Quote:
Originally Posted by Winnipeg59
Any player (let alone All-Star calibre)...
Of any age (with the possible exception of someone say 40+)...
And at any point in their career (the original post only says All-Star, but the younger, the worse this is)...
...when offered a contract like that in the original post, should immediately break off negotiations and refuse to ever talk further! 
That way your only control over the player would be for either the remainder of his arbitration years or the remainder of his current contract (unless you trade him of course)...period. 
And your in-game reputation should also immediately change to "snake-oil peddler" (whether that's top or bottom of the scale used)! 
If this is happening in 16, I had hoped they made progress in the negotiating process. I see they clearly have some more work to do. While it will never be "perfect" or "human", in my opinion, it could be a bit more realistic.
These dudes need a better agent! 
Oh, and one more thing...the YANKEES should be hard-coded to "Win Now!"
"George is gettin' angry"!!! |
While I agree that extreme front-loading like in OP is gaming the system, to pretend that real life players wouldn't prefer 90% of their contract up front is ludicrous to me
Teams back load contracts because it's beneficial for the team to defer expenses while getting immediate returns from the player's in-game output
You think if Washington told Scherzer "We've got extra budget room these next 3 seasons, so we're gonna have to offer you $42M per season over the first 3 years of our offer, but then we'll have to only offer you $22M per for the following 3 seaons & end it with a $17M season...we're sorry we have to give you a ton of money up front like that" that Scherzer & his agent would immediately get up, walk out of the room & refuse to return any calls?
Because I think Scherzer would've been just fine with getting more up front
Is it realistic to offer majorly front-loaded deals? Nope, but it's b/c the front offices are adverse to offering them, not at all b/c the players would prefer getting most of the money deferred when inflation makes that $40M a decade from now worth less than $40M today is worth (not even including the up front salaries' worth in better investment opportunities). A player has zero incentive to turn down a front loaded deal