Jump to content
NBC Sports Edge Forums

2019-2020 Off-Season and Hot Stove Thread


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, kmoore1521 said:

Just wanting to mention from 2001-Present the Yankees have probably spent an ABSURD amount of money on bad contracts n such (id be curious on the amount compared to other teams) for ONE RING (2009)

 

this team seems to finally be home grown for the most part except Stanton-Cole (assuming they get him) so maybe they finally learned doing research and developing is better than throwing money at every situation like an ignorant fool hah

 

or maybe this Cole contract incoming is the cycle repeating itself, i hope not as i like Cole though as a pitcher

 

i agree.  with this strasburg contract u KNOW boras/cole want 8 or 9 years at about 35+ mil a year.  its an insane deal and i hope the yanks dont do it.  try and trade for kluber or something if they really need another pitcher.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 941
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Happy Pitchers and Catchers Report Day to all! Not sure if this is the place to put this, but indulge me for a few minutes if you feel like it. I have to admit this is the fourth year I've gotten sent

Michael Schur, creator of Parks & Rec and The Good Place, blasts one into the bleachers: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1224882392369786880.html?refreshed=yes  

FASTBALL:     CURVE:       CHANGE:        

Posted Images

Everyone in the thread seems to agree these big pitcher contracts are insane, but the Nationals just won a title with a team built around them.

Scherzer has produced 32.5 WAR over the first 5 years of his 7/210 contract. $8M per WAR seems to be a popular standard, which would mean he’s earned $260M already with 2 years to go. The Nationals certainly don’t win a title without him. Hard to argue that move has been anything but awesome for Washington.

Strasburg signed for 7/175, but ended up getting paid about 4/86 with the opt-out. He was good for 18 WAR over those 4 years, which would be $144M - a steal even without factoring in his postseason brilliance. (Not so sure I like his new deal though).

Obviously way too early to judge Corbin’s 6/140, but 4.8 WAR in year one is a good start.

There’s always risk in paying pitchers, but they don’t all bust. Teams need good arms one way or another, and the alternative of trying to develop youngsters is far from a safe proposition.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SpartyOn4 said:

Everyone in the thread seems to agree these big pitcher contracts are insane, but the Nationals just won a title with a team built around them.

Scherzer has produced 32.5 WAR over the first 5 years of his 7/210 contract. $8M per WAR seems to be a popular standard, which would mean he’s earned $260M already with 2 years to go. The Nationals certainly don’t win a title without him. Hard to argue that move has been anything but awesome for Washington.

Strasburg signed for 7/175, but ended up getting paid about 4/86 with the opt-out. He was good for 18 WAR over those 4 years, which would be $144M - a steal even without factoring in his postseason brilliance. (Not so sure I like his new deal though).

Obviously way too early to judge Corbin’s 6/140, but 4.8 WAR in year one is a good start.

There’s always risk in paying pitchers, but they don’t all bust. Teams need good arms one way or another, and the alternative of trying to develop youngsters is far from a safe proposition.

 

Far Far Far more misses than hits for pitchers with contracts like these no matter how you slice it

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 2ndCitySox said:

Heyman tweeted that after the Strasburg deal, Cole is now seeking a 10 year, $300 million deal, part ownership in the team that signs him, and a live dinosaur. 

 

Close...

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jfazz23 said:

 

would not go near him for that money.  please yankees dont do it!

Yeah that RIDICULOUS. Best bet would be to wait it out and see if the offer comes down. Or not and let some idiot team pay him. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, 2ndCitySox said:

What does NBA level dumb mean? I don't follow 


Josh Donaldson, 34, is looking for a 4-year deal.

MadBum (30) is looking for a 5-year/$100 million deal.

Rendon is looking to get paid.

Zack Wheeler got paid and he didn’t even have a great season last year. 
 

 


 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, kmoore1521 said:

Far Far Far more misses than hits for pitchers with contracts like these no matter how you slice it

Hits get championships. Champions with zero large contracts are very rare. You have to take chances somewhere. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, jfazz23 said:

 

would not go near him for that money.  please yankees dont do it!


The Angels will get him. You don’t resign Trout and then decide to not do anything. Who else can they get to help their pitching staff? MadBum? Wait until next year and get a Bauer/Ray/Paxton/Tanaka? Their best prospects are all hitters. I also don’t see them trading any of their top prospects for a SP because they’ll need them. Cole to the Angels makes too much sense. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct, winning a WS has very low odds. You have to capitalize when your team is in that position.

It's really weird that fans these days care some much about financial at a time most teams wont hamstring themselves with $$$ if they got the extra mile. There is some truth to diminishing returns in over-paying for meh/ok talent. Why pay 100M for a mid tier starter when you can find one comparable that is way cheaper, right?

However, someone like Cole is a game changer for a team. Yet, Yankee fans are more concerned about Billionaires checkbook then trying to win when your team is in a position to win it all. You wouldn't trade away some bad money at the end of a Cole contract for a WS ring in the near future?

Edited by Slatykamora
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

if a team is willing to overpay to get an ace like Cole to help win a championship, then is it really dumb?

Cole on the Yankees would certainly have to make them one of the favourites to win the World Series. Angels not so much because they need more pitching even after Cole. I'd rather see the Angels lose out on Cole but then sign 2 of the other quality starters left like Ryu and someone else.

I'd rather not see Cole to the Yankees, so I guess I'm hoping for a 3rd team to get more involved.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Slatykamora said:

Correct, winning a WS has very low odds. You have to capitalize when your team is in that position.

It's really weird that fans these days care some much about financial at a time most teams wont hamstring themselves with $$$ if they got the extra mile. There is some truth to diminishing returns in over-paying for meh/ok talent. Why pay 100M for a mid tier starter when you can find one comparable that is way cheaper, right?

However, someone like Cole is a game changer for a team. Yet, Yankee fans are more concerned about Billionaires checkbook then trying to win when your team is in a position to win it all. You wouldn't trade away some bad money at the end of a Cole contract for a WS ring in the near future?

 

This is disingenuous imo.  Yankees fan's aren't worried about their owner's pocketbook, they are worried about the lack of financial flexibility they will have because of this in the future.  In other words, that 5-10 years down the line they will be bogged down by this contract and would have been able to get a better player instead.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Fbaseballgod said:

 

This is disingenuous imo.  Yankees fan's aren't worried about their owner's pocketbook, they are worried about the lack of financial flexibility they will have because of this in the future.  In other words, that 5-10 years down the line they will be bogged down by this contract and would have been able to get a better player instead.

You must have ignored  this part of the statment:

at a time most teams wont hamstring themselves with $$$ if they got the extra mile

 

The point is that it wont. Now, does that mean they should give into all his demands? No, they shouldn't bid against themselves. They need to read the Market before anything.

We are not talking about the Marlins or Brewers here.

Edited by Slatykamora
Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys worried about future flexibility realize that if Cole remains good, you could get stuck trading prospects to keep up with the Angels or Dodgers? You don't avoid risk of he signs elsewhere.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, 2ndCitySox said:

What does NBA level dumb mean? I don't follow 

Gordon hayward at 30 as an example.

Chris paul at 38

john freakin wall at 38 and hasnt played in like 2 years

Tobia harris/middleton/PAUL MILLSAP over 30

Westbrook gonna look worse than pujols pretty soon.

 

 

 

Lots of players got max deals because the dalary cap went up. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

We've already seen NBA-style contract dump for financial flexibility deals as a result, e.g. the Adrian Gonzalez / Matt Kemp deal in 2017, Jay Bruce to the Phillies last season, or even Jonathan Villar to the Mariners just a week ago.  The situations aren't quite comparable since the NBA has provisions that keep the difference between the highest and lowest spending teams relatively small -- including a salary floor -- but as long as MLB owners are treating the luxury tax like a hard cap (even though it's far less punitive than the NBA's), we will continue to see these salary dump trades.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...