IggyPride00;1597522 wrote:Tigers owner Ilitch is reportedly detested by most other teams owners because he is willing to operate the team at a loss seemingly forever.
My first thought on the Cabrera deal was that they should have waited if they were going to overpay.
Then I thought about it today, and what they did is smart.
If Cabrera has another 2 huge seasons, then he would have probably been in line for the Pujols type deal which was 10 years for roughly the same money but they at least avoid those 2 extra years at the end where he would have been even less worth it yet still making almost $30 million.
Not to mention there is no guarantee that another big market team wouldn't have broken well past $300 million. The precedent is there for a 32 year old signing the 10 year deal. No matter how poorly they go, owners still seem to give them out.
If the team's owner is fine with running the team at a loss then a deal like this doesn't really matter. It only completely cripples a team if you're like the Dolan's and need to make X amount of money off the team because you aren't lighting the world on fire in your other businesses.
The Tigers are a play toy for a rich person, which is exactly what a professional sports team should be. You are in the wrong business if you need it to be your primary income generating asset.
Isnt a very smart, or responsible, contract.
A little similiar to the Votto deal in that he had 2 years remaining, but JV is younger.
They should have waited another season, and then put forth a 4-5 year deal with a shit ton of $$.
Why do teams, especially to a 30 yr old with two years remaining, feel the need to offer a 10 year deal? I dont know, maybe they tried it, but what about offering 4 years at 120 mil? STill gets the buzz of 30 mill a year, but without the long term ramifications of paying him on the downward decline?
FUcking stupid, as they arent bidding against anyone! I guess I could see in the Pujols deal as he was a free agent and have to try out outbid teams....