Which deal is better for the club: Verlander 7/$180 mm (age 30-36) or Kershaw 7/$215 mm (age 26-32)?

[Frobby]

Just curious what people think of this. Verlander's deal starts at age 30 and runs through age 36. Kershaw's starts at age 26 and runs through age 32. I'd rather have Kershaw's age 26-29 seasons than Verlander's age 33-36 seasons. But is it worth the extra $35 mm, knowing that Kershaw can opt out of the final two years if he is pitching well but the Dodgers are stuck if he's hurt or pitching poorly?

[Can_of_corn]

Just curious what people think of this. Verlander's deal starts at age 30 and runs through age 36. Kershaw's starts at age 26 and runs through age 32. I'd rather have Kershaw's age 26-29 seasons than Verlander's age 33-36 seasons. But is it worth the extra $35 mm, knowing that Kershaw can opt out of the final two years if he is pitching well but the Dodgers are stuck if he's hurt or pitching poorly?

You also have to consider the market, the Dodgers can more easily absorb Kershaw's 215 then the Tigers can Verlander's 180.

[Redskins Rick]

can I vote for both?

Can you image having them as a 1-2 combination as your starting 5?

[Frobby]

can I vote for both?

Can you image having them as a 1-2 combination as your starting 5?

It's great if they're healthy. But I really wonder about the Verlander deal. He wasn't nearly as good last year (which was the first year of his new deal) as he had been the previous few seasons. Could be a blip, or it could be the start of an inevitable decline.

[Can_of_corn]

It's great if they're healthy. But I really wonder about the Verlander deal. He wasn't nearly as good last year (which was the first year of his new deal) as he had been the previous few seasons. Could be a blip, or it could be the start of an inevitable decline.

And now he is hurt.

[Redskins Rick]

It's great if they're healthy. But I really wonder about the Verlander deal. He wasn't nearly as good last year (which was the first year of his new deal) as he had been the previous few seasons. Could be a blip, or it could be the start of an inevitable decline.

Looking at his stats, nothing really jumps out, that would explain why his wins were down and his losses were up.

[Redskins Rick]

And now he is hurt.

recovering from surgery and expected back on time, is the party line.

[Elbren]

I voted for Kershaw's deal.

That's a crazy-stupid amount of money, but it locks him up during his prime years and, as far as I'm concerned, it's a shorter deal than Verlander's. I see no reason why he wouldn't opt out after year 5, making him a FA at the age of 30, meaning he'd be in line for another long term/big money deal.

Only reason he stays for the last 2 years is if he blows out his arm. Even then, he's guaranteed money those two years and he's a FA again at 32.

[Redskins Rick]

Really good article by Peter Gammons that exams the career of Kersaw and how he ranks with his peers.

http://www.gammonsdaily.com/how-does-clayton-kershaw-compare-to-other-pitchers-at-25-years-old/

Better good company when you look at his WAR.