0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
This may force us into long contract situations. Then again, I do like the simplicity part of it even though small market teams will drop out of bids that go over $40-50m. The other issue with this is that it creates a longer bid process. How long would it take to get up to $90m total contract for Holliday? I don't know, it may be worth a shot Roy.
Roy that is true but what if someone offers 10 years at 12 mil a year = 120 mil, and someone offer 4 at 25 = 100 mil, then by total contract the person that offered 12 mil per, would be the winner.
I believe that FA offers should be judged by the *total* dollars on the contract, not the amount per year. This method would keep things simple and offer owners an interesting choice. It would force owners to choose between longer guaranteed contracts at less dollars per year or shorter ones at larger dollars.
Just so I'm straight on this...Under Colby's 90%+yr/130%-yr proposal, Matt Holliday's bidding could look something like this...$20m/1 yr initial offerfollowed by $18m/2 yrs, then $16.5m/ 3 yrs, $15m/4 yrs, $13.5m/5 yrs, as minimums by adding a year per bidor$20m/1 yr initial offerfollowed by $18m/2 yrs, then $23.5/1 yr in a drop down back to a one year dealIs that a correct breakdown?