Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 38
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    58,130
    I think it can be a deal that works out but theres limited upside. Its notblike if we plays at an mvp level you will get a guy outplaying his contract.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    2,962
    Quote Originally Posted by metswon69 View Post
    I would have waited one more year only because Tatis hasn't played a full major league season worth of games yet. No doubting how talented he is but that's a lot of money for 143 games worth of production.
    THey are betting that they locked him in at a reasonable rate. You assume the risk is on the down side. There is also risk that he performs so well the next season or two that they would have had to pay a bunch more to lock him in.

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    2,962
    Quote Originally Posted by More-Than-Most View Post
    and if he busts where is this financial certainty? wtf is happening right now.. a dude who hasnt played 1 full season combined got 340 million and we out here calling it a great deal. Holy ****

    **** me we should have given hoskins 360-400 mill after his first 160 games as well holy ****
    Padres organization has the cost certainty that the tax payers funded 75% of the cost of Petco that will benefit the Padres ownership 100%. They will be fine.

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Central Iowa
    Posts
    5,117
    Quote Originally Posted by SiteWolf View Post
    Where did the Padres suddenly find all this money? Not sure their team payroll had ever been anything but below league average prior to last year.
    The Padres are the only professional team in town now. They have a huge marketing advantage there. San Diego has always been a great sports city and they have a monopoly on the sports dollars (except for those that go to San Diego State).
    Tatis will only be 35 when this deal expires. He should still be in his prime, or at least not too far away from it.

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    1,368
    Quote Originally Posted by WOwolfOL View Post
    It's a commentary on the Tatis trade possibly going down among the most lopsided deals ever, and thats funny to me, because many Sox fans like to boast of how they acquired Eloy as if it was some major robbery when it will end up nothing close to the Tatis deal.

    Thought I made that pretty clear
    Then go to the Sox forum if you want to talk how bad that trade was........I absolutelly hated that trade and said the day it was made, and got a lot flack from FO *** kissers in Sox forum....Hated it for two reasons obviosely throwing in Tatis at that young age and the fact that I hated Shields and he was basicallty on the down slope of his career....As far as Eloy and Cease go, that was a win by the Sox, we will have to wait and seee how big of a win it will end up being.

  6. #21
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    57,758
    Quote Originally Posted by More-Than-Most View Post
    With respect WHAT THE **** IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE? This is a great deal? Na **** that noise because this dude could be what exactly? He hasnt even played 1 full season... What are we even talking about here? The dude is on the hook for 340 million that is 100 pct garanteed and hasnt proven much of anything let alone shown he will be healthy or be great consistantly. How many year would he have been arb eligible? I would have sent his *** throw that first
    He would have been arbitration eligible in 2022 and a FA three years later. I'd call it a no-brainer for Tatis Jr. to sign this and really risky for the Padres to offer it.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    57,758
    Quote Originally Posted by metswon69 View Post
    All these California teams have money with the exception of the A's.
    ....and I'd say the A's likely have much more money than they lead people to believe. They simply choose not to spend it.

  8. #23
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    57,758
    Quote Originally Posted by catman View Post
    The Padres are the only professional team in town now. They have a huge marketing advantage there. San Diego has always been a great sports city and they have a monopoly on the sports dollars (except for those that go to San Diego State).
    Tatis will only be 35 when this deal expires. He should still be in his prime, or at least not too far away from it.
    In his prime at 35? Let's be real here.

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    58,130
    Apparently he signed a % of his future earnings away back when he was a minor leaguer.

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles County, CA
    Posts
    45,568
    Quote Originally Posted by spliff(TONE) View Post
    In his prime at 35? Let's be real here.
    No ****. Prime usually runs through age 28, some are saying these days its even earlier than that. But that's just on average. There are obviously plenty of examples of exceeding that. I believe he can stay at SS through 28, probably longer. Probably peak at 25 or 26 offensively. Are the Ks gonna catch up to him eventually? Can he handle a full 150ish games at top performance? And most importantly, can he remain available?

    These are the questions I'm most interested in ATM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Raps18-19 Champ View Post
    Apparently he signed a % of his future earnings away back when he was a minor leaguer.
    27m to Big League Advance. Hell of an investment there for them.

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    123
    Quote Originally Posted by spliff(TONE) View Post
    ....and I'd say the A's likely have much more money than they lead people to believe. They simply choose not to spend it.
    Agreed...a quick google search yielded this result: https://www.forbes.com/sites/kurtbad...h=2920040869d1

    The A's owner is ranked 8th among all MLB owners. The money is there, but they have capitalized on the idea of moneyball and have convinced the fan base that they are a small market team that can "beat the system" by fielding a championship team with a bottom level payroll. Unfortunately what we've seen in the last 20 years or so is that they can win in the regular season but then get crushed by teams that actually spend to build a good team (aside from maybe the Rays a couple of years ago).

    The Padres are headed in the opposite direction, which is good for baseball. They are investing in their team and community. They'll make this money back because Tatis sells tickets and merchandise. People come to watch him and to watch the amazing team they're building. Although a risky investment, the upside is worth it. They're not trying to convince their fans that they are shrewdly putting together a good team. They are convincing their fans that they are ready to put their money where their mouth is and go for a championship.

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    40,143
    Quote Originally Posted by nyyfan555 View Post
    Agreed...a quick google search yielded this result: https://www.forbes.com/sites/kurtbad...h=2920040869d1

    The A's owner is ranked 8th among all MLB owners. The money is there, but they have capitalized on the idea of moneyball and have convinced the fan base that they are a small market team that can "beat the system" by fielding a championship team with a bottom level payroll. Unfortunately what we've seen in the last 20 years or so is that they can win in the regular season but then get crushed by teams that actually spend to build a good team (aside from maybe the Rays a couple of years ago).
    Owner net worth doesnt really mean anything. Owners base their payrolls on revenue. Reports are the A's are only paid 20 million dollars a year to broadcast their games and over the last few years they've been averaging under 20,000 fans a game. They are not pulling in the revenue these other California teams are. That has a lot to do with ballpark, the Giants dominating much of Northern California, etc.

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    337
    Baseball contracts are unreal. Out of this world these days. Wonder if a $1B will be coming up!
    Showers of April!

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    117,382
    Quote Originally Posted by JPPT1974 View Post
    Baseball contracts are unreal. Out of this world these days. Wonder if a $1B will be coming up!
    they arent to a point. Basketball is probably the worst. Baseball you get like what 2 guys at best a season making 200 plus over a so and so year? in basketball you get meh players making 100 mill easy every season. Baseball and basketball is what i would try to teach my kid to play

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    40,143
    Quote Originally Posted by More-Than-Most View Post
    they arent to a point. Basketball is probably the worst. Baseball you get like what 2 guys at best a season making 200 plus over a so and so year? in basketball you get meh players making 100 mill easy every season. Baseball and basketball is what i would try to teach my kid to play
    Who cares, really? I don't say that to sound like a prick but we don't condemn owners for signing lucrative tv deals or ******** cash with their RSNs. Whatever the owners are making, the players are entitled to half of that and if that includes guys making 40, 50, 60 million dollars a year so be it.

    Its better in the player's pockets than the owners.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •