|
Post by scottysmalls on Oct 19, 2022 18:27:47 GMT -5
It's $8 million/WAR *on the free agent market.* Obviously every team depends on getting a bunch of surplus value from cost-controlled players. And you wouldn't need to pay Mookie $50 million a year for a 6 WAR season because a long-term contract takes into account his decline years.
But your comment is a good illustration of why a successful team needs that young talent - you can't buy your way to a winning record with free agents alone.
Your point (the one foreverred9 also made) is well taken. I fully understand that $8M/1 WAR is the going rate on the FA market, but these discussions are usually in the context of how much it would cost to sign a FA or to retain a player who's about to be a FA (like Mookie in the winter of 2019-'20). Using the $5M figure, as foreverred9 suggests, supports a point I often make on here. That is that these long-term mega contracts are destructive for the teams giving them out. At $5M per 1 WAR, Mookie contributed $33M in FG WAR this year, not $53M. It means he'll be posting a lot of negative value if he turns into Andrew McCutchen in a couple of years. On the other hand it's worth considering that the value is different to different teams. Teams that can afford to pay more should be willing to (as in the value of a win to the Yankees might be $9M instead of $8M). The value is also different for higher end guys than mid-lower guys (as in a 6 WAR guy adds more value than three 2 WAR guys, so you should be willing to pay more for the one great player than in total for the three average ones). I also think true top of the market guys like Mookie should get some value add for the marketing aspect and because they are even more rare.
|
|