Kershaw lands 7 years and $215 million

[The Franchise]

The*Los Angeles Dodgers*and*Clayton Kershaw*have agreed on a seven-year, $215 million deal, sources with knowledge of the situation said.

Kershaw has an out clause after five years.

It is the richest deal for a pitcher in Major League Baseball history, eclipsing the seven-year, $180 million contract Detroit gave*Justin Verlander*last winter, and his average annual salary of $30.7 million is the highest ever for any baseball player.

The 25-year-old Kershaw has won two of the last three National League Cy Young Awards, as well as a Roberto Clemente award for his charitable work.

Kershaw and his wife, Ellen, founded an orphanage in the African nation of Zambia called Hope's Home that they visit every offseason. They co-wrote a book about their experiences last winter titled, "Arise: Live Out Your Faith and Dreams on Whatever Field You Find Yourself."

Kershaw went 16-9 with a 1.83 ERA and 232 strikeouts last season, his sixth with the Dodgers. The left-hander has a 2.60 career ERA and recorded at least 212 strikeouts in each of the past four seasons.

ttp://m.espn.go.com/mlb/story?storyId=10298436

[Mr. Laz]

Originally Posted by duncan_idaho

Money is just going to the ownership otherwise.

Would rather see the players get a big piece of it than just see the owners pocket it all.

only a few teams can afford to pay that much


competitive balance is shot to shit

[Mav]

Originally Posted by Mr. Laz

only a few teams can afford to pay that much


competitive balance is shot to shit

Nah, that's not true at all. With revenue sharing, they can all afford it.

different owners, are more worried about turning a profit. it is why teams like the Royals, and Rays, and Marlins will never be consistent winners.

[BigRedChief]

Originally Posted by Mr. Laz

only a few teams can afford to pay that much


competitive balance is shot to shit

Not true. All it does is cover their mistakes. Allow them to make new ones. How many of these large contracts have ever worked out good for the team? Maybe 5%? 10%?

These $2 BILLION cable TV contracts are a threat to the game but having the most money doesn't guarantee shit.

You can still draft and develop players on the cheap. There is just no room for error like the LA/NY teams can just buy their way out of mistakes. Other teams can't make mistakes. Look at Oakland this year. Perfect example.

[Mr. Laz]

Originally Posted by Mavericks Ace

Nah, that's not true at all. With revenue sharing, they can all afford it.

different owners, are more worried about turning a profit. it is why teams like the Royals, and Rays, and Marlins will never be consistent winners.

complete bullshit

television markets for some teams are 50 times that our others

Does it guarantee wins, no. But they have access to talent that others don't and can have backups making starter money. If they make a mistake they just go out and buy another. Most importantly they can afford to keep their great players and dump the players that don't live up to their position.

[Unsmooth-Moment]

Originally Posted by New World Order

I don't think you understand what I am saying.

No one deserves that much money for playing sports.

If any professional player is worth their contract it's Kershaw.

[vailpass]

Originally Posted by New World Order

I don't think you understand what I am saying.

No one deserves that much money for playing sports.

Deserves? What does that have to do with it? Who decides?
Everyone is worth what the market will bear.

[tk13]

Originally Posted by Mavericks Ace

Nah, that's not true at all. With revenue sharing, they can all afford it.

different owners, are more worried about turning a profit. it is why teams like the Royals, and Rays, and Marlins will never be consistent winners.

The Dodgers are going to make over $300 million dollars this year from their TV contract. The Royals are going to make about $20 million. You don't need to be a math wizard to figure that one out. The Dodgers are directly giving some of that money back through revenue sharing aside from the payroll tax... although it's not THAT much. I don't know what the Royals get.... but the Twins get $1.5 million this year from the Dodgers TV contract, and they have a lower payroll than the Royals.

[Mav]

Originally Posted by tk13

The Dodgers are going to make over $300 million dollars this year from their TV contract. The Royals are going to make about $20 million. You don't need to be a math wizard to figure that one out. The Dodgers are directly giving some of that money back through revenue sharing aside from the payroll tax... although it's not THAT much. I don't know what the Royals get.... but the Twins get $1.5 million this year from the Dodgers TV contract, and they have a lower payroll than the Royals.

Right, but, that is not the only revenue shares that the Royals get. What let's say was the Royals profits from last year? I bet it was high.

[tk13]

Originally Posted by Mavericks Ace

Right, but, that is not the only revenue shares that the Royals get. What let's say was the Royals profits from last year? I bet it was high.

According to Forbes, which is all we really get to go on... the Royals lost $6.5 million last year. The Marlins also lost money, but they have no fan base. The Rays made $15 million in profit. Oakland made $27 million. What kills the Royals is revenue... they were 2nd to last in total revenue, only ahead of the Marlins, who had gutted their team.

[Mav]

Originally Posted by tk13

According to Forbes, which is all we really get to go on... the Royals lost $6.5 million last year. The Marlins also lost money, but they have no fan base. The Rays made $15 million in profit. Oakland made $27 million. What kills the Royals is revenue... they were 2nd to last in total revenue, only ahead of the Marlins, who had gutted their team.

Okay. I'll take your word for it. I remember Buster Olney talking about it a couple years ago. Ill see if I can find it. Thanks tk

[tk13]

Originally Posted by Mavericks Ace

Okay. I'll take your word for it. I remember Buster Olney talking about it a couple years ago. Ill see if I can find it. Thanks tk

You don't have to take my word for it. Take it up with Forbes. It's not like I know what their books say.

http://www.forbes.com/teams/kansas-city-royals/

If you look at that, they did turn a big profit a couple years ago when they originally brought up Hosmer, Moose, Perez and company. Otherwise they usually have made about $5-10 million a year over the last decade. They lost money last year, and I'm guessing they'll lose money this year. They are locked into that horrible TV contract... and the last couple years their payroll has been closer to middle of the pack than at the bottom. There are 10-12 teams that will get more in revenue sharing than them.

[BigRedChief]

Originally Posted by New World Order

Who in their right mind would ever pay a sports player that much cash?

You have no intelligent thoughts left in your head do you?

Why are you not asking why a baseball team should get a $2 BILLION contract to have fans watch the team on cable?

Just cable TV money. No ticket, jersey, T-Shirt, concessions, ad money in the ballpark and or on TV. No money for license fees etc. etc.

It's okay for large corporations to get BILLIONS in revenue but if a player's skills allow them to make 10% of their profits, **** that player. Those BILLION owners need every cent to survive.

[tk13]

And all that aside... the Dodgers supposedly will pay $14 million into the main revenue sharing pool, and another $40-45 million from their TV contract, based on which article you read. That number will increase in future years.

http://www.startribune.com/sports/twins/256850341.html

So when it's all said and done this year, the Dodgers will keep between $260-300 million of their TV money, and teams like the Twins and Royals will get an extra $2-3 million dollars a piece on top of $20 million in their own TV money. You figure it out.

[BigRedChief]

Originally Posted by tk13

And all that aside... the Dodgers supposedly will pay $14 million into the main revenue sharing pool, and another $40-45 million from their TV contract, based on which article you read. That number will increase in future years.

http://www.startribune.com/sports/twins/256850341.html

So when it's all said and done this year, the Dodgers will keep between $260-300 million of their TV money, and teams like the Twins and Royals will get an extra $2-3 million dollars a piece. You figure it out.

Yeah **** the best players in the league for wanting 10% of the profits. Those greedy bastards. The owners need $260 million profit to field a baseball team.

[tk13]

To be fair according to Forbes the Dodgers lost money last year, but there are plenty of reasons behind that. It certainly wasn't due to lack of revenue. They put over $100 million into stadium renovations and took on hundreds of millions of dollars in salaries.

Even if everyone's numbers are wrong, surely the Dodgers are at least making $200 million extra through that TV deal.