RealGM

Miggy is the best hitter in the game today and possibly the decade. He's 30yrs old and will be up for a new contract in 2 years. Do we resign him?


IMO

If he's seeking a 10 year deal then no, if its a 5 year deal, maybe. FAct of the matter is that as players get older there bodies break down, no matter how great they are/were. Miggy will maybe live up to his contract for the first 2 years and be average or almost dead weight for the next 8 or 3. While the IIitch pockets maybe lined, i'd be much happier giving that money to a younger guy who can produce

I don't see a scenario where he doesn't get resigned if Illitch is still running the team.

Ideally he'd take a 5 year deal, 6 at most, but 10 years would be a very risky investment. Dudes' gonna get paid though, and we will likely be the ones to do it.

I pray we win a ring with him, in this contract or the next one, he deserves it, and I wanna see that clown in a victory parade in the D

Apparently the answer is 10 years 292 million, with a vesting option for the 11th and 12th at 30 million a piece.

MONEY OVER EVERYTHING!

Its Cabrera so its tough, and its Dombrowski and he's really earned my trust, but man, this deal is tough to understand. Were they really that positive the market was going to get that scary for Miguel in a couple of years?

IMO this means Scherzer will play his last year with the Tigers this season.

Years 7 and beyond (maybe sooner) are going to be a nightmare based on the odds. His abilities are going to fade. No way he is anywhere near his current level in the 2020's. It is win now and deal with the repercussions later.

Higgie wrote:Years 7 and beyond (maybe sooner) are going to be a nightmare based on the odds. His abilities are going to fade. No way he is anywhere near his current level in the 2020's. It is win now and deal with the repercussions later.

This.

I've seen projections that say he'll age reasonably well, but even then this deal will be a nightmare late in this decade and early in the next.

Nightmare for whom? It's not a salary cap sport so a big contract doesn't cripple a team's ability to get more good players unless the owner is just plain stupid or something, i.e. can only spend $80M a year without losing money and signs one player for $30M a year. If someone wants to give a player a ton of money because they can spend and want to sign/keep that player in order to win, I don't see why fans get upset about it. It's not like ticket prices are going to double because someone got a fat contract, and MLB is still easily the cheapest pro sport ticket in most towns if not all.

Manocad wrote:Nightmare for whom? It's not a salary cap sport so a big contract doesn't cripple a team's ability to get more good players unless the owner is just plain stupid or something, i.e. can only spend $80M a year without losing money and signs one player for $30M a year. If someone wants to give a player a ton of money because they can spend and want to sign/keep that player in order to win, I don't see why fans get upset about it. It's not like ticket prices are going to double because someone got a fat contract, and MLB is still easily the cheapest pro sport ticket in most towns if not all.

judging by all the moves we made for financial flexibility, i would assume that our owners pockets aren't infinitely deep

Nobody said they were infinitely deep. But if you want to keep the players that the Yankees/Red Sox/Dodgers/Cubs are willing to snatch up, you'd better expect to pay them what other big spending teams would. Sure, sometimes things all come together, a bunch of less than shining stars all shine at the same time, and big things happen with a low payroll. But that's easily the exception and not the norm.

When you get a chance to keep that once in a lifetime player longterm I think you keep them. Miggy is one of those players. Did the Tigers have to go $29M a year to keep Cabrera? Maybe not. But I'm still not seeing the "nightmare" situation.