OnlyBucs

According to a report in The Athletic:



"Moustakas agreed to a one-year contract worth a guaranteed $6.5 million from the Royals, a deal first reported by Yahoo Sports’ Jeff Passan. The pact could pay him an additional $2.2 million in performance bonuses and includes a $15 million mutual option for 2019 with a $1 million buyout."



Wonder how Mr Boras feels about his client's deal.

I wondered the same thing when I saw that signing. Teams now are really being guided by statistical analysis. Boras has thrived by getting teams to buy into the idea that his players are an exception to general guidelines, but with all the stats available now that's getting harder to do. Add in the loss of a draft pick if anyone else signed Moustakas and it's no wonder the market for him was weak. (Note that the Royals had to give up the draft pick they would have gotten for him if he'd signed elsewhere, to the cost to them was slightly higher.

It's collusion.  Or, at best, it's 15+ teams that aren't trying to win, and the rest not needing a 3bman. Nothing statistical about it.   



Sean Rodriguez signed a more lucrative contract lol.  Come on folks...

646D65747A000 wrote: It's collusion.  Or, at best, it's 15+ teams that aren't trying to win, and the rest not needing a 3bman. Nothing statistical about it.   



Sean Rodriguez signed a more lucrative contract lol.  Come on folks...


Maybe the Sean Rodriguez contract was dumb.

00323E3E2A183B323F3A3532530 wrote: It's collusion.  Or, at best, it's 15+ teams that aren't trying to win, and the rest not needing a 3bman. Nothing statistical about it.   



Sean Rodriguez signed a more lucrative contract lol.  Come on folks...


Maybe the Sean Rodriguez contract was dumb.


there are a ton of contacts that make Moustakas at 1 year/ 7 with incentives look absurd. So I guess they were all dumb and now...it's stats lol

He turned down $17.4 million to sign with the same team. Looks like a pity signing. That mutual option is funny too. What is that? Do other players have that option? I never heard of that before.



Boras might lose a bunch of clients after this off season.

It's kind of amazing that, 60 years after he died, baseball is finally catching up to Branch Rickey.

The owners are stupid for being so obvious about this, especially when every team is getting a 50mil revenue check from BAM first quarter of this year.    It could hardly be more obvious to me what's happening now.   The big spenders are boxed in by the luxury tax working like a salary cap, and the lucrative FA class next year.... and 50%+ of the league WHICH SHOULD BE stepping into this vastly more competitive FA market because of that aren't trying to win.    



Unfortunately MLBPA will have to wait until 2021 to strike.   All prior strikes have been an ownership lockout, but this one may actually be an MLBPA work stoppage in 2021.   So far away...

next year is going to be even more interesting.  How much is this going to impact the big FA class signings next year?   



You've gone from a market price of about $8mil per WAR to approximately 2.5 mil per WAR in a calendar year.   IMO, there's no possibility a "correction" like that is due to some profound, industry wide revolutionary re-understanding of stats.      

7B727A6B651F0 wrote: The owners are stupid for being so obvious about this, especially when every team is getting a 50mil revenue check from BAM first quarter of this year.    It could hardly be more obvious to me what's happening now.   The big spenders are boxed in by the luxury tax working like a salary cap, and the lucrative FA class next year.... and 50%+ of the league WHICH SHOULD BE stepping into this vastly more competitive FA market because of that aren't trying to win.    



Unfortunately MLBPA will have to wait until 2021 to strike.   All prior strikes have been an ownership lockout, but this one may actually be an MLBPA work stoppage in 2021.   So far away...

next year is going to be even more interesting.  How much is this going to impact the big FA class signings next year?   



You've gone from a market price of about $8mil per WAR to approximately 2.5 mil per WAR in a calendar year.   IMO, there's no possibility a "correction" like that is due to some profound, industry wide revolutionary re-understanding of stats.      


Well, I see what you're saying.  But from the teams' (and fans for that matter) perspectives, what's the real difference between winning 75 games a year or winning 78 games a year?  Nothing except a draft order really.  I remember lots of criticism directed towards David Littlefield and his "Drive for 75."



Of course those extra war are more valuable to a contender than a non-contender.  I don't know why people think there has to be "collusion" for teams to come up to that very obvious realization.  I mean, clearly Moustakas' value was NOT $8M per WAR or else someone would have given it to him.  Now earlier in the offseason I think it might have been more valuable but he and many others held out for what they thought they were worth. 

He turned down $17.4 million for either more money or a long term deal. It was a risk he took. He lost that gamble.



A lot of players take that gamble and want to become free agents. A lot of players sign an extension so they aren't in that situation.



When Moustakis signed his two year contract in 2016 to avoid arbitration, was he offered a longer deal?