Author Topic: The Bryce Harper Compendium (2016)  (Read 115179 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Optics

  • Posts: 9233
Re: The Bryce Harper Compendium (2016)
« Reply #75: February 08, 2016, 12:33:59 PM »
Id say Stephs Q rating is way above Harps.

Right now yes. But come July when NBA is over and Harper is having another monster season things will be different.

Kinda annoying though how other guys that win league MVPs are winning or at least competing for championships. Our guys that win it don't even make the playoffs.

Offline whytev

  • Posts: 8768
Re: The Bryce Harper Compendium (2016)
« Reply #76: February 08, 2016, 12:55:11 PM »
There are some here who pay no attention at  all to basketball.  Like me.  I had to look up Seth Curry to see who he was.

I'm one! I had no idea either.




Offline BrandonK

  • Posts: 8182
  • #LOLNats
Re: The Bryce Harper Compendium (2016)
« Reply #79: February 10, 2016, 05:37:16 PM »

Offline phil219

  • Posts: 89
Re: The Bryce Harper Compendium (2016)
« Reply #80: February 12, 2016, 10:58:54 AM »
$400 million is apparently insulting.

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2016/02/11/nationals-bryce-harper-400-million-contract/

Hope we win it all by 2018

Offline HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 21606
Re: The Bryce Harper Compendium (2016)
« Reply #81: February 12, 2016, 11:17:48 AM »
$400 million is apparently insulting.

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2016/02/11/nationals-bryce-harper-400-million-contract/

Hope we win it all by 2018


I wonder if he has any option years left

Offline Ray D

  • Posts: 10073
Re: The Bryce Harper Compendium (2016)
« Reply #82: February 12, 2016, 11:17:58 AM »
I don't know exactly what he meant by "don't sell me short".  But if he means that $400M is insulting, then freak Harper.  I'd just as well see him traded now.

Offline Ray D

  • Posts: 10073
Re: The Bryce Harper Compendium (2016)
« Reply #83: February 12, 2016, 11:18:46 AM »

I wonder if he has any option years left
I think 2018 IS the option year (team option).  Not entirely sure.

Offline HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 21606
Re: The Bryce Harper Compendium (2016)
« Reply #84: February 12, 2016, 11:26:10 AM »
I meant minor league options

Offline Jedgi

  • Posts: 149
Re: The Bryce Harper Compendium (2016)
« Reply #85: February 12, 2016, 12:16:25 PM »
I don't know exactly what he meant by "don't sell me short".  But if he means that $400M is insulting, then freak Harper.  I'd just as well see him traded now.

Normally I'd think saying something like this is overreacting, but seriously. If the greed and arrogance is high enough to think $400M is insulting( that much more than any MLB player has ever made), then I think maybe cutting our losses and trading him before his contract expires makes sense.

Offline dracnal

  • Posts: 1696
Re: The Bryce Harper Compendium (2016)
« Reply #86: February 12, 2016, 12:45:06 PM »
I'm not in a place I can listen, but that's a quote I'd -really- have to hear in context. It's way too easy to unintentionally misread a line of text. It's also very easy for a reporter to pick a specific line to quote because it is out of context and click bait.

Offline Slateman

  • Posts: 63106
  • THE SUMMONER OF THE REVERSE JINX
Re: The Bryce Harper Compendium (2016)
« Reply #87: February 12, 2016, 12:46:40 PM »
If Stanton is worth 13 million a win,  than Harper with his 9 WAR a season would equate to 117 million a season.

Offline HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 21606
Re: The Bryce Harper Compendium (2016)
« Reply #88: February 12, 2016, 12:48:26 PM »
I'm not in a place I can listen, but that's a quote I'd -really- have to hear in context. It's way too easy to unintentionally misread a line of text. It's also very easy for a reporter to pick a specific line to quote because it is out of context and click bait.

I didn't hear it, but I heard grant and danny talking about it- they both thought he was serious

Offline dracnal

  • Posts: 1696
Re: The Bryce Harper Compendium (2016)
« Reply #89: February 12, 2016, 01:02:30 PM »
I didn't hear it, but I heard grant and danny talking about it- they both thought he was serious

Interesting. I've gotten used to things like, 'Where's my ring, bro?' which I saw as a silly throwaway comment because he was happy getting turned and twisted into proof that he's some arrogant punk. Grant and Danny usually don't fall into that trap too often though.

Online imref

  • Posts: 42525
  • Re-contending in 202...5?
Re: The Bryce Harper Compendium (2016)
« Reply #90: February 12, 2016, 01:04:29 PM »
Go big or go home - $600 million.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fancy-stats/wp/2016/02/12/forget-400-million-bryce-harper-should-be-worth-over-600-million/

So given our deferment strategy, that works out to $20 million a year for 30 years.

Offline Slateman

  • Posts: 63106
  • THE SUMMONER OF THE REVERSE JINX
Re: The Bryce Harper Compendium (2016)
« Reply #91: February 12, 2016, 01:06:22 PM »
Go big or go home - $600 million.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fancy-stats/wp/2016/02/12/forget-400-million-bryce-harper-should-be-worth-over-600-million/

So given our deferment strategy, that works out to $20 million a year for 30 years.

I don't think the deferment is going to work. Particularly if someone (the Yankees) come in oferring 35+ a year with a third year opt out

Offline NJ Ave

  • Posts: 3485
Re: The Bryce Harper Compendium (2016)
« Reply #92: February 12, 2016, 02:04:43 PM »
I think the best thing to hope for is that he wants an opt-out with a near-100% chance of him taking it. Give him one 3 years into a 10-year/$450 million contract. He'll be heading into his age-29 season with 7/$315 million left and at that point would almost certainly opt-out (the same way A-Rod did).

That way, you get your 3 prime Harper extension years without the long-term commitment. Let him walk then if you want. Handle him the way the Cardinals handled Pujols, and the way the Yankees SHOULD have handled A-Rod.

Offline NJ Ave

  • Posts: 3485
Re: The Bryce Harper Compendium (2016)
« Reply #93: February 12, 2016, 02:06:11 PM »
Or just give him the money and don't give him an opt-out at all. There are worse things to hope for in life than for your team to control a HOFer for his entire career :)

Online imref

  • Posts: 42525
  • Re-contending in 202...5?
Re: The Bryce Harper Compendium (2016)
« Reply #94: February 12, 2016, 02:53:25 PM »
IMHO it's crunch time for the Lerners.  Quit using the MASN deal as an excuse and either  bite the bullet and pay him what he deserves, or watch the franchise go to mid-tier status with an annual goal of just being competitive.  There is nothing more important for the health of this franchise over the next 10-15 years than locking up Harper no matter the price.  He's a once in a generation talent.

Pay the man.

Offline HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 21606
Re: The Bryce Harper Compendium (2016)
« Reply #95: February 12, 2016, 02:58:46 PM »
IMHO it's crunch time for the Lerners.  Quit using the MASN deal as an excuse and either  bite the bullet and pay him what he deserves, or watch the franchise go to mid-tier status with an annual goal of just being competitive.  There is nothing more important for the health of this franchise over the next 10-15 years than locking up Harper no matter the price.  He's a once in a generation talent.

Pay the man.

the rangers said the same about ARod.

Offline Ray D

  • Posts: 10073
Re: The Bryce Harper Compendium (2016)
« Reply #96: February 12, 2016, 03:03:01 PM »
IMHO it's crunch time for the Lerners.  Quit using the MASN deal as an excuse and either  bite the bullet and pay him what he deserves, or watch the franchise go to mid-tier status with an annual goal of just being competitive.  There is nothing more important for the health of this franchise over the next 10-15 years than locking up Harper no matter the price.  He's a once in a generation talent.

Are you comfortable with half the payroll going to two players.  I'm not . So we'd have a roster of Harper, Scherzer, and 23 average players.  That would certainly be below mid-tier.

Online imref

  • Posts: 42525
  • Re-contending in 202...5?
Re: The Bryce Harper Compendium (2016)
« Reply #97: February 12, 2016, 03:06:21 PM »
the rangers said the same about ARod.

Well, they did get Soriano for him.  But it was a different environment with a more established ball club.  And A-Rod wasn't home-grown either.

The Nats are finally a winning team after a nearly a decade of decadence.  They've got the greatest player in the game, who may even be better than Griffey, A-Rod, etc.  For them to let him go because they won't pay him, when they've got one of the richest owners in sports, will do a great deal of harm to this franchise IMHO.  Look around Nats park on any given game night/day, i'd bet at least half the fans are there with Harper shirts/jerseys, and probably close to an equal amount are there to see him play.  Take him away and attendance dwindles unless we miraculously turn into a winning club after losing JZ, Strasburg, and Harper.

Online imref

  • Posts: 42525
  • Re-contending in 202...5?
Re: The Bryce Harper Compendium (2016)
« Reply #98: February 12, 2016, 03:07:13 PM »
Are you comfortable with half the payroll going to two players.  I'm not . So we'd have a roster of Harper, Scherzer, and 23 average players.  That would certainly be below mid-tier.

Remember that a lot of Scherzer's money is deferred.  I wouldn't have signed Scherzer though, but I'd break the bank to sign Harper.

Offline skippy1999

  • Posts: 19411
  • Believe!!!
Re: The Bryce Harper Compendium (2016)
« Reply #99: February 12, 2016, 03:09:40 PM »
I'm with imref, there's something so special about having your star player remain with your team the duration of his career, it's so rare anymore and he's such a special talent I'd do whatever it took to keep Bryce with this team for as long as he is in baseball.