Zito

by Corsair553 on Dec 28, 2006 11:55 AM CST Comment 10 comments

"Sources told ESPN's Peter Gammons that the former A's pitcher has agreed to a seven-year contract from the Giants. The $126 million deal averages approximately $18 million per season. Zito will be formally introduced by the Giants this afternoon."

If Zito's worth 18 million a year, what does that make Mark and the rest of our starters worth? 16 million a year? More? Scary to think about.

SouthSideSox is a community driven site. As such, users are able to express their thoughts and opinions in a FanPost, such as this one, which represents the views of this particular fan, but not necessarily the entire community or SouthSideSox editors.

0 recs | Comment 10 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

we may find out soon...

HEY THIS IS JI
JIM THOME
THE PEORIA POUNDER

by The Wizard on Dec 28, 2006 12:19 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Another reason Kenny's

Trades look good. How many young pitchers do we have now that have a decent chance at the majors? Cheap rotation for a while.

Just.Win.

by hawksview on Dec 28, 2006 12:43 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

assuming MB pitches like MB next year

he's probably looking at $16.5 million or so over basically however long he wants it.

by larry on Dec 28, 2006 2:10 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Unless he takes that hometown discount....

7 years, 116 million just isn't St. Louis' style. I could see him taking 5 yrs. 80 mill to sign with St. Louis. Unfortunately, the only way we can get such a deal is if we sign him to it right now (before his bounce back year).

So Santana gets what 8 years, 200 mill when he hits free agency?

by bhoov on Dec 28, 2006 2:52 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

maybe it's just me

but it seems pretty stupid to sign a pitcher like MB (or zito or any other young, workhorse type pitcher), to shorter contracts. they're just going to be more expensive to re-sign after 5 years so why not go for longer? hell, in five years, $16 million will probably get you gil meche - not mark buerhle.

as for santana, you're right, he will pitch for the yankees and make $25 million a year. if roger gets just over $22 million, that sounds right for a couple years from now. hell, if i had the money (and whoever he signs with will), i'd probably give him ten years.

by larry on Dec 28, 2006 3:06 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

injury

The much greater injury risk for pitchers is the limiting factor for most teams. For example MB's most similar player through age 27 is Mark Mulder. Imagine if Mulder was signed to a 7 year contract prior to last year.

Of course there are instances where the pithcer is so good that you have to sign a contract of unwise length to get the guy. I just don't think Buerhle or Zito are the kind of guys you make that kind of gamble on. For me, that guy would have to be dominant and durable (Santana).

by bhoov on Dec 28, 2006 5:12 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

mulder ain't that similar

mulder missed starts in both '02 and '03. no surprise that he had arm trouble now. can't say i ever recall MB (or zito, for that matter) missing any time.

i see no problem in making offers like that to guys who are consistently good and durable, as well - especially when you'll be getting their prime years. doesn't really seem like all that much of a gamble.

by larry on Dec 28, 2006 5:20 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

But there are many pitchers....

who didn't miss any starts over a let's say 4 year period and then went on to have arm trouble in the 7 year period after that.

Buerhle's year this past year is probably the greatest indication of the gamble of giving a pitcher a 7 year deal. Although Buerhle didn't miss any starts I'd be surprised if "injury" didn't play a role in him being a very below average pithcer last year. But different people are entitled to different opinions.

Interestingly though there is another Chicago pitcher who fits my requirements of being both durable and dominant to get a long term deal, and he's a free agent after the year. Carlos Zambrano. Man he's got to be looking at 7 years, 140 million! That should be interesting.

by bhoov on Dec 28, 2006 5:50 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

well

assuming he continues next season, we're talking seven years of not missing a start. zito's at six. i'm guessing there aren't many pitchers with their numbers who can say that. maddux. glavine. jack mcdowell probably is a guy who would favor your argument. i'd be intersted in seeing some analysis into this sort of thing. my feeling is that guys who are durable over a long period early in their careers - especially since, these days, they don't throw as much as mcdowell did - tend to stay that way. mechanical problems usually crop up by the time a pitcher is 25 or 26. i suppose it's your tolerance of risk. i don't see much in that sort of signing.

zambrano? i'd certainly pay that much.

by larry on Dec 28, 2006 6:07 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Maybe some creativity

I think that at minimum Buerhle might sign right now for something like $85 million for 5 years, thus giving him some security against injury or bad year in 2007, especially with some creative structuring:

- $15 million signing bonus with an annual salary of $14 million,
- limited trade clause (such as the Cardinals).

I know it sounds crazy but really, now that Sabean, that dope out in Frisco, has set the market, KW has to either do something early with MB or not at all.

Also, boy don't we all feel bad for Donald Fehr and the Union, after all he's done to clean up baseball?

When do single game tickets go on sale?

Canada's finest

by MarkD on Dec 28, 2006 4:48 PM CST reply actions 0 recs