We owed Olivera 30. We are taking back 55.5. The difference there is 25.5 or 8.5 a year. Sounds like we are getting 10 million or so as well.
So, Hector's commitment is $28.5M. Kemp's is $54.5M, but San Diego is pitching in $10-12M total, so roughly ~$42M. Assuming Hector's dead money (If they had DFA'ed), that's basically Kemp for 3/$15M. Ok, that's perfectly fine. No problem with that, actually.
I gotcha, you're saying you are paying $8m a year to go from Olivera to Kemp. Your post made it sound like you were only having to pay Kemp $8m per year. Probably would have been better off just eating Olivera's deal rather than taking on more bad money. Kemp at $15m a year isn't a good investment.
At this price, I would not be shocked at all to get a few calls by AL teams that could hide Kemp's defense by putting him at DH.
Potential value > No value Kemp provides potential value. Cutting Olivera provides none, and puts on on the hook for the rest of his contract as well.
If the potential value came at the same cost of the no value, sure. It didn't, though. I mean the Padres are paying the Braves $10m to take the option of cutting Olivera over the option of paying Kemp. That should tell you what Kemp's value is.
I'm not for sure if you're aware, but MLB contracts are guaranteed. Cutting Olivera doesn't get us off the hook for his contract. Olivera is owed $8m this year, $10.7m, $11.7m, $12.2m, and $13.2m. We are only spending just a bit more money, but getting a power bat that can be moved due to the value he is now going to be paid.
Olivera sucks and sucks as a person. We get Kemp at ~ $5-$8MM to see if he can regain literally anything of value. He can be a below average player, and Braves still come out on top here.
The Padres kicked in enough money to make this worth it for the Braves. Kemp isn't good, but we desperately needed to (a) add power and (b) get rid of Olivera. Interested to see where we go with out OF situation. I'm sure the Braves would prefer to trade Markakis, but are they willing to eat a pretty large portion of the contract in order to do so...because that's what it will take. On the flip side, Inciarte's popular - but we'd be selling low on him.
that you think someone will give you something of value that someone was just willing to take Olivera for you to take. You realize how silly that is, right? An AL team could have taken Kemp and $10m for a bag of baseball from the Padres. Hell the Padres would have kicked in more than $10m to avoid taking Olivera back. Knowing that, you think an AL team is now going to give you something of value. Stp and realize how silly that is.
I'm not saying it's the worst deal ever. I'd just prefer to cut bait on a bad contract rather than taking on more money for another bad player.
OK so what are you arguing then. He's projected to finish right around 1 WAR this year. And he's getting ~5-8 million. That's about what he's worth and we got rid of Olivera.
I commented on 2 things. First was when it was posted that were paying Kemp $8m, not $8m more than they already had invested in Olivera. Second was the silly notion that the Braves can now flip Kemp for prospects.
The Padres just took Olivera and gave you $10m for you to take Kemp. You think an AL team will give you prospects for Kemp. What part are you not grasping?
Olivera is/was a sunk cost. The difference between the $8MM comment is so minuscule. And Kemp just got flipped for Olivera, who is a prospect....he'll now be on a cheaper contract making it easier to deal him again in the future if they want.
You're a Yankees fan, dbl. All you guys do is take on bad contract after bad contract for players past their primes.
No, I said prospects. It's like you guys are forgetting that the Padres were willing to take a "sunken cost" in Olivera and throw in $10m to get rid of Kemp. It's safe to say the Padres would have kicked in more if they didn't have to to take the "sunken cost" in Olivera. An AL team could have gotten him for less than he's costing right now. No AL team did that. Why would they want him now at a higher cost than they could have had him at earlier today?
Olivera is a sunk cost to the Braves, not the Padres....Nevermind, I can't do this right now. Some dude is about to jump out of an airplane.
Joel Sherman @Joelsherman1 2h2 hours ago Manhattan, NY Between offloading Olivera's $28.5M (2017-20), getting $ from #Padres to further offset Kemp's $54M (17-19), #Braves want to complete deal Joel Sherman @Joelsherman1 2h2 hours ago Manhattan, NY Once Olivera was suspended 82g as part of domestic abuse protocol was never in #Braves plans to bring him back to MLB Joel Sherman @Joelsherman1 2h2 hours ago Manhattan, NY #Braves willing to add star power/RH power knowing Kemp poor def/OBP/rep as teammate because price right, namely moving Olivera/$ Joel Sherman @Joelsherman1 5m5 minutes ago #Braves see Kemp's warts, but were desperate for power and to get rid of Olivera, felt cost for power this offseason would be prohibitive
Oliver was never going to play for us, but we still had his contract. So we turned that +5 million a year into Kemp, who will play. Not a bad deal by Copp
I just don't see the point of paying an extra $8m for Kemp. He's just not good. He's a name so I guess that helps for something. You guys are happy so it's whatever.
We weren't going to be able to play Olivera so that's gone. So we took that sunk cost and got Kemp for 8 mil. Chance we could deal him for a young arm or somebody we can coach up
Kind of surprised the Braves haven't been linked to Derek Norris. Padres are desperate to trade him and he's reasonably priced for this year and next. Probably better than dropping $10-15 million a year on a free agent this off-season who's over 30.
I'd end up getting behind a Ramos signing, but when do these big free agent deals ever work out like they're supposed to for us? I don't remember a big free agent signing working out since...I don't know, Gary Sheffield? Rather try to swing deals like this Kemp deal and develop the kids we have behind him. That's why I like the idea of buying low on Norris. Just keep going short term until we have a core together. Otherwise, put the money into extending the kids who prove capable of playing at this level.
Turns out the San Diego money is actually the LAD money from the first deal. So Kemp is roughly 3/$27M. Eh.
Still a bad contract, but not an albatross. I still like adding that much power without breaking the bank or giving up prospects. Now is kind of the time to take on some short-term money in order to fill out the big league team while simultaneously leaving the farm system untouched. I'd do something similar with McCann if the Yankees weren't being delusional. I don't want to go 5/60 for Ramos or give up two top prospects for Lucroy. For what? To turn 65 wins into 68?
You can say "We're paying Kemp 8.5 a year" all you want but it won't make it true. If you're only getting the Dodgers money, you're paying him $18m a year.
How are the Yankees being delusional in terms of McCann? Bc they won't give him away for free while paying half his deal?
I just didn't want to interact with you anymore. I'll give you an econ lesson though if you insist on hanging around in our thread. In economics and business decision-making, a sunk cost is a cost that has already been incurred and cannot be recovered.
You can rationalize it all you want but the fact remains that the Braves will stroke checks to Matt Kemp for $18m. They no longer have to pay Olivera, but that doesn't mean they are only paying Kemp $8.5, which is what you keep saying. Hopefully you can grasp that eventually.
Finances in the deal: Padres pay ~30M owed to Olivera, who will be DFAed Braves pay ~62M owed to Kemp, with Dodgers on the hook for 10.5M We are on the hook for an additional 21.5 over 3 years.