JeffElJefe

@JustinMacmahan @nastylep Ok it sounds like we agree that it would be unimaginable for him to sign it once he got onto the top prospect lists. Looked everywhere and can’t find a date other than 2017 when he was 18.

@JeffKCollins @nastylep Right I can’t imagine he’d have signed it then. I think he had just been traded as an unranked prospect and took the deal right before breaking out in 2017 minors

Hot Take: These deals aren’t as evil as they seem. Most guys will make more from the payment than their career because they never make it to the MLB. Long term EV is in favor of the financier, but the individual would rather operate within a range of $2m to $300m than $0 to $340m

@JustinMacmahan @nastylep He signed the deal in 2017 so I guess it depends on when. If it was during or after that season he was clearly a top prospect — list I posted is 2018 preseason where he was already #8, BP had him #22 mid season 2017.

@JeffKCollins @nastylep Not sure how accurate this is, but ChatGPT seems to think he signed the deal before his 2017 breakout Minor League season. And before that he was hardly a ranked prospect

@JustinMacmahan @nastylep Of course the biggest bust here is a guy whose superfractor rookie card I bought — Brendan McKay. Had Tommy John surgery and his career is over. He made $900k + $7M signing bonus. Gotta get that money upfront if you’re a pitcher.

@JeffKCollins @nastylep Yeah true the risks are quite low for prospects like that

@JustinMacmahan I fully support that logic for someone that is actually taking a meaningful risk at not making any money. Makes sense for guys who grew up poor where this money would change their family's lives. It doesn't make sense for a kid from a rich family who already signed for $700k.

@JeffKCollins You’re thinking about it too mathematically. It’s really just a question of getting money now or maximizing future money with the risk of never getting it at all. When we’re talking about an amount over 20m before it’s a bad choice, I think it’s totally valid to secure the bag

@nastylep @JustinMacmahan Not even close. I don't think people realize how good the Top 50 are. Position players that highly touted are pretty much locks to become millionaires (if they aren't already from their signing bonuses).

@JeffKCollins @JustinMacmahan The percentage of top 20-50 prospects who never get a MLB contract has to be something like 60-70%+ still, though?

@JustinMacmahan I think it’s very unlikely he did this deal in order to invest the money elsewhere. If he’s like most teenage athlete millionaires, he’d be better off with it deferred. TVM is what the deal is offering, but $1M into $3M a couple years faster isn’t worth 10% in perpetuity.

@JeffKCollins Yeah but if all you do is play 3 years and make $2m in contract earnings, you’d be glad you doubled your money by taking $2m up front and investing it. Time value of money is also relevant here. When they get the big contract, those dollars are worth a lot less than the initial $

@JustinMacmahan Not only do they get called up, but guys like him are fast-tracked and aren’t given up on quickly. Once you’re called up you’re making $500k+/year until arbitration. The position player busts are still millionaires. Pitchers are more volatile (arm injuries).

@JeffKCollins Those top 20 prospects pretty much all get called up, but do they all earn $20m contracts after their rookie deals? I’d think it’s less reliable than people think

@JustinMacmahan I think it was a very bad idea at the time. If he had good advisors, he clearly ignored them. His floor was nowhere near zero. He signed for $700k at 16 and was a Top 20-50 prospect at 18 when he took the loan. Could make sense for others, but not him.

@JeffKCollins That same line of logic could be used the other way too. With his Dad who he is, he was probably advised better than 99% of other players, and he still concluded that $2m for 10% was worth accepting. Just because he regrets it now doesn’t mean it was a bad idea at the time

@nikolinalepht @ClayLaSoul 🤦🏽‍♂️

@JeffKCollins @ClayLaSoul It 100% is, what? There’s less time to rest, it’s a higher percentage of the game. If your argument stems from NBA games being more physically demanding than WNBA games then you aren’t the brightest.

My Caitlin Clark hot take is that so many folks on here aren’t used to typical WNBA stats or the shorter games, so they get on here and downplay numbers that don’t necessarily stand out in the NBA. Meanwhile, it’s actually a lot of stats that have never before been seen in the W.

@nikolinalepht @ClayLaSoul You aren’t seriously claiming that 34 of 40 minutes in a WNBA game is more grueling than 34 of 48 minutes in an NBA game… Clark is the best in the WNBA. No need to make ridiculous NBA comparison claims to make her fans look dumb.

@JeffKCollins @ClayLaSoul Stats in general are way different but let’s not be stupid and act like playing 34 of 40 and 34 of 48 minutes are the same thing. Way less rest.

@DrunknCanuck @ClayLaSoul 🤦🏽‍♂️

Not trying to convince anyone of anything. You said time doesn't matter, but it does. She plays 90% of 40 minutes. If she plays 90% of 48 minutes her numbers would be even more stupid. So would Steph's fwiw. inversely if she played the same ~70% as Steph her numbers would be worse over the long run (yes she torched the Storm, but the Storm suck).

@DrunknCanuck @ClayLaSoul You’re trying to convince a huge Caitlin Clark fan that what’s impressive about her is the percentage of minutes she plays compared to NBA players? What a weird position to take…

@JeffKCollins @ClayLaSoul But she doesn't. 34/40 > 34/48

@Sane__Thinker @ClayLaSoul @grok Use your sane critical thinking. Why would the tail end of the distribution be ~2x higher in the NBA? Could it be that there are twice as many teams?

@JeffKCollins @ClayLaSoul @grok Only the top 4 MPG players in the WNBA are comparable to the top 10 NBA MPG players. Caitlin Clark and Paige Bueckers average less MPGs.

@Sane__Thinker @ClayLaSoul @grok No, I’m saying that the minutes are comparable, so the shorter game length doesn’t affect people’s opinions. Comparing the two leagues is just silly in the first place. They don’t even play with the same ball. Smaller balls are easier to make (physics!). And I’m a huge CC fan.

@JeffKCollins @ClayLaSoul @grok No, you're indirectly saying that Clark's MPG is why her stats are so high. [trying to use the NBA as a benchmark] My argument is that if that's true then all 5 WNBA women above her in MPG should have higher stats than her. Ir you're going off-topic from the OP.

@DrunknCanuck @ClayLaSoul Outside of the occasional last possession of a quarter on defense with a stoppage, Curry is never subbed out situationally. And that wouldn’t affect my point anyway. Point is: she plays comparable minutes despite the shorter game length.

To be fair they also have a deeper bench in the NBA and can check more boxes than the benches in the W can. Allows teams flexibility i.e. in tight situations when you want press coverage, a team can carry a guy specifically to replace Steph in those situations...and that's it, teams in the W don't have that same flexibility, their bench needs to have players who can fill multiple roles, and at times multiple positions.

@Sane__Thinker @ClayLaSoul @grok No idea what you’re trying to argue. Reread my post. Do you think I’m saying that Clark doesn’t play a bunch of minutes or something? I’m saying she plays comparable minutes to NBA star players.

@JeffKCollins @ClayLaSoul @grok Fine, then based on your changed criteria Clark is 16th with the highest MPG:

@m_andrews93 @ClayLaSoul There are numerous differences. But game length isn’t something that skews opinions about her numbers.

@JeffKCollins @ClayLaSoul Sure but it’s a diff game as far as intensity goes too

@Sane__Thinker @ClayLaSoul 😂 @grok how many minutes does Caitlin Clark average per game for her WNBA career

@JeffKCollins @ClayLaSoul No, 31 MPG. She's 6th most on the list. Starting guards typically play at least 30 minutes per game: