Jump to content

I wish the Orioles had signed Max Scherzer

srock

By srock
in Orioles Talk

Recommended Posts

srock Veteran All-Star

srock

Posted
Posted

So we could be elated the front office is putting its best foot fowards to win it all!

Or horrified at the franchise crippling contract given to a 30 year old pitcher.

Either is immeasurably superior to this Blue Jays nonesense.

04accb26018b43fd5ec8495b9cae3801.jpg

Zut Alors!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
UpstateNYfan Major Leaguer Rising Star

UpstateNYfan

Posted
Posted
Considering all the deferred money, it's not that bad of a deal.

About 10% of your payroll (a little less as payrolls escalate) for 14 years and even worse when he is done playing? It is a stupid, Yankee type contract for the Nats IMO. Pitchers are a gamble in the best of circumstances. Verlander on MT Olympus a couple years ago, now on a downward slope. Good for Scherzer (it's not about the money). I hope he turns very average.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SouthRider Major Leaguer Rising Star

SouthRider

Posted
Posted

Considering Scherzer's age (30) and the length of the deal, I don't think it is such a good deal for the Nats, They will be paying him 15 million for the next 7 years and then 15 million for 7 more. I would guess he plays for the Nats for say, 5 years until they trade him in a salary dump. The only problem is they would owe him for 9 more years - over 50% of the deal. Sure the deferred value of those dollars is not as much as today, but that is still a lot of money. Bottom line is they are going to be paying Scherzer for a lot of years to be either retired or pitch for someone else.

Oh, and another thing. The Nats don't even need him this year. They were going to win the division anyway. The playoffs is a crapshoot. With Scherzer you increase your odds, but that didn't really help Detroit last season. Plus, the Nats traded one of their best relievers in Tyler Clippard. Roark will most likely get bumped to the bull pen to replace Clippard, but Roark looked to be a pretty good, inexpensive starter, being replaced by the ultra-expensive Scherzer. Just not a good allocation of resources.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
orioleraven Newbie

orioleraven

Posted
Posted
About 10% of your payroll (a little less as payrolls escalate) for 14 years and even worse when he is done playing? It is a stupid, Yankee type contract for the Nats IMO. Pitchers are a gamble in the best of circumstances. Verlander on MT Olympus a couple years ago, now on a downward slope. Good for Scherzer (it's not about the money). I hope he turns very average.

Sounds like your upset and mad at the nationals lol. Lerners wanna win bottom line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TonySoprano Hangout Grand Counsel

TonySoprano

Posted
Posted
I think my point is zooming over some heads.
The point that the Orioles should have signed a pitcher for over 4X what we paid Ubaldo? This organization has for the most part been going with the "grow the arms" philosophy since Flanagan (yes, before MacPhail). If you were going to argue that we should have done the other part of the equation, "buy the bats," then that point would have hit home.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
srock Veteran All-Star

srock

Posted
  • Author
Posted
The point that the Orioles should have signed a pitcher for over 4X what we paid Ubaldo? This organization has for the most part been going with the "grow the arms" philosophy since Flanagan (yes, before MacPhail). If you were going to argue that we should have done the other part of the equation, "buy the bats," then that point would have hit home.

;(

The point is I would rather be arguing about the Orioles signing a player, even if it's a stupid signing, then arguing about an exec and the stupid blue jays.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...