Bryce: All things considered, I'd Rather be in Philadelphia

[imref]

Jason Schwartz
@JasonSchwartz
 There are children in Philadelphia who aren't even born yet who will throw batteries at Bryce Harper before the end of this contract

[shoeshineboy]

Harper has been booed since he was a child. He doesn't care. It is business. He wanted to go FA. Can't begrudge him for getting paid. I think in the end Boras didn't really do him any favors. But he made his play and the Nats made theirs. Lerners had no appetite for a bidding war. Moving on and impriving the team elsewhere was smart business given their desire to keep the finances in check so they never spend their own money. They never have. That is their business. Biggest blunder was not Bryce and Boras settlingvfor Philly. That was a blunder. But the bigger one was Lerner not trading him when they knew their plans. Stupid.

[HalfSmokes]

BiL is right, trading him would have alienated fans and made the team the bad guys. The way this played out, Harper leaves as the villain

[Baseball is Life]

Harper has been booed since he was a child. He doesn't care. It is business. He wanted to go FA. Can't begrudge him for getting paid. I think in the end Boras didn't really do him any favors. But he made his play and the Nats made theirs. Lerners had no appetite for a bidding war. Moving on and impriving the team elsewhere was smart business given their desire to keep the finances in check so they never spend their own money. They never have. That is their business. Biggest blunder was not Bryce and Boras settlingvfor Philly. That was a blunder. But the bigger one was Lerner not trading him when they knew their plans. Stupid.

I doubt Harper has been booed a lot by his hometown fans. Therein lies the Philly rub.

I don't think the Lerners were stupid not to trade him. One, I think they thought they could sign him because he was talking all that legacy loyalty crap. Also, if they traded him they would have taken a huge hit with the fan base. It may have been a bad baseball decision but it was a great business decision. Right now, the narrative is that they made him a great offer and he greedily went somewhere else. He comes across as the bad guy and the Lerners come out looking good.

[tzinc]

harper gets to spend years 37 38 39 of his life playing for essentially 10 million a season in philly

 

i would fire boras right now if he was my agent

[Baseball is Life]

BiL is right, trading him would have alienated fans and made the team the bad guys. The way this played out, Harper leaves as the villain

From a business perspective the Lerners played it masterfully. They made an overly generous offer and didn't have to pay it. And they won over the fan base.

[Baseball is Life]

harper gets to spend years 37 38 39 of his life playing for essentially 10 million a season in philly

 

i would fire boras right now if he was my agent

And no opt outs. Machado's offer is so much better.

[miller10]

Count the Phillies owner in "the NL should have a DH" camp.

[Air Desmond]

I am going to miss Harper’s uncanny ability to ignore the cutoff man.

[Elvir Ovcina]

From a business perspective the Lerners played it masterfully. They made an overly generous offer and didn't have to pay it. And they won over the fan base.

Did they?  They just lost an all-star hitter to a division rival for less money annually than they offered.  That doesn't look so good to me.

[Natsinpwc]

harper gets to spend years 37 38 39 of his life playing for essentially 10 million a season in philly

 

i would fire boras right now if he was my agent

He might be injured. Or just cooked as a player. $10 million might be far more than he would get on an open market. I am very surprised there are no opt outs. All those reports were just wrong I suppose.

I think Middleton figures a strike in 2021 and maybe into 2022. So he doesn’t have to pay him then.

[Greg_SRT]

Did they?  They just lost an all-star hitter to a division rival for less money annually than they offered.  That doesn't look so good to me.

I’d think a lot of the fans are happy we didn’t put our season on hold waiting for Harper.

Sure, you’d hate to lose him to a division rival. But he didn’t want to sign the offer. Then the Nats went out and got the best pitcher available along with a few other big additions by not waiting for him.

[Upper Level Dad]

And no opt outs. Machado's offer is so much better.

Have they released a structure yet?  If it’s front loaded (or lower in 2022) than it could be a higher AAV.  He could always retire earlier than 13 years and not lose a lot of $.

Plus who knows about any bonuses.

[Baseball is Life]

Did they?  They just lost an all-star hitter to a division rival for less money annually than they offered.  That doesn't look so good to me.

Life is about timing. They proposed to him but he wasn't ready for a commitment. When he was ready for a commitment, they had already found another. Were they supposed to wait around for him while he played the field? Life just doesn't work that way.

[tzinc]

compare the philly and nats rotation and bp
that ll be the difference

[Elvir Ovcina]

Life is about timing. They proposed to him but he wasn't ready for a commitment. When he was ready for a commitment, they had already found another. Were they supposed to wait around for him while he played the field? Life just doesn't work that way.

The timing is fine for PR purposes, but the end question boils down to this.  You have a choice of three contracts to hand out:

Give Patrick Corbin $140 million over 6 years from age 29-34 seasons inclusive  ($23.3m/y);
Give Manny Machado $300 million over 10 years from 26-35 ($30m/y);
Give Bryce Harper $330 million over 13 years from 26-38 ($25.4m/y);

Out of that, Corbin might well be my last option.   I realize it's not that easy to read the market up front, but I think there's a much higher probability of Corbin undershooting his contract value by $100 million plus than the other two.  There's more upside too, in theory, but given the rest of that menu I don't think I'd bet on the 29-year-old Tommy John recipient coming off a career year.

[Baseball is Life]

The timing is fine for PR purposes, but the end question boils down to this.  You have a choice of three contracts to hand out:

Give Patrick Corbin $140 million over 6 years from age 29-34 seasons inclusive  ($23.3m/y);
Give Manny Machado $300 million over 10 years from 26-35 ($30m/y);
Give Bryce Harper $330 million over 13 years from 26-38 ($25.4m/y);

Out of that, Corbin might well be my last option.   I realize it's not that easy to read the market up front, but I think there's a much higher probability of Corbin undershooting his contract value by $100 million plus than the other two.  There's more upside too, in theory, but given the rest of that menu I don't think I'd bet on the 29-year-old Tommy John recipient coming off a career year.

I don't like any of those three contracts for various reasons.

--Machado's contract because, well, he's a dirty player and bad role model for younger players and the wrong face for an organization.
--Harper's contract with Philly is a massive overpay. He was worth more to the Nats being a hometown player. The Phils will never take to him like we did. He's just a hired gun and they will turn on him as he ages if not right away.
--Corbin, as you said, is a health concern and is an overpay.

For PR (read business) purposes the Nats played this perfectly. For baseball purposes, it's debatable.

[bluestreak]

The fact of the matter is that the Nats needed starting pitching more than they needed a corner outfielder, even one as good as Bryce. So I’m happier they signed Corbin. I honestly think the die was cast when Soto ended up being as good as he did. It made the marginal wins you got over by signing Harper wasn’t worth the big contract. Given the entire organization, it really didn’t make sense for this team to pay Bryce what he was looking for, if you’re assuming that the owners won’t put up unlimited money.

Second, I think if Bryce had gone to the Yankees or the Dodgers for this same contract, no one would care. And if the Phillies gave him the $400 million he wanted I think most Nats fans would have wished him well. But the optics of this are that he left for less dollars per year than the Nats offered him, so it looks like he couldn’t wait to get out of DC. And then add on the fact that he signed what seems to most people to have been an inferior contract just for the hype of having ESPN declare it the “LARGEST CONTRACT IN
THE HISTORY OF NORTH AMERICAN SPORTS!”  People can understand going for the most money. But signing where you don’t want to be just for the weird ego boost of having the biggest contract for two years just seems pathologic.

And when you look back on how he’s acted, it all just seems like he wasn’t actually “tweaking the media” or “having fun,” he just legitimately didn’t want to be here and most of the stuff he said was BS. And this was despite the fact that the team and the fans adored him.

So yeah. I can see how folks are pissed. I personally thought he was a good player who seemed to be a total couch. And I’m excited to see what the Nats can do without him.

[shoeshineboy]

I’d think a lot of the fans are happy we didn’t put our season on hold waiting for Harper.

Sure, you’d hate to lose him to a division rival. But he didn’t want to sign the offer. Then the Nats went out and got the best pitcher available along with a few other big additions by not waiting for him.

Yeah, moving on was smart, not trading him was stupid.

[aBaltoNat]

harper gets to spend years 37 38 39 of his life playing for essentially 10 million a season in philly

 

i would fire boras right now if he was my agent

You dumb bro? He won't be playing...but he'll still be making that.

[bluestreak]

Yeah, moving on was smart, not trading him was stupid.

If you actually wanted to keep him, not trading him makes sense.

[Slateman]

We need to go all in on Trout

[JCA-CrystalCity]

You were the Chosen One! It was said that would destroy the Philth, not join them. Bring balance to our offense, not leave it in darkness.

 

[Slateman]

If you actually wanted to keep him, not trading him makes sense.

No, it doesnt. It's a simple explanation about winning and how the team wasnt going to do crap. It's why Rizzo didnt add anyone at the deadline.

[aBaltoNat]

No, it doesnt. It's a simple explanation about winning and how the team wasnt going to do crap. It's why Rizzo didnt add anyone at the deadline.

Agree with blue and the other guy. If you wanted to try and keep him, you couldn't trade him...plus you would've turned the base against you.

This way...he's the ungrateful jerk.