Anyway, now that I have set the parameters for my arguement, here is my arguement. Nope, not worth it. The fun part is, my reasoning for this, contains more questions.
First question: Is Bryce Harper better than Alex Rodriguez was heading into their first major free agent year?
The answer there is no. Harper won an MVP, but to say he is a better and more valuable player than A-Rod was, is a tough argument to make.
A-Rod was a year younger and had better offensive numbers across the board. Furthermore, Rodriguez was a shortstop. Not only did he play a more valuble defensive position, but his offensive production obliterated the offensive production of any other player at that position. Therefore, Harper should make slightly less than what A-Rod got after factoring in inflation and other economic factors.
Second Quesion: Is Bryce Harper better than Giancarlo Stanton?
Oh, man, I don’t know. Maybe? I’ll say yes.
I don’t have any factual basis for that claim. They have pretty comparable numbers, but I’d say Harper’s defensive ability and versatility give him a slight edge. But because he’s a slightly better player/athlete doesn’t mean he deserves to be paid more. So I’d say I FEEL like he is a better player, which is very scientific of me.