User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
Page rendered in 0.9224 seconds
48 querie(s) executed
| ||||||||
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Discussion
| ||||||||
Baseball Primer Newsblog — The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand Friday, December 02, 2022Jacob deGrom signs with RangersWhat a HORRIFIC contract! It’s an expensive contract that bases value on hope. The Rangers HOPE he can be healthy enough to provide them value. It’s the kind of contract that gets a GM fired. DeGrom turns 35 next June. He pitched 64.1 innings in 2022 and 92 innings in 2021. I expect they went five years to lower the AAV. Of course, it’s a great contract for DeGrom, especially considering he’ll pay no state tax when he pitches in Texas. It’s a shocker for sure. Although it might not seem like it now, the Rangers did Mets fans a favor.
jimfurtado
Posted: December 02, 2022 at 08:43 PM | 108 comment(s)
Login to Bookmark
Tags: free agents, jacob degrom, rangers |
Login to submit news.
You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks. Hot TopicsNewsblog: Yankees get Juan Soto in blockbuster trade with Padres
(60 - 2:49am, Dec 08) Last: rr: over-entitled starf@ck3r Newsblog: OT - NBA Redux Thread for the End of 2023 (155 - 2:34am, Dec 08) Last: aberg Newsblog: Jeimer Candelario, Reds reach 3-year, $45M deal, sources say (17 - 12:08am, Dec 08) Last: NaOH Newsblog: Shohei Ohtani's secretive free agency is a missed opportunity for him and MLB (34 - 11:36pm, Dec 07) Last: Booey Newsblog: OT Soccer - World Cup Final/European Leagues Start (327 - 11:06pm, Dec 07) Last: SoSH U at work Newsblog: Who is on the 2024 Baseball Hall of Fame ballot and what’s the induction process? (416 - 10:20pm, Dec 07) Last: Tom Nawrocki Newsblog: Carlyle’s Rubenstein Is in Talks to Acquire Baltimore Orioles (8 - 8:44pm, Dec 07) Last: sunday silence (again) Hall of Merit: 2024 Hall of Merit Ballot Discussion (191 - 7:43pm, Dec 07) Last: Howie Menckel Newsblog: Guardians win Draft Lottery, securing next year's top pick (7 - 6:19pm, Dec 07) Last: Zach Newsblog: Eduardo Rodriguez signs with Diamondbacks: NL champs add to solid rotation on four-year, $80M deal, per report (3 - 6:15pm, Dec 07) Last: Walt Davis Newsblog: Reports: Astros, Victor Caratini agree to 2-year, $12M deal (7 - 5:23pm, Dec 07) Last: Tom and Shivs couples counselor Newsblog: Mookie Betts will be 'every-day second baseman' for Dodgers (38 - 4:14pm, Dec 07) Last: jacksone (AKA It's OK...) Newsblog: Red Sox trade Alex Verdugo to Yankees for three pitchers (29 - 4:14pm, Dec 07) Last: Walt Davis Newsblog: Jerry Reinsdorf meets with Nashville Mayor Freddie O'Connell (5 - 3:14pm, Dec 07) Last: Tom Nawrocki Hall of Merit: 2024 Hall of Merit Ballot Ballot (4 - 3:10pm, Dec 07) Last: Jaack |
|||||||
About Baseball Think Factory | Write for Us | Copyright © 1996-2021 Baseball Think Factory
User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
|
| Page rendered in 0.9224 seconds |
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
$37 M would have bought a lot of AC for BDC
This won't look bad in the next couple years as the market resets much higher
Rodon has to be looking at 6/7 years at 30 million now. It's a way better bet than Degrom
What this also means is the top 15 teams will move up to the cap to compete and the top 5-7 will be perpetually over.
If they get any value for him at all it will probably be as a reliever.
The Mets interest in Verlander is presumably more intense now. Cheaper than deGrom, I would think, but still a lot of $$.
I fully expect Texas to do some more moves. Just glad I'm not a fan of theirs as it could and should get very ugly by 2025.
It's really hard to know with pitchers. I guess on form you'd figure deGrom for ten starts a year with an ERA of 0.91 and most of his time on the training table - but then I think of guys like Bret Saberhagen or even Adam Wainright, I guess, who disappeared intermittently and ended up having very long careers, with very good years late in those careers. DeGrom's Texas contract runs ages 35-39 but that can be prime years for a great pitcher, as various of us noted above in different ways.
The Rangers ... somebody here made a great point about the Dodgers that I think is also true of the Astros of late - they are "weakest-link" organizations, they stress depth throughout and finding guys who can contribute in every role a team needs. Texas is going full-tilt the other way, the "strongest link" philosophy. DeGrom, Seager, Semien, and who needs an outfield, catchers, bullpen, DH, or back-end rotation starters. They'll be fun to watch at times but the strongest-link philosophy has also given us the current Los Angeles Angels, so ... I reckon that if Josh Jung comes on fast at 3B that Texas have bought their way up to 78 wins tops in 2023.
Obviously if everyone has a career year they'll beat that ... but every team thinks that every year, except the Dodgers and Astros :)
It continues to be a tale of East and West spending mega bucks while the Central non tenders and sheds $10 million one year contracts.
Man. As a New Yorker, this really sucks. Not a mets fan, but deGrom starts were appointment viewing (if somewhat infrequent the last two years). Will miss watching him pitch.
More than he's going to get, I suspect.
They were absolutely built to win last year. I would contend they're a bit older than you (Marte, Canha, and McNeil key to their offense), they were at the upper limits of their payroll, and they put everything they had into the expectation that Scherzer/deGrom could win them every playoff round. To be successful next year, the kids needs to instantly produce, Scherzer can't decline, and the Mets have to spread out all that de-Grom money elsewhere on their roster.
Says who?
It's an awesome contract for deGrom. I don't root for ownership profits.
Fun deGrom facts: his career WHIP is below one, in the past two seasons (both partial, admittedly) he's got a K/BB ratio of about 13. He's the extremiest of extreme players. That said, TEX is going to regret this.
I'm surprised to see he's had 9 "seasons" already so he will be eligible (without waiver) with his next start. The obvious (really only) comp at the moment is Koufax ... OK, maybe Dizzy Dean. Obviously any serious consideration of the "Koufax exception" requires accepting that (give or take) 6 innings today is like 9 innings in the earlier era:
SK 12 "years," 2324 IP, 165-87, 131 ERA+, 53 WAR, 31 WAA, 3 CYA ... that 4-year peak of 1200 IP, 97-27, 172 ERA+, 36 WAR
JD 9 "years," 1326 IP, 82-57, 155 ERA+, 41 WAR, 30 WAA, 2 CYA ... his career is in line with Koufax's amazing run
That last point might be the most favorable way to view deGrom's case as it stands. He has come close to matching Koufax's peak, he's just spread that out over 5 full seasons, a full 2020 and partial years in 2014, 2021 and 2022. It's not his fault the Mets won't score him any runs to get more wins.
Given his late start and current usage, even a healthy deGrom won't match Koufax's "bulk" by the end of this contract. Sobering thought -- it could be 14 years, never missing a full season, still barely over 2000 innings, about 200-210 decisions (not wins, decisions).
Still anybody who is a "peak" voter has just seen a Koufaxian peak and if we buy the logic that, although a fine pitcher in those other years, Koufax is (and should be) in the HOF on that great peak, then deGrom should be in (unless we think Koufax is the border). Dean too was a fine pitcher but I think you have to conclude that, at worst, deGrom sits between Dean and Koufax. I don't know who the Koufax of the HoVG is -- Guidry maybe? I'd put deGrom ahead of him too.
I don't know how quickly the BBWAA will come around on what a pitching career looks like now or maybe they'll (understandably but unlikely) decide that almost no pitchers of this era will have the necessary bulk and just add 1 or 2 super-peak cases after Verlander/Scherzer ... but Kershaw and deGrom would seem to be those guys.
Nice analysis (although DEg might not be a lock quite yet). But you in no way can lump Kershaw with DeGrom as far as peak cases.
Having said that, he's one helluva lot better candidate than Billy Wagner or any number of relievers in the Hall.
My general view on relievers is would a guy like hershisher or David cone be able to do what that reliever did and would that reliever be able to replicate what Cone or Hershisher did.
In almost every case, I think Cone and Hershisher could replicate those relief totals with maybe the exception of Rivera, Gossage, and Wilhelm. Degrom is basically a WAY better Billy Wagner doing his K thing at the front end , not the back end.
Kershaw's at 75 WAR. He's in without Clayton Kershaw's peak.
Pedro is a better Kershaw comp, IMO.
Yes, it's an awesome contract for deGrom.
Unfortunately for fans those greedy, greedy owners don't have unlimited budgets. So, when a team spends money foolishly the fan isn't rewarded with playoff happiness, he just gets a team with a higher payroll loser. The higher payroll then restricts options and, most often, buries the team in the standings for years.
Now, there is a chance this works out for Rangers fans. A Dumb & Dumber chance.
Kershaw has pitched 100 innings less than Scherzer
Kershaw is clearly a career candidate; Pedro comp is accurate. If Kershaw can stay on the field, he'll end up passing him.
By the way, for those of you who have back issues, you can see Kershaw's physician: Watkins Spine; in Los Angeles near Marina del Rey, highly recommended.
I don't know that it's possible to tell how much is due to different usage patterns vs advances in pitching tech vs pitcher WAR being weird (it's certainly beyond me) but Fergie's best 1200ish inning stretch is also around 30-31 WR ... that was in just 4 seasons. (He had three more big years outside of that stretch). Is it easier to pitch as well as Fergie when that load is spread out across 5 (now 6 or even 7) seasons? Is it less valuable? Are today's starters pitching a higher or lower %age of high-leverage innings?** During the Maddux, etc. era, it was at least possible that the reduced load might lead to more seasons and the equal number of career innings but that's clearly not going to happen in current usage (unless these guys start consitently pitching until they're 48).
Were near-Koufaxian peaks more common than we think? In the modern era, we've turned up quite a few already in deGrom, Kluber, Webb and I assume Kershaw, Verander, Scherzer and maybe Greinke have some 1200 IP stretches in the 30-35 WAR range too. Chris Sale 2013-18 is 1200 innings, 143 ERA+, 33 WAR, 22 WAA (no CYAs though). To be clear, I'm not saying they were Koufax's equals necessarily but again I don't think Koufax should be the minimum standard for peak-only. I don't think all of those guys belong but I don't find "if only he had another 1000 innings of 105 ERA+..." any more inspiring than most around here. (By the way, Mo vs Koufax is the most convincing argument to me that Mo belongs.)
** I guess they virtually never pitch high-leverage innings because it's rare for a 6th or 7th inning to be high-leverage. So I guess the question is whether they are wasting fewer innings on low-leverage to make up for whatever high-leverage innings they are missing.
(Wow, Webb's last season was way back in 2009 ... no wonder I don't realize Kershaw has been around 15 years.)
I think the "Koufax door" to the HOF is that there was a significant fraction of the voters who thought that Koufax was the best pitcher they'd ever seen. The most similar case is Pedro Martinez, who similarly sailed in despite a short career.
2 Cy Youngs is impressive, but are there many people in the electorate who think DeGrom is the best pitcher they've ever seen?
Even though no one regularly throws more than 200 innings anymore, there's gotta be SOME good young pitchers with better durability than Sale and deGrom, right? (in addition to the aforementioned Cole)
Edit: #43 - Yeah, I thought about Kluber. He had that great 5 year peak (32 WAR), and if he'd added almost literally ANY VALUE WHATSOEVER before or after that peak, he'd be in the conversation too. But a whopping 2.7 WAR outside of those 5 years ain't gonna cut it.
Which, as you know, didn’t happen.
Fixed.
To recap, the Mets are now much richer than the Yankees and, unlike the Yankees, have an owner who actually likes baseball. If you think Uncle Unlimited-Resources Steve is going to field some 83 win team to save a few bucks, you have your head squarely up your bunghole.
Sure, but that's not the debate I'm curious about (yet). Will deGrom actually be elected? I don't know, how long will it take HoF voters to accept that the old standards don't exist anymore (barring some upcoming change)? It seemed to take them several years to adapt to the full-blown 5-man rotation and it might have taken even longer than that if Maddux et al hadn't posted old-school totals. The question I'm raising is whether the "peak-oriented" saber types here and elsewhere will/should support deGrom now and/or how much more does he need to get their support.
But it's not Koufax/Pedro anymore, it's Halladay. He was still compiling enough bulk that his peak/prime was 2200 innnings, 148 ERA+, 63 WAR ... granted, roughly 2 Klubers. But I don't think anybody thought Halladay was the best pitcher they'd ever seen or close to it. (I'm not sure he's in my personal top 10 but I wasn't paying that much attention either.) He also sailed in pretty comfortably. Is he really the minimum even for current voters?
deGrom is already 17th in career CYA shares. Verlander 3, Scherzer 5, Kershaw 6, Kluber 15. (Price 19, Greinke 21, Wainwright 24, Cole already 26, Sale 27.) There's plenty of agreement about who the best pitchers of the era are, the question is whether that's enough.
As to best ever ... their Koufaxian bWAR peaks (i.e. about 1200 innings):
Koufax 36
deGrom 39
Gibson 36
Seaver 40 (his peak is "long" in this comp)
Maddux 40
Clemens 41
Pedro 49
Unit 42
Halladay 34
Verlander 31 (see below)
Scherzer 34+
Kershaw 36
Sale 33
So yes, deGrom's peak hangs with these guys by bWAR at least. Verlander is hurt by my laziness looking at conseecutive stretches, he's had more ups and downs but at his best would be around 35 WAR. None of them touch Pedro.
Obviously all of those pitchers except Koufax gave voters plenty more outstanding seasons to remove any doubt and of course deGrom and Sale might do that too.
And that's the question. Does deGrom need another 1000 or so innings of very good pitching (say 15-20 WAR) to move into Halladay territory? Or is he already close enough?
As for my “straw man,” it was directly responsive to your conjecture about the Mets’ finances.
So yeah, good as they've been when they were healthy, I think both Sale and deGrom need at least 2-3 more healthy seasons to warrant serious consideration. They don't even need to be CYA contending peak seasons; just some valuable bulk.
EDIT: Nimmo and McNeil played in both games Wright appeared in at the end of the 2018 season.
That's a much more interesting debate. I think almost anyone who is knocking on the Koufax door is going to get elected regardless of the statistical case. But "high peak that doesn't have that many innings behind it, plus a short career by historical standards" is a tougher case to make. Would Roy Halladay be a good test case?
Edit: didn't see that you discussed Halladay in depth later on.
This is Cohen's 3rd offseason as owner, right? He's never operated with an "unlimited budget" mentality. Scherzer was the biggest signing last offseason, but he stopped there. He lost 2 of the top 10 (money wise) free agents in Baez and Stroman. He could have signed one of the top SS out there and moved them to 3rd, which was a big black hole.
I remain a strong believer that 22 was the upper limits of the Mets budget. And now as a repeat tax offender, 23 was going to require a bit of belt tightening.
Also, while deGrom is not a HOF, does Cooperstown celebrate people like him? People who I will tell my grandchildren about having seen them play live? I feel like they do, but it's been so long since I've been there.
Ok but again, you’re making that up. Letting Stroman and Baez go isn’t evidence of anything.
Cohen has said repeatedly that his plan is to spend as necessary to contend until the farm starts supplying the players necessary to sustain things. The idea that he’s going to pull up 20 or 40 million short because it’s the “upper limit of the Mets budget” doesn’t make any sense.
am not happy about it, because the expectations had been that he would be a Steinbrenner reincarnation and well, it's about time. but that's not going to happen.
still a big upgrade over the previous cheapskates, so there's that.
It wasn't just letting them go. It was deciding to start a season with JD Davis, Escobar, McNeil, Cano and Guillorme to combine to play 3rd, 2nd, and DH. Either Cohen 1) thought that was the best team money could buy 2) no free agent on the market wanted to take Cohen's money or 3) there's an upper limit to what Cohen is willing to spend.
They didn't take on a salary dump at the deadline when they were in a tightening division race, despite having a win-now roster and a topheavy rotation that would benefit from the bye. Every action the team has taken in the past two years indicates they have money, but not unlimited money. What standard of proof are you asking for?
Including postseason statistics, deGrom will finally match Mariano Rivera for career IP next year.
That last year’s payroll was the Mets’ maximum? No standard of proof; it was just a silly proclamation.
But certainly a great guy to add to the Koufaxian list: 1150 IP, 36 WAR, 25 WAA. DeGrom tops that one too.
Santana pitched in 12 "seasons." For 4 of those, he spent a lot of time in the pen and for another he was hurt for about half of it. So it's 7 years as a full-time SP -- 44 WAR, 30 WAA, 1500 IP. DeGrom has 4 full plus 2020 (not his fault unless I missed a really good covid conspiracy theory) and 4 partial seasons totalling 1300 IP. Is it his fault that starters aren't allowed to go deeper into games? So one more solid season to tie Santana's 1500 and 44 WAR? Or 3 more full seasons after that to get to 2000 IP? Or does Santana simply not belong even under today's pitching usage?
In Koufax's era you need 4 seasons to get your super-peak 1100-1200 innings; in Santana's era it was about 5; now it's more like 6.5. Obviously it also takes more seasons to add another 800 innings of bulk. So deGrom needs at least 13 seasons to get to 2000 innings. I don't necessarily disagree with that but if we're saying 2000 innings with more than half of it pitched at a deGrom level is the minimum standard for the HoF, I don't think we're gonna see a lot of HoF pitchers in the future.
The one Mets offer we know about was a higher AAV than he ended up with the Rangers, so that ought to dispose of the silliness about this being an indication last year was their maximum payroll. We’ll see if the rumor they’re signing Verlander at 86/2 is true.
Maybe Bob Lemon? though I guess not really. Lemon won 20 games seven times, 200 for his career, might have been the World Series MVP in 1948 if they'd had the award then. He was a better hitter than Jim Hegan, but he could have been a lot worse and nobody would have cared. Lemon's hitting is not mentioned on his HOF plaque, etc.
Except the Mets still need to resign or replace: Nimmo, Bassitt, Walker, in addition to arb guys Alonso, McNeil, and Guilliorme. We don't know what the Mets would have done the rest of the offseason if they resigned deGrom.
I feel like starting pitchers in Texas don't have a great track record. Yu Darvish worked out pretty well I guess, but Texas has never had a CYA winner and they've only had one pitcher with an ERA+ of 150 or better since 1983.
Agreed.
It's not a huge thing, but it's not nothing, either.
Edit: Red Ruffing added 13.3 WAR and 12.5 WAA to his career totals with his hitting, bringing him from a borderline (at best) 55.4 WAR and 15.3 WAA to a solid 68.6 WAR and 27.8 WAA. I think that would have made a big difference today, although obviously no one knew what WAR/WAA were when he was elected in 1967 (but I'm sure they noticed that a .269 career avg and 36 homers were really good for a pitcher).
They are waiting for the Cowboys' season to be over so that they have a hope of getting a local reporter or two to attend.
While they may have been a bit over the top, I think this undersells the concerns with DeGrom going forward. Yes, he pitched three straight "full" seasons 2018-2020, but even with a shortened 2020 he could not stay healthy the past two seasons. This is a concern with any pitcher, but even more so with one who is going to be 35. Combined with his time missed to injury in 2011 and 2016 it is likely more concerning still. For him to average 22 starts per season for the next 3 seasons at 35-37 seems a bit on the high side. I'll be rooting for him though, what an amazing talent!
Edit: Should have given him credit for four "full" from 2017-2020.
1. Tom Seaver 198
2. Dwight Gooden 157
3. Jerry Koosman 140
4. Ron Darling 99
5. Sid Fernandez 98
6. Al Leiter 95
7. Jon Matlack 82
7. JACOB deGROM 82
9. David Cone 81
10. Bobby Jones 74
Mets Career Innings Leaders
1. Tom Seaver 3045.2
2. Jerry Koosman 2544.2
3. Dwight Gooden 2169.2
4. Ron Darling 1620.0
5. Sid Fernandez 1584.2
6. Jon Matlack 1448.0
7. Al Leiter 1360.0
8. JACOB deGROM 1326.0
9. Craig Swan 1230.2
10. Bobby Jones 1215.2
Mets Career Strikeout Leaders
1. Tom Seaver 2541
2. Dwight Gooden 1875
3. Jerry Koosman 1799
4. JACOB deGROM 1607
5. Sid Fernandez 1449
6. David Cone 1172
7. Ron Darling 1148
8. Al Leiter 1106
9. Jon Matlack 1023
10. Jon Niese 838
given the age of Scherzer and the team overall, I think The Future Is Now so I'm okay with that deal.
seemingly having no stud SPs in the pipeline is going to be a big problem, so overpaying deGrom in 2024-beyond doesn't seem appealing to me.
That'll buy alot of pitching.
https://abcnews.go.com/Sports/sources-mets-signing-cf-brandon-nimmo-rhp-david/story?id=94820924
So far.
The Mets’ payroll last year was $288MM. Is there anyone among you willing to revise your emphatic statements that last year’s payroll (or $300MM) is the maximum?
Is this thing on?
he said a couple of months ago that $300M was plenty as a total payroll....
Look, you got it wrong. You said that deGrom leaving was evidence the Mets couldn't or wouldn't increase payroll for 2023. You discounted entirely all of the reporting that deGrom just wanted to move on. And then Cohen went out and signed a more expensive pitcher three days later.
Oh, and you accidentally put "unlimited payroll" in quotes. Probably just a typo.
That's disingenuous. 5/185 is more expensive than 2/86.
I guess, in the sense that he's had a long enough career you don't "only" need to look at his peak. But he would be in if his career ended after 2017.
We were talking about the 2023 payroll. Verlander costs more than deGrom in 2023.
There's always a trade off. If Cohen is willing to go above $300M this year and next (seems likely) he's going to want to dip below the threshold at some point to reset the tax rates. The deGrom contract makes that much harder to do.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main