|
|
Post by rxmeister on Nov 27, 2013 18:35:14 GMT -5
Years and dollars not announced yet. Brandon Arroyo was supposedly their number one target, so they're now out of the mix. I believe the Angels are still interested though. He wants a third year and that appears to be a sticking point with most interested teams.
|
|
|
|
Post by rxmeister on Nov 27, 2013 20:59:13 GMT -5
4 yrs 49 million with a team option for. 13 million in year five. Good luck , Minnesota!
|
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Nov 28, 2013 12:26:13 GMT -5
So not quite the 5/$80 that he was seeking.
All in all, not a bad deal for Minnesota. Nolasco gets to toil in obscurity for the next four or five years. Minnesota gets to pay alot of money for a player that has little to no chance of making any significant difference in their place in the standings.
|
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Nov 29, 2013 14:46:17 GMT -5
Allen makes some good points here. I was surprised Ricky didn't get more, although I wouldn't have given it to him.
A year ago Edwin Jackson's contract showed that 4/$52 was about the amount a league-average starter could earn in free agency. This year Nolasco, whose career ERA+ of 94 is 6% BELOW average, showed that in this year's market, a below-average starter is deemed worthy of nearly as much.
It should be pointed out that Nolasco's ERA+ figures for the past three seasons has been 101, 100 and 101, which is about as close to league average as one could expect.
Most would say that Tim Lincecum's 2/$35 contract carries less risk than Ricky's 4/$49, but that depends on how one evaluates the pair. The marginal cost of Ricky's contract is just 2/$14, which really isn't a lot of risk.
I personally would choose Tim's 2/$35, since I think he's cleary a better pitcher than Nolasco. That hasn't been true the past two seasons, but Tim's career ERA is nearly a full run lower than Ricky's.
I would be surprised if Nolasco is even a league-average starter over his contract, while I think Tim has considerably more potential than that.
The Steamer projections have Tim at 3.83 in 189 innings, with Nolasco at 4.01 in 192 innings. If those numbers come true, Ricky likely will have been the better value in year one.
Nolasco's contract carries him through age 35, while Tim's reaches only age 31. I'm glad the Giants re-signed Tim, although one could also argue that the $5 million saved in 2014 might make the difference in acquiring a good left fielder.
|
|
