Hogville Info
• 10,755,980 Posts
• 420,244 Topics
• 24,695 Hogvillians
THE RULES (Read 'em!)
Quick Links
Pick'Ems:Football      Basketball      Baseball
Sister Sites:Gridiron HistoryFearless Friday
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Max Scherzer  (Read 1465 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

GolfNut57

Max Scherzer
« on: December 11, 2014, 11:28:01 am »

Ok..........where does he end up? I can't see Boston wanting to go the requested $200M/8 years he and Boras are looking for. The NYY can not hope to seriously contend for a WS berth unless they sign the guy. Detroit will also likely bow out as they already made their best pitch for him last season.

I'm guessing the Dodgers may be the landing place in a fierce spending battle with NY. They seem to not care what it takes to spend, ala Yankees, and are probably drooling over the thought of Scherzer stacked in with Kershaw and Greinke.
Logged

jrulz83

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Total likes: 596
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,750
  • Lenin lived, Lenin lives, Lenin will live forever!
Re: Max Scherzer
« Reply #1 on: December 11, 2014, 12:17:49 pm »

I'm going Yanks. The Dodgers just signed McCarthy, they may go for Scherzer too though. It's a shot in the dark and I bet Boras drags it out as long as he can to drive the price up.
« Last Edit: December 11, 2014, 12:39:22 pm by jrulz83 »
Logged

Sponsored Ad



Hogville encourages you to do business with the following...

ErieHog

  • Gold Hogvillian
  • *********
  • Total likes: 1383
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 51,828
  • Life as a Politics Mod....
Re: Max Scherzer
« Reply #2 on: December 11, 2014, 12:34:29 pm »

I think he ends up a Dodger.  The Yankees need him, but I don't know if they'll swallow the 8/200 deal, unless there is a team opt out after year 3 or so.
Logged

GolfNut57

Re: Max Scherzer
« Reply #3 on: December 11, 2014, 01:32:38 pm »

The Yanks have been trying to lower payroll the last couple years. But I am betting that in the end they will succumb to desperation and make a big bid for his arm. (Their fan base will not tolerate back to back years of no postseason) But will they go high enough?
Logged

ErieHog

  • Gold Hogvillian
  • *********
  • Total likes: 1383
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 51,828
  • Life as a Politics Mod....
Re: Max Scherzer
« Reply #4 on: December 11, 2014, 02:34:51 pm »

The Yanks have been trying to lower payroll the last couple years. But I am betting that in the end they will succumb to desperation and make a big bid for his arm. (Their fan base will not tolerate back to back years of no postseason) But will they go high enough?

Well, they have no choice; they just went back to back.    The question is, will it be 3 years or not.
Logged

GolfNut57

Re: Max Scherzer
« Reply #5 on: December 11, 2014, 05:35:38 pm »

Well, they have no choice; they just went back to back.    The question is, will it be 3 years or not.

I forgot they sat at home in 2013. That makes signing Scherzer even more imperative for them.
Logged

pigture perfect

Re: Max Scherzer
« Reply #6 on: December 11, 2014, 05:44:38 pm »

Mozeliak doesn't have the smarts to make a reasonable bid for him. I get lots of disagreement because I'm not a Mo fan. But Max has St. Louis roots and speculation has been that he would give a home down discount (although small) if offered.
Logged

GolfNut57

Re: Max Scherzer
« Reply #7 on: December 11, 2014, 07:00:34 pm »

Mozeliak doesn't have the smarts to make a reasonable bid for him. I get lots of disagreement because I'm not a Mo fan. But Max has St. Louis roots and speculation has been that he would give a home down discount (although small) if offered.

With an agent like Boras? Fat chance.
Logged

ucahogfan

Re: Max Scherzer
« Reply #8 on: December 11, 2014, 08:01:34 pm »

With an agent like Boras? Fat chance.
Yep, Boras doesn't let his clients take home town discounts.  Means less money in Scott's pocket which is unacceptable.

I don't think the Cards will be players for Scherzer because they simply don't have the payroll.  I think I have seen where Scherzer wants an 8/200 deal which is crazy.  He might get 7 years, but he is looking at about 25M per year.  I think the main players for Scherzer will be the Tigers, Yankees, Red Sox, and Dodgers with the Yankees having the upper hand.

The Red Sox are the least likely to sign Scherzer IMO because Cherington isn't going to overpay for the ace even though they lack one currently.
Logged

jrulz83

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Total likes: 596
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,750
  • Lenin lived, Lenin lives, Lenin will live forever!
Re: Max Scherzer
« Reply #9 on: December 11, 2014, 08:14:41 pm »

For all the negative press he gets, Boras and the Cardinals have always seemed to be reasonable with each other. Maybe it's because he played for them in the minors.....
Logged

GolfNut57

Re: Max Scherzer
« Reply #10 on: December 12, 2014, 09:20:57 am »

Yep, Boras doesn't let his clients take home town discounts.  Means less money in Scott's pocket which is unacceptable.

I don't think the Cards will be players for Scherzer because they simply don't have the payroll.  I think I have seen where Scherzer wants an 8/200 deal which is crazy.  He might get 7 years, but he is looking at about 25M per year.  I think the main players for Scherzer will be the Tigers, Yankees, Red Sox, and Dodgers with the Yankees having the upper hand.

The Red Sox are the least likely to sign Scherzer IMO because Cherington isn't going to overpay for the ace even though they lack one currently.

Lesters deal nets him $25.8M per year with the Cubs. (6 years at $155M) I don't see Boras letting Scherzer sign for less than that. Scherzer has something Lester doesn't. A CY award. My guess is it will take the winning team to at least bid $27M per year and likely for 7 years. Which equals $189M. Or somewhere in that neighborhood.
Logged

mhuff

Re: Max Scherzer
« Reply #11 on: December 12, 2014, 05:16:16 pm »

Mozeliak doesn't have the smarts to make a reasonable bid for him. I get lots of disagreement because I'm not a Mo fan. But Max has St. Louis roots and speculation has been that he would give a home down discount (although small) if offered.

Why would you say that MO doesn't have the smarts to make a bid for Max..... He had the smarts to not sell the farm for Pujols. The farm system keeps producing well. Your statement has no merit. I believe a lot of teams wish they had MO. Now with that said, I would not be surprised if we don't make an effort to get Max.
Logged

pigture perfect

Re: Max Scherzer
« Reply #12 on: December 12, 2014, 06:41:11 pm »

I made the statement about MO, because he won't go out and get that proven veteran missing piece to go along with his farm system through free agency. I like the deal with Atl, but if we only have JH for 1 year that is not a long term solution to the problem. Max could be had for 5-7 years as the #1. Waino is getting long in the tooth and has his rough games especially at the end of the season. But with a signing of Scherzer, we could have the 3rd or 4th best rotation in MLB for the next 2-3 years. Only behind the dodgers in the NL. Yes many teams would like to have Mo., but many also have better as well.
Logged

ucahogfan

Re: Max Scherzer
« Reply #13 on: December 14, 2014, 03:49:35 pm »

Lesters deal nets him $25.8M per year with the Cubs. (6 years at $155M) I don't see Boras letting Scherzer sign for less than that. Scherzer has something Lester doesn't. A CY award. My guess is it will take the winning team to at least bid $27M per year and likely for 7 years. Which equals $189M. Or somewhere in that neighborhood.
Lester also had something working in his favor that Scherzer does not - draft pick compensation.  Since Lester was traded in the middle of the season, the As couldn't give him a qualifying offer which would cause the team to lose either a 1st round or 2nd round pick.  Scherzer was given a qualifying offer which means the team that signs him will have to give up a draft pick which will drive the price down some IMO.  Scherzer will get crazy money, but not as much as Boras will want.
Logged

ucahogfan

Re: Max Scherzer
« Reply #14 on: December 14, 2014, 03:59:23 pm »

I made the statement about MO, because he won't go out and get that proven veteran missing piece to go along with his farm system through free agency. I like the deal with Atl, but if we only have JH for 1 year that is not a long term solution to the problem. Max could be had for 5-7 years as the #1. Waino is getting long in the tooth and has his rough games especially at the end of the season. But with a signing of Scherzer, we could have the 3rd or 4th best rotation in MLB for the next 2-3 years. Only behind the dodgers in the NL. Yes many teams would like to have Mo., but many also have better as well.
But do the Cards have the resources to go out and get that proven veteran in FA?

The Cards payroll last year was about 111M which was very similar to the Braves.  Both teams are very well-run and are extremely successful because they spend money wisely in FA and develop most of their top players in their farm systems and trust them.

Could the Cards increase their payroll to 140-150M because I think that is what the Cards will need to do in order to get Scherzer and keep the excellent young core y'all have in tact?  I know some of the more expensive contracts will come off the books soon, but Carpenter, Lynn, Rosenthal, Adams, Wacha, Martinez, and Wong all made 1.25M or less last year.  In the next couple of years, those players will start hitting arbitration and their salaries will shoot up 10X or more what they are currently making.

If the Cards can't increase their payroll 30-40M or more to sign Scherzer and keep those guys, would it really be worth it to sacrifice the long-term future of the Cards to sign Scherzer and eventually trade a good portion of those players away because you can't afford their arbitration?
Logged

clutch

Re: Max Scherzer
« Reply #15 on: December 14, 2014, 05:37:30 pm »

But do the Cards have the resources to go out and get that proven veteran in FA?

The Cards payroll last year was about 111M which was very similar to the Braves.  Both teams are very well-run and are extremely successful because they spend money wisely in FA and develop most of their top players in their farm systems and trust them.

Could the Cards increase their payroll to 140-150M because I think that is what the Cards will need to do in order to get Scherzer and keep the excellent young core y'all have in tact?  I know some of the more expensive contracts will come off the books soon, but Carpenter, Lynn, Rosenthal, Adams, Wacha, Martinez, and Wong all made 1.25M or less last year.  In the next couple of years, those players will start hitting arbitration and their salaries will shoot up 10X or more what they are currently making.

If the Cards can't increase their payroll 30-40M or more to sign Scherzer and keep those guys, would it really be worth it to sacrifice the long-term future of the Cards to sign Scherzer and eventually trade a good portion of those players away because you can't afford their arbitration?

I don't think there's any way the Cards try to get him. That's just not how they run things. If they were willing to give up their future for a player they would have done more to retain Pujols. I like the way they do it. Think long term, not just right now.
Logged

hoghappy

Re: Max Scherzer
« Reply #16 on: December 14, 2014, 07:28:42 pm »

I agree they won't pull that deal. But when you are 1 key individual from going over the top I think you do it. It's not like dismantling a team by multiple signings. It's one very key piece to the puzzle. Bill DeWitt is not going broke over 1 added piece. He might even increase his profit.
Logged

ucahogfan

Re: Max Scherzer
« Reply #17 on: December 14, 2014, 07:59:33 pm »

I don't think there's any way the Cards try to get him. That's just not how they run things. If they were willing to give up their future for a player they would have done more to retain Pujols. I like the way they do it. Think long term, not just right now.
Yeah, I feel the same exact way.  When you have as good a young core as the Cards, you don't leverage your future success by bringing in a 25-30M FA much like Pujols.

And the price of top tier pitching on the open market is just too great for any team outside of the top 7-8 payrolls in baseball without destroying the future of the team IMO.  Heck, the Nats are in the running for Scherzer and would probably have to trade Zimmerman to afford him and their payroll was like 130-150M last year.
Logged

mhuff

Re: Max Scherzer
« Reply #18 on: December 14, 2014, 09:26:34 pm »

I made the statement about MO, because he won't go out and get that proven veteran missing piece to go along with his farm system through free agency. I like the deal with Atl, but if we only have JH for 1 year that is not a long term solution to the problem. Max could be had for 5-7 years as the #1. Waino is getting long in the tooth and has his rough games especially at the end of the season. But with a signing of Scherzer, we could have the 3rd or 4th best rotation in MLB for the next 2-3 years. Only behind the dodgers in the NL. Yes many teams would like to have Mo., but many also have better as well.

I just figured that if we were going after a starting picture of that magnitude, it would be better to go after a free agent and not have to give up prospects.

I am hoping that Waino has solved his arm problems. When they flamed up, he was a vastly different pitcher..... hitting might have helped him as well.
Logged

clutch

Re: Max Scherzer
« Reply #19 on: December 15, 2014, 12:09:18 am »

I just figured that if we were going after a starting picture of that magnitude, it would be better to go after a free agent and not have to give up prospects.

I am hoping that Waino has solved his arm problems. When they flamed up, he was a vastly different pitcher..... hitting might have helped him as well.

The thing about bringing in big name FAs though is that a lot of times it forces you to get rid of players that are already proven in the near future. Which a lot of times is worse than giving up prospects.
Logged

ucahogfan

Re: Max Scherzer
« Reply #20 on: December 16, 2014, 08:16:37 pm »

I just figured that if we were going after a starting picture of that magnitude, it would be better to go after a free agent and not have to give up prospects.

I am hoping that Waino has solved his arm problems. When they flamed up, he was a vastly different pitcher..... hitting might have helped him as well.
But you are also giving up prospects if you sign a big time FA who turned down a qualifying offer.  When you sign a FA like Max Scherzer, you have to forfeit either a 1st round or 2nd round (if 1st round pick inside top 10) pick and the bonus pool allotment that goes along with it.  That could be huge especially for a team like the Cards who seem to have an excellent hit rate on their 1st round picks.

I know it is under the old system, but losing Pujols gave the Cards the pick that they used on Michael Wacha.  Now it isn't 100% certain that the Angels would have drafted Wacha, but he would have never been drafted by the Cards if Pujols had re-signed as well as Matt Adams would have more than likely been traded.

The thing about bringing in big name FAs though is that a lot of times it forces you to get rid of players that are already proven in the near future. Which a lot of times is worse than giving up prospects.
Yeah, like I said above, giving Scherzer 25M+ a year means that the Cards would have to trade away some key pieces like Lynn, Wacha, Adams, etc. when they came up for arbitration/FA because the Cards would not have the room to keep them all.  Would you rather have 1 player like Scherzer who would be worth about 6 WAR per year and entering his decline in his 30s or multiple players like Lynn, Wacha, Adams, etc. who would be worth about 15-20 WAR collectively for the same price?

Smart front offices like the Cards and Braves will trust their own development and tend to stray away from the huge FAs because they can get more value for their buck elsewhere.
Logged

mhuff

Re: Max Scherzer
« Reply #21 on: January 06, 2015, 04:55:04 pm »

But you are also giving up prospects if you sign a big time FA who turned down a qualifying offer.  When you sign a FA like Max Scherzer, you have to forfeit either a 1st round or 2nd round (if 1st round pick inside top 10) pick and the bonus pool allotment that goes along with it.  That could be huge especially for a team like the Cards who seem to have an excellent hit rate on their 1st round picks.

I know it is under the old system, but losing Pujols gave the Cards the pick that they used on Michael Wacha.  Now it isn't 100% certain that the Angels would have drafted Wacha, but he would have never been drafted by the Cards if Pujols had re-signed as well as Matt Adams would have more than likely been traded.
Yeah, like I said above, giving Scherzer 25M+ a year means that the Cards would have to trade away some key pieces like Lynn, Wacha, Adams, etc. when they came up for arbitration/FA because the Cards would not have the room to keep them all.  Would you rather have 1 player like Scherzer who would be worth about 6 WAR per year and entering his decline in his 30s or multiple players like Lynn, Wacha, Adams, etc. who would be worth about 15-20 WAR collectively for the same price?

Smart front offices like the Cards and Braves will trust their own development and tend to stray away from the huge FAs because they can get more value for their buck elsewhere.

+1
Logged

The Boar War

Re: Max Scherzer
« Reply #22 on: January 13, 2015, 11:07:09 am »



I know it is under the old system, but losing Pujols gave the Cards the pick that they used on Michael Wacha.  Now it isn't 100% certain that the Angels would have drafted Wacha, but he would have never been drafted by the Cards if Pujols had re-signed as well as Matt Adams would have more than likely been traded.
Yeah, like I said above, giving Scherzer 25M+ a year means that the Cards would have to trade away some key pieces like Lynn, Wacha, Adams, etc. when they came up for arbitration/FA because the Cards would not have the room to keep them all.  Would you rather have 1 player like Scherzer who would be worth about 6 WAR per year and entering his decline in his 30s or multiple players like Lynn, Wacha, Adams, etc. who would be worth about 15-20 WAR collectively for the same price?

Smart front offices like the Cards and Braves will trust their own development and tend to stray away from the huge FAs because they can get more value for their buck elsewhere.

Apparently they were willing to go farther than I thought.  Buster Olney says that the Cards were willing to go up to $120 m with Lester. 

Supposedly the "soft" 3-5 year team payroll plans are in the $130 m range to accommodate the homegrown talent.  Who knows?
Logged

ucahogfan

Re: Max Scherzer
« Reply #23 on: January 14, 2015, 09:02:13 pm »

Apparently they were willing to go farther than I thought.  Buster Olney says that the Cards were willing to go up to $120 m with Lester. 

Supposedly the "soft" 3-5 year team payroll plans are in the $130 m range to accommodate the homegrown talent.  Who knows?
Doesn't surprise me the Cards were willing to go that high for 7 years of Lester.  I would think the Braves would be in the same boat, but paying him 20M+ a year along with Waino meant that some of your young talent was going to walk.
Logged

jrulz83

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Total likes: 596
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,750
  • Lenin lived, Lenin lives, Lenin will live forever!
Re: Max Scherzer
« Reply #24 on: January 19, 2015, 02:33:16 pm »

Nationals, 7 year $210 mil deal, half of the money is deferred, he'll make $15 mil annually for the next 14 years and a tidy $50 million signing bonus. 
Logged

ucahogfan

Re: Max Scherzer
« Reply #25 on: January 19, 2015, 07:31:58 pm »

Nationals, 7 year $210 mil deal, half of the money is deferred, he'll make $15 mil annually for the next 14 years and a tidy $50 million signing bonus.
The Nationals are doing everything they can to win it all in 2015 because their window is quickly closing.  A rotation of Scherzer, Strasburg, Zimmerman, Fister, and Gonzalez is just not fair.  Maybe the best rotation we have seen in a long time in terms 1-5 all being potential All-Stars.  It will be interesting to see if the Nats do trade Zimmerman like had been rumored or just go all out this year and take the compensation pick that Zimmerman will bring next year.

And this is a horrible signing by the Nats IMO.  No way is Scherzer worth 30M a year.  Kershaw only got 5M more than Scherzer did.  The Nats see a young, re-building NL East (and the Phillies) and see a small window to win it all IMO.
Logged

jrulz83

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Total likes: 596
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,750
  • Lenin lived, Lenin lives, Lenin will live forever!
Re: Max Scherzer
« Reply #26 on: January 19, 2015, 09:35:52 pm »

The Nationals are doing everything they can to win it all in 2015 because their window is quickly closing.  A rotation of Scherzer, Strasburg, Zimmerman, Fister, and Gonzalez is just not fair.  Maybe the best rotation we have seen in a long time in terms 1-5 all being potential All-Stars.  It will be interesting to see if the Nats do trade Zimmerman like had been rumored or just go all out this year and take the compensation pick that Zimmerman will bring next year.

And this is a horrible signing by the Nats IMO.  No way is Scherzer worth 30M a year.  Kershaw only got 5M more than Scherzer did.  The Nats see a young, re-building NL East (and the Phillies) and see a small window to win it all IMO.

I can't believe they are going to be paying him until 2028, that's unbelievable! Somebody was going to overpay for Scherzer, and it couldn't have happened to a nicer franchise. This kind of deal rarely ever works out well for the franchise that hands it out. I hope it hamstrings the Nats for years.  :)

I guess if it gets them a WS title it'll be worth it, but it doesn't seem like a very smart move to me. They'll be paying him to sit on a beach in his retirement.
Logged

ucahogfan

Re: Max Scherzer
« Reply #27 on: January 20, 2015, 06:27:41 am »

I can't believe they are going to be paying him until 2028, that's unbelievable! Somebody was going to overpay for Scherzer, and it couldn't have happened to a nicer franchise. This kind of deal rarely ever works out well for the franchise that hands it out. I hope it hamstrings the Nats for years.  :)

I guess if it gets them a WS title it'll be worth it, but it doesn't seem like a very smart move to me. They'll be paying him to sit on a beach in his retirement.
Yep, I'm excited the Nats decided to do this because it means they are unlikely to keep Zimmerman and Fister who are nearly as good as Scherzer, but for much cheaper.  You would think teams would stop giving 30+ pitchers 25M+ per year after what has happened to CC and Verlander.
Logged

clutch

Re: Max Scherzer
« Reply #28 on: January 20, 2015, 11:35:05 am »

I think the Nats see their window closing quickly for sure. I think they also think back to a couple years ago, when they had probably their best chance, to where they sat Strasburg and lost their chance at a WS.

I know that situation wasn't entirely theirs, but in hindsight they should have started him later in the year if they knew he was going to be on an innings limit so that he'd still be there for the postseason. I think they felt they let one get away and are throwing out all they can now.
Logged

toshortrock

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Total likes: 0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 3,165
  • Hogville.net Rocks!
Re: Max Scherzer
« Reply #29 on: January 22, 2015, 09:49:37 am »

its not the money that they gave up to get him,,its how long they going to b pay n him after he;s gone,,my goodness
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
 

KARK
KWNA
Fox 16 Arkansas