Why sign a guy like that if it becomes a liability so quickly, anyways? I read an article the other day that almost every mega-deal becomes a mistake/liabilty for the team a few years after the deal is done. Given that reality, should we just let Harper walk? I mean if Stanton is hardly worth anything signed to those huge dollars, why sign him in the first place?
The thinking is that since Harper is so young entering free agency, that a long term deal for him might not be such a boondoggle. For instance if we look at Miguel Cabrera, he signed an 8 year $152 million contract in 2008 when he was 25. That was the 4th biggest contract in history at the time. It's less than what Harper will get, but there has been significant inflation. If he had played out that contract it would have expired last year and the Tigers would have come out really well. But the problem was that they extended him when he was 31 and now its a franchise destroying contract. So Giving Bryce 8-10 years now isn't awful..
