Correa is only 27, but anybody who signs him will probably be paying him a lot of money when he is well past being productive. I dont think he's gonna sign for three years.
Does anybody really think he will be worth $25 mil per year at age 33 and beyond?
Anyway you cut it, Suzuki is a prospect...a good one to be sure...but a prospect nevertheless.
Lets say we trade for a Laureano. We have a 27 yr old OF for three years...as close to a sure thing as you can get in baseball...with a total cost of far less than Correa will cost for one year....and less than Suzuki will cost.
Which org is better off going forward...the one with Correa for ten years, or the one with Laureano for three?
And if things don't work out, which team has a better trade chip in two years? Let's look...
Haniger as a rental has a trade value of 7.5. Lindor has a trade value of -85.3.
Thats according to Baseball Trade Values, which...as I have said...is pure hokum. But its a system that many seem to believe in.
Now, lets say the cost for Laureano is three/four very good prospects. How bad off does that make us? Well, by this time next year, we will be talking about Martinez, Tena, Noel, Rodriguez, Tucker, and Sanquinton the same way are talking about the top prospects we have now.