It Seems Unlikely Scott Boras Has a $300-Million Bid for Bryce Harper
Manny Machado and Bryce Harper were never supposed to be free agents all the way into spring training. There are several different reasons why things have dragged on, but among them is that Machado is represented by Dan Lozano, and Harper is represented by Scott Boras. Neither agent wanted to be the first one to sign, believing that would cede the other too much leverage. And so we had a waiting game, up until Tuesday. Tuesday, someone finally blinked, and Machado agreed to a ten-year contract with the Padres worth $300 million. In theory, that makes it easy for Boras: He’ll be looking for at least $301 million to beat Machado, if not $326 million, to beat Giancarlo Stanton. Rumors have already started flying around.
Harper’s decision point is coming, and it stands to reason it’s coming soon. With Machado signed, there’s less reason to wait. Days ago, a number of people reported Harper was close to agreeing with the Phillies for $300+ million. Now, Wednesday, we have this, from Jon Heyman:
Bryce Harper is believed to have turned down multiple offers over 300M in recent weeks. at least 5 teams are believed still in contact, tho Philly, SF and perhaps Wash appear to have more chance than SD (just gave 300M to Manny) and CWS (seemed more focused on MM)
— Jon Heyman (@JonHeyman) February 20, 2019
It was widely reported that, at the end of last season, the Nationals offered Harper a $300-million extension. That’s just another reason why Boras would be trying to get something bigger. I’m not sure there’s a more prideful agent in the world. Despite everything, though, I’m skeptical there’s an actual $300-million offer for Harper on the table. My best guess is that Boras finds himself in a tricky position.
The team at the heart of this right now is the Phillies. The Phillies were connected to Machado, and they remain connected to Harper, with many people, myself included, having assumed they’d end up with one of them. They’ve been perfectly lined up to strike, with the big-league roster improving, and with other big-budget ballclubs sitting the sweepstakes out. You know about the whole “stupid money” quote from months ago. The Phillies are under public pressure to make another splash, and Boras certainly knows it. For as active as the Phillies have already been, if they miss on Harper, the fans will be…less than understanding.
We know the Phillies are still in touch with Harper. It’s the rest of the suitor pool that’s tough to figure out. Machado appeared to have the broader market. The Nationals have already made Harper a huge offer once, but they’ve also already conducted a whole offseason, and their projected outfield is solid and full. Here’s an excerpt from Brittany Ghiroli from the other day:
People in the Nationals’ organization, per sources, were told by the team’s front office this week that the team was out of the running for Harper.
The Giants have been linked to Harper of late. It’s a big-resource organization, with holes to fill, and perhaps they’re now playing the part of the Padres on Machado, trying to take advantage of a slow-developing market. And yet the Giants are also now directed by Farhan Zaidi, whose background with the A’s and Dodgers doesn’t lead one to believe he’s a fan of handing out mega-contracts. What reports there are have suggested the Giants are only interested in a shorter term. Plenty of teams would be more interested in a shorter term.
Meanwhile, it’s improbable that the Padres would give out another one of these. And the White Sox reportedly topped out at $250 million in guaranteed money to Machado. There were options and incentives that would’ve made the sum far greater, but those aren’t guarantees. An agent like Boras is looking for a guarantee.
So let’s circle back to the Phillies. We can assume that the Phillies would love to sign Bryce Harper. But where might they be today? Matt Gelb’s recent article offers some clues:
Throughout the negotiation process, two sources said, Phillies general manager Matt Klentak was adamant with Lozano: The Phillies would not go to $300 million for Machado. Lozano called again on Tuesday. The Phillies would not counter San Diego.
[…]
“If the reports are true, then this contract will exceed our valuation,” Klentak said. “Sometimes you have to be willing to walk away.”
Then this contract will exceed our valuation. It’s not the most poetic way to put it, but it’s still a significant message. With regard to Machado, the Phillies didn’t believe he’s worth $300 million. They didn’t believe he’s within what you might call the margin of error. They weren’t close enough to $300 million to just bump the offer up to seal the deal. The Phillies held firm, and they watched Machado go somewhere else. They stuck to their valuation of the player. And their valuation of Machado is almost certainly close to their valuation of Harper.
The Phillies haven’t revealed who they actually prefer. Different members of the organization might even give you different answers. This has been one of the most common questions of the offseason: Do you take Machado, or do you take Harper? In reality, though, the reason they’re hard to separate is because they’re so close. Both Machado and Harper are star players who became available as free agents at the age of 26. Here’s a comparison of their past three years, along with a next-year projection:
| Player | Age | Years | PA | wRC+ | xwOBA | UZR | DRS | WAR | WAR/600 | 2019 WAR/600 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Manny Machado | 26.6 | 2016-2018 | 2095 | 125 | 0.369 | 6 | 12 | 15.1 | 4.3 | 4.8 |
| Bryce Harper | 26.3 | 2016-2018 | 1814 | 132 | 0.377 | -7 | -25 | 11.2 | 3.7 | 4.5 |
Yes, Harper won the league MVP in 2015. As such, he might’ve established a higher ceiling. But he hasn’t been close to that player ever since. He has still been good, absolutely. But over three years combined, Machado has been a little better. Moving forward, Machado is projected to be a little better. Harper has the more dangerous bat, but he’s also a below-average defensive corner outfielder. Machado is an above-average defensive third baseman, who can even spend some time at shortstop. Harper is good, but he might be more replaceable. Especially if he’s close to as bad a defender as he was in 2018.
When the Phillies looked closely at Manny Machado, they ran their math, and came up with a valuation under $300 million. They stuck to it in negotiations. What reason do we have to believe the Phillies’ valuation of Harper would be much higher? If anything, there’s reason to believe their valuation would be a little *lower.* And when the Phillies were challenged on their valuation of Machado, they didn’t budge. Granted, they knew then they could fall back on Harper, but they still might not feel much pressure. Even assuming the Phillies are at a number under $300 million, they could still feel as if they have the high bid.
Scott Boras wouldn’t want the Phillies to think they have the high bid. The Phillies don’t want to bid against themselves, so Boras would want to turn up the heat. It is presumably not a coincidence that so many rumors are floating around these days, trying to jolt the market. There have already been a number of reports simply assuming that Harper’s contract will be larger than Machado’s. That’s what Boras is looking for, but I also don’t think it’s something to be taken for granted. The Phillies would have to be convinced they need to go higher. I doubt they think they’ll be out-bid by the Giants. Or the White Sox, or the Padres.
The great unknown here is, and has always been, the Nationals. In so many ways, the Nationals have already moved on, and they’re set in the outfield with Victor Robles, Adam Eaton, and Juan Soto. But ownership has a long-standing connection to Boras, and it seems like convincing the Lerners to splurge is Boras’ best path forward. The Nationals seem like the most likely team to bail Boras out of this, probably by giving Harper some massive guarantee with significant deferrals. Deferrals like what Max Scherzer got, or like what Stephen Strasburg got. With the Nationals in play, Boras could get his guarantee. He wouldn’t have to lose face.
But if the Nationals are out — and the Nationals seem very possibly out — I don’t know who’s there to realistically push the Phillies. The market simply isn’t strong. Which would put Boras in an uncomfortable position, looking at less guaranteed money than what Lozano got for Machado. At that point, Boras might prefer a record average salary over a record total commitment. Whether even that would be possible, I don’t know. But Boras right now is in a tough spot. If the Nationals don’t come back around to save him, it feels like he’s going to get a blow to his ego.
Jeff made Lookout Landing a thing, but he does not still write there about the Mariners. He does write here, sometimes about the Mariners, but usually not.
I think Boras might try to get over $300 million with tons of deferred money. Just to say he got a”bigger” deal.
This was why I thought the Nationals always made the most sense to offer him the highest contract, since that’s kind of their MO, but apparently not this time.
Sad, the word is that ~$100M of the Nats $300M was indeed deferred compensation, which is why Boras rejected it.
Agents and reporters lied? Shocker.
It’s my view that effectively 100% of these off-season rumor can be sorted into two buckets:
(A) deliberately leaked by a party with an agenda/seeking to affect the narrative
(B) just flat-out made up by someone trying to drive pageviews/follows.
DBA, agreed. Agendas and clickbait.
If Bryce really did turn down 300 million then he’s a damn fool.
I don’t disagree, but the Nationals offer didn’t include any opt-outs or no-trade protection, some of which is standard in these megadeals. Those particular features aren’t easily quantifiable, and might be important to him. But if Harper turned that down without trying to add those, then that would have been an enormous mistake.
Hard to know if the Nats would come up with an opt-out but the no-trade with DC would take care of itself in a little over 3 seasons when he becomes a 5/10 guy. In fact, it would be a full no-trade at that point.
There’s a strong rumor that ~$100 million of that Nats $300 million was deferred, Bonilla-style.
Or Scherzer style or Strasburg style or even going back Bruce Sutter style- the Braves are still paying him.
And why do players/Boras object to deferred deals? Just the future value of money thing? Or does the player not get the money if they die or something? (I assume Pujols for example still technically has to personally perform the professional services part of his contract?)
Inflation–$10 today is likely worth more significantly than $10 in 2030. Not guaranteed, but likely.
Doesn’t the Bonilla deal also have some pre-financial crisis crazy pills interest rate? I’m sure the agent knows how to keep the present value high on these deferred deals.
Quite literally the fraudulent returns of Bernie Madoff’s Ponzi Scheme. The deal made sense on the order of like a 12% return year over year. The Mets owners took a huge hit.
With 10-5 rights, he would have gotten the no-move clause after 3 years.
Maybe but I think there were deals offered by teams with lesser money and years but a decent contract overall. Boras just knows Harper is is biggest fish right now and he’s greedy as all get out
He is going to get over $300 million, just wait and see. We heard crazy lowball rumors for Manny too.
I bet the market for Harper is stronger than you might think. The market for Machado ended up being significantly stronger than most predicted. The longer things dragged out, the more people thought the market for Machado (and Harper) had diminished. Everyone started dropping their estimates as to what they would sign for. Most had Machado pegged for 7-8 years. Than all of a sudden, there was an uptick in activity and before you knew it, he signed for more years and more money than most were estimating. I think we’ll see a similar situation with Harper and he’ll top Machado’s contract shortly.
I agree. So far for all the sturm und drang, everybody who is worth a lot of money has been paid a lot of money. Harper’s going to get paid.
Yes, but who’s going to be the team that is dumb enough to pay Harper over $300 million? Remember he’s had one great year, one good year, and three crappy years by WAR out of the last five years (and his defense is, too say the least, lacking). That inconsistency has got to be scaring teams. Machado may be an annual candidate for the sports jerk of the year award, but he’s a competent defender who is consistently worth 5 WAR or so, and that makes him a much better overall package and worth more money than Harper is.
The Phillies are right. He’s just not worth it. There’s waaaaay too much risk.
But were the Phillies right? The Phillies said Machado’s price exceeded their valuation. While that could be telling for Harper, I think that’s a stretch. The majority of Analysts have projected Harper to get the bigger deal all along. Also, the Phillies seem to prefer Harper to Machado. I think the Phillies are still very much in it, the favorite and he will likely land a better deal than Machado. And while the reports may be a bit exaggerated, I don’t doubt there are multiple teams still in on Harper and a dark horse may very well emerge.
I think his defensive struggles may be a bit exaggerated. While last year was pretty brutal, 2016-2017 were much closer to average. Granted 2015 was also definitively below average, but not to the 2018 level.
Injuries derailed 2017, but it was still ~1.000 OPS and 155 wRC+ in 111 games. If he’d played the full season, he likely would have been pushing 7 fWAR. Don’t forget, Machado put up a sub-3 fWAR in 2017 himself, so there is floor with him also.
Watching Harper’s 2018, I think his relatively poor performance was due to being a victim of his own stubbornness and bad attitude. Murphy was hurt. Rendon got hurt. Soto wasn’t up yet. He was not getting pitched to, and he got sick of it.
He walked 38 times and ran a .458 OBP in 29 games in March/April. It was close to a 30% BB%, and I think it clearly altered his approach. He went from a K/BB of close to 1/2 in March and April to the inverse of 2/1 in May and June.
Now that’s not to say that there isn’t inherent risk in that profile, but to me, it isn’t skill related. If you can’t trust a player to perform at his best out of stubbornness, that’s an issue. However, I don’t see the down 2018 as an indication of declining skills.
He needs a fresh start and an attitude reset. I’m sure he’ll have a chip on his shoulder coming into 2019. Look out.
There is no chance his defense last year wasn’t a result of his pending free agency. I don’t know why no one talks about that. He didn’t want to get hurt. Go back and watch some of the balls hit to him that he literally let drop because he didn’t want to run into the wall. While he might not be a good defender, I think he can be slightly below average. Last year was 100% because of not wanting to be hurt.
Wait, is 3+ WAR now considered “crappy”?
For $30m/y, 3 WAR is crappy.
I think that Johnston must be referencing Baseball Reference WAR.
rWAR puts Harper at ~3 less total WAR for his career than fWAR (27.4 rWAR vs. 30.7 fWAR), and rWAR also has three sub-2 WAR seasons for Harper (2014, 2016, and 2018).
Here’s Harper’s rWAR by year:
2012: 5.2
2013: 3.7
2014: 1.1
2015: 10.0
2016: 1.5
2017: 4.7
2018: 1.3
Harper’s fWAR by year:
2012: 4.4
2013: 4.1
2014: 1.6
2015: 9.3
2016: 3.0
2017: 4.8
2018: 3.5
I’d take the bet that it wont be “dumb”.
First the “stupid money” quote, now the “exceeds our valuation” quote. If the Phils don’t sign Harper, things are going to get really ugly with their fans and on sports radio.
Can’t they just sign kimbrel and keuchel?
What? And just start trying to improve the team for the next couple years?
It’s a weird reversal of roles to see a team’s GM sticking to the financial plan while the owner is the one who wants to go wild.
You must not have been paying attention to the Yankees in the 1970s.
I was not yet born, so you’re correct.
And even more recently during the George Steinbrenner era.
I unfortunately can’t find the link now, but I recall an article a few years back saying that Cashman had long been an internal advocate for more disciplined spending by the Yankees. I remember it struck me as the weird reversal of roles that js17 mentions.
…or the Tigers while Leyland was still alive.
To the contrary, Boras et al have gone to the owner and gotten stupid money numerous times. An elderly owner is a favorite target.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see him go back to the Nats on a pillow-“swell-opt” hybrid. Something like 2/75 ($30m per year plus $15m signing bonus) with an opt-out after year 1, but giving that Nats the right to override the opt-out by giving Harper a 10/400 extension.
Is not the serais dog surprised and is the only income for the cousin-hybrid Super-choix. Environ 2/75 (30 million plus plus a bonus of $ 15 million) with just 1 minute of refuser refusal, for the NATS machine rematch machine for Hape 10/400.
So it’s basically Nightengale(Who is always wrong), and Heyman(who is Boras’ minion), pretty much saying Harper is gonna get over 300 mil, and all of a sudden Heyman is claiming Harper has five teams after him now. I believe it was Rosenthal that reported that the teams interested in Harper and Machado preferred Machado and Rosenthal is really good at breaking news and is objective. Heyman claiming that the Padres were still weighing going after Harper even after the Machado signing smells like desperation on Boras ‘ part. You know as a Mets fan I really want Harper to sign outside of the division (since the Mets won’t sign him), but my guess is that Boras plays Lerner like a fiddle yet again.
Shouldn’t you want him to sign in the division if you think he’ll sign for too much. Here opponent, catch this boat anchor.
He’s a good player and would be a huge upgrade over Nick Williams in the OF if he sign with Philly.
um no since the ill effect wouldnt be felt until 2025 or beyond. He’s a great4-6 fWAR/season player thats only 26.
Heyman is such a jackass
He made an erroneous tweet the other day based on his belief that 100% of Machado’s contract would be subject to California’s tax rate.
Yes I would believe Rosenthal 5 times over what I would believe out of Nightengale’s mouth. There is no bloody way 5 teams have offered Harper 300 million. I so hope he has to sign for less than Machado and then watch Boras try to explain it.
To be fair, the nationals haven’t gotten that “played”. Scherzer has been worth every dollar. Strasburg has/might continue to be fine. Rendon is good. Gio Gonzalez was worth a lot more than he got, especially if you factor in what actually happened/vs fip. Werth was almost worth his contract even with the years of -war. Basically only Wieters sucked, and you are always going to have guys who over/underperform.
The Nationals still should be considered a dark horse here, for this reason: they’re about to land a windfall amount of money from their broadcast rights. I mean shitloads of $$$ to the tune of more than >$100M. The exact number will be determined by the MLB Revenue Sharing Definitions Committee (RSDC) which should announce their arbitration decision any day now. Some of the money will be from overdue payments from previous five-year agreements with their rights holder, MASN, and some for the current five-year agreement. If the Nationals receive this windfall before Harper signs, his return to the team would be purely a baseball decision and not one of finance. Perhaps Ted Lerner has told Scott Boras that the Nationals would offer Harp his record-setting contract but only after the MASN check has cleared. That might help explain the delay in signing with another team.
Sullivan’s read on the market has pretty much been mine also. I can’t see the valuation that puts Harper at over $300M/10 years. The main reason that teams get pushed to the top of that salary range is team-specific-need. The Padres needed a premier third baseman due to positional needs, but more important, to demonstrate good faith to both fans and the team’s players alike. The $300M payout may even impact AJ Preller’s ability to draw in other free agents, such as a TOR pitcher, in future years.
Secondly, I could not honestly understand why Harper would want to play for an East Coast team, and especially the Phils (previous bad blood between National’s players and the Phils). That’s not a “dis” to East Coast teams, but simple geography. Harper makes his home in Las Vegas, and has made no secret that Vegas will always be his home. That’s his childhood and family home. He’s a young (Mormon) guy who’s going to start building a family – at HOME – in Vegas. Cross country flight across three time zones , even with private jet’s, kills a whole day because of the time zone change. If he’s in Philadelphia, for example, for 180 days a year, he’s NEVER going to be home to raise his kids, and his family will only see him when they visit during the summer, perhaps in a second home.
Bottom line: Harper’s going to be pissed if Boras backed him into accepting the Phils, or even Washington, taking a huge pay cut for a shorter guaranteed contract, or sitting out the season until the “need” for his services intensifies for a team in a pennant race. This is just a “rumor”, but a good source saw Boras and Harper in a restaurant yesterday, in a heated conversation, with Harper mouthing the words “San Diego” a bunch of times. There are rumors that San Diego may be considering him, but I strongly doubt it would be at $300M, let alone $325M+. Now, AJ Preller is a brilliant guy, and could re-arrange the guaranteed money and incentives to make it work for both Padre ownership and Harper, offering Harper a lifeboat and accelerating the Padres timeline. However, I doubt it, and as a Padres fan, I hope they don’t pull that trigger. The Padres do have enough high ceiling, high floor pitching prospects within 1-2 years from pitching MLB ball to build a top rotation, but those kids take time to develop and adjust, some will wash out, and getting four or five of those kids aligned to contribute at the same time is a real hat trick. The Padres would have some good outfielders to trade for pitching, but those guys (Reyes, Renfroe, Margot, and Myers) have realistic unrealized upside, that one more season in 2019 could fully define. In 2020, the Padres might have some more proven, valuable guys to bring back a true TOR pitcher. In 2019, they’re just “MEH”. All good problems to have, though, if the Padres can find the cash for Harper.
My best guess, Harper gets screwed on both his contract and preferred playing location because of Boras’s ego. As one poster wrote, Boras lives in Newport Beach, California. It’s not Boras who will be spending six months a year in Philadelphia, and seeing his family on rare occasions. Harper’s gonna be just absolutely pissed, I guarantee you, if he goes back East for a whole DECADE of his life. For $300M+, he’ll probably do it, though.
Of course the notorious Boras shill Heyman would have posted that. Why does anyone take what he says serious about any Boras client at this point?
I see that other people have noticed that he’s been carrying water for Boras. I have been wondering what the deal is there.
Isn’t he the one who keeps making it sound like Marwin Gonzalez is just as good as Zobrist was when he signed the Cubs?
“Hey this dude plays multiple positions, that must mean he has the same value as the best multipositional player of the last 20 years!”
To be fair, some on this site posited that Jed Lowrie was as good as Zobrist, as well. People seem to forget just how effective Zobrist was in Tampa Bay.
I’d say the last 15 years, as Albert Pujols was a better multi-positional player from 2001-2003 before he settled down at 1B starting in 2004.
Isn’t it funny how this time of the year Heyman disappears from whatever site he’s writing for to resurface at some other site no ones heard of? Its a full time job carrying Boras water and it’s heavy too. No time to write a colum. Ha!
I’m curious what people think Heyman should do. Report responsibly but take less money?
I heavily discount anything Heyman writes about Boras clients, especially regarding “mystery teams” or “multiple offers”, but I don’t begrudge the guy the role that he’s found.
I’ll make jokes about it in the comments, but it’s oddly refreshing to understand exactly how his “sources” are trying to spin.
People think the Giants are just leverage, but I wonder if it’s actually the Phillies. Harper seems to prefer the West Coast, and Boras might be dragging this along to see how high Zaidi might go on years/dollars before putting a massive contract from the Phillies in front of Harper’s face.
If the Giants offered an 8 year/280 contract, I think Boras opens champagne.
That isn’t Farhan’s style, and Harper presumably wants to either go to a current winner, or a team likely on the upswing in the next year or two, and the Giants don’t check either of those boxes. I do wonder if the Dodgers could sneak in here, but Philly still seems like the odds-on favorite.
The competitive lifespan of any team throughout Harper’s deal is going to fluctuate. If you’re good now, you might not be good in 5 years and vice-versa.
I don’t think Farhan is giving out this contract but the fact they are still “trying” to be involved tells me we don’t know much about his style/mesh with the Giants and their ownership.
The difference though is that 26 YO Harper is likely better than 30 YO Harper. To maximize this deal you want the window of competition to be pretty darn close to now.
I would assume there have been several offers of that size by multiple teams
Was replying to frisconights,there has to of been offers of 8/280
Why in the world would you turn down $300 million guaranteed dollars?
If your egotistical agent tells you that you can get more…
And if Bryce Harper had played like he did in 2017 over the course of a whole season he definitely would have. But the strategy never changed.
Because you think you can get more.
If he signs for 10/$330M are you going to come back and sing Boras’ praises?
At what point does “more” become fairly meaningless though? If you already have and offer for $300 million (plus the $50 or so million he has already made + endorsements) is another $30 million really going to change your life at all?
I’m all for players getting as much as they can but at a certain point its also kind of silly. People wonder why fans tend to side with owners, its things like this. Its hard to sympathize with a guy who turned down $300 million because he wants $330 million instead. Even if he is actually worth it.
I make (subjectively) really good money, but I would love to make 7k a year more. Imagine the option of getting $30m more? Seems not hard to get motivated by that even if it’s to give it to your church group.
I wouldn’t call 77k subjectively good fyi
It’s not hard to sympathize with him, it’s impossible, because all this is about is ego and greed.
It is. Why is management being so greedy that they’re unwilling to pay market prices for top players?
The idea that “management [is] unwilling to pay market prices” is self-contradictory. The “market price” is defined by what someone is willing to pay. If no one’s willing to pay a given price, then by definition that’s not the market price.
That’s assuming a competitive free market without collusion between a unified ownership seeking to drive down prices in an effort to maximize their own gains.
This is a silly argument to make because the inverse is equally true. Your Team wants to be competitive. Why should YourTeam be willing to spend 300m but not 330m? What’s the extra 30m when you’re already spending 300? YourTeam should just do it because that 30m is marginally meaningless.
That 30m is going into someone’s pockets, and it isn’t the fans’.
I remember long time ago some player was asked:
– What is the difference between $4M and $5M? (team was offering 4, he wanted 5)
– The ddifference is one million dollars.
$30M is a lot of money. More than majority of uss will earn in our lifetimess.
More than a majority? More like more than 99% of us will make in a lifetime (based on $422K putting you in the top 1% of salaries).
But it’s not like turning it down will result in him getting nothing. His floor is probably $275m guaranteed ($250 if you’re very pessimistic).
This reminds me of the Chappelle bit about how he’s worth $10 million and he’s dining alongside and eating the same entree as someone worth $50 million. The lifestyles may be the same, but the difference is… an astounding $40 million.
https://youtu.be/Gj7A9jXClEo
IDK, as a fan to me the idea of my favorite team pissing off top talent because they’re unwilling to pump an extra 30 million of their BILLIONS AND BILLIONS OF DOLLARS into the deal and watching that player walk to a rival would sure burn my biscuits.
But hey, I’m a registered socialist. I’m physically unable to take the side of management in situations like this.
I’m very definitely not a socialist, and I’m with you and Bananas.
The idea that somehow a player shouldn’t care about $30m, but that management should, is just bizarre. If it’s too little to notice, then let the billionaires be the first to demonstrate that you should be happy to just leave an extra $30,000,000 on the table before we ask the much “poorer” multi-millionaires to do so.
If he gets 10/$330 then I’ll say that he gambled and got lucky. $30 million is a huge amount of money for anyone, but the calculation here is the risk of offers decreasing or going away entirely versus the reward of offers going up. The longer you wait to sign, the less teams remain involved to compete with each other. It only takes one to blink, as the Padres did with Machado, but there is a significant chance of overplaying your hand and ending up with less money than was offered earlier in the process.
I think he’ll still top $300 MM. Bryce is much more marketable and one of the tiny few notable Franchise type players/personalities. I know this site is about stats; but teams, owners, fans, and tv viewers want to watch a Star. There is monetary value in Bryce that didn’t exist with Johnny Hustle.
Yeah… even if that were all true, the fans would start to turn on their so-called “star” when he inevitably fails to live up to the contract.
Fans, especially Phillies fans, love the asshole when he’s their asshole. You want the guy other teams hate and pitchers clearly fear.
The Phillies should have signed Machado then. More consistent, better defender, serious jerk.
Manny is misunderstood by most people, even those with clear baseball smarts like FG readers. He’s generally beloved by his peers (witness the Pedroia situation) and he was a great teammate in B’more. I think his competitiveness led to those bush-league playoffs moments, and clearly he does have a temper. But generally not the A-hole that he keeps getting painted as.
Neither of those things are true.
That’s just your opinion.
I dare you to objectify this ‘truth’. (Have you watched 2/3s or more of all his O’s games?)
They didn’t love Mike Schmidt when he was their asshole.
But they did love Steve Carlton.
This may be true, but Carlton was legitimately great.
Meanwhile, Harper has been long on attitude and short on actual production (at least for a so-called “superstar”) for all but one lone season in his career.
I don’t think that it even has much to do with “living up to the contract”. A really good player on a team that doesn’t win many games simply doesn’t drive that much revenue for a team. Winning drives attendance / revenue, often with some lag. And fans will find player(s) to embrace as their stars on a winning team.
Let’s look at A-Rod with the Rangers as just one example. He was there from 2001 to 2003, and was great by whatever individual stats and achievements we want to use. Modern stats such as WAR (which were not at all mainstream at the time) but also triple crown stats. He was an All Star each year, won 2 Gold Gloves in 3 years, and had AL MVP finishes of 6th (2001), 2nd (2002), and 1st (2003).
Look at attendance by year – https://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/TEX/attend.shtml . There was an attendance increase A-Rod’s first year there (2001), but then the Rangers’ attendance was back down to 2.1 million by 2003. That was actually *less* than attendance in 2000. And a more competitive team in 2004 (89 wins) drew ~400k more attendance than the last year with A-Rod (2003).
And some of the things that people *think* they know about drivers of team revenue simply aren’t how the actual economics work. The vast majority of merchandise revenue is split equally between all 30 teams, because licensing revenue and online team apparel sales (mlbshop.com) are both centralized. The actual revenue benefit of selling a ton of Bryce Harper jerseys isn’t *that* much for the particular team that has Harper: it should essentially be just the retail mark-up sold at physical locations operated by the team (concessions and a physical team store).
Good point about merchandise revenue, but if Harper signs with Philly they will likely win a lot of games, so the A-Rod/Rangers comparison doesn’t really apply. Unless you’re talking about the Giants
While this an extremely good point, it’s hard to compare 2000 to 2001-2003 and then to 2004.
As you note, there is some lag between winning and attendance. The 1999 Texas Rangers won 95 games and were a very exciting offensive ball club. The 2000 club only won 71 games. So it’s possible, and I’d say even likely, that you would have seen a significant decrease from 2000 to 2001 had A-Rod not been signed. And attendance may have been closer to zilch in 2002 and 2003 without him.
Winning is absolutely the biggest driver of attendance, but there is such a thing as star power which really only applies to the 0.1% of players.
Unfortunately, for the purpose of this exercise, it’s obviously impossible to compare the 2001-2003 Texas Rangers attendance both with and without A-Rod, but that’s really what you’d need to be able to illustrate the impact of the individual.
If Harper records 30HR 100 RBI wrc+135 4 WAR for the next several years, that would be failing to live up to the contract but he would still be loved by fans.
He’s pretty disliked in MLB, and comes across to many fans as angry when facing adversity. Combine that with one of the streakiest track records in stud hitter history, and it’s no surprise teams are gunshy.
There’s not really any excess monetary value in it. But you’re right that rich people (like baseball owners) like to buy prestige items.
Their absolutely is value outside on-field performance. Advertising, merch, thousands more tickets, better tv ratings, I could go on.
I’m getting irritated by people on this site being so ignorant of external factors. It’s a hell of a lot more nuanced than stats. (and I fucking loovveee stats)
It’s a blindspot where if you can’t quantify it under known metrics, it doesn’t exist.
Echoing my comment above, please provide examples where “star player on team with a bad record” drives a lot of attendance and TV ratings.
As for merch, I’ve already noted that there’s so much revenue sharing of merchandise revenue that the common fan perception of it being a boon to individual teams isn’t correct. As reference, I’ll point to this blog by an individual who has run a company that’s a licensee of MLB and other major sports. He walks through this math as well as quite a bit more – https://licensedsports.blogspot.com/2012/03/insiders-guide-to-world-of-licensed.html
Out of curiosity, what additional can international brand do for teams’ bottom line? Obviously the Yanks are the premier international franchise, but what has having ichiro done for a team like the Mariners, for example? Does that fall in the same revenue split?
Merchandise is the same set-up as domestic.
My understanding is that MLB’s international broadcast deals (i.e., outside the U.S. and Canada) are all league-wide deals with the money split equally among all teams, just like national TV contract money (with the minor caveat that San Diego gets an area around Tijuana as part of its home broadcast market).
I can think of two ways that a prominent Japanese player makes money directly for his specific team.
One is more revenue from in-stadium advertising signage, with the idea that signs will appear on broadcasts and highlights watched in Japan. Here’s an article mentioning that the Yankees got just that sort of revenue when Matsui played for them – https://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/yankees/fans-new-york-yankees-lose-world-series-mvp-hideki-matsui-free-agency-article-1.418348 – though the amount is tough to quantify. The clear caveat on this one is that it’s the *incremental* amount that should really matter to a team, if we assume that the same advertising space would be sold at some price even without the international element.
The other one is ticket sales to Japanese tourists who attend a game because of Ohtani on the Angels, etc.
Why do you keep limiting this assertion to only bad teams? The original poster just said Harper will get over $300M because of his popularity, not necessarily that a bad team would sign him for that amount or that he is definitely worth that amount.
Because my view is that a winning team will draw well and get good local TV ratings*, and that Harper changes that very little beyond his on-field contribution to winning.
I’m similarly saying that I don’t think that Harper moves the needle on attendance/revenue much if any if the team isn’t good, beyond an attendance pop during his first year with the team because a lot of fans now expect the team to win.
I’m responding to Spitball McPhee’s comment that “Bryce is much more marketable and one of the tiny few notable Franchise type players/personalities. I know this site is about stats; but teams, owners, fans, and tv viewers want to watch a Star. There is monetary value in Bryce that didn’t exist with Johnny Hustle.”
I’m saying I think that comment dramatically overstates the revenue impact from Harper’s marketability and reputation as a star.
*Within the parameters of its market. I’m certainly not saying that a winning team in Oakland or Tampa Bay draws the same attendance as a winning team in Philadelphia or L.A.
Fair enough, I tend to agree.
Bonds. Sosa.
dl80, I think you’ve raised a good counterargument that’s an exception to my claim, if I’m correctly understanding your intent.
The HR record chase guys (those two plus McGwire) probably did drive attendance for some teams that didn’t have very good records.
It’s why a lot of them own baseball teams in the first place! Guys like Harper and Machado are like works of art; there’s prestige value in being the only one who owns it.
True, but it seems like this kind of owners are mostly gone. Now all the owners are finance guys in it to make a profit.
It is so much this. I used to live in Colombia, and he was the only baseball player people recognized. My wife can name one baseball player, Babe Ruth, from the candy bar. The other guy is “the guy with the cool hair” .
From a performance perspective, I agree they are similar players.
But from running a club perspective, Harper is a significantly better draw and these things matter when we are talking 10 year face-of-the-franchise deals. (Compare their twitter/IG followers, jersey sales, endorsement deals, etc.)
When all is said and done, I’d be very surprised if Harper’s contract is not as good as Machado’s.
The hair is worth $10m on its own
How many people are buying Nationals gear outside of the DC area because of Bryce Harper?
Big personalities like Harper, I think, at best generate passive interest in a club. Baseball fans may pay closer attention when Nats highlights of Harper’s performance come on TV, they may tune into the HR derby, or hate-read an article about whatever controversy Harper has gotten involved in, but none of that generates income for the Washington Nationals. I mean, what Illinois or Texas-based baseball fan is going to shell out $150 for a Harper jersey? And are there really hundreds of thousands to millions of these people around the country, so that they can generate the difference in tens of millions of dollars to offset the additional price tag of Harper compared to Machado?
In some esoteric, incalculable way, Harper’s presence raises the profile of his team, and makes them more thought about by sports fans. But the Nationals winning games accomplishes that exact same thing! It raises the profile of the club, and makes them more present in baseball news, and makes the team more valuable. That’s how signing Harper will benefit a team: it will make them better and more likely to win. But if Machado is equally likely to make you win, and will do so for less money, then why not just save a bunch of money and sign Machado for the same outcome?
Customer acquisition is a thing, and it’s quantifiable. It’s a hugely key metric for brands, which I think baseball teams can be categorized as.
I grew up in New York in the 90s, so yes, the Yankees’ winning accomplished the goal of acquiring me as a lifetime customer. It wasn’t Derek Jeter.
However, if I’d grown up in say Baltimore, perhaps the only reason I would have been engaged with the team at all would have been Cal Ripken, versus if I’d grown up in Milwaukee, I might just have gone all in on the Packers and never signed up as more than a casual baseball fan.
Winning is 100% the biggest driver of attendance and revenue. Stars absolutely matter, however, and I don’t know that it’s debatable. Isn’t that why fans constantly bemoan baseball’s ability to market their best players? Because young people who don’t a) inherit fanhood or b) live near and root for the best teams, don’t have reason to tune in?
I always take Heyman’s reporting that “sources say Boras client has lots of really big offers!” with many grains of salt. It’s easy to infer from Heyman’s reporting history that Boras is a major source.
The worst thing to ever happen to Jon Heyman is Twitter. No one needs his thoughts, hunches or “insights” on a real time basis. Organize your thoughts into a well-crafted article and publish, that’s the job of the sportswriter. I sound old-fashioned (or just “old”) when I read that, but what can you do.
I don’t mind the format. I do mind the lack of objectivity and accuracy.
This is exactly why I never understood each of these agents waiting out the other. Once one signs, then you know that’s one less team for the remaining player left unsigned b/t Harper/Machado. With so few realistic suitors, you need as many teams interested as possible to maintain leverage in negotiations. Now I think Philly knows they are bidding against themselves.
The “i took undergrad econ” opinion: Because supply and demand.
The supply just got cut in half when machado signed
If you believe only 5 teams were in the market for a superstar, then demand is cut by 20%
If all teams were bidding demand is only cut by 3%. That’s incredibly favorable to the supply side.
You’d have to believe only 2 teams were in pursuit of these players for the ratio to flip in favor of demand side, which I find really unlikely.
And that’s assuming supply and demand scale equally which is also not true. When supply becomes more constrained then the cost increases but it doesn’t have to be linear (i.e 4 players to 2 players is not the same as 2 to 1). If a team missed on machado they could fall back to harper, even if it costs them a bit more. If a team misses harper, then what? The only fallback plans are inferior performance.
To get it out of the way, we have to acknowledge there was likely more natural market demand for a good fielding 3B than there was for a poor fielding corner outfielder.
San Diego was rumored to be in on both, but honestly they have a high priced LF who they don’t know what to do with already. They have now shown the world that 3B wass their preferred add
White Sox have indicated they don’t want to go near that high of price
San Francisco has said they don’t want to go anywhere near that length. The fact they are even in it now probably indicates they feel he won’t get his asking and are hoping he will instead have to settle for the higher AAV but shorter contract they are said to be offering
Washington has supposedly recently said they wouldn’t offer 300 at this point. That makes sense considering their team is fairly set
The Phillies seem to be the only team in on him at anywhere near his new lower expected asking price, and they might not even be at that, as outlined above
At 300 million, the demand might currently be 0 while the supply is 1
And it is quite possible it has always been a situation of more supply than demand (at that price) if SD was not all that interested in the corner outfielder they would have a harder time rostering, and therefore justifying spending that sum on.
Once SD indicated they are for sure more interested in the 3B instead of the COF, all of a sudden Phi looks to be the last team standing anywhere near that length/cost.
Given what we seem to know, they have to be wondering why they are doing so. All indications are leaning toward their needing just match/best the believed 10/250 from the White Sox at this point, since SD is no longer a factor pushing the value up.
When did the White Sox indicate that they
don’t want to go near Harper’s asking price? If they offered 8/$250M guaranteed plus two vesting options and incentives that could take it to 10/$350M for Machado, that seems to be a strong sign that they’d be willing to get near $300M for Harper.
Hey Jeff, which team are you hoping hires you? With all the pro-owner articles and chat responses it’s clear you’re looking for a new job. Best of luck, and I’ll sincerely miss reading your amazing work.
This comment is wrong on at least three levels.
The only reason not to downvote further is that it’s already at -69, and I think that’s what Jeff would want.
You can downvote now if you want. When I got here, it was at -82, so I made it -83.
Lmao called it. I really am going to miss you, one of the best writers of any genre on the internet.
Hey, gotta give credit where it’s due. Didn’t downvote you, don’t even read comments that often let alone vote on them, but this stuck in my head. Hopefully you get about 127 apologies in the coming hours.
Yup, this stuck out for me as well. Well played, even though I don’t particularly agree with the reasoning – Jeff remained jiff until the very end.
Despite the injury risk, I believe Harper could earn more money overall, and have a more enjoyable career, if he went year-to-year.
Every year there are contending teams that would pay $40M+ for 1 year of Harper. It would ensure competitive bidding every year, and it would mean every team (aside from rebuilding clubs) would need to be in the mix. Even a team like the Pirates or Rays would need to consider 1 year at $40M.
Harper would never be tied to a team he grows weary of. And if he has a monster year, or if MLB sees a surge of new revenue, he would potentially earn $50M+ per year.
The mandate that a contract be long-term seems silly. It offers security, but so does an insurance policy. And there is risk in anything. Why not gamble on yourself and go year-to-year?
“Why not gamble on yourself and go year-to-year?”
Because he’d have to keep that trick up for 8 years to earn more at $40m per than a $300m guarantee would provide.
“And there is risk in anything.”
That’s not a good enough reason to take unnecessary risks with a lot of money at stake.
Speaking from a purely objective position, I believe you are definitely, probably wrong. But that is just my subjectuve opinion. Although my opinion is objectively 100% correct. Admittedly, however, I am only fairly certain about any of this.
Maybe Bauer will share some of his drugs with Harper and convince him that approach is somehow a good idea.
If he blows out a knee or something in year 1, he just lost himself hundreds of millions of dollars. Also, his defense was abysmal in 2018. If that’s his new normal, he’s a DH-only guy, and no one’s gonna give Harper $40 million a year to DH, unless he returns to his MVP-level hitting ways. No team is just gonna assume he can hack it at first base. Going year-to-year would require Harper improving both his defense and offense in 2019 and maintaining that level each year in order to demand $40+ million per year.
Two years of good-not-great production would ruin his future earning opportunities. That’s why I don’t buy him only accepting a 3 or 4 year deal. He needs to take the biggest dollar amount available; he’s only getting further and further away from his MVP season.
I honestly think Bryce’s crap defense is the under-reported part of this. He’s going to be at 1B in the next few years at this rate, since he was abysmal in both RF and CF last year, and pretty bad in RF in 2017. 300M is a lot of scratch for a 1B/DH type. His decline from being a plus RF to a borderline defensive liability should concern teams (as should his inability to hit a slider for most of last year.)
I believe the Lerners when they say they’re out of the running. I’m among the few that thought he never had any intention of staying – other than Rizzo, who’s obviously done a damn good job of preparing for it.
I don’t think it will happen, but as a Nats fan I would love to see him sign for less than the Nats’ offer. Just because.
By UZR, he’s been average or better every year but last year.
It was because of the pending contract. Go back and watch the high probability catches that he didn’t make. He was scared to run into a wall/dive and get hurt.
excellent piece but i’d argue that you conveniently left out Harper’s monster 2015 season in your stats review, and i’d also argue that Bryce was on pace to win a second MVP in 2017 before he slipped on a wet base (an event that would have caused injury to 100% of ballplayers). it seems to me that Harper has unfulfilled potential to become a regular 950 OPS player. if you watched him last year, he was tinkering a lot and seemed to settle in in the second half. i think he’s also much more driven than Machado, which is a factor when you consider the huge paychecks coming their way (potential for resting on their laurels). add it all up, and personally i’d feel more secure paying Harper than Machado. to me, Manny has a huge “chill factor” and there’s potential for him becoming just a regular player by age 30. Harper will fight his ass off to stay in the MVP discussion for years to come. but anyway i agree with your assessment of the market—Boras cooking shit up in the news, regretting having passed on 300M from the Nats, and now just fighting to save face. i hate that guy.
Flavors of chill Cano VS ellsbury in this comment. Machado plays every day every year. Mister hustle doesn’t.
Harper’s been durable over the last four seasons, excluding that one fluky injury, which is MLB’s fault for being dumb enough to use a several-inches-elevated slick surface as a landing spot. and i think drive is important. the all-time greats usually possess greater determination to succeed, in every line of work. if i’m going to bet on a person’s success, i’d prefer that he be a relentless worker. Harper has that reputation.
edit: and wasn’t Cano juicing?? not sure he’s a great example. if you’re implying that a relaxed approach leads to fewer games missed, maybe you’re right, but it’s also much more likely to lead to production declines.
There is no year in which Harper has played as much as Machado. Over the last three years, Machado played 475 games and was worth more WAR when he played. Harper has played in 417 games over that period. I would prefer a player who knows how to stay on the field and be more valuable when there than a guy who does hustle theater and dives headfirst for first base.
Upvoted comment despite not agreeing because of the hustle theater part.
I hate that we have to talk about what Boras wants. It should not be about what Boras wants. It is about what Bryce wants. What we have seen about Bryce so far I think supports the idea that a contract like the White Sox offer to Machado makes more sense. He would be betting on himself, and what player is more likely to bet on himself than Bryce Harper?
If the Phillies wouldn’t go to $300 on Machado it wasn’t just a matter of a million here and a million there. Not on a ten year deal, where there’s to frontload, backload, defer, opt-out, etc.
And whatever the difference ($30, 40, or even 50 million) it is hard to argue Harper is that much better.
And if the Phillies are that far off the bogie, Boras may not be able to get creative enough to paper it over. Could get interesting.
If you Google ‘Bryce Harper 500 million dollars’ you’ll see exactly what he and Boras were thinking. Yes, writers were spitballing for clicks/page views, and certainly Boras could’ve planted (some of) those. But a year ago it was generally believed that Harper was absolutely going to break the bank. Then he put up a not-really-great 2018, with scary defense, and here we are.
I recall Harper himself a few years back saying he thought $400 mill was on the low side for his free-agent-to-come contract. Didn’t come up on the front Google page, and I wasn’t going to start paging through it. But Harper himself has always been anticipating Insano Dollars. And of course, no player signs on with Boras in the first place other than for the intention of squeezing every last nickel that he can out of the game.
“And of course, no player signs on with Boras in the first place other than for the intention of squeezing every last nickel that he can out of the game.”
Greg Maddux reportedly took less than the Yankees offered to sign with the Braves.
And Harper will still get his 300+ mill. The Lerners will bail Boras out if it comes to that. Seems like every year they’re peddling Eaton anyway.
And the contract will be a disaster. I see such a parallel to Gregg Jefferies. Each had a Daddie Dearest who saw to it that his son got an insane amount of reps, which helped each peak really really early while leaving less room for further development. They simply maxed out at an age much earlier than usual. That insane amount of reps as a teenager broke Jefferies’ body down at an early age, now it’s doing the same to Harper. Who as a player per se will age less badly than Jefferies did – with his body type he needed to stay in the middle infield to become a Star!, and he could no longer field period – but imo Harper is a couple of years away from turning into Nelson Cruz.
Is turning into Nelson Cruz in a few years supposed to be a bad thing? He’s one of the best “peak past his supposed prime” guys in recent MLB history (Bautista, Encarnacion being others like this). His past 10 years (ages 28-37, so Harper in a few years) have been worth 32-33 WAR, hit 338 HRs, etc. If you could guarantee that sort of aging curve for Harper, teams would jump all over it. Maybe not for 300 million, but Cruz has been consistently valuable for a long time. He’d be one of the best case aging curve examples I’d use if I were Boras, noting that Harper is starting from a higher baseline of course.
What I’m positing, aweb, is that in a couple of years – so say at age 28 – Bryce will have turned into the current 38-year-old version of Nelson Cruz. I guess if I de-hyperbolize that, I would seriously project that at age 30 Bryce will be where and what Nelson is today.
Fair enough Richie. Harper just looks more and more like Norm Cash to me. One all time great year and a bunch of perfectly fine years which seem worse because of the prior mountainous peak.
‘Norm Cash’. I like that comp, aweb!
I always thought $500M, with half the money deferred until the apocalypse, was the most likely deal, and that it would come from the Nationals. And I maintain that if he had simply replicated his 2017 over the course of a full season he might have gotten it. At that point, he would have been at least tied for the best, maybe the best free agent to hit the market this year, and perhaps for many (many!) of the previous years too. But he didn’t do that. Now we are stuck wondering if he can still play the field, or if he’s the guy makes all that hard contact or the streaky guy who sometimes is only average. But last offseason, it was worth speculating about.
Hey Jeff,
I recognize you were trying to be respectful, but given its Heyman on a Boras client, isn’t there explicit skepticism to be had about the source? His track record w/ Boras has been… documented.
I honestly never understood why teams would pay more for Harper than Machado. Both have really unfortunate attitudes (Machado more so), but Harper is the bigger injury risk (Harper has missed time in four of his seven seasons, Machado only really missed time in 2014). And while Harper does theoretically have a higher ceiling, that’s entirely based on his 2015 season, where he was slugging air balls at a completely unsustainable rate (over 300 points beyond his expected air SLG based on exit velo). It seems fluky to me. And that’s aside from the fact that Harper is a defensive liability, while Machado is very much not (at least at Third).
Is it really just the one season where Harper hit the ball at an unsustainable level given his contact quality? Are teams really that gullible? Are Machado’s home/road splits and general poor attitude that off-putting? Or am I missing something completely?
This is where I come down too. You can talk all day about Harper being the bigger star, but people in San Diego are going nuts right now about signing Machado and he’s got a better chance of actually being a draw over the long term because he’s a safer bet.
I’m no stats expert but why is everyone so dismissive of harp’s 2017 season? Recall the scenario: he was labeled overrated after a down 2016, came back and was the best hitter in the NL, with insane clutch production, including 3 walk-offs. That was TWO seasons ago. Then last year he was swinging too hard in the first half, toned it down post-asb and was a 950+ ops guy the rest of the year. Granted his D sucked and is a big question mark but 950 ops to me seems likely and is worth 30M, right?
Partly because he hit like a monster for two months of the season (April and July) and was average for a RF the rest of the time. Partly because he hit an unsustainable .346 on ground balls (nearly a hundred points more than his career average). Partly because he hit an unsustainable 170 wRC+ in Away games, more than thirty percentage points higher than his career mark. And he was slightly worse against lefties than his career numbers, but posted a BABIP against that was a hundred points higher than his career average against them, which indicated that he logically should’ve been much worse. It was basically the same trend of fluky, back and forth production that has defined his entire career and it wasn’t backed up by the underlying metrics even if his results were positive.
I would guess that you could break down most players’ stats in that way. No? There’s a lot of luck and inconsistency in baseball. Couldn’t you examine every great season and identify good and bad months?
Of course, but there’s “good and bad months” and then there’s 100 percentage point swings like Harper had in 2017. His wRC+ between April and May literally swung 104 points and stayed that way until July, then swung back down even farther in August and September. That’s just ridiculous. And the rest of the points I gave were based on his full season, not specific months.
Machado>>Harper. More consistent, better defense at a premium position, less injury prone.
Here’s one way to display why teams may value Harper over Machado.
Career OBP/SLG/wRC+ for each:
Harper .388/.512/140
Machado .335/.487/120
In other words, Machado’s peak wRC+ of 141, which he put up last year, is one point better (or less than 1%) better than Harper’s mean.
As far as the Off (Offense – Batting and Base Running combined [above average]) stat here on Fangraphs, Harper is a career 199.7 and Machado is 90.6.
Harper has been more injured, but he’s been healthy 3/4 years, and that injury was of the fluke variety. Machado is a better defender, and plays the more premium position. However, Harper has been mostly an average defender throughout his career, and last season was a very clear outlier at this point. Harper has also actually been the superior baseunner, but not by a significant margin for their careers.
When you’re doling out 10 years and $300mil, and will be paying a player unto their mid 30s, are you really paying up for defense at 3B? Machado can play SS, of course, but he’s not actually any good there, so let’s call a spade a spade. He’s a premium 3B. To me, that’s a bonus.
Or are you paying for offense? These stats are career. Inconsistency is baked in. Machado’s peak is Harper’s average. Harper’s peak is (clean?) 90s Barry Bonds.
Since you mentioned outlier, it’s Harper’s 2015 that is the clear outlier. He hasn’t come close to those numbers in any other year. What teams usually pay for is expected performance. With Machado that is easier to figure, with Harper you might need a Ouija board. That’s why Machado is signed and Harper isn’t.
If 2015 weren’t an outlier, he’d be getting paid $500+ mil.
2017 absent injury, which again, was a bit of a fluke, is still significantly better than Machado’s ceiling in terms of offensive production. Even the down 2018 was only a few points shy of Machado’s peak.
If he had been an about average defender, or even not awful, like he was in his career prior to 2018, the fWAR would look a whole lot better. Try not to get hung up on it.
Harper is demonstrably better offensively, inconsistency and all.
It seems like there were a lot of forces working against Harper this year: contending, big spending teams like the Yankees and Dodgers are set, the current labor agreement allows for teams to buy good, young player years for cheap, etc….
I hesitate to even write this because I don’t know what the hell I’m talking about. But what about Harper taking a two year contract (break the record AAV) that will allow him to seek a fresh deal under a new CBA? He’ll be 28 then and teams will probably be forced to pay more for young talent, making large contracts for players at their prime a little more palatable to teams? Or maybe a player opt out after two years?
Opt out sure, but it would be foolish to bank on the new CBA being better. The current system, with no hard salary cap and the ability to fill around a star with low-salary young players, is ideal for getting a big contract. The new CBA might be better, but it also might force higher salaries to young players, institute a hard salary cap, or something else that reduces the superstar contracts to get more money to more players.
Oh I see. What you said makes sense. Thanks for your reply, The Stranger.
If teams have to spend more on young pre-FA players, they will have less to spend on actual free agents.
The missing link (factor) in the story is, what does Bryce Harper want? Where does he want to play? What will he force Scott Boras to accept? I think Harper’s preferred place is/was San Diego, a short hop from home in Las Vegas, and thee city where he just got married and spent his honeymoon.
I don’t know if the Padres are tapped out or not, but a short term contract, even one or two years with the Padres, using whatever excuses Boras wants to put out, might be possible.
If you’re the Phillies, how much of your reluctance to go all-in on a long-term deal for Harper is related to the possible 2021 availability of an even better outfielder who (a) is a known to love the city and (b) is already getting paid $33M+ and presumably would want (much) more as a FA?
Yes, it’s two seasons away but so might be the real window for the team.
I actually think Trout could end up in Boston.
The Phillies just turned a bunch of prospects/young post-prospects into Jean Segura and JT Realmuto this offseason- the Realmuto trade especially doesn’t make sense for a team that thinks it needs two more years to contend.
I’m under the impression Harper has the last word, not Boras. Am I incorrect? Doesn’t what Harper prefers supercede his agent, who works FOR him?
“Machado is an above-average defensive third baseman”
Just above-average?
I know it’s a business and these guys are all just trying to make the best cold-blooded value decisions they can, but do you think that on some level and at the margins, teams might be less willing to bump up their offers because they think Boras is a jerk?
Probably not. He’s just another agent to teams.
It’s possible that the Machado and Harper markets were less linked (in the sense “gotta have one” than advertised. Both would improve most teams, but that doesn’t mean it would be smart money. Both of their ages could justify an ultra-long contract, but on yearly value, if $30M is the peg…well, Machado can play the field well, Harper is the better hitter, but is he much better than JD Martinez, for example, who is at $23.5 just last year? I don’t think so. So, that leaves you with some valuation difficulties for Harper if he’s really thinking north of of $300M. I don’t blame Boras for thinking he could do better because while there was some troubling cracks in the market last year, most of them seemed to be related to QOs. He probably couldn’t have anticipated a secular coordinated repricing of the entire market.
So, we wait, with Boras feverishly trying to find something that satisfies his pride. Would Harper take 3 years $35-38 M per? Could there even be an offer like that when big spending teams might be too close to various CBT thresholds that the actual cost would go up substantially? It’s hard to see how this ends. Harper is going to play somewhere. But he’s probably never been “worth” that much more than what Machado just got.
That’s the thing though, Harper ISN’T much better than JD Martinez. In fact, he’s not even better. Since Manrtinez’s swing change in 2014, they’re the same player: https://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=bat&lg=all&qual=0&type=8&season=2018&month=0&season1=2014&ind=0&team=0&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=6184,11579
Harper with a .282/.401/.525, .390 wOBA, 145 wRC+
Martinez with a .307/.371/.586, .401 wOBA, 154 wRC+
The only difference is that Martinez’s defence was worse than Harper’s over that span. But you have to consider this includes a few seasons where Harper wasn’t a horrific defender. Harper’s 2018 defence was Martinez-esque. Will it continue to be that bad? Maybe not. But you’ve just named a really good comp for Harper.
With several references herein about Boras needing to safe face (along with his pride and ego) I’m disappointed not a word was said about the ham-handed deals for Mike Moustakas in 2018 and now 2019.
So if Machado and/or Harper turned down $300M offers and went unsigned into spring training because of ego, doesn’t that blow the whole “collusion” and “teams aren’t spending to win” complaining?
I think people are glossing over what San Francisco’s late entry into this sweepstakes indicates
They came in saying they are not going anywhere near that many years, but will offer a huge AAV to get it done.
That basically says they do not believe he is going to get his 10/300, and instead is going to have to settle on a much lesser deal.
The fact they keep getting included as one of the only serious contenders at this point kind of proves they are likely right. If he was honestly sitting on multiple 10/300 range offers, then SF’s offer isn’t a true serious one.
Or maybe the Giants are upping the ante. The Padres got into the Machado sweepstakes when they heard the price was below $250 million and still ended up well north of that. Maybe now that they are involved the Giants are likewise increasing their bid, in a “well, if we’re gonna offer $220m over 7 years we might as well go to $270m over 9” kind of way.
I figure if the kind of short term, high AAV deal that the Giants wanted to offer was actually being considered, other teams like the Dodgers would be more heavily involved.
I think Harper has been , or at least he has to appeared to have been to me, playing defense like he is seriously avoiding injury the last year or two. When he first came up he would go all out and dive for balls, but now they bounce in front of him. A team might get a much improved defender next year if he signs the deal he wants.
Very interesting observation!
I think it’s far more likely that he continues to be a Roger Dorn defender, with thinking along the lines of Jabari Parker: “They don’t pay me to play defense.”
I have to check it
all of yall saying boras is a fool for turning down 300mm…….you are all the real fools. He will get way above that for harper. Thankfully there is a reason none of you are agents. You would’ve cost your clients millions. Machados agent did the right thing holding out on these crooked owners penny pinching trying to screw over the players. Owners are using the desperate writers to tweet out bs like puppets, remember the 175$MM tweet about machados deal trying to drive the market down? pure bs move by owners and Lozano call them out on it. You all would have told machado to sign for 250. sad.
Now you are all hear doing the same with harper….you all would have cost him 100 million dollars book it.
The fact is none of us know what is going on behind the scenes, so quit acting like boras is ill advising his client. In fact he is doing whats best for them and will win again.
Ask Moustakas about the genius of Boras.
you don’t want to go that route. Boras has more skins on the wall and record deals broken in the histroy of the game. You can point to one deal though, good job. I can point to 50 deals that say the opposite. Like i said if you were advising machado you all would have told him to sign for 100MM less.
Still going to pretend St. Louis is gonna sign him until he signs elsewhere. He makes so much sense for that ugly weakness in RF, and with Goldy and Ozuna likely to leave next year, the money doesn’t look like a huge concern.
I am aware my delusions are unhealthy.
I’m also surprised the Cardinals aren’t more involved with Harper given the fact they were willing to take on Stanton’s contract while giving up some of their best prospects. Did Goldschmidt’s 15.5M really put them over the salary number they were willing to cross if they signed Harper?
As you can see by my name, I’m a Cubs fan, so I’m gonna polk fun. Maybe Bryant was right, the Cards made tacit overtures to gauge interest, found that Harper wasn’t interested, so they backed off not wanting to get burned again like they did with Stanton? I know Stanton was coming off a historic year. Maybe they valued Stanton more last year than they value Harper now. I agree that it’s weird they aren’t more of a player for Harper.
It’s a bit concerning if the agent is willing to put the client’s interests in jeopardy just to satisfy his own.
any chance a team sees Harper as something other than a corner OF? If he’s a terrible OF at 26, he’ll be even worse in the future.
If the Nats sign him and put him at first, that’s like a 4 WAR upgrade assuming is average at fielding 1B.
Otherwise he probably has more value to an AL team.
Though you’d think the Phillies might value Harper a bit lower than Machado, and while Machado’s been objectively slightly better than Harper, Harper’s the bigger name and more marketable so that might increase what a team like Philly would be willing to offer him vs Machado
First of all, I wish I was 26.3 years old again. Secondly, as a Cubs fan, I hereby promise to absolve the Ricketts family of blame for all of the off-season chicanery that has taken place if they just sign Harper.
The Phillies valuation on Harper could be heavily influenced by John Middleton and the business operations of the ball club. Machado is a star, obviously, but Harper might be the most marketable player in the league. He also plays more akin to Philadelphia’s “blue collar” mentality (whether or not that’s a stupid concept is a separate issue). Thus, Harper’s valuation may not only consist of his on-field value, but also his off-field revenue-generating ability.
Also, as was noted in the article, the fallout in Philadelphia if the Phillies get outbid for both Machado and Harper would be devastating to the Phillies’ brand. People have been getting excited about the prospects of getting one of these two stars since last winter (especially Harper). At this point, I feel like it’s gone too far for the Phillies to back out now. So, even if there is no other team bidding for Harper’s services, the Phillies are going to have to pay whatever they have to in order to ensure Harper is in red pinstripes on Opening Day.
“Person not wanting to jeopardise the Fangraphs-to-FO-employment path writes article critical of agent” shocker.
“Anonymous troll questions Jeff’s integrity” lol.
I agree with the premise of this article. While the player WAR comparisons are very close I believe Manny to clearly be the more complete and therefore valuable player. Manny has something Bryce doesn’t – 55-60 grade defense, while Bryce is arguably a 45. That has to count for something. Side by side, I don’t see how I could conclude that Bryce’s value is the same as Manny. Then again, I’m not the one with a corner outfield need and therefore Bryce is going to get paid. 10/300+? Who knows, but I can’t see the Phillies doing this for him when they wouldn’t for Manny.
Poor Scott Boras might only get a commission of $25 million rather than $30 million. 🙁
The Nationals have never low-balled their pending free agents, offering them market value with not a sniff of hometown discount. Their last all-star who was in this situation was Ian Desmond, and he found out the hard way that his best offer was the one made by the Nats just prior to him hitting the open market. Will Bryce Harper learn the same lesson in the same way?
Aged well.