Pro-tips

1) Backloading is almost always going to be better than frontloading.  It's not really important, but if you always frontload for the sake of maintaining future financial flexibility you're doing it wrong
2) Mutual option years should always have the MAXIMUM % of the total $ value of the contract that you are able to offer.

You're all welcome.

to expand on the backloading thing- pretend that every offseason you give out a 2 yr $3M contract for 100 consecutive seasons.

assume you frontload by always offering 2M in season 1 and 1M in season 2.  Your payroll hits will be 2, 3, 3,....,3,3,3, 1

assumed you always backload by offering 1M in s1 and 2m in s2.  Your payroll hits will be 1, 3, 3, 3,..., 3, 3, 3, 2

The difference is having an extra $1M of spending cash in S1 or S100...obviously having it in S1 is preferrable, by always frontloading, the future money saved will always be in arrears and you'll never be able to access it, much like a security deposit.

But in our universe here there's no inflation or interest. The future value of a $1 is a $1. So backloading or frontloading contracts should change depending on your franchise needs. Free agent crop weak? Front load and wait for next year. Payroll tight but playing for a championship? then backloading might give you that extra help now.

That's why it's not a huge deal, just a trivial detail.  It's also why I said "almost always" instead of "always"

I think a lot of people carry the cognitive bias that frontloading is good for the precise reasons that make it bad.  I would also say that most people would value winning a title in S1 more than S100, because for all I know I'll be dead by S100.  Or even if we're talking S10, that's still 2.5 calendar years which is a long time to wait to bear the fruit of your fiscal responsibility.

I'm just going to make this a general bad contract thread and rip on ones that look bad to me.  Maybe some people will find this to be educational.  The frontloading vs. backloading is really just my pet peeve so don't sweat that one too hard.  Stuff like this is much worse:

whatifsports.com/HBD/Pages/Popups/PlayerProfile.aspx

33 y/o pitcher, team with $20M training budget offers 8/9/10 (mutual option for year 3).  The correct distribution for this deal would have been 6/6/6/9 (with a mutual option for year 4).  With 20M training, most pitchers will be roughly as good at age 35 as they are at age 33.  In total stretching the contract out over 4 years only guarantees an extra $750K to get the 35 y/o season, which is peanuts for a guy that you're willing to pay $19.5M for age 33 and 34.

What you fail to recognize is that many of us prefer more flexibility later rather than now.   You break the 100m barrier and stay there.   That's not how everyone plays the game.

But thanks for trying.  Maybe, one day, everyone will play deano's way.   Or, if they don't, it's because they realize there are many ways to play this game.   Someone said that in an interview.  Can't recall who.

To be a bit more clear, say one has about 50m in payroll and he's looking at a crap FA class.   He thinks "How the F can I spend this without tying myself into a bad contract for an extended period?"   One's best option is to offer a big bonus or frontload the deal.  Especially if he knows he's going to decline the option.

Wouldn't you agree?

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/4/2012 10:55:00 PM (view original):
To be a bit more clear, say one has about 50m in payroll and he's looking at a crap FA class.   He thinks "How the F can I spend this without tying myself into a bad contract for an extended period?"   One's best option is to offer a big bonus or frontload the deal.  Especially if he knows he's going to decline the option.

Wouldn't you agree?

+1

I've started to get more and more into front-ending contracts with bonuses when I have the available cash to spend in the current season.  Like Mike says, I'd rather have the flexibility in later seasons.

Case in point: I had a moderately talented FA pitcher I signed a few seasons ago.  He was looking for 3 x $4.8m (IIRC).  I had the spare cash at the time so I offered him 3 x $1.5m with a $10m bonus.  Highly overpaid for him in the first season, but saved $3.3m in both the second and third season of the contract that I can put towards other players.

Posted by tecwrg on 5/4/2012 11:06:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/4/2012 10:55:00 PM (view original):
To be a bit more clear, say one has about 50m in payroll and he's looking at a crap FA class.   He thinks "How the F can I spend this without tying myself into a bad contract for an extended period?"   One's best option is to offer a big bonus or frontload the deal.  Especially if he knows he's going to decline the option.

Wouldn't you agree?

+1

I've started to get more and more into front-ending contracts with bonuses when I have the available cash to spend in the current season.  Like Mike says, I'd rather have the flexibility in later seasons.

Case in point: I had a moderately talented FA pitcher I signed a few seasons ago.  He was looking for 3 x $4.8m (IIRC).  I had the spare cash at the time so I offered him 3 x $1.5m with a $10m bonus.  Highly overpaid for him in the first season, but saved $3.3m in both the second and third season of the contract that I can put towards other players.

+ Internets.

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/4/2012 10:55:00 PM (view original):
To be a bit more clear, say one has about 50m in payroll and he's looking at a crap FA class.   He thinks "How the F can I spend this without tying myself into a bad contract for an extended period?"   One's best option is to offer a big bonus or frontload the deal.  Especially if he knows he's going to decline the option.

Wouldn't you agree?

No, best option is to trade for players on big $ contracts.

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/4/2012 10:40:00 PM (view original):
What you fail to recognize is that many of us prefer more flexibility later rather than now.   You break the 100m barrier and stay there.   That's not how everyone plays the game.

But thanks for trying.  Maybe, one day, everyone will play deano's way.   Or, if they don't, it's because they realize there are many ways to play this game.   Someone said that in an interview.  Can't recall who.

Nobody has to play my way, but it would be beneficial if people learned how to give contracts properly.

The frontloading/backloading thing is basically trivial so if you want to disregard that bit, then be my guest.  It's really not useful advice at all, I just had that example on my mind and was in the mood to share.

a better piece of advice is for this guy: whatifsports.com/HBD/Pages/Popups/PlayerProfile.aspx

4/46 guaranteed with a $10M mutual option, shoulda been 4/42 guaranteed with a $14M mutual option.  You're almost certainly going to want to be declining that option, and the buyout is only going up by $1M by loading the option year; you can argue that $1M in s5 > $1M in s1, but you can't argue that $1M in s5 is > $4M spread over s1-s4.  Hope this helps!

Deanod, other than the issues with team's financial needs that were brought up above, you have to use all the information you have to try to predict a player's decline curve when choosing a contract structure.  The two guys you've linked are perfect contrasting examples. 

Roy Branson (second guy linked) is already losing range, and is therefore probably going to start dropping in other ratings such as power fairly soon.  All things being equal, I would load up the mutual option since I'm almost certainly going to decline it (again, all things are not always equal). 

On the other hand, Frankie Allen (first guy you linked) is a pitcher who, despite being 33, hasn't lost a point of velocity or stamina yet; he's going to be as good in season 3 of the contract, and damn near as good in season 4, as he is now, barring injury.  All things being equal (and again, they aren't always equal) I probably would have given him a 4-year contract without a mutual option; I just want him to pitch for me through his age 36 season.


footnote-- I have use frontloading in the same way tec has to great success-- particularly good for rebuilding, since the player is way more desirable in trade than he would be with a balanced contract.

Posted by deanod on 5/5/2012 12:10:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/4/2012 10:40:00 PM (view original):
What you fail to recognize is that many of us prefer more flexibility later rather than now.   You break the 100m barrier and stay there.   That's not how everyone plays the game.

But thanks for trying.  Maybe, one day, everyone will play deano's way.   Or, if they don't, it's because they realize there are many ways to play this game.   Someone said that in an interview.  Can't recall who.

Nobody has to play my way, but it would be beneficial if people learned how to give contracts properly.

The frontloading/backloading thing is basically trivial so if you want to disregard that bit, then be my guest.  It's really not useful advice at all, I just had that example on my mind and was in the mood to share.

a better piece of advice is for this guy: whatifsports.com/HBD/Pages/Popups/PlayerProfile.aspx

4/46 guaranteed with a $10M mutual option, shoulda been 4/42 guaranteed with a $14M mutual option.  You're almost certainly going to want to be declining that option, and the buyout is only going up by $1M by loading the option year; you can argue that $1M in s5 > $1M in s1, but you can't argue that $1M in s5 is > $4M spread over s1-s4.  Hope this helps!

Again, you fail to understand.

Perhaps an owner is looking at having a shitload of payroll leftover when FA is done and has no desire to enter the IFA fray again.    So, I ask, what's the better option in that situation?   More money on the front end(where he expects to have a shitload of leftover payroll) or more money on the back end where he hopes to actually need payroll room?

Did you fire one up at noon on Saturday, stoney?

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/5/2012 3:07:00 PM (view original):

Posted by deanod on 5/5/2012 12:10:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/4/2012 10:40:00 PM (view original):
What you fail to recognize is that many of us prefer more flexibility later rather than now.   You break the 100m barrier and stay there.   That's not how everyone plays the game.

But thanks for trying.  Maybe, one day, everyone will play deano's way.   Or, if they don't, it's because they realize there are many ways to play this game.   Someone said that in an interview.  Can't recall who.

Nobody has to play my way, but it would be beneficial if people learned how to give contracts properly.

The frontloading/backloading thing is basically trivial so if you want to disregard that bit, then be my guest.  It's really not useful advice at all, I just had that example on my mind and was in the mood to share.

a better piece of advice is for this guy: whatifsports.com/HBD/Pages/Popups/PlayerProfile.aspx

4/46 guaranteed with a $10M mutual option, shoulda been 4/42 guaranteed with a $14M mutual option.  You're almost certainly going to want to be declining that option, and the buyout is only going up by $1M by loading the option year; you can argue that $1M in s5 > $1M in s1, but you can't argue that $1M in s5 is > $4M spread over s1-s4.  Hope this helps!

Again, you fail to understand.

Perhaps an owner is looking at having a shitload of payroll leftover when FA is done and has no desire to enter the IFA fray again.    So, I ask, what's the better option in that situation?   More money on the front end(where he expects to have a shitload of leftover payroll) or more money on the back end where he hopes to actually need payroll room?

Did you fire one up at noon on Saturday, stoney?

The correct answer is to still backload the contract with a small twist.....S2 becomes the cheap season. And a big first season bonus

Posted by jvford on 5/5/2012 5:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/5/2012 3:07:00 PM (view original):

Posted by deanod on 5/5/2012 12:10:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/4/2012 10:40:00 PM (view original):
What you fail to recognize is that many of us prefer more flexibility later rather than now.   You break the 100m barrier and stay there.   That's not how everyone plays the game.

But thanks for trying.  Maybe, one day, everyone will play deano's way.   Or, if they don't, it's because they realize there are many ways to play this game.   Someone said that in an interview.  Can't recall who.

Nobody has to play my way, but it would be beneficial if people learned how to give contracts properly.

The frontloading/backloading thing is basically trivial so if you want to disregard that bit, then be my guest.  It's really not useful advice at all, I just had that example on my mind and was in the mood to share.

a better piece of advice is for this guy: whatifsports.com/HBD/Pages/Popups/PlayerProfile.aspx

4/46 guaranteed with a $10M mutual option, shoulda been 4/42 guaranteed with a $14M mutual option.  You're almost certainly going to want to be declining that option, and the buyout is only going up by $1M by loading the option year; you can argue that $1M in s5 > $1M in s1, but you can't argue that $1M in s5 is > $4M spread over s1-s4.  Hope this helps!

Again, you fail to understand.

Perhaps an owner is looking at having a shitload of payroll leftover when FA is done and has no desire to enter the IFA fray again.    So, I ask, what's the better option in that situation?   More money on the front end(where he expects to have a shitload of leftover payroll) or more money on the back end where he hopes to actually need payroll room?

Did you fire one up at noon on Saturday, stoney?

The correct answer is to still backload the contract with a small twist.....S2 becomes the cheap season. And a big first season bonus

Exactly, a good strategy to use if you have some extra money to spend this season.  Then give him one more season that you think he will be still effective and backload it as much as possible with an option.  It will make the 2nd, 3rd and maybe the 4th much cheaper this way...

I havent had the option of doing this with my main team quite yet, as I have a win now situation there and need to use my dollars in this and the next season or 2 as wisely as possible bringing in the best FAs I can afford, but in my other team I can see using this option this year - as the rebuild is well under way and am ready to bring in some impact FAs.