http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2012/1...-contract.html
MLBTR thinks the deciding factor could be whether 6th year is guaranteed,
Printable View
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2012/1...-contract.html
MLBTR thinks the deciding factor could be whether 6th year is guaranteed,
I really want Sanchez so I'd do it but no one is ever going to be dumb enough to make me a GM. If Sanchez breaks down like Santana did, it'll be a horrible deal.
Haha, 6 years. You lost me at and TR at multiple years. I could see going 3-4 years for a pitcher in free agency, but six is stupid. I don't think anyone, except a hometown hero who plays a premium position and is a sure fire hall of famer, is worth 6 years. Especially with the frequency of Tommy John surgeries nowadays.
Absolutely ridiculous. I'm gonna laugh at the team that does that...he's a good pitcher, but not worth THAT kind of moneyQuote:
Originally Posted by Willihammer
Yeah, not so much. Anything over four years is a mistake when acquiring a pitcher, especially this offseason where there are so many quality arms to be had.
I think Anibal is going to be the 2nd highest paid pitcher this offseason. I have him pegged at around CJ Wilson's contract last year (5/75) so this isn't surprising. And I had already crossed him off my wishlist.
Yep, I had pretty much crossed him off. He hasn't proven enough in the AL to warrant even five years, in my opinion. At least Wilson had years under his belt of pitching half his games in Arlington and against American League offenses.Quote:
Originally Posted by kab21
I feel a little bad about our estimate in the Handbook right now, which is quite a bit lower. But the reason it was lower is interesting, especially given this report...
It's because the initial writeup of him was done at the end of August. And at that point, his time with the Tigers was a big question mark. He really struggled early with them, his numbers were down, and initially we wondered if he wouldn't need to sign a "make good" deal to show he was healthy or could pitch in the AL. Then he finished strong, seemingly answered those questions and became everyone's darling. We revised our estimate when the season was over, but it still weighed down the number a little bit.
I just think it's interesting that a small number of starts - just eight - can change the paradigm or story, and suddenly the guy is guaranteed tens of millions of more dollars. Teams really are fishing in the dark on a lot of this stuff.
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Bonnes
This probably shows why quality pitchers are such a scarce commodity....8 starts and GM's are drooling over themselves.
Worth mention it's what he's looking for, not necessarily what he'll get, Edwin Jackson wanted a multiyear deal last year and no one sprang for that. I see teams shying away from offering that many years with his injury history. The 15 million per year wouldn't surprise me at all but I see a 4 year deal as much more likely, perhaps an option for a 5th year.
This guy has to be nuts! 6/90? No way an injury prone pitcher who has around a 4 ERA in the NL? No thank you. 3 years 24 million is more like it.
Good luck. Maybe 3/40. Maybe. More like 3/30-35
I am looking for a 5 year 6 million dollar deal to coach another elementary basketball job.
I guess he wanted to start his opening negotiation price a little on the high side. I can't imagine a team offering even close to that in years or dollars.
I think the reverse is true. Some were pointing to his early struggles as a reason that he wouldn't be successful. Both are small sample size. The fact is that he's been good (not great) and he hasn't missed a start in 3.5 yrs. He's also the youngest FA pitcher available this offseason. the only argument that people really have is this AL/NL thing and I think people completely blow that out of proportion.Quote:
Originally Posted by sorney
ok. Any evidence to suggest that NL pitchers can be as successful in the AL?Quote:
Originally Posted by kab21
I can throw over a slew for the other way. Mater of fact, when I am trying to evaluate NL performance for SPs and try to translate it to AL performance, I start with a factor of about 1.2 for most metrics...
Nope. 3/30 is as high as I would go for him.
If he gets 6 years for 90 this market is out of whack. 3 - 4 years is the max I would pay for a pitcher that rates to be a #2 or #3 starter. It may be that $15 mil a year may be standard.
In other news, Gerald Laird looking for 5 years/50 million.
Yeah I remember your adjustments. it was something like subtract 1.5 K/9 and add 1 BB/9. There should be an adjustment but these numbers are completely ridiculous. NL pitchers don't become pumpkins when they move over to the AL and AL pitchers don't become aces when they do it.Quote:
Originally Posted by thrylos98ok. Any evidence to suggest that NL pitchers can be as successful in the AL?Quote:
Originally Posted by kab21
I can throw over a slew for the other way. Mater of fact, when I am trying to evaluate NL performance for SPs and try to translate it to AL performance, I start with a factor of about 1.2 for most metrics...