makes more than twice the $$$ their highest paid position player makes. He made $25 mil this year, which is pretty close to that Kershaw money. Johan Santana in healthy form was a stud too, almost as good as Kershaw is now, if you weigh their bodies of work, not just a particular season.


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25