Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
bmags

Scherzer to Mets for 3 yrs/$130m

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, chw42 said:

Remember when nobody wanted to work or play for the Mets like 2 weeks ago? I guess money does solve some things. 

BS Walks

  • Fire 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never really thought the Sox would be in play, but it woulda been nice. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What does Steve tweet if this contract doesn't work out?

"well shit, never doing THAT again"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surprising that Scherzer's issues with fatigue in the post season, didn't hurt his value at all. I mean, clearly the best pitcher available, and a great one at that. But...pushing the AAV so far beyond the existing one is some sort of risk for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Capn12 said:

Surprising that Scherzer's issues with fatigue in the post season, didn't hurt his value at all. I mean, clearly the best pitcher available, and a great one at that. But...pushing the AAV so far beyond the existing one is some sort of risk for sure.

We're talking about a team in the NY market that in 2019 was 13th in the league in attendance. The team was estimated to be worth under a billion dollars a decade ago, and sold for $2.4 billion. Most teams in MLB have their values shooting up, and the Mets are in a place like the Dallas Mavericks when Cuban bought them - tons of room for revenue and franchise value growth. If they win 1 world series and make the playoffs 6 or 7 times this decade, how much is that franchise worth if he sells it? Hasn't he cleared a billion dollars easily?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Put me in the camp that is happy we're not paying Scherzer $43.3M a year for his age 38, 39, and 40 seasons.  I never put any realistic stock in this being a possibility, despite what a few here were pushing.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ChiSox59 said:

Put me in the camp that is happy we're not paying Scherzer $43.3M a year for his age 38, 39, and 40 seasons.  I never put any realistic stock in this being a possibility, despite what a few here were pushing.  

I agree with this. Definitely seems like a move that would blow up in their faces immediately.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Three years, at $43 million a year, for a guy who will turn 38 in July. That is an expenditure that this Sox fan is glad that our team's front office and ownership did not make. It makes gambling on Rodon seem like a low risk move, by comparison. I hope that they resign Carlos, perhaps for 3 or 4 years. Then let's see which contract looks better in 3 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, ChiSox59 said:

Put me in the camp that is happy we're not paying Scherzer $43.3M a year for his age 38, 39, and 40 seasons.  I never put any realistic stock in this being a possibility, despite what a few here were pushing.  

I wanted the Sox to be in on Scherzer, but there is zero chance the club entertains a contract remotely close to what the Mets just did. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any expensive, long term contract for a pitcher is risky, but this deal is just nuts. Perhaps the moniker "Mad" is on the wrong entity. "Mad Mets" sounds more appropriate. "Mad" as in crazy. That kind of money is hard to justify, even for the best pitcher in baseball, which is highly unlikely to be the case, in Scherzer's age 40 season. How many pitchers, in the history of the game, have been the best in baseball, at age 40? Anything is possible, but the Mets are making a very bad bet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, steveno89 said:

I wanted the Sox to be in on Scherzer, but there is zero chance the club entertains a contract remotely close to what the Mets just did. 

 

I was thinking he'd get 2/$80M, so $3/$130M with an opt out isn't insanely different AAV.  But yeah, Sox were never signing Scherzer despite what some here wanted to believe. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ChiSox59 said:

I was thinking he'd get 2/$80M, so $3/$130M with an opt out isn't insanely different AAV.  But yeah, Sox were never signing Scherzer despite what some here wanted to believe. 

Are you as glad, as I am, that they didn't?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Lillian said:

Three years, at $43 million a year, for a guy who will turn 38 in July. That is an expenditure that this Sox fan is glad that our team's front office and ownership did not make. It makes gambling on Rodon seem like a low risk move, by comparison. I hope that they resign Carlos, perhaps for 3 or 4 years. Then let's see which contract looks better in 3 years.

These contracts are bad for baseball IMO.  Is baseball a contest of who has the most money?  I would love to have the game played on a level field where every team has the same payroll to spend...no exceptions.  If every team had $200 million to spend and revenue sharing it would be a fair fight.  I know some will say life's not fair...but this has gotten out of hand.  It isn't good for the game when only three or four teams can afford to play.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

 

The Mets should have gotten the opt-out, and not just after the second year. That would have been the only way that this deal could make sense, for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Lillian said:

The Mets should have gotten the opt-out, and not just after the second year. That would have been the only way that this deal could make sense, for them.

Yea exactly. 2 years 85 million with a club option for a 3rd is a helluva lot better. That they had to include the opt out -- who the fuck were they bidding against at that AAV and those years?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×