Eric Hosmer agreed to a deal with the San Diego Padres late Saturday night:
The average annual value of the eight-year deal is $18 million, the largest monetary commitment in Padres history.
The Padres had said they would be creative. The $144-million contract is believed to be front-loaded, which might make the opt-out more attractive for Hosmer.
The signing will push first baseman Wil Myers, whose six-year, $83 million deal signed in 2017 was the team’s biggest contract ever, to the outfield. Myers, who played with Hosmer briefly in Single-A while in the Royals’ system, has said he would be happy to move if it meant the Padres got Hosmer.
It looks to me that the Padres are paying Hosmer about $9.3 million per WAR. He is going to play his age 28 season, which means the Padres get two years of his prime. He averaged 2.5 WAR over the last three seasons. I’m giving him that value the first two years of the contract, then 10% less each season over the last six seasons for a projected WAR of 15.5 over the eight years. The Padres are paying more upfront, to encourage Hosmer to play well before the opt-out. This is smart, as Hosmer’s value is volatile year to year. (The opt-out is after the fifth year.)
Hosmer is not the traditional slugging first baseman. His skill set was well suited to Kansas City, and San Deigo plays in a park that limits home runs. This strikes me as a great signing for both the player and the team.
It also pretty much blows the collusion argument out of the water. I doubt the Padres would have paid this much if there wasn’t competition for the player, or if they didn’t think he was a key piece to winning.
It really does not blow the collusion argument out of the water. When you have 30 companies in an industry engaging in collusion its not unusual for a couple to break an agreement.
In this case Hosmer got a lower AAV than any of the projections 18 vs 21 million. While he did get more years than were projected he is being guaranteed only 13 million for his age 34-35 season. This is consistent with what we have seen all offseason with players not guaranteed miney past age 34 or 35. So if Padres broke with the collusion, it was not by much.
There is also the fact that if MLB were to worry about a collusion grievance after the offseason, they might want to throw one of the likely leaders of such a charge a bone tonpossibly avert one.
Also, according to my math, NL teams have outspent AL teams 822 million to 266 million. Perhaps the collusion is mainly centered in the AL. Under the CBA you only need a few teams engaging in it (legally it only 2)not necessarily all 30
Furthermore, the dumping of many good players on the trade market (9 players) by Marlins, Rays and Pirates for not very much in return obviously depresses demand for FA. This is another possible area of collusion as all 3 teams are among the biggest revenue sharing recipients and frankly were not they far away from being WC contenders with a couple of additions. Tanking when so many teams are doing so does not seem wise, especialy if you are seeking public financing for a stadium or heading into negotiations for a new RSN.
So its either a break, or not. But an isolated or even several breaks is not proof against collusion.
Pft » Yes, but it makes it much tougher to prove.