rokimar Posted June 18, 2008 Share Posted June 18, 2008 Detriot is pounding Zito right now. Is there anyway he lets the Giants restructure his contract? Otherwize Giants are our like 18 million a year till 2013. Its one thing if a player is not any good, but he cant get anyone out and for whats he is making you would think he would have it in him to restructure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted June 18, 2008 Share Posted June 18, 2008 Maybe deferred money, otherwise it could just be a Mike Hampton situation where they have to trade him and pay at least half probably 2/3'rds of his remaining contract. Who would want him the way he is pitching ATM though? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted June 18, 2008 Share Posted June 18, 2008 Not a chance in hell. Not only would Zito not agree to give up guaranteed money but the MLBPA would NEVER allow it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daa84 Posted June 18, 2008 Share Posted June 18, 2008 (edited) placido polanco is now 9 for 13 lifetime off of zito (2-2 today)....glad i picked him in my beat the streak btw scott boras is pretty good at what he does Edited June 18, 2008 by daa84 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted June 18, 2008 Share Posted June 18, 2008 QUOTE (Kalapse @ Jun 18, 2008 -> 03:30 PM) Not a chance in hell. Not only would Zito not agree to give up guaranteed money but the MLBPA would NEVER allow it. Exactly. I don't care how much SF would hate me, I'm not giving back any money if I'm him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted June 18, 2008 Share Posted June 18, 2008 QUOTE (DBAH0 @ Jun 18, 2008 -> 03:26 PM) Maybe deferred money, otherwise it could just be a Mike Hampton situation where they have to trade him and pay at least half probably 2/3'rds of his remaining contract. Who would want him the way he is pitching ATM though? I have seen a few different trade rumor sites indicating that SF is trying to work out a deferred contract deal with Zito so they can trade him ASAP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swingandalongonetoleft Posted June 18, 2008 Share Posted June 18, 2008 Detroit is hella scary at this point. Thank goodness for their inability to put s*** together in the early part of the season. I wonder if Thames launched one again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted June 18, 2008 Share Posted June 18, 2008 QUOTE (ChiSox35 @ Jun 18, 2008 -> 04:04 PM) Detroit is hella scary at this point. Thank goodness for their inability to put s*** together in the early part of the season. I wonder if Thames launched one again. How so? We swept the Giants. They didnt have it quite as easy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santo=dorf Posted June 19, 2008 Share Posted June 19, 2008 I'll ask it again; would it be smart for the Giants to give up Lincecum to rid themselves ofZito's entire contract? If you were the GM would you take Zito and his whole contract if you knew you were getting Lincecum? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
almagest Posted June 19, 2008 Share Posted June 19, 2008 QUOTE (santo=dorf @ Jun 18, 2008 -> 06:21 PM) I'll ask it again; would it be smart for the Giants to give up Lincecum to rid themselves ofZito's entire contract? If you were the GM would you take Zito and his whole contract if you knew you were getting Lincecum? Hmm... maybe. As long as they didn't ask for too much in return. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WCSox Posted June 19, 2008 Share Posted June 19, 2008 QUOTE (santo=dorf @ Jun 18, 2008 -> 05:21 PM) I'll ask it again; would it be smart for the Giants to give up Lincecum to rid themselves ofZito's entire contract? If you were the GM would you take Zito and his whole contract if you knew you were getting Lincecum? If I'm Sabean, I don't deal Lincecum. It's not like the Giants will struggle financially if they continue to pay Zito to suck. And I don't think that a GM would want to take ALL of Zito's contract, even if they got Linceum with it. Half of Zito's contract and Lincecum might be doable, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxfest Posted June 19, 2008 Share Posted June 19, 2008 This is why people do not want to deal with Scott Bor-Ass! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TCQ Posted June 20, 2008 Share Posted June 20, 2008 What happened to this guy, there had to be an injury or he was juicin cause theres no other explanation for him losin that velocity Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted June 23, 2008 Share Posted June 23, 2008 I think you could make a serious case that it would actually be a good idea to do that if it allowed you to get completely rid of Zito's contract. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Posted June 23, 2008 Share Posted June 23, 2008 QUOTE (TCQ @ Jun 20, 2008 -> 01:07 PM) What happened to this guy, there had to be an injury or he was juicin cause theres no other explanation for him losin that velocity Well, the guy pitched more innings than anyone for a while there and at a young age. Might have just emptied the tank, we humans weren't made to throw that ball, let alone that much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted June 23, 2008 Share Posted June 23, 2008 QUOTE (Jake @ Jun 23, 2008 -> 08:39 AM) Well, the guy pitched more innings than anyone for a while there and at a young age. Might have just emptied the tank, we humans weren't made to throw that ball, let alone that much. Or, frankly, there could have been other things going on that enhanced his performance for some time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TCQ Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 That he pitched too much thing is BS, back in the good old days there were no relievers, a starting pitcher could easily throw three hundred innings a year. Pitchers today are babied too much, and im not buying that that is why he now is the highest paid batting practice pitcher. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptatc Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 QUOTE (TCQ @ Jun 25, 2008 -> 08:41 AM) That he pitched too much thing is BS, back in the good old days there were no relievers, a starting pitcher could easily throw three hundred innings a year. Pitchers today are babied too much, and im not buying that that is why he now is the highest paid batting practice pitcher. This is wrong. It's not that pitchers are babied, it's that most of these guys shouldn't be in the majors. Back in the good old days as you put it, the pitchers whose arms couldn't handle the workload were sed up in the minors and were out of baseball. With the increased number of teams there is a need for more pitchers so you have to take it easier on arms that really shouldn't be here. they should throw more and should throw more innings and many could handle it but many could not so with the money invested in these pitchers you have no choice but to be careful with pitchers who back in the good old days would have been out of the game before they saw the majors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 QUOTE (ptatc @ Jun 25, 2008 -> 09:12 AM) This is wrong. It's not that pitchers are babied, it's that most of these guys shouldn't be in the majors. Back in the good old days as you put it, the pitchers whose arms couldn't handle the workload were sed up in the minors and were out of baseball. With the increased number of teams there is a need for more pitchers so you have to take it easier on arms that really shouldn't be here. they should throw more and should throw more innings and many could handle it but many could not so with the money invested in these pitchers you have no choice but to be careful with pitchers who back in the good old days would have been out of the game before they saw the majors. There also wasn't anywhere near the financial risk of leaving a pitcher out there to burn up his arm. You didn't still owe him $80M if you overwork his arm in the first year of a 5 year deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.