MO
- Thread starter vbsideout
- Start date
They SHOULD want to go with the young starters. CMart, Reyes, Weaver, Flaherty, and Lynn (hopefully). Move the bag of bones that is Waino to the pen. Sucks, but he's done.
Ok. Now lets judge the Leake signing.
Given the makeup of our club, his overall performance and the fact that we are paying to get rid of him for basically nothing in return, THAT WAS HORRIBLE MO. Just horrible.
Anyone who rationalizes by saying we needed his innings or we knew what we were getting. STOP IT. It was horrible.
Period.
Given the makeup of our club, his overall performance and the fact that we are paying to get rid of him for basically nothing in return, THAT WAS HORRIBLE MO. Just horrible.
Anyone who rationalizes by saying we needed his innings or we knew what we were getting. STOP IT. It was horrible.
Period.
Ehh it wasn't that good or bad. He was fine for what we paid him. 9.5 M per WAR is the average market price of a free agent. And we proved we could dump him when the time came to do so.
You signed an innings eater SP. you paid him like a 2 WAR a year player. he ate innings and played like a 2 WAR a year player. You had to eat some to trade him because the contract is backloaded.
Given the health concerns of Garcia plus Wacha and where the prospects were in 2015, the cards did need another arm. The prospects are coming along fine and the cards need payroll flexibility to improve the lineup. It's time for him to go.
The fifth year was always silly though. The contract was a year too long
Last edited:
You sign someone to a 5 year deal and trade him in less than 2 seasons. Then pay $17 mil while he plays elsewhere? Thats called a blunder.
You got about 4 WAR out of a guy for about 40 M. You were able to shed the contract when needed. You had to pay some to make it go away because you were only scheduled to pay him 27 of the 80 M in the first two years of a five year deal. And the natural aging and injury risk curve suggests you expected to get about half of the value of the contract in the first two years.
Its not bad on a micro level (not good either, it is just ok). The bigger question is more about if the cards needed to sign an innings eater in the first place.
Wonder what his next contract will look like. Talk about knowing what to do in your walk year!!!!!Shed that money!! GIANCARLO!!
Please quit NM. It was a bad signing. You sound like one of trump supporters.
UhhhhhhhhhWonder what his next contract will look like. Talk about knowing what to do in your walk year!!!!!
What? He signed a 13 year, 325M contract.....starting in 2015
No VB. You always sign a guy for five years expecting to trade him and 17 million dollars in 18 months.
war that.You want them to rebuild this team. That means you have to make some fundamental decisions about how to allocate your budget. The Cards felt in 2015 they needed a stable arm in the rotation for a few years. Given the emergence of Weaver, etc. now they don't feel that way (probably because they envision Lynn in that stable #4 role.)No VB. You always sign a guy for five years expecting to trade him and 17 million dollars in 18 months.
I suspect Mo thought something like the following - if I'm handing out a ~3 year, ~$36 M contract today, would I give it to Leake or to Lynn? He chose Lynn for his potential upside.
The big question on Leake not really was the money that bad (it was fair for the time with the possible exception of the 5th year), it's whether or not the Cards needed to make this sort of long term commitment.
Last edited:
If he keeps hitting like this he can opt out at some point in the near future. 2020 maybe?
Harper and Trout will get more, though, and those aren't that far away!
2020. Trout should just be handed a blank check. Name your price to whoever you want to sign with
Angels are lucky he signed that extension. He undervalued himself.
Man, some of these club option deals like Rizzo are brutal.
Martinez was kind enough to give the Cardinals two club option years as well. I have no clue why he signed that deal.
That is why I'm glad Rizzo loves Chicago. He could be pissed about his deal, and I wouldn't blame him. I'm assuming they will work out an extension and just give him a lifetime deal. Just spread the cost out over time and be a coach/ambassador down the road.
I don't keep with all these guys contracts, if he's locked up for that long why is everybody talking him being on the move with that kind of contract? Surely the new ownership group will want him to stick around.
Because everyone wants him. Same reason Trout talks exist. No team will ever be able to trade for him, but everyone wants him because he's on the way to being one of the best players ever
Similar threads
