I've been wrestling with this news for the past day, trying to understand Seager's motivation. I fully understand why anyone would accept $325 million. But what keeps rattling around in my brain is how he's giving up playing with one of baseball's premier and storied franchises, one who's intention has been to reach the postseason every year since the 1940s, to join an organization that presently is one of the game's worst and which has rarely been competitive, by comparison, since moving to Dallas some 50 years ago.
Seager will not live long enough to spend all of that money and, while it's commendable that he's seeing to his family's care for as long as they live, too, wouldn't he have been able to do that by accepting, say, $250 million from the Dodgers, assuming they'd offer that much, which would certainly be possible? At $250 million, he'd have $5 million at his disposal each and every year for the next 50 years. Think of that: a new $5 million every year!
So the question is, is the extra $75 million he's getting from the Rangers enough to offset playing for an organization where the losing has been greater than the winning; where a title has never been won; where the team has reached the postseason only eight times since moving from Washington? Baseball's supposed to be fun. Would giving up $75 million be worth having fun (mostly due to the winning) over the remainder of his career, knowing he'd have more money than he'll ever be able to spend anyway?
I don't think the Rangers are as bad as all that. Between 2010 and 2016 they finished first 4 times and second twice. They have won 90+ games in 5 of the last 12 years and at least 87 games in 7 of those 12 years. Prior to signing Seager they signed Marcus Semien (45 HRs, 102 RBIs) and Jon Gray. The Rangers have a new stadium and lots of money to spend and I think they sold Seager on the idea that they are going to turn things around.
I'm not convinced. The Rangers organization can't compare to the Dodgers, new ballpark or not. And as we've seen over and over again, spending obscene amounts of money is no guarantee of success. As for Semien, he's 31 years old and soon headed to the downside of his career. I like Cory Seager and I think he's a heck of a player. Money doesn't buy happiness but I hope it comes close enough for him.
I guess Seager was convinced. The Rangers' problem has always been pitching. But they drafted Leiter and their new park has a retractable roof and is pitcher friendly. Their previous parks were hot and batter friendly. So now they are spending money and more attractive to FA pitchers. They must have made a pretty convincing case to Seager that they can compete. Either that or they made a pretty convincing case that he can spend the 325 million.
It’s likely to take a few years for the new park to establish itself as pitcher friendly, so I wouldn’t expect free agent pitchers to make a mad rush to sign with the Rangers quickly. Besides, will the team be able to sign that many pitchers with numerous other teams competing for them, too?
And if the new park is not hitter friendly, that serves to neutralize Semien’s ability hit all those HRs, not to mention Seager, who’s a middling power hitter to begin with. Will the Rangers be the offensive force fans are thinking they’ll be?
My question remains: will that extra money he received from the Rangers soothe the real possibility that the Rangers will still be an average to below average team? Seager’s been spoiled playing with the Dodgers, being a playoff contender every year. I don’t see it being the same with Texas any time soon. Will it be worth it?