The worst contract in baseball

braden · Feb 2, 2010

Good read over at Hardball Times. The other side of the coin, per se.

And this isn't really a case of revisionist history. People were shocked at this deal when he signed it.

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/the-worst-contract-in-baseball/

Sly · Feb 2, 2010

Gotta love an article that basically bashes a player for:

1. Not playing for the money
2. Making sure he's secure for many years to come
3. Realizing that $44M is really not much different than $70M
4. Wanting to stay where he's enjoys playing

braden · Feb 2, 2010

Sly said:
Gotta love an article that basically bashes a player for:

1. Not playing for the money
2. Making sure he's secure for many years to come
3. Realizing that $44M is really not much different than $70M
4. Wanting to stay where he's enjoys playing

I don't really take it that way. The security is valid, yes. But I'd bet the value of that contract that Longoria would've gone year to year in hindsight.

HPC · Feb 2, 2010

Sly said:
Gotta love an article that basically bashes a player for:

1. Not playing for the money
2. Making sure he's secure for many years to come
3. Realizing that $44M is really not much different than $70M
4. Wanting to stay where he's enjoys playing

If you could have 44 or 70million, which would you take?

That's basically all that article boils down to.

JzWand · Feb 2, 2010

Never a good idea to leave money on the table.
BUT nothing is guaranteed except his contract so he took what was offered and hes happy with at the time so I get that.

I also get the fact that 44 million is enough to set up his family for generations down.

At the same time, if Tampa is smart and Longoria continues to produce at the same pace, they may want to consider making him even happier and renegotiate sometime down the road!

mredsox89 · Feb 2, 2010

While now you can look at the past and maybe call it a bad decision, when you are sitting as Longoria, a week into you debut, you would be an idiot to turn down a contract like that. For every player that is hyped and starts out hyped, there are 10 that flop within 2 years.

zach · Feb 2, 2010

Tampa made a smart deal locking him up for this time period.

Longoria doesn't appear to be a risk taker and wanted to lock in his guarantee. NO ONE knows what kind of player he'll be like in 2-3 years. I am all for a player trying to make as much money as possible. He certainly has the the potential to make more. However, this may be what's he's happy with.

andyduke86 · Feb 2, 2010

Evan went with the security of having a long term contract early in his career at the expense of possible higher salaries down the line. It was a great move by Rays management. I'm sure Evan is regretting signing it now but at the time it wasn't that bad of a deal for him.

miguelcabrera · Feb 2, 2010

im still confused at how soriano makes the worst contract lists all the time

pujolsjunkie · Feb 2, 2010

That contract was laughable the day he signed it. This isn't retrospect, as the OP accurately stated.

hive17 · Feb 2, 2010

pujolsjunkie said:
That contract was laughable the day he signed it. This isn't retrospect, as the OP accurately stated.

What if that contract had gone to Chris Shelton? The fact that Longo was only a babe in terms of playing time at the MLB level is still amazing. NOTHING was a sure thing at that time. Anyone who thought the contract was insane for Longo at that time was probably also fooling themselve into thinking the KNEW that he would be this good and consistant; they just turned out to be right and never had to be called on their "hunch."

Sly · Feb 2, 2010

HPC said:
Sly said:

Gotta love an article that basically bashes a player for:

1. Not playing for the money
2. Making sure he's secure for many years to come
3. Realizing that $44M is really not much different than $70M
4. Wanting to stay where he's enjoys playing

Click to expand...

If you could have 44 or 70million, which would you take?

That's basically all that article boils down to.

Guaranteed $44M vs. A "year-to-year" total of $70M with ZERO guarantee...

I'll take the guaranteed.

$44M will be more than I will ever spend in my life and will set up my family for many, many years!

And as others have said, at that point in Longoria's career, there was no reason not to take it. He could have been a big-time fluke and left A LOT of money on the table. It also allows you to avoid arbitration on a year to year basis, which basically boils down to the team explaining to you (or a mediator) why you're not worth x-amount of money.

This article is garbage because no contract is a terrible contract for a player. To look at bad contracts, you need to look at what is OFFERED, not what is taken.

leatherman · Feb 2, 2010

Is this any different (other than the amounts) than Tulowitzki's $31 million over 6 years with an option on the 7th year at $15 million?

Sly · Feb 2, 2010

leatherman said:
Is this any different (other than the amounts) than Tulowitzki's $31 million over 6 years with an option on the 7th year at $15 million?

The difference would be in how many years of Free Agency are bought out? I believe Longoria's deal bought out three (?) years of free agency. I think Tulo's is one, maybe two.

Regardless, I blame no player for looking out for themselves and setting them up with solid deals like Tulo and Longoria. I give props to players willing to play for the game, and not fully for the money.

carrsallstars · Feb 2, 2010

Ask Alex Gordon if he'd take 17.5 mil right about now...?

Kershaw could be hit in the face by a line drive this spring and never be the same....and never earn 1/8th of what Longoria will under his contract.

darocker80 · Feb 3, 2010

JzWand said:
Never a good idea to leave money on the table.
BUT nothing is guaranteed except his contract so he took what was offered and hes happy with at the time so I get that.

I also get the fact that 44 million is enough to set up his family for generations down.

At the same time, if Tampa is smart and Longoria continues to produce at the same pace, they may want to consider making him even happier and renegotiate sometime down the road!

They are on a contending team. MAybe by leaving money on the table, Longoria is hoping that the Rays can secure a solid core of players for years to come (and stay a contender for years to come).

JzWand · Feb 3, 2010

darocker80 said:
JzWand said:

Never a good idea to leave money on the table.
BUT nothing is guaranteed except his contract so he took what was offered and hes happy with at the time so I get that.

I also get the fact that 44 million is enough to set up his family for generations down.

At the same time, if Tampa is smart and Longoria continues to produce at the same pace, they may want to consider making him even happier and renegotiate sometime down the road!

Click to expand...

They are on a contending team. MAybe by leaving money on the table, Longoria is hoping that the Rays can secure a solid core of players for years to come (and stay a contender for years to come).

When he signed though werent they still crap?
IIRC it was his rookie season they turned it around and went to the WS.

Eitherway, hindsight is 20/20 but it alwasy sucks to make a deal and realize you could have done so much better. Of course he also could have done worse so it is what it is.

Welcome to our community

Be apart of something great, join today!

The worst contract in baseball

braden

New member

Sly

Active member

braden

New member

HPC

New member

JzWand

New member

mredsox89

New member

zach

New member

andyduke86

New member

miguelcabrera

New member

pujolsjunkie

New member

hive17

Active member

Sly

Active member

leatherman

Active member

Sly

Active member

carrsallstars

Member

darocker80

New member

JzWand

New member

Similar threads

Members online

Latest posts