This is kind of a follow up on my Harper blog, because some players complained about free agents not getting deals. Now these days, how well a player has done is going to determine their value to their current team or future teams who may lure them away. There have been some deals that many will not want to see happen again.
If you're into basketball, then the Allan Houston contract with the New York Knicks will make you sick. With six years and 100 million dollars, that should be a little ridiculous but not horrible. Add in bad knees, and you have a rule now regarding waiving a player and the whole luxury tax thing. About as equal is Albert Haynesworth and a deal roughly similar to that with football's Washington Redskins. Whether the effort was in or the animosity with him and Mike Shanahan in 2010, it was anything but good.
As I said for baseball, players complained about guys like Harper not getting deals. Teams are a lot more cautious now. Albert Pujols is one of the great modern players of the 21st century, but his deal with the LA Angels is a bust. Some of the years haven't been putrid, but for a guy that made 27 mil last year? I don't know. I know there's comparisons to Ryan Howard's contract because of it being centered on the Phillies. As I said in the last one, this is different. Harper is going to be in the prime years of his career. Howard was already past his prime when his five year deal started in 2012. I don't think the system is as flawed as some like Justin Verlander say it is. As much as any team would love to have their dream lineup and bullpen, everyone has their pros and cons.
It's like anything. You don't know what you are going to get. Could we see Harper not living up to it? Maybe. But there have been guys like Robinson Cano (ignoring the PED thing for a second) who have done tremendously well with their long term deals. Harper is capable. Can he just be mature be committed to playing and getting a World Series trophy?
No comments:
Post a Comment