KL2

I think those numbers are woefully under. Too many people think $20 million is the big threshold. 12 players last year made more than $30 million. 33 different players, including guys like Charlie Morton, made at least $20 million. Heck guys are getting $18 milliion in arbitration. Story made $18.5 million last year. He is a good age, plays Short and is a free agent. I'd love to get him for a 2 million raise, but I'd be shocked if it happens. Then you got some big makets saying hey we're gonna spend. None of that seems to indicate a bunch of $18 AAV deals. Correra will get something like 300 million with opt outs on both sides (like a mutual option that become a player option after four years if he pays in an average of like 80 games). Seagar will approach 300 million. Story and Seimien will both be around the 225 range.

not to mention no team has a bunch of sucess developing 9th round players. Saber is being unfair in his criticsm. It's not like the White Sox are out there hitting o 7th round picks year after year.

We've had this discussion before people like Tiger337 just want something fun to watch. Me -- the correct group-- wants championships because that's the goal. Nobody remembers the really good teams.

Sure in a vacuum compared to us, but I think if you told them they signed pujols one one title and then sucked the other 9 years they'd be ok with that too. The point, which you just ignored, is that letting pujols go didn't make them win more. So to argue its somehow the right decision is just conjecture.

Different discussion. Now you're talking about the length of the contract and whether he should be signed. Mike was not gonna let him walk, nor should he. At that time he was the best player but nobody thought he'd break down in year 1. It was absolutely necessary they extend him two years before free agency instead of one. (Not to mention there were a slew of young players ready to break the bank and that would have created further problems. It's why they extended jv when they did)

Again, not the question! The question was it necessary that we signed him two year before he hit FA. They wanted to keep him, that was the time to reisgn him. Whether that was a prudent decision is a different discussion (And I've said it before the cardinals let pujos go, they won exactly as many world series as we have in that time)

A) Semien is one player the other guys are like 8 bodies. b) I don't get why people don't get this. They weren't trying to spend and win. It's silly to pay for a year of semien when you have little around him.

I think you missed the point. You said since he had two years to go on the old contract that it was completely "uneccisary" to extend them. I disagree, if they didn't it would have put him a eyar from FA when they tried to extend them and he would have gone to FA. The Tigers weren't gonna let that happen, just like you don't let a coach that you want to keep getdown to the final year of his deal

I don't get your love of Semien. Fine player, but let's look at it. He has exaclty zero years with an OPS over .900. He has exaclty two years with an OPS+ above 100. He no longer plays shortstop, wasn't very good in 2020 and wasn't much until his 28 year old season. Not to mention he will be 31. What makes you think he's the best value/gonna sustain those two years compared to the otehr 8?

I would argue that it "was unnecessary" if you waited another year all players are likely to take it to FA. It's the same reason coaches don't want to have a one-year deal. See every College football coach with a contract under four years of Phillip Seymour Hoffman in Moneyball.

There is less of a history of decent players signing one year deals, especially with us. But, sure lets go with that one.

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2021/11/top-50-mlb-free-agent-rankings.html 1. Carlos Correa. Ten years, $320MM. Tim Dierkes: Tigers / Steve Adams: Phillies / Anthony Franco: Tigers In this winter’s star-studded class of free agent shortstops, we consider Correa the best. The Astros drafted Correa first overall out of Puerto Rico Baseball Academy back in 2012, and he won the 2015 AL Rookie of the Year award despite debuting in June. The 2016 season was a continuation of that success, and Correa seemed unstoppable.

is it domed?

But there is ahuge difference in the sports. In the NBA the max contract is 4/5 years. In the MLB the standard contract for a big time signing is 8-12 years. So it makes way way way more sense on the NBA level and you aren'te leaving 200+ million on the table. Really and apple to oranges .

I don't think anyone would risk that. Think about it you're putting something like 200 million (20 million) for the agent on the table to get what maybe another 25 on the back end of teh second contract. Its no way worth the risk.

On Posey, I mean I get it but I don get it, why he's this sure fire first ballot hall of famer. His counting numbers are bad, even for a catcher. 158 homers, 729 RBI, 1500 hits. One year with an OPS above .900. Compare that to say...Bill Freehan. 200 homers, 758 RBI and 1591 hits. and 0 years with an OPS above .900. Now sure Freehan played in some 400 odd games more, but its just an example to show that Posey's counting offensive stats are pretty pedestrian. (and let's not forget freehan's prime years were dead ball era 2 of 1968). They aren't the end all be all, and i know what the saber and defense shows, but its part of the pie and I don't quite get this thought that he should get 99.72 percent of hall of fame votes on fthe first try.

Many second rounders never make the majors and the ones that do its rare to find a guy who puts up a career war above 8. So it's not so much ours, but just the way 2nd rounders work. Fun to talk about em on draft night. But by year 8 they've all become pretty meh I mean a fun example, in 2014 and 15 the top war players out of all second round players are....Tyler Alexander and Spencer Turnbull! (well Turnbull was till Verdugio passed him in the second half). But, just goes to show what most second rounders are.

You have yet to explain, ever, why tanking is bad other than "I doesn't make me feel good." I and other have given cold hard facts on why tanking is fine. It guarentees the highest draft pick possible. If you're gonna be bad what's the difference between being god awful and really bad? Set yourself up the best for the future that you can. It's silly just to win a game in football or five in baseball or spend a bunch of money for that extra win or five when you're still gonna be really bad. It does little for player development, it doesn't change the ticket gate, it doesn't save jobs. All it does is provide some insta-feels goods. Seriously if the lions were 2-15 instead of 0-17 would you think the season was better? Would you think its OK? Well at least they won a couple, you really think you'd say that? And everytime all you respond with "it's bad"

And at the expense of a higher draft pick I and the organization should not care about that at all. let's put it this way, its the Ryan Leaf/Peyton Manning draft would you be happy to win a game and let Houston have the top pick, I.e. manning, and we get Ryan Leaf just to win one game to make fans happy in a god awful year? Everything you're talking about is just immediate gratification and feeling good. That's not the way to build a winner, especially not in the cut throat NFL. You have to be cold, you have to be vicious and you need very high end talent at the key postion. Not win some meaningless game cause it will make Derrick friggin Barnes feel good.

So two. Swell and Hockenson. As I said. The rest or mid round talent and not much. I mean if you're counting St. Brown as a key building block for a winning team in teh future... you don't see the problem with that?

Well, I showed have the 0-16 it took till the fourth (thinking the bad season is season 1, which i did in my post) But, its all about the quarterback. Which I noted. If they take Matt Carroll and he is the second coming you can have a turnaround like the Bengals are currently doing. If you take him and he's Daniel Jones, the giants are still in suckitude. Youre timeline only applies if you find the quarterback this year. Most year there is a QB worth drafting that high. This is one of those odd years. Are you sure they can find a QB this year to put it on the three year timeline? You guys thinking this is a three year rebuild are a bit too optomistic. Not only are the Lions crazily devoid of talents, there is no Trevor Lawrence or Matthew Stafford to draft. Stop thinking its a standard turnaround, if you do you're gonna be disappointed.

0 chance someone takes $60 million over 80

Great the Troy Smith of the minor. He isn't here to do school

And 31 years old? Calvin would have more of a point if he was 37 played 15 years and we refused to trade him. None of that happened. He left and wanted to keep the engagement ring. Then got all pissy when the lions took it back

No, but turned down offers are rarely reported in any sport. That's why I mentioned he was among the top 10 free agents so it wasn't like there wasn't demand. And the "you tell me" was more a royal phrase. Just a turn to say, I can't imagine the lions were offering like 20 million more than let's say the packers, where the guy has to choose the crappier teams. Nfl players know they're careers are so short and most have one nfl free agent pay day, get all the money you can, if you don't have a ring there is usually a couple more years where you can go ring shopping