Thursday, October 17, 2019

My take on this is the following....................................................:  .................maybe racism..............and they might want a Latino coach to upstage the Black coach....................i say all that b/c.............................and the general consensus.........was that Bryce Harper was their top player.............................................is b/c a better coach can do more with less...........any coach can win with super stars..........it is more difficult to win with less talented players.......hence the whole Moneyball type of stuff......................................it is really sad to me..............it is like that they try to make up stuff with something even worse.............................................they should just play baseball................and whoever wins................wins.................................





Harper took a chance, tested his freedom and found out his options. He risked leaving a home in D.C. that valued him, athletically and personally, and wanted to pay him vast sums. But he wanted to explore his choices. Maybe be a Los Angeles Dodger near his hometown of Las Vegas. Or become a New York Yankee, playing for the team his dad always loved.


Aren’t people supposed to have that option? Shouldn’t you be rewarded for that? Or at least be given several palatable choices? Doesn’t America cheer risk takers?
But choice is also a risk. And every place that’s not home is, by definition, the unknown. Now Harper is the star who left for just a few dollars more. His final deal is, essentially, not that much better than the Nats’ reported offer.


Bryce Harper’s with the Phillies has the highest total value of any contract in baseball history — by $5 million. (Katherine Frey/The Washington Post)
Bryce Harper’s with the Phillies has the highest total value of any contract in baseball history — by $5 million. (Katherine Frey/The Washington Post)
AD

And he will play in Philadelphia, a town with a team seldom if ever associated with him and his future until, one by one, the more glamorous suitors all said, “No thanks.” And the Nats, their money spent and their roster completed, never circled back for a player who, if they met his price, might have hampered them in building competitive rosters over the next decade.
His drama feels like a parable but not the kind that we usually tell little children at bedtime if we want them to sleep tight. For no particularly compelling reason, except that he got trapped without any other appealing destination, Harper left the only team he has ever known — the Washington Nationals — with whom he was a third of the way to a Hall of Fame career.
Five months ago, Harper turned down $300 million for 10 years from the Nats, albeit much of it in deferred payments, so he could discover his value. What he found was a shockingly barren market.

No comments:

Post a Comment