Will Tigers Pony up for Skubal

[SoCalTiger]

If the new CBA limits years then someone will offer Skubal 60 million a year. The limit has to be total salaries and that's a cap and it's kryptonite for a deal. Maybe there can be added bonuses for losing free agents. Perhaps multiple draft picks. Maybe the team signing the highest contract loses a player off their 40 to the team that lost the player ? Or both. I think all is possible with the union provided salaries are not overly suppressed or capped. 

[Witz57]

I'd like to see teams get a slot money bonus based on total contract value of free agents lost.

Say you lose players who sign 500 million in contacts. Maybe you get 1% of that and you can spread between draft and international signings. 

Maybe it's reduced by the team's own spending. So if you lose a 500m player and sign a 300m player it's calculated off the difference.

If you want to tweak it further, there could be a minimum amount you don't get the difference for. So it's calculated after say the first 50m. So if a team spends zero-50m and loses a 500m guy they get the bonus for the 450 million. This would encourage a minimal level of FA spending you don't "lose" extra bonus money for.

 

[Sports_Freak]

3 hours ago, Shinzaki said:

I would not sign him for 10 years...six is as far as I would want to go

Boras would never allow Skubal to sign for 6 years. 8 years maybe?

[Stormin]

1 hour ago, Longgone said:

Trading a 30 year old pitcher, who will require a long term, mega contract, for a haul of young talent, and then using that financial wherewithal to invest in other needs, diversifying your risk, makes sense.

If the return is Franklin Perez, Daz Cameron, and Jake Rogers (Return for JV) or DL Hall, Joey Ortiz, and a draft pick (Brewers return for Corbin Burns), no Thank you. Or maybe Jhony Brito, Kyle Higashioka, Drew Thorpe, Rangy Vasquez, and one good year of Michael King for Trent Grisham and Juan Soto?  Prospect deals are crap shoots.   It is not uncommon that a haul of prospects ends up being maybe one average MLB player.

If Chris Ilitch learned anything from his father, I hope it is that "fans come to see the stars."   Tarik Skubal is the only real star the Tigers have right now.  Every game he pitches, for the rest of his career in Detroit, will have above average attendance.   A 1.0 to 2.0 war MLB left handed starter is getting over $20 million AAV these days.  I think Skubal has at least a few above average seasons ahead of him.

When it comes to trades, free agent contracts, and Tigers in 2026, the lowest risk projection might be that Skubal  will have another good year and help the Tigers compete in 2026.   That is why I won't be upset even if the Tigers ride it out, and just let Skubal pitch in 2026.

Edited Tuesday at 01:07 AM by Stormin

[papalawrence]

18 minutes ago, Sports_Freak said:

Boras would never allow Skubal to sign for 6 years. 8 years maybe?

I think Boras would consider 8/350. Maybe add vesting options for years 9 and 10. If he is still producing at that point he gets rewarded

[Sports_Freak]

4 minutes ago, papalawrence said:

I think Boras would consider 8/350. Maybe add vesting options for years 9 and 10. If he is still producing at that point he gets rewarded

Maybe. I thought i heard Slubal wanted to break the $400 million dollar threshold. If so, 8 @ $50M per season would get it done.

[gehringer_2]

53 minutes ago, Witz57 said:

I'd like to see teams get a slot money bonus based on total contract value of free agents lost.

Say you lose players who sign 500 million in contacts. Maybe you get 1% of that and you can spread between draft and international signings. 

Maybe it's reduced by the team's own spending. So if you lose a 500m player and sign a 300m player it's calculated off the difference.

If you want to tweak it further, there could be a minimum amount you don't get the difference for. So it's calculated after say the first 50m. So if a team spends zero-50m and loses a 500m guy they get the bonus for the 450 million. This would encourage a minimal level of FA spending you don't "lose" extra bonus money for.

 

I think it only works if you have some way to force teams to spend it on their own FAs, otherwise the money just disappears into their budget like current lux tax payments and does nothing to insure teams are actually using it to keep players.

[Longgone]

13 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

I think it only works if you have some way to force teams to spend it on their own FAs, otherwise the money just disappears into their budget like current lux tax payments and does nothing to insure teams are actually using it to keep players.

For heavens sake, just share equally all broadcast revenues, you don't even need the CBA to do that. Without the gross revenue imbalance, more teams will compete for free agents.

[Tigermojo]

I think 8/350 is mentioned because it would be a record total and yearly value for a pitcher.

[Witz57]

1 hour ago, gehringer_2 said:

I think it only works if you have some way to force teams to spend it on their own FAs, otherwise the money just disappears into their budget like current lux tax payments and does nothing to insure teams are actually using it to keep players.

I don't think it should be a financial transfer, just the ability to spend additional slot money. Sorry if that didn't come across.

[papalawrence]

1 hour ago, Sports_Freak said:

Maybe. I thought i heard Slubal wanted to break the $400 million dollar threshold. If so, 8 @ $50M per season would get it done.

Last week Skubal was on foul territory and he said his camp never mentioned 400 million. 8/350 and with 2 vesting years potentially that would be 10/ 437

[gehringer_2]

1 hour ago, Longgone said:

For heavens sake, just share equally all broadcast revenues, you don't even need the CBA to do that. Without the gross revenue imbalance, more teams will compete for free agents.

certainly the optimum system to produce a balanced league, but unfortunately also the least likely outcome possible in the current reality.

If you are NY or LA your message to the other owners is "go find your own 15 million local fans"

Edited Tuesday at 03:01 AM by gehringer_2

[RatkoVarda]

biggest domestic FA pitching contract: Cole signed for 9/324 (AAV 36M)

biggest international FA pitching contract: Yamamoto 12/325 (AAV 27.3M)

no including Ohtani

so Skubal needs to clear 325 total value and 36AAV to reset pitching market for Skenes

10/370 = one more year than Cole; highest AAV; highest total comp

[papalawrence]

Shorter contracts, but JV and Max had contracts with 43 aav. That's why I think 8/350 seems more in line with what he will get. 

[gehringer_2]

31 minutes ago, papalawrence said:

Shorter contracts, but JV and Max had contracts with 43 aav. That's why I think 8/350 seems more in line with what he will get. 

and there has probably been 7-10% devaluation of the dollar since those were signed.

[Longgone]

8 hours ago, gehringer_2 said:

certainly the optimum system to produce a balanced league, but unfortunately also the least likely outcome possible in the current reality.

If you are NY or LA your message to the other owners is "go find your own 15 million local fans"

They are only two votes, and it's more likely than the players ever agreeing to any salary inhibitions. MLB is the anomaly in this regard for US sports leagues. LA and NY have no revenues without the other franchises to play against.

Edited Tuesday at 11:42 AM by Longgone

[gehringer_2]

2 hours ago, Longgone said:

They are only two votes, and it's more likely than the players ever agreeing to any salary inhibitions. MLB is the anomaly in this regard for US sports leagues. LA and NY have no revenues without the other franchises to play against.

probably closer to 6 - Mets, Boston, SF and the Cubs would  also likely be on the other side on the question. But the question  is why revenue equalization is any more likely to happen now when it hasn't in 100years? You'd think maybe with two teams playing in minor league parks there might be more sense of crises in the sport, but there doesn't seem to be.

[chasfh]

15 hours ago, Longgone said:

Trading a 30 year old pitcher, who will require a long term, mega contract, for a haul of young talent, and then using that financial wherewithal to invest in other needs, diversifying your risk, makes sense.

Sounds good on paper.

[RedRamage]

12 hours ago, Longgone said:

For heavens sake, just share equally all broadcast revenues, you don't even need the CBA to do that. Without the gross revenue imbalance, more teams will compete for free agents.

I think this is a good start, but if I'm a big market team who's been able to grow the media demand, I want some level of assurance that small market teams aren't just going to pocket the inflow of money. Now, I certainly think that many teams will use the money to try to improve their teams, but I also wouldn't be shocked to hear that some are simply happy to live off what the major market teams have built.

[RedRamage]

11 hours ago, gehringer_2 said:

certainly the optimum system to produce a balanced league, but unfortunately also the least likely outcome possible in the current reality.

If you are NY or LA your message to the other owners is "go find your own 15 million local fans"

My reply to them would be: How much would your 15 million local fans be in watching just the Mets, Yanks, Dodgers, and Angels play each other 162 times a year?

[gehringer_2]

7 minutes ago, RedRamage said:

My reply to them would be: How much would your 15 million local fans be in watching just the Mets, Yanks, Dodgers, and Angels play each other 162 times a year?

sure - but it doesn't matter how great the arguments are that we concoct for revenue sharing, the rich teams have heard them all before and said "nice talk, no thanks" repeatedly. The question isn't whether revenue equalization would be wonderful for the sport, it's how do you move the sport in that direction in less than another 100 yrs? Sadly the union has been zero help in this regard because their perspective is that they want Dodgers and Yankees bidding up the pay schedule even if that means the gains for their membership are a mile high and only an inch wide.

[RedRamage]

6 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

sure - but it doesn't matter how great the arguments are that we concoct for revenue sharing, the rich teams have heard them all before and said "nice talk, no thanks" repeatedly. The question isn't whether revenue equalization would be wonderful for the sport, it's how do you move the sport in that direction in less than another 100 yrs? Sadly the union has been zero help in this regard because their perspective is that they want Dodgers and Yankees bidding up the pay schedule even if that means the gains for their membership are a mile high and only an inch wide.

Yeah... it's not an easy quick fix... maybe we should have a thread where we throw around some major ideas to restructure things in MLB. There's an idea... 😉

[papalawrence]

Stavenhagen on Tigers Territory mentioned he doubts teams are willing to empty their farms for 1 year of Skunal, given Boras is his agent and an extension now is highly unlikely. The Dodgers might have the best rotation since the 90s Braves and have Sasaki and other top pitching prospects ready, so do they really want to go in for Skubal right now? If they made an offer it's probably less than what's been speculated. 

[Hongbit]

18 minutes ago, papalawrence said:

Stavenhagen on Tigers Territory mentioned he doubts teams are willing to empty their farms for 1 year of Skunal, given Boras is his agent and an extension now is highly unlikely. The Dodgers might have the best rotation since the 90s Braves and have Sasaki and other top pitching prospects ready, so do they really want to go in for Skubal right now? If they made an offer it's probably less than what's been speculated. 

I’d agree with Stevehagen that most teams wouldn’t empty their farms for a single season.  

It just takes one team.  Doesn’t matter what the rest of the league does. 

I think it’s very possible there’s someone that would throw caution to the wind and make a deal.  

[chasfh]

48 minutes ago, Hongbit said:

I’d agree with Stevehagen that most teams wouldn’t empty their farms for a single season.  

It just takes one team.  Doesn’t matter what the rest of the league does. 

I think it’s very possible there’s someone that would throw caution to the wind and make a deal.  

Betcha five bucks?