Jump to content

Happy Bobby Bonilla Payday!


beervendor

Recommended Posts

This has to be the most interesting contract in sports history.

Every July 1 the Mets issue a check for nearly $1.2M to former Met and Oriole Bobby Bonilla. This abomination will continue thru 2036. Additionally, Bonilla collects a separate payment of $500,000 annually thru 2028, shared roughly equally between the Mets and O's.

For a guy who never looked like he was working very hard, he sure knows how to retire in style.

http://espn.go.com/blog/new-york/mets/post/_/id/105897/its-bobby-bonillas-payday

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 33
  • Created
  • Last Reply

You are worth what you negotiate. I'm surprised more agents and players don't negotiate deals like this. I guess the retirement negotiated by the MLB Players Union is pretty strong so there is little incentive.

That's a lot of coin to be collecting until 2036! Geez!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This has to be the most interesting contract in sports history.

Every July 1 the Mets issue a check for nearly $1.2M to former Met and Oriole Bobby Bonilla. This abomination will continue thru 2036. Additionally, Bonilla collects a separate payment of $500,000 annually thru 2028, shared roughly equally between the Mets and O's.

For a guy who never looked like he was working very hard, he sure knows how to retire in style.

http://espn.go.com/blog/new-york/mets/post/_/id/105897/its-bobby-bonillas-payday

1) Why in the world would anyone call this "an abomination"? It's a creatively structured contract that sets him up well and makes sure he's not one of the many athletes who spent all of their fortune at age 27.

2) What's with the "never looked like he was working very hard" bit? He had a 15-year career on some very good teams with a solid value over 30 wins. As far as I know he never complained about being shuffled around from the outfield to third to first to DH.

I don't understand why there's anything to complain about here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) Why in the world would anyone call this "an abomination"? It's a creatively structured contract that sets him up well and makes sure he's not one of the many athletes who spent all of their fortune at age 27.

2) What's with the "never looked like he was working very hard" bit? He had a 15-year career on some very good teams with a solid value over 30 wins. As far as I know he never complained about being shuffled around from the outfield to third to first to DH.

I don't understand why there's anything to complain about here.

Not complaining at all. "Abomination" was tongue-in-cheek - I don't fault any player (or owner) for negotiating the best deal they can. I love the outside-the-boxness of it all. Bet we could find some Mets fans who would disagree.

His defensive shortcomings and lack of speed (objective) and hustle (subjective), when combined with his undeniable offensive gifts made it all look pretty easy for him. Some players just never look like they're working that hard. That's all I was saying.

While he was seen as a malcontent in NY, he was never a problem during his stint with the O's. I met him once and we chatted briefly. He couldn't have been a nicer guy, nor had bigger hands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not sure which report to believe concerning the O's portion of the Bonnila deferred salary.

Here is a report from the New York Times:

He also remains on the Baltimore Orioles? payroll. That team?s $500,000-per-annum deferred payments began two months ago (2011) and extend until 2015. But he has to split that loot with the ex-wife.

http://nypost.com/2011/05/15/mets-has-been-bonilla-gets-30m-last-laugh/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • Posts

    • There is just no way Hyde is going to PH a lefty for a lefty when you have your #9 hitter RHB coming up. If Cedric sucks so bad that you PH another lefty then he really has no business being in the lineup at all. We may be approaching that point soon but we're not there yet.
    • I get where you are coming from but disagree.    You had 2 viable bench bats in Mountcastle and to a lesser extent Stowers. Mountcastle was there to hit if he could tie it.    You can’t compare Mateo and Mullins offensively the last couple of years. 
    • It’ll be curious to see what happens.  I see a guy that can’t throw strikes and when he does he gets hammered with meh stuff.  A 4.5 era 1.44 whip guy with significantly less Ks than IP is a dime a dozen in MLB.  
    • I get that and normally I'm in favor of playing the matchup game.   But Ced's terrible go of it lately negates that lefty .825 OPS against Munoz for me in that situation.  I'd have been alright with Mountcastle trying to catch a hold of one there instead...at least I think Mounty would have at a better chance to draw a walk and get on for Gunnar.  IMO, getting a runner on for Gunnar was the most important part of that inning, especially if you're going to prop up the .825 OPS Munoz has against lefties.  If getting a runner on was the most important thing, then I don't want the weakest hitter on the team up there no matter what side of the plate he's standing on, I want the guy who can likely give the best at bat.  For me, that was Mountcastle. Now I get the whole veteran thing, there was no way that Hyde was going to pinch hit for Mullins since he's been a valued member of the team.  But you could argue that Mateo has been a valued member of the team for the past couple years and that pinch hitting Stowers for him was a slap in the face to Mateo, especially when Mateo hasn't been the automatic out that Mullins has been lately.  
    • I’m the opposite. I think he gets claimed. Ton of bad teams would give him a look. 
    • I think we’ve all noticed that more calls have gone against the O’s than for them in the last few years.  It was only the Alomar part of your thesis that made me shake my head.   
  • Popular Contributors

  • Popular Now

×
×
  • Create New...