Whenever a megastar in professional sports signs a multi-million deal, the chain
reaction of comments from media and fans alike remain the same -- comical.
reaction of comments from media and fans alike remain the same -- comical.
Bryce Harper is the latest to get heavier in the wallet as the Philadelphia Phillies
signed the 26-year old left-handed slugger to a 13-year contract worth $330 million
dollars. The Los Angeles Dodgers, New York Yankees and San Francisco Giants
were also considered potential landing spots for Harper, who spent his previous
seven seasons with the Washington Nationals.
signed the 26-year old left-handed slugger to a 13-year contract worth $330 million
dollars. The Los Angeles Dodgers, New York Yankees and San Francisco Giants
were also considered potential landing spots for Harper, who spent his previous
seven seasons with the Washington Nationals.
Harper hit 184 home runs in that span with Washington, where he also won an MVP
award. Harper saw time in the limelight at an early age, appearing on the cover of
Sports Illustrated, becoming the first overall pick in the Major League Baseball
draft at age 19 and making the All-Star team at age 19. Harper’s aforementioned
MVP came at age 22.
award. Harper saw time in the limelight at an early age, appearing on the cover of
Sports Illustrated, becoming the first overall pick in the Major League Baseball
draft at age 19 and making the All-Star team at age 19. Harper’s aforementioned
MVP came at age 22.
The Giants reportedly offered 12 years before the Phillies offered him the biggest
contract in North American pro sports history. As a lifelong Giants fan, I wish he
were wearing Orange & Black but it did not pan out that way.
contract in North American pro sports history. As a lifelong Giants fan, I wish he
were wearing Orange & Black but it did not pan out that way.
I’m not going to get into how Harper’s signing effects the landscape of Major League
Baseball, and more specifically the National League and the NL East. Harper’s
contract speaks to a more grand issue. Reaction to the amount of money of Harper’s
contract ranges from excitement to outrage.
Baseball, and more specifically the National League and the NL East. Harper’s
contract speaks to a more grand issue. Reaction to the amount of money of Harper’s
contract ranges from excitement to outrage.
It is astounding how many casual fans show their lack of scruples when they link a
player’s salary with his resume, stats and where they rank among their peers. Though
most people consider Mike Trout of the Los Angeles Angels to be the game’s best
player, Harper is in the conversation and has not yet entered his prime.
player’s salary with his resume, stats and where they rank among their peers. Though
most people consider Mike Trout of the Los Angeles Angels to be the game’s best
player, Harper is in the conversation and has not yet entered his prime.
When a player signs a record-setting contract, some fans have an orgasm with statements
like, “He’s not worth that money!” or “How can he be making that much money when
this player over here has better stats” or things to that effect. Basing a player’s salary on
where he ranks among his peers is flawed logic because careers have peaks and valleys.
You just hope their performance averages out relevant to their salary.
like, “He’s not worth that money!” or “How can he be making that much money when
this player over here has better stats” or things to that effect. Basing a player’s salary on
where he ranks among his peers is flawed logic because careers have peaks and valleys.
You just hope their performance averages out relevant to their salary.
Contracts are about timing, leverage and economics. If you think they are about resumes,
stats or ranking peers, you are naive by definition. Short of teams losing revenue, player
salaries are only going to skyrocket.
I remember when Jim Kelly signed a contract with the Buffalo Bills signed a contract
worth $1 million dollars per year in 1986. I recall people being astounded in those days
because $1 million dollars was so much money in that time.
worth $1 million dollars per year in 1986. I recall people being astounded in those days
because $1 million dollars was so much money in that time.
I would argue that the same fans and media that grovel about athlete’s exorbitant salaries
are at least partially responsible for those heavier pocketbooks. I’m among the enablers
but I can humble myself enough to admit it. Think about it, fans keep flocking the
turnstiles at games and if they are not doing that, they are involved in the following:
a) Contributing to ratings by watching the games or listening on radio, b) Purchasing
the team’s clothing or c) Calling talk radio and/or expressing their views on social media.
are at least partially responsible for those heavier pocketbooks. I’m among the enablers
but I can humble myself enough to admit it. Think about it, fans keep flocking the
turnstiles at games and if they are not doing that, they are involved in the following:
a) Contributing to ratings by watching the games or listening on radio, b) Purchasing
the team’s clothing or c) Calling talk radio and/or expressing their views on social media.
As astronomical as Harper’s latest contract appears to be, it won’t be much longer before
that amount is considered a drop in the bucket because until people’s interest level in pro
sports diminishes, teams and owners will keep benefiting financially. Where then does
that money go? Back to the players.
that amount is considered a drop in the bucket because until people’s interest level in pro
sports diminishes, teams and owners will keep benefiting financially. Where then does
that money go? Back to the players.
Relevant to the idea of “is the player worth the contract?” That notion is very subjective.
Define being “worth your contract?” In many cases, I would argue that the years that the
player is producing his best numbers often come before the big payday. In which case,
he is outperforming the contract. On the flip side, when the player receives his big
payday, he is older and not many of the years on the contract are in his prime. In which
case, he underperforms the contract.
Define being “worth your contract?” In many cases, I would argue that the years that the
player is producing his best numbers often come before the big payday. In which case,
he is outperforming the contract. On the flip side, when the player receives his big
payday, he is older and not many of the years on the contract are in his prime. In which
case, he underperforms the contract.
As it pertains to Harper, barring injuries, he figures to be enormously productive for most
of those years because even if his skills diminish, he can be a designated hitter. Granted,
the National League has not adopted the DH yet but it’s only a matter of time, for better
or worse, before both leagues incorporate it.
of those years because even if his skills diminish, he can be a designated hitter. Granted,
the National League has not adopted the DH yet but it’s only a matter of time, for better
or worse, before both leagues incorporate it.
As salaries keep escalating, the question begs, “Is anyone really worth their contract?”
No comments:
Post a Comment