Phillies extend Howard

[Ding Dong Johnson]

125 million bones

[NewUserName]

I am a Howard fan, but the Phillies overpaid here

[MWV]

5 years, $125 million for Howard? Pujols' asking price will have to be $27-30 million annually.

[SouthSideRyan]

5 years, $125 million for Howard? Pujols' asking price will have to be $27-30 million annually.

 

Holy [expletive]. I just assumed this was for like 7-8 years.

[BigSlick]

Yeah this will end up blowing up in the Phillies' faces, Howard does not have the skills that age well and he still has never figured out how to hit lefties, nor does he play good defense.

 

Even Baseball Between the Numbers correctly predicted (In 2005 after his ROY season) that this would happen

[Guest]

This is a bad contract, but at least five years is better than eight.

[RammyFanny]

Am I the only one shocked to find out he's 30 already? I was expecting 27 or so...

[SouthSideRyan]

This is a bad contract, but at least five years is better than eight.

 

I'd take 8/136 over 5/125 for anyone.

[Sammys Boombox]

This is a bad contract, but at least five years is better than eight.

 

I'd take 8/136 over 5/125 for anyone.

 

Me too.

[Guest]

This is a bad contract, but at least five years is better than eight.

 

I'd take 8/136 over 5/125 for anyone.

 

Me too.

Not sure I would say that, especially without knowing the structure of the deals.

[CubbieBum]

Am I the only one shocked to find out he's 30 already? I was expecting 27 or so...

 

Jim Thome is to blame for that. He was stuck in the minors for a couple years past when they thought Howard was ready because they had Thome in his prime.

[SouthSideRyan]

This is a bad contract, but at least five years is better than eight.

 

I'd take 8/136 over 5/125 for anyone.

 

Me too.

Not sure I would say that, especially without knowing the structure of the deals.

 

 

You can structure it however you want internally. Set aside 25M a year for the first 5 years then you "pay him" 3/11 the next 3(Actually less than that due to the interest you've accrued over the first 5 years.)

[Guest]

This is a bad contract, but at least five years is better than eight.

 

I'd take 8/136 over 5/125 for anyone.

 

Me too.

Not sure I would say that, especially without knowing the structure of the deals.

 

 

You can structure it however you want internally. Set aside 25M a year for the first 5 years then you "pay him" 3/11 the next 3(Actually less than that due to the interest you've accrued over the first 5 years.)

So...

 

if you have a 35 year old player at the beginning of this deal, you'd rather be on the hook for an additional $11M for that player's age 41-43 seasons rather than being done paying him after age 40? May I ask why?

[SouthSideRyan]

Not sure I would say that, especially without knowing the structure of the deals.

 

 

You can structure it however you want internally. Set aside 25M a year for the first 5 years then you "pay him" 3/11 the next 3(Actually less than that due to the interest you've accrued over the first 5 years.)

So...

 

if you have a 35 year old player at the beginning of this deal, you'd rather be on the hook for an additional $11M for that player's age 41-43 seasons rather than being done paying him after age 40? May I ask why?

 

If I think a player is worth 20M in his age 40 season(assume you're overpaying in the last couple years for a bargain in the first couple), I have a hard time imagining not being worth 11M over the following 3.

[Guest]

Not sure I would say that, especially without knowing the structure of the deals.

 

 

You can structure it however you want internally. Set aside 25M a year for the first 5 years then you "pay him" 3/11 the next 3(Actually less than that due to the interest you've accrued over the first 5 years.)

So...

 

if you have a 35 year old player at the beginning of this deal, you'd rather be on the hook for an additional $11M for that player's age 41-43 seasons rather than being done paying him after age 40? May I ask why?

 

If I think a player is worth 20M in his age 40 season(assume you're overpaying in the last couple years for a bargain in the first couple), I have a hard time imagining not being worth 11M over the following 3.

I believe the point is that you're taking on additional risk when the player is most likely to be worthless. I'll stand by my statement that there are circumstances in which I'd rather be on the hook for 5/125 than 8/136.

 

Just look at it like this:

 

after three seasons of Soriano's deal, would you rather have 2/50 remaining or the 5/90 we're stuck with? I'd sure love for him to be gone after two more years and would pay the extra $7M per year to make it so.

[SouthSideRyan]

Not sure I would say that, especially without knowing the structure of the deals.

 

 

You can structure it however you want internally. Set aside 25M a year for the first 5 years then you "pay him" 3/11 the next 3(Actually less than that due to the interest you've accrued over the first 5 years.)

So...

 

if you have a 35 year old player at the beginning of this deal, you'd rather be on the hook for an additional $11M for that player's age 41-43 seasons rather than being done paying him after age 40? May I ask why?

 

If I think a player is worth 20M in his age 40 season(assume you're overpaying in the last couple years for a bargain in the first couple), I have a hard time imagining not being worth 11M over the following 3.

I believe the point is that you're taking on additional risk when the player is most likely to be worthless. I'll stand by my statement that there are circumstances in which I'd rather be on the hook for 5/125 than 8/136.

 

Just look at it like this:

 

after three seasons of Soriano's deal, would you rather have 2/50 remaining or the 5/90 we're stuck with? I'd sure love for him to be gone after two more years and would pay the extra $7M per year to make it so.

 

2/50 vs. 5/90 isn't the question. You can't just erase the extra money that would have already been paid out to him.

 

Re: "Most likely to be worthless" The point is you wouldn't sign a guy to that kind of money who is most likely to be worthless. Yes, I concede that I'd rather sign Aaron Miles to 5/125 than 8/136, but that's really Kyleing up the question.

[chuckywang]

$125M for a platoon player?

[Eephus Speed]

5/$125M for a 30-year-old, 4-win first baseman? That's a horrible contract. For that amount, Philly could have extended both Werth and Hamels.

[17 Seconds]

howard has been on a pretty steady decline too.... especially his patience. his walk totals keep going down Edited April 26, 2010 by 17 Seconds

[BigSlick]

Also this makes them sending Lee off because he was too expensive to keep (8 million a year) really look ridiculous

 

How about you don't extend Howard, you give an extension to Werth, keep Lee and win the World Series this year?

 

Nah?

[Post Count Padder]

He's a good player, but I wouldn't want to pay a 35-year-old slugger $25 million.

[TruffleShuffle]

He's a good player, but I wouldn't want to pay a 35-year-old slugger $25 million.

 

especially when he very well may not be slugging much by that age.

 

pat gillick was a really good GM; i'm not sure that ruben amaro jr. is very good. this doesn't seem like something gillick would have done.

[17 Seconds]

i didn't realize howard had been doing that porrly this year until i just looked. 3 walks to 80 ABs. yuck

[cubsfan5150]

Heard a good point on ESPN radio...

 

Obviously they overpaid for Howard, who is a good player but not a "special" player. The guy (maybe Kurkchen (sp?)) said that based on this deal, Pujols should be able to ask for $50m being that he's twice the player as Howard. I know that Pujols couldn't approach that much, but he is a considerably better player than Howard and if he tries to get paid like it, I could see $35m per. Probably won't happen though being that Pujols is on decline.

[Little Slide Rooter]

I dont think it will make a difference who will gladly stay in St. Louis for $12/hour and the smiling faces of Cardinals fans with nothing else to live for, but Adrian Gonzalez and Prince Fielder are going to get very, very rich.