Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

2015 Washington Nationals Thread - Hot Stove News: Daniel Murphy signed, Phillips is an idiot.

Riggo#44

By Riggo#44
in The Tailgate

Recommended Posts

Going Commando

Going Commando

Posted
Posted

He'll be paid until he's 44 and long gone from the league. It makes sense for him to sign a deal like this, it's his last big contract.

It's a big financial risk for the team to structure the deal this way, the guy could not pan out and then the deal becomes an untradeable millstone that would outlast the careers of anyone actually in the Nats organization today.

But if he does work out, then it definitely makes sense to buy him with the credit card so that we can keep some room to keep one of our own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SkinsHokieFan

SkinsHokieFan

Posted
Posted

He'll be paid until he's 44 and long gone from the league. It makes sense for him to sign a deal like this, it's his last big contract.

It's a big financial risk for the team to structure the deal this way, the guy could not pan out and then the deal becomes an untradeable millstone that would outlast the careers of anyone actually in the Nats organization today.

But if he does work out, then it definitely makes sense to buy him with the credit card so that we can keep some room to keep one of our own.

 

Ownership really must feel that a MASN deal will get done eventually, and if the team wins a WS and hosts an All Star game, the naming rights to Nationals Park will fetch big money to take care of the back end of the 105M

 

In 2022 15M in "dead money" may not be a big deal. We just don't know what revenues will be 

The net present value of this deal at 4% interest is 157M 

 

http://www.calculatorsoup.com/calculators/financial/present-value-cash-flows-calculator.php

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/max-scherzer-and-when-210-million-isnt-210-million/

 

In reality, this does NOT make sense for Max Scherzer to structure his deal with half of it deferred, when you take into account net present value.

 

This is an even better deal for the Nationals then Lester to the Cubs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hersh

Hersh

Posted
Posted

From an outside perspective, I don't understand this move at all.

 

That Nats didn't lose in the postseason cause they lacked great starting pitching, they lost cause they couldn't hit/manufacture runs and their closer didn't get it done.

 

All that's needed in the post season for most every team are one or two great starting pitchers, a great bullpen and some clutch hitting. Unless you are the Giants in which case you need one great starter and pretty much nothing else. Being 5 deep in a rotation doesn't mean anything in October.


Ownership really must feel that a MASN deal will get done eventually, and if the team wins a WS and hosts an All Star game, the naming rights to Nationals Park will fetch big money to take care of the back end of the 105M

 

In 2022 15M in "dead money" may not be a big deal. We just don't know what revenues will be 


The net present value of this deal at 4% interest is 157M 

 

http://www.calculatorsoup.com/calculators/financial/present-value-cash-flows-calculator.php


http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/max-scherzer-and-when-210-million-isnt-210-million/

 

In reality, this does NOT make sense for Max Scherzer to structure his deal with half of it deferred, when you take into account net present value.

 

This is an even better deal for the Nationals then Lester to the Cubs. 

 

It will be interesting to see if MLB approves this type of deal with so much money deferred. With Bonilla, I can't remember how much it was but it wasn't $15 million per year. Could be a dangerous precedent that will throw the spending balance even more out of whack between big market teams and small market teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GoSkins0721

GoSkins0721

Posted
Posted

From an outside perspective, I don't understand this move at all.

 

That Nats didn't lose in the postseason cause they lacked great starting pitching, they lost cause they couldn't hit/manufacture runs and their closer didn't get it done.

 

All that's needed in the post season for most every team are one or two great starting pitchers, a great bullpen and some clutch hitting. Unless you are the Giants in which case you need one great starter and pretty much nothing else. Being 5 deep in a rotation doesn't mean anything in October.

 

Well, if the above Twitter comment is to be believed, it looks like the Nats & Strasburg have soured on each other. If that's the case, he'll be moved soon & Maxi-Dollars will be inserted as the #1 starter. 

 

I wonder what the issue(s) is between Stras & the Nats? 
 
Edit: Pitchers & catchers report 30 days from today...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheGoodBits

TheGoodBits

Posted
Posted

Here's an idea... If we're really trading Stras, we still re-sign Zimm.

2015: Scherzer, Zimmermann, Fister, Gio, Roark/Cole

2016: Scherzer, Zimmermann, Gio, (pick 2 of Roark, Cole, and Giolito)

With 2 years left before Stras hits FA, we should get a real nice haul of prospects for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Going Commando

Going Commando

Posted
Posted

Well, if the above Twitter comment is to be believed, it looks like the Nats & Strasburg have soured on each other. If that's the case, he'll be moved soon & Maxi-Dollars will be inserted as the #1 starter. 

 

I wonder what the issue(s) is between Stras & the Nats?

The above twitter comment is not to be believed.

That person seems to think Strasburg is a free agent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RemoveSnyder

RemoveSnyder

Posted
Posted

 

Then how come we won one game in October?

 

I told you before. Our "Big 3" is more of fan misperception, media hype, than a reality. 

I also told you I wanted to add another arm, last year, in preparation for the playoffs.

 

I told you that J. Zimm was our ACE and that's all we really could hang our hat on. I said we needed to stop using regular season era to arbitrarily notch wins for the postseason, different beast. YOU all said, "pitching is fine." 

 

Well, I think you should be asking yourself the same question you posed to me. Simply said, Straus ain't the ACE.  He's a #4 in our rotation now. Let that sink in vis-a-vis fan perception. And Gio has declined steadily since year-1.

 

I know you wanted bats last summer, but I never got your treatise on the matter. I was fine with trading Laroche last year, especially to improve 2nd base or to get a better situational bat. We all knew moving R.Zimm to 1st was the endgame. I was fine with getting rid of Espi.

 

And I also told you that the bats would naturally rise back to level as guys got healthier and they did. 

 

I was fine with Souza gets ABs. I wanted Walters to get more ABs. We all know about Dezi's situational hitting and we've seen the flashes of Rendon's bat. I was ok with going balls-out after a premiere bat for 1st base. I was even fine with going after an outfield bat ... the name escapes me right now, can't remember if was someone from the Rockies or Red Sox. 

 

I was perfectly fine with trading for some bats, but it had to be the right guy. 

 

I still haven't got your thesis on how we get our superbat by having Miggy man 1st base for us?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Slateman

Slateman

Posted
Posted

From an outside perspective, I don't understand this move at all.

That Nats didn't lose in the postseason cause they lacked great starting pitching, they lost cause they couldn't hit/manufacture runs and their closer didn't get it done.

All that's needed in the post season for most every team are one or two great starting pitchers, a great bullpen and some clutch hitting. Unless you are the Giants in which case you need one great starter and pretty much nothing else. Being 5 deep in a rotation doesn't mean anything in October.

It will be interesting to see if MLB approves this type of deal with so much money deferred. With Bonilla, I can't remember how much it was but it wasn't $15 million per year. Could be a dangerous precedent that will throw the spending balance even more out of whack between big market teams and small market teams.

Mets gave Bonilla 1.2 million a year for 25 years

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hersh

Hersh

Posted
Posted

I told you before. Our "Big 3" is more of fan misperception, media hype, than a reality. 

I also told you I wanted to add another arm, last year, in preparation for the playoffs.

 

Your starting pitchers gave up 4 Runs, 2ERs in 24.2 innings in October. You didn't lose cause of a starting pitching problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...