Where does Harper end up?

[Erik]

Word is that the contract is front loaded. No opt outs and full no trade clause.

Makes sense, given that we don't know if the NL will get the DH in the next 13 years, and Harper might not be able to play anything else by the final years of the contract.

[harmon]

Is this the longest contract ever signed in MLB?

[Sour Masher]

Is the longest contract ever signed in MLB?

I think it is. It seems like a bet against himself to take this deal over the 10 for 300 mil deals from the Nationals and Phillies that were reported to be on the table. he doesn't think he could make more than 30 million from ages 35-37? I know this is the longest and biggest contract ever, but Machado's and Arenando's seem better.

[joncarlos]

keep at 41-O in NL-only 12-team 5x5 with decent inflation?
not an OBP league, though - just AVG

Probably. I think that's about right. He should get a boatload of R/RBI.

[joncarlos]

Is the longest contract ever signed in MLB?

I think Stanton's was also 13.

Pujols' LAA deal was 10 + another 10 years of "personal service" but that doesn't really count, does it? And then there's Bobby Bonilla?

[Hornsby]

I think it is. It seems like a bet against himself to take this deal over the 10 for 300 mil deals from the Nationals and Phillies that were reported to be on the table. he doesn't think he could make more than 30 million from ages 35-37? I know this is the longest and biggest contract ever, but Machado's and Arenando's seem better.

I was listening to the XM fantasy channel the other day on the way into work, and I believe that it was Bowden who said that Harper wanted to sign a deal that would take him until the end of his career. So this one makes a lot of sense. He can live in Vegas and work in Philly, not a bad deal overall...

[Gregg]

I think Stanton's was also 13.

Pujols' LAA deal was 10 + another 10 years of "personal service" but that doesn't really count, does it? And then there's Bobby Bonilla?

Yep, Stanton was 13 years too.

[Judge Jude]

Bonilla will get $1.2M a year every July 1 through 2035. the Mets also give Bret Saberhagen a check for $250,000 each year through 2029.

neither is as terrible deal for the Mets as people think - it's complicated.

[Mithrandir]

Bonilla will get $1.2M a year every July 1 through 2035. the Mets also give Bret Saberhagen a check for $250,000 each year through 2029.

neither is as terrible deal for the Mets as people think - it's complicated.

No, it's terrible. ��

[joncarlos]

Bonilla will get $1.2M a year every July 1 through 2035. the Mets also give Bret Saberhagen a check for $250,000 each year through 2029.

neither is as terrible deal for the Mets as people think - it's complicated.

It is complicated but I do think they're still not great for the Mets. As I understand it, they basically converted their current salaries into a payment that assumed the Mets could get a 10% return on their cash investments forever. Because they basically had an investment that was paying them 10% annually. And as long as the Mets kept those investments, they would be making money on the Bonilla deal. Well, it turned out the 10% was what they were getting from Bernie Madoff. Oops. Is that abour right?

As for Harper, there seems to be a feeling that he really didn't enjoy free agency and took a deal long enough that he doesn't have to do it again. But if that's true, why didn't he just take the 10/300 the Nats offered in December? I guess the Nats deferred too much of it for his liking? That is a thing they do.

[TranaGreg]

I was listening to the XM fantasy channel the other day on the way into work, and I believe that it was Bowden who said that Harper wanted to sign a deal that would take him until the end of his career. So this one makes a lot of sense. He can live in Vegas and work in Philly, not a bad deal overall...

yeah, I could understand this; the idea of never having to go through this again would be high on my list as well.

26 years old, knowing you'll be getting almost a third of a billion dollars. wild.

[harmon]

I was listening to the XM fantasy channel the other day on the way into work, and I believe that it was Bowden who said that Harper wanted to sign a deal that would take him until the end of his career. So this one makes a lot of sense. He can live in Vegas and work in Philly, not a bad deal overall...

Wait.....Bowden said something that happened and made sense too???

[gcstomp]

I havent seen breakdown, but assuming he is really front loaded, as in 45 mill a year 1st 3 years, and 5 mill a yr last 3, that front loading is worth way more than an even 25 mill a year even spread. Assuming an interest rate of 9%, money doubles every 8 yrs.

[pitbull]

It is complicated but I do think they're still not great for the Mets. As I understand it, they basically converted their current salaries into a payment that assumed the Mets could get a 10% return on their cash investments forever. Because they basically had an investment that was paying them 10% annually. And as long as the Mets kept those investments, they would be making money on the Bonilla deal. Well, it turned out the 10% was what they were getting from Bernie Madoff. Oops. Is that abour right?

As for Harper, there seems to be a feeling that he really didn't enjoy free agency and took a deal long enough that he doesn't have to do it again. But if that's true, why didn't he just take the 10/300 the Nats offered in December? I guess the Nats deferred too much of it for his liking? That is a thing they do.

Whether Harper enjoyed or didn't he got the biggest contract ever so what's not to enjoy. Boras negotiated all the way to the end to get the most he could. And he did. The Phillies have a stacked line-up maybe the best in baseball. The fans should have fun watching this team but then again these are Philly fans.

[cavebird]

It is complicated but I do think they're still not great for the Mets. As I understand it, they basically converted their current salaries into a payment that assumed the Mets could get a 10% return on their cash investments forever. Because they basically had an investment that was paying them 10% annually. And as long as the Mets kept those investments, they would be making money on the Bonilla deal. Well, it turned out the 10% was what they were getting from Bernie Madoff. Oops. Is that abour right?

As for Harper, there seems to be a feeling that he really didn't enjoy free agency and took a deal long enough that he doesn't have to do it again. But if that's true, why didn't he just take the 10/300 the Nats offered in December? I guess the Nats deferred too much of it for his liking? That is a thing they do.

Yep. Not a good deal for the Mets. Could have been worse---they got off the Madoff train before it derailed. I don't remember if the trustee got some money back from them, however. I know it was a possibility. That being said, it hardly breaks the Mets.