I reading the long discussion in comments about front v. back-loaded contracts and I wanted some thoughts on front-loaded contracts. Now I understand the arguments for both because they're pretty obvious, a dollar today is worth more tomorrow because of the interest you can get for back-loaded and you pay more for the most productive years of a player for a front-loaded, and if this is really the crux of the argument then you always want to back-load. I have a couple thoughts that a wanted some feedback on.
First, since dollars per win (based on WAR) keep raising 'inflation' could dramatically reduce this perceived future value. I believe Brett wrote that a win was going for $1 mil over last year (6.5 to 7.5?). That's about a 15% increase. Not a lot of investments are going to do that well.
Second, if you want to trade the player you have to eat money to gain value. The Soriano trade is an example. The Cubs are paying for him to play for the Yankees. For this year he is totally lost money. The Yankees have a $5 mil player and that's what they are paying him. That's just a baseball advantage. The Cubs, essentially, paying off the debt the signed up for six years ago doesn't feel good though. And of course you hope the Cubs are trading for guys not trading them away at the end of these contracts.