My latest obsession over a Bregman extension. 5 comps ( 3 realistic, 1 team friendly the Astros will push, 1 player friendly Boros will push) K. Bryant: 7yr / $182M = $26M per - age 36 *Arenado: 6yr / $153M = $25.5M per - age 36 Semien: 7yr / $175M = $25M per - age 37 J.Ramirez: 7yr / $141M = $20.1M per - age 35 Machado: 11yr / $350M = $31.8M per - age 40 *only includes remaining years after opt-out was declined (8yr / $260M originally) Average: 7.6yr / $200.2M = $26.3M - age 37 Obviously a contract must he full seasons, so: 7yr / $184.1M or 8yr / $210.4M Since Alex is a FA @31, and these average 30 then the 7 yr projection makes sense. If Crane/Brown want to keep the deal at 6 yrs, I would look at Justin Turner as a comp. He signed 2yr / $34M at age 36 and 2 yr / $21.7M at age 38. So Bregman's can reasonably expect to get a $14M contract at age 37, so subtract that. 6yr / $170.1M ($28.35 AAV) I think that's fair market value, I don't know if Alex goes for it, or if other teams will overpay and he leaves
The Astros went 5 years for the face of the franchise. They have a policy. They do not do long contracts. I expect an offer of 3 to 5 years for Bregman and that is in line with their policy. There is absolutely no reason to expect the team to deviate from it's policy. Bregman is a good player today but nobody knows what he will be next week let alone next year. The odds are pretty good that he will not even be playing 7 years from now. Taking on that kind of risk is asking too much. Try to temper your obsession with some measure of reason.
By all accounts they offered 6 to Correa. I am not debating that Altuve is the face of the franchise and certainly among the top 3 and likely #1 Astro of all-time. That said I don't understand the disrespect Bregman gets? He is in the top 10 in almost every major offensive catagory despite being 21st in games played. He is also in the top 10 of many all-time MLB post season hitting lists. He is also 4 years younger than Altuve. I would bet real, meaningful, money that would hurt to lose that a 7 year contract to Bregman ends up being better value than a 5 year contract to Altuve, all $$$ being equal.
There is nothing disrespectful in an offer to extend Bregman that fits within the teams policies regarding extending its players. Why is this difficult to understand? Your offer to bet is a good corollary to the Astros stance on contract offers. They are willing to bet on their players within limits dictated by reason. Betting beyond those limits puts the teams ability to stay competitive at risk. It is a gamble they they should not take.
If the normal senior officers/executives in your industry made $1M per year + and when you got a promotion your company offered you $750K because they want to be sure they keep their payroll below other peer companies, how would you feel? It's tough to find a perfect comparison in the "real, fan world" but that's what the "no long term contracts policy" is. Players that compare to Alex in the past have all commanded, expected, and been given $150M+. If people in any industry have been given X when hitting a certain objective, and management offers 75% of X, that is disrespectful. It would be different if Alex wasn't performing, had any red flags for the future, or was a negative in any way, but that simply isn't the case. He is still young He misses very few games He is a top 50 player* in MLB (fWAR= 47th in 23, 25th in 22, 2nd in 19, 6th in 18. 46th in 17) *all players, even pitchers. He excels in the playoffs. He has helped bring 2 W S. Titles to Houston. He wants to be in Houston. FYI: in his 2 injured seasons he was 191st and 128th in fWAR. Considering there are 30 teams and 780 players, he was still among the top 25% and 17% of all players even then. I understand management's stance, but it's very simple: Do they really want to keep Alex or not? He will get $150M+ and probably $200M. He is not trying to get the most money or set some new bar like Correa. He simply wants what others in his position have gotten. And Astros ownership wants to suppress and reverse what players have worked decades to get after decades of indentured servitude. And for some reason fans are on owners side in their opinions.
None of that is what this is about. An extension is not a promotion. Professional ball players are not employees, they are independent contractors. Of course the Astros would like Bregman to take an extension. He has been an important part of this team for years. Continuing that relationship is simpler than going out to find another third baseman or developing one in the minors. They are not going to cut their own throats to make that happen. Bregmans value is at its zenith. From here on out he is likely to be less valuable every year, that is just what happens. He could be that rare exception to the rule for a year or two but that would be an extremely high risk bet. There are a couple of third basemen in the system that will be ready to take the job for pennies on the dollar next season and plenty more of them working their way up.
The bottom line is the Astros ownership treat players like chattel. The players work 6 years + minor league time and frequently part of another MLB season at significantly less than their "value" according to performance metrics. Then when they get a chance to finally sign for what they are expected to be worth (and granted some insurance for potential underperformance) the Astros owner refuses to do what every other contending team will do and has done because they rake in the dollars - partially because of that players performance. Players are CONTROLLED with no freedom to choose where they play for a minimum of 6 seasons and usually 8+. They contributed to earning the owner millions of $$$ during that time. Then ownership refuses to commit 6 years to them? That's inhuman and sounds like something bosses used to do before players earned basic labor rights. Jim Crane does not recognize humanity or loyalty just winning and profits.
I really enjoy these discussions with you but I recommend we step back a bit. You seem angry. I apologize if I have offended you. I have always been a part of what most workers call management. Perhaps that colors my perception of situations in business. What I see as simple facts you see as disrespectful or even inhuman. One way or the other I think we can focus on our mutual love of the game and move on.
I appreciate the back and forth. I'm not angry and apologize that I came across that way. What I am is stunned that so many Astro fans have bought in to Crane's philosophy and are so willing to just consider players as chess pieces without emotional attachment. I have been an Astros fan for 45 years. Jose Cruz was my first favorite Astro and it hurt when he left but he was 40 years old. I have had several since and it always stinks to see them leave, especially when the team trades them or appears to not want them. The difference here is that with every one of my favorite players, there was a reason behind it that improved the team- age, need to rebuild, simply an improvement. None of that applies with Alex. He is still in his prime, the team is still a contender, and there is no scenario where him moving on is better for the team. And he wants to be here unlike Cole or Springer. Unlike Correa he isn't looking for the new largest contract in MLB history (or at least there is no indication of that) The difference is for the first time, Crane's philosophy is going to most likely hurt the team w/o any reasonable chance of it even being a lateral move for several years. Alex may not he worth $25M (3.1 WAR) in 6 or even 5 years, but he may. He almost certainly will be for 4+ and his floor will prevent him from ever going under 2 unless he's injured. He is probably as safe a bet as there is in MLB to hit these numbers. And all the while, there is no player in the system who will likely be able to replace them for at least 3 years. If the team thinks Dezenzo can, then great - I think he may end up very good, but the team would be even better with him at 1b and Alex at 3b. If Crane refuses to make a 6+ year offer to Alex, then for the first time he is prioritizing money over winning (now or the future) and that is something that worries me as an Astros fan. And it's contradictory to the reasons Crane gave for having that philosophy. Alex needs to be the exception.
2025: I think there is a 95% chance Alex out performs any other 3b the Astros have. Injury and the chance a mid-level veteran is brought in and has a career year, or a very unlikely rookie performance are the only reason it's not 100% All the while this core is getting older and Framber, Tucker, Verlander, and Pressly likely move on. 2026: I think there is a 90% chance Alex out performs any Astro 3b. Same reasoning. 2027: I think there is an 80% chance Alex out performs any Astros 3b. Alex is now 33 so less of a sure thing but still likely close to his prime and now there has been enough time for a prospect to have emerged. 2028: I think there is a 70% chance Alex out performs any Astros 3b. 2029: I think there is a 60% chance Alex out performs any Astros 3b. 2030: The chance is finally 50-50. 2031: in year 7 the chances finally are against Alex for the first time, but probably still 40% Is it worth giving up 2025-2029 in order to avoid 2031? Only if Crane actually views his rule absolutely without actually considering exceptions or its about money and not winning.
