Which NY Team Made the Better Signing - Fantasy Baseball Cafe 2014 Fantasy Baseball Cafe
100% Deposit Bonus for Cafe Members!

Return to Baseball Leftovers

Which NY Team Made the Better Signing

Moderator: Baseball Moderators

Which NY Team Made the Better Long-Term Signing???

Yanks Sign A-Rod
17
35%
Mets Sign Santana
31
65%
 
Total votes : 48

Re: Which NY Team Made the Better Signing

Postby pokerplaya » Sat Feb 02, 2008 12:44 pm

I agree. I would much rather have had this deal be a year or two less.
pokerplaya
Kitchen Staff
Kitchen Staff

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe MusketeerPick 3 Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 12812
(Past Year: 9)
Joined: 18 May 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: Which NY Team Made the Better Signing

Postby kab21 » Sat Feb 02, 2008 12:49 pm

I'll say that the Santana signing was just the slightest bit better than the AROD signing. But it's close to a push. Both players were very very important for each team to get to increase their getting to and succeeding in the playoffs.

I'm not sure that Johan's contract is the more risky one just because he's a pitcher.

Risk of long-term contract - Pitchers are inherently more risky of course. But Arod will be about 42 at the end of the contract, Santana will be about 36. Arod's contract is also longer bringing more risk (compared to a shorter contract, not necessarily a pitcher contract). Alot can happen in 10 years. Arod's contract will also end up being worth close to 2x what Santana's contract is worth. Just on gauranteed money I think it's about 270M to 152M. These aren't the exact numbers or ages because I didn't feel like looking them up, but Arod will be gauranteed significantly more cash and be older when the contract is done.

But we are also leaving out that the Mets shipped 4 decent prospects to the Twins for the right to sign Santana. The Yankees only lost the 2 draft picks that would have been FA compensation. You might disagree that the Mets package was that good (it's not that great), but these are 4 legitimate prospects.
kab21
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicCafe WriterCafe Ranker
Posts: 5340
(Past Year: 170)
Joined: 24 Nov 2007
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: Which NY Team Made the Better Signing

Postby KCollins1304 » Sat Feb 02, 2008 12:49 pm

HOOTIE wrote:
pokerplaya wrote:That is an interesting point that I had not thought of. The Zito deal was really that bad, making the Santana deal seem like a steal in comparison. :-b


Any deal looks good to Zitos. He was already in decline mode (K/9), before the deal. SF was crazy, in years and amount. I don't think history is on the side of long deals for pitchers.

Kevin Brown 7 years
Wayne Garland 10 years
Mike Hampton 8 years
Denny Neagle 5 years
Barry Zito 7 years
Mussina 6 years
Park 5 years
Dreifort 5 years

Some worked out

Pedro 6 years
Maddux 5 years
RJ 4 years

http://junkcharts.typepad.com/.shared/i ... tracts.png


While Mussina wasn't worth this total value of his contract, he did pretty much live up to his career stats prior to the deal and stayed healthy never going less than 25 starts in a season.
Image
KCollins1304
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyePick 3 Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 5089
Joined: 29 Dec 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Charlotte, NC

Re: Which NY Team Made the Better Signing

Postby Grounded Polo » Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:00 pm

HOOTIE wrote:Any deal looks good to Zitos. He was already in decline mode (K/9), before the deal. SF was crazy, in years and amount. I don't think history is on the side of long deals for pitchers.

Kevin Brown 7 years
Wayne Garland 10 years
Mike Hampton 8 years
Denny Neagle 5 years
Barry Zito 7 years
Mussina 6 years
Park 5 years
Dreifort 5 years

Some worked out

Pedro 6 years
Maddux 5 years
RJ 4 years

http://junkcharts.typepad.com/.shared/i ... tracts.png


Mussina shouldn't be grouped with those other guys, he's pretty much always produced for the Yankees except last year and at least he remained a viable option long enough until the Yankees had young prospects ready to take his place.

Apart from Hampton, the other guys were pretty much no brainers for decline or had one good year and cashed in. No one else would have paid those guys such ridiculous contracts. Hampton's contract was absurd but at least he was at his peak and had strung together multiple nice seasons, the rest were Carlos Silva obvious to backfire. Signing starters in their mid 30's like Brown and Neagle to 5+ year contracts is just poor decision making, same with Garland for 10 years after producing as a starter for one year.
Grounded Polo
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 6584
(Past Year: 11)
Joined: 11 Aug 2007
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: Which NY Team Made the Better Signing

Postby moochman » Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:15 pm

I have to agree with TeddyBallgame, the Yanks made a deal to stay the same while the Mets made a deal to get them over the top. Santana should keep the Mets in legitimate contention for WS throughout the length of his contract. ARod just had a stellar season that took the Yankees where?

As for injuries and pitchers, sure that is a big concern but I feel the years he will be healthy, Johan will produce well enough to lead the Mets deep into the playoffs. If ARod stays healthy one could argue that it will only lead to first round playoffs lack of performances that seems to be ARods destiny.
Image
moochman
Major League Manager
Major League Manager

User avatar
Pick 3 Weekly WinnerSweet 16 SurvivorLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 1649
Joined: 20 Jul 2003
Home Cafe: Football
Location: First place baby

Re: Which NY Team Made the Better Signing

Postby Generals94 » Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:47 pm

I think you have to look beyond just the signing of each player. A-Rod cost a boat load of cash but no players or prospects. If the Yankees had signed Santana (& not A-Rod), they would have had to fill the following holes:

1) 3B: They just signed Morgan Ensberg or the rumor was Betemit would be used. Yup, that would have pleased Yankee fans and the terrible twosome that King George fathered.

2) CF: With Melky gone, could the Yankees possibly have gone another year with Damon's sub par defense? Would they have paid all that money to a player like Aaron Rowand? Would Damon even last the season if he did play CF?

3) SP: At one point, the Yankees were going to have to trade Ian Kennedy along with Hughes. The Yankees would have have to either bring up another raw prospect or sign one of the less then stellar FA pitchers available for way too much money.

In the end I agree with what many said: a tie. A-Rod will help fill the new stadium in 2009 as he starts creeping closer to 600, 700 & beyond. Santana gives the Mets pitching staff at least a fighting chance depending on the recovery of Pedro.
Generals94
Little League Legend
Little League Legend


Posts: 14
Joined: 12 Jan 2006
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Western Mass

Re: Which NY Team Made the Better Signing

Postby SignGuy » Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:49 pm

Generals94 wrote:I think you have to look beyond just the signing of each player. A-Rod cost a boat load of cash but no players or prospects.


Bingo.
SignGuy
Minor League Mentor
Minor League Mentor


Posts: 609
Joined: 14 Feb 2007
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: Which NY Team Made the Better Signing

Postby Diggin4third » Sat Feb 02, 2008 3:21 pm

This question will be debated well into the 2008 baseball season. From an Injury-risk stand point I would have to say like previously mentioned above, the signing of ARod was a better deal. But as the 2008 season progresses, we'll see exactly which player is earning his paycheck. :-D

(Congrats to the Mets for signing their new stud)
Image
Diggin4third
Softball Supervisor
Softball Supervisor

User avatar

Posts: 53
Joined: 2 Feb 2008
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Central New York

Re: Which NY Team Made the Better Signing

Postby Grounded Polo » Sat Feb 02, 2008 3:29 pm

Generals94 wrote:I think you have to look beyond just the signing of each player. A-Rod cost a boat load of cash but no players or prospects. If the Yankees had signed Santana (& not A-Rod), they would have had to fill the following holes:


It's not like the Mets created any holes by signing Santana and getting rid of the guys they traded. Mulvey and Humber are middle/back end rotation starters, Gomez is only needed to fill in when Alou gets hurt and his speed should make him destined to leadoff but that spot won't open up on the Mets until 2020, and Guerra is years away. Credit must be given for knocking the Twins down from Reyes to Martinez to Carlos Gomez.
Grounded Polo
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 6584
(Past Year: 11)
Joined: 11 Aug 2007
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: Which NY Team Made the Better Signing

Postby Generals94 » Sat Feb 02, 2008 3:41 pm

Grounded Polo wrote:
Generals94 wrote:I think you have to look beyond just the signing of each player. A-Rod cost a boat load of cash but no players or prospects. If the Yankees had signed Santana (& not A-Rod), they would have had to fill the following holes:


It's not like the Mets created any holes by signing Santana and getting rid of the guys they traded. Mulvey and Humber are middle/back end rotation starters, Gomez is only needed to fill in when Alou gets hurt and his speed should make him destined to leadoff but that spot won't open up on the Mets until 2020, and Guerra is years away. Credit must be given for knocking the Twins down from Reyes to Martinez to Carlos Gomez.


I agree the Mets did not hurt themselves, but the Yankees would have created several major holes if they signed Santana. I was trying to break down why signning Santana would have been problematic for the Yanks. I also agree that the Mets did a great job in acquiring him by giving up players that are ???? at best. However, I am just not sure I would have guaranteed that kind of $$$$ to a pitcher for that many years with that much wear/tear. In the end, it was a no brainer for the Yankees going after A-Rod. It would have cost them more $$$ trying to fill the holes at 3B, CF & SP if they signed Santana and let A-Rod go. Plus, average fans pay/show to watch HRs being hit, not lights out pitching performances.
Generals94
Little League Legend
Little League Legend


Posts: 14
Joined: 12 Jan 2006
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Western Mass

PreviousNext

Return to Baseball Leftovers

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: unioreimi and 9 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Today's Games
Saturday, Oct. 25
(All times are EST, weather icons show forecast for game time)

Kansas City at San Francisco
(8:07 pm)

  • Fantasy Baseball
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact