Oh Mets

[WhiteWonder 2,171]

Goodbye deGrom. At least they still have highest paid 38 year old Max Scherzer
 

https://www.foxnews.com/sports/rangers-sign-jacob-degrom-five-year-185-million-deal

 

[Flipper 57]

And perhaps soon his OLDER ex-Tiger pal Verlander ...

[Drizzay 645]

I wouldn't pay him. 

[Flipper 57]

He's a horse but worth a 2 or 3 year deal

[Crestwood 2 128]

50 starts total for this guy over the lifetime of this bloated contract

[Crestwood 2 128]

Enjoy the AL West cellar battling it out with those Oakland A’s

[posty 2,296]

Looks like Verlander is heading to the Mets...

Two-year, $86 million contract...

[TBayXXXVII 2,116]

1 minute ago, posty said:

Looks like Verlander is heading to the Mets...

Two-year, $86 million contract...

That's a better deal for the Mets than paying deInjury.

[edjr 5,562]

Remember when John Henry didn't want to pay any pitcher 30+ a long term deal. Cost them Jon Lester.

Only to over pay that hack David Price a year later

Now teams are paying pitchers 35+ and 40+  

[WhiteWonder 2,171]

6 minutes ago, posty said:

Looks like Verlander is heading to the Mets...

Two-year, $86 million contract...

 

4 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

That's a better deal for the Mets than paying deInjury.

Maybe. They already paid max until he’s 40. Now Verlander until 42? Maybe the two of them back together will be good

hopefully they still go after Rodon 

[WhiteWonder 2,171]

Just now, edjr said:

Remember when John Henry didn't want to pay any pitcher 30+ a long term deal. Cost them Jon Lester.

Only to over pay that hack David Price a year later

Now teams are paying pitchers 35+ and 40+  

It’s logical when you’re not talking about hall of famers. If it’s ace type pitchers still getting it done I think it’s okay. 
 

also they should have known better with Price. 

[edjr 5,562]

1 minute ago, WhiteWonder said:

It’s logical when you’re not talking about hall of famers. If it’s ace type pitchers still getting it done I think it’s okay. 
 

also they should have known better with Price. 

Michael Cuddyer is only 43. He deserves a shot. 

Cmon that DeGrom contract is outrageous. 

[TBayXXXVII 2,116]

3 minutes ago, WhiteWonder said:

 

Maybe. They already paid max until he’s 40. Now Verlander until 42? Maybe the two of them back together will be good

hopefully they still go after Rodon 

I don't if it'll work out well for them, though I think it will... for the next 2 years, but I think it's a much better investment in money.  deGrom has less than 25 starts over the last 2 years and he's only getting older.  I wouldn't invest in 2 years for him, let alone 5.  Even if Verlander only gives you 1 good year, the $86M over 2 is a much better use than $185M over 5, where cumulatively, he may only give you 2 good years.

I do think they overpaid on Verlander.  I don't imagine too many teams were lined up to hand over $43M AAV over a 2 year period.  I'll be curious to see how much money they're willing to invest into the payroll.  I heard that they had $195M already on the books before deGrom (if they brought him back).  With Verlander, they're around $240... not counting arbitration guys.  They might be around $275M before they even try to improve the team.

[edjr 5,562]

5 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

I don't if it'll work out well for them, though I think it will... for the next 2 years, but I think it's a much better investment in money.  deGrom has less than 25 starts over the last 2 years and he's only getting older.  I wouldn't invest in 2 years for him, let alone 5.  Even if Verlander only gives you 1 good year, the $86M over 2 is a much better use than $185M over 5, where cumulatively, he may only give you 2 good years.

I do think they overpaid on Verlander.  I don't imagine too many teams were lined up to hand over $43M AAV over a 2 year period.  I'll be curious to see how much money they're willing to invest into the payroll.  I heard that they had $195M already on the books before deGrom (if they brought him back).  With Verlander, they're around $240... not counting arbitration guys.  They might be around $275M before they even try to improve the team.

This is why baseball is dumb. The salaries and no salary cap are just embarrassing. 

[TBayXXXVII 2,116]

8 minutes ago, edjr said:

This is why baseball is dumb. The salaries and no salary cap are just embarrassing. 

Agreed.

[WhiteWonder 2,171]

22 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

I don't if it'll work out well for them, though I think it will... for the next 2 years, but I think it's a much better investment in money.  deGrom has less than 25 starts over the last 2 years and he's only getting older.  I wouldn't invest in 2 years for him, let alone 5.  Even if Verlander only gives you 1 good year, the $86M over 2 is a much better use than $185M over 5, where cumulatively, he may only give you 2 good years.

I do think they overpaid on Verlander.  I don't imagine too many teams were lined up to hand over $43M AAV over a 2 year period.  I'll be curious to see how much money they're willing to invest into the payroll.  I heard that they had $195M already on the books before deGrom (if they brought him back).  With Verlander, they're around $240... not counting arbitration guys.  They might be around $275M before they even try to improve the team.

I imagine they decided to pony up the extra $$ on the 2 year deal because it had been widely reported that Verlander wanted a 3 year deal. 

I get the deGrom injury history and him not getting any younger but he's going to be 39/40 at the end of his deal with the Rangers, whereas Verlander is already 40 and had TJ 2 years ago 

 

Im only a secondary Mets fan so it doesn't matter much to me. I've heard deGrom is kind of a diick anyway. Maybe Verlander will be better for the overall team chemistry too. 

[WhiteWonder 2,171]

22 minutes ago, edjr said:

This is why baseball is dumb. The salaries and no salary cap are just embarrassing. 

and it's why I jettisoned the Yankees in favor of the Rays back in high school

[Cruzer 1,992]

Talk about a Texas Rangers textbook move - paying an aged, often injured, former pitching star a shiitload of $$$ to pacify the homers.

I know, I know - IF this and IF that and MAYBE this and HOPEFULLY that..............fock almighty, this organization never changes. 

[Reality 2,710]

9 hours ago, Cruzer said:

Talk about a Texas Rangers textbook move - paying an aged, often injured, former pitching star a shiitload of $$$ to pacify the homers.

I know, I know - IF this and IF that and MAYBE this and HOPEFULLY that..............fock almighty, this organization never changes. 

Right, as a Mets fan, it sucks to lose him, obviously. Would have loved a 2 or 3 year deal.

All that said, what the actual fock are the Rangers doing? Such an odd move on their part.

[Cruzer 1,992]

13 hours ago, Reality said:

Right, as a Mets fan, it sucks to lose him, obviously. Would have loved a 2 or 3 year deal.

All that said, what the actual fock are the Rangers doing? Such an odd move on their part.

Heck if I know. This ownership always does just enuff to get what they want and not an ounce more. Their go-to move is to sign old big name arms who are always either coming off an injury or looking for a last and final payday. 

[WhiteWonder 2,171]

31 minutes ago, Cruzer said:

Heck if I know. This ownership always does just enuff to get what they want and not an ounce more. Their go-to move is to sign old big name arms who are always either coming off an injury or looking for a last and final payday. 

didnt they sign a bunch of big bats last year too? Seager and Simien?

[Cruzer 1,992]

6 minutes ago, WhiteWonder said:

didnt they sign a bunch of big bats last year too? Seager and Simien?

They did.. which isn’t out of the norm here. This ownership doesn’t give 2 shiits about winning, they will spend just enuff tho to big bats to keep the sheep coming back. They’ve no clue (still) that arms win you titles. 
 

Even still, Simien - $175m (guaranteed), with his 1st year starting at the age of………………..32.