Bryce Harper 2018 and beyond

[LoveAngelos]

This Harper talk is mirroring the Cousins angst.
It's clear he's gone just like with Cousins. Enjoy it while he's  here.
For me if it means keeping Rendon and Turner I say happy trails

[UMDNats]

At this point, if I'm Bryce, my options for 2019 and beyond are:

Dodgers, Phillies, Nationals, Cubs. 3 of those 4 teams are extremely competitive right now, and the other should be in 2 years or so, but is not a guarantee. Money is pretty much likely going to be equal across the board. His dream of joining the Yankees is out the window at this point. Maybe the Red Sox find a way to give him big money, but I don't see it.

It'll boil down to if I want to be the face of a team in DC, or just another guy in LA/Chicago, a guy who jumped on good teams? Basically Kevin Durant. Can't blame him for doing it, but judging from what I've heard from him he values legacy. Probably not enough to stay here, but maybe. I don't think he's clear-cut gone but I think Stanton going to NYY helps us tremendously.

[bluestreak]

If I had to bet my own money on where he will be next year, I would put it on the Nats. From all accounts he has a good if not great relationship with ownership, as does his agent, and he’s never given any indication he doesn’t like playing here. Plus ownership has demonstrated that they will pay top money for stars.
But the biggest advantage they Nats have is that they the exclusive right to negotiate with Harper until the end of the WS.

Those are the facts as I see them. Anything else is people 3 and 4 degrees removed trying to read the guy’s mind.

[varoadking]

Royce looked totally disinterested in the field today...not that I blame him with the crap we trotted out to the mound...but still...

[Natsinpwc]

Royce looked totally disinterested in the field today...not that I blame him with the crap we trotted out to the mound...but still...

That's why you get to pay so much for exhibition games. You wouldn't see that during the regular season.

[HalfSmokes]

If I had to bet my own money on where he will be next year, I would put it on the Nats. From all accounts he has a good if not great relationship with ownership, as does his agent, and he’s never given any indication he doesn’t like playing here. Plus ownership has demonstrated that they will pay top money for stars.
But the biggest advantage they Nats have is that they the exclusive right to negotiate with Harper until the end of the WS.

Those are the facts as I see them. Anything else is people 3 and 4 degrees removed trying to read the guy’s mind.

Nats are the most likely, but I’d still take the field

[Slateman]

But the dynamics of baseball make it different for non-pitchers to stand out.  The "football quarterback" or "basketball center" star in baseball is a dominant pitcher, not a star hitter.  That teams might be evolving for a lineup of good players that a couple of top star hitters.

Are you dumb?
There are 7 players ahead of the biggest contract for a pitcher?

Every day player > pitcher

[aBaltoNat]

Are you dumb?
There are 7 players ahead of the biggest contract for a pitcher?

Every day player > pitcher

How can he be dumb when he's a math guy?

[Ray D]

Every day player > pitcher

So, Michael A Taylor > Max Scherzer?

[Slateman]

So, Michael A Taylor > Max Scherzer?

Well one of them has played in a postseason as a National

[imref]

Altuve is signing a 5 /$151 million deal starting in 2020.  He’s already under contract through 2019. So that pretty much sets the floor for Harper at around $30 million a year.

[Natsinpwc]

Haroer will get $40 million. You know why? Because it just takes one team to want to pay that much. One of the big spenders or someone who wants to make a splash.

[HalfSmokes]

Haroer will get $40 million. You know why? Because it just takes one team to want to pay that much. One of the big spenders or someone who wants to make a splash.

Is cano still in Seattle, after he signed his deal, I really haven’t heard much about him. Maybe Seattle can add Harper too

[More of #34]

Maybe I'm being silly, but to me, more than the money, is whether or not Harper sees the team as a winner.  What good is it if he makes oodles of money but is on a team that is not victorious?

[HalfSmokes]

Maybe I'm being silly, but to me, more than the money, is whether or not Harper sees the team as a winner.  What good is it if he makes oodles of money but is on a team that is not victorious?

The oodles of money are pretty good

[Baseball is Life]

I know it may be sacrilege to say this but I'm undecided if I want the Nats to sign Harper to some massive deal. I would hate the team to invest that much in one player but...

[HalfSmokes]

I know it may sacrilege to say this but I'm undecided if I want the Nats to sign Harper to some massive deal. I would hate the team to invest that much in one player but...

I’m in that boat and I think a lot of others are too. If he really gets 40 million a year, you’re a decent way to the cap with only three players

[nfotiu]

I know it may sacrilege to say this but I'm undecided if I want the Nats to sign Harper to some massive deal. I would hate the team to invest that much in one player but...

Yeah, if I was a GM who's only concern was coming up with the best team you can with the budget you have to work with, it would be very tough to justify the risk of giving Harper a rich, long term deal. 

There are other factors too, though.  He generates significant revenue, both short term and long term.  Kids all over Nats territory are excited about baseball, playing baseball, going to games because of Harper.  It's hard to put a dollar figure on it, but my gut would say he is worth 15-20 million in revenue/year which offsets a lot of his salary.  Luxury tax complicates that math though.

[dcpatti]

I’m in that boat and I think a lot of others are too. If he really gets 40 million a year, you’re a decent way to the cap with only three players

That’s a temporary problem though; $13m additional  cap space added over the next 4 years, and you can bet that the next CBA will be  a lot more player-friendly than the current one. If Tony Clark is still around in 2021, I’ll eat my hat.

[HalfSmokes]

That’s a temporary problem though; $13m additional  cap space added over the next 4 years, and you can bet that the next CBA will be  a lot more player-friendly than the current one. If Tony Clark is still around in 2021, I’ll eat my hat.

I don’t think the players are strong enough to win in a work stoppage any more. Too many owners have their teams as a side business; it’s not like you can bleed the learners dry by cancelling a season, meanwhile the buillk of pre arb players are going to feel the pain fast

[rileyn]

I know it may be sacrilege to say this but I'm undecided if I want the Nats to sign Harper to some massive deal. I would hate the team to invest that much in one player but...

I'm right there with you.

[Natsinpwc]

I'm right there with you.

If not Harper they need to lock up Rendon. An OF of Eaton, Robles and Taylor should be fine. But probably Mutphy is gone also after this year. So they need to find a way to replace his bat also.

[JCA-CrystalCity]

I have a hard time saying Harper is better than Altuve at this point.  Pas t 4 years, not only has he racked up more fWAR (24  v. 19.2), but he's also just played more.  Harper has a bit over 2200 PAs.  Altuve has 400+ more than that, or 3/4 of a season.  wRC+, Altuve has gone  137 / 124 / 151 / 160, while Harper has gone 115 / 197 / 112 / 156.  This year, most projections have Harper around 150 and Altuve around 140, but he plays a tougher defensive position a bit better than Bryce plays an easier one.  Altuve's 2.5 years older, and, given Bryce's age, maybe the best is yet to come, but is he worth $10MM more a year over the next 5 years and an additional couple years of $40 MM beyond that?   I just don't see it.

I'd be OK with a deal that offer him $105 MM over the next 3 years, then an opt out, and tacking on 4 more years at a price low enough to ensure he does opt out (say, $100MM).  The opt out is insurance for him.  It's only not exercised if he's a bust.  I don't overpay on that insurance policy.  Would I scream if years 4 and 5 are at $35MM and another opt out before payments drop?  Probably not.

[bluestreak]

I have a hard time saying Harper is better than Altuve at this point.  Pas t 4 years, not only has he racked up more fWAR (24  v. 19.2), but he's also just played more.  Harper has a bit over 2200 PAs.  Altuve has 400+ more than that, or 3/4 of a season.  wRC+, Altuve has gone  137 / 124 / 151 / 160, while Harper has gone 115 / 197 / 112 / 156.  This year, most projections have Harper around 150 and Altuve around 140, but he plays a tougher defensive position a bit better than Bryce plays an easier one.  Altuve's 2.5 years older, and, given Bryce's age, maybe the best is yet to come, but is he worth $10MM more a year over the next 5 years and an additional couple years of $40 MM beyond that?   I just don't see it.

I'd be OK with a deal that offer him $105 MM over the next 3 years, then an opt out, and tacking on 4 more years at a price low enough to ensure he does opt out (say, $100MM).  The opt out is insurance for him.  It's only not exercised if he's a bust.  I don't overpay on that insurance policy.  Would I scream if years 4 and 5 are at $35MM and another opt out before payments drop?  Probably not.

Bryce will just be hitting his prime. Altuve is already in his. At least based on standard aging curves. Harper does tend to get injured more, though.

[JCA-CrystalCity]

Bryce will just be hitting his prime. Altuve is already in his. At least based on standard aging curves. Harper does tend to get injured more, though.

I agree, which is why I'd be willing to pay a bit more in order to sign him. "Better at this point" means going into this season off the recent past.  Recent past just has not been better.  My huge concern is the injury factor, and, of course, Altuve is healthier until he isn't.