Zito Blunder
At first glance the signing of Barry Zito by the Giants seems to be for the best for the Mets, Giants and Zito.
After experiences with Zambrano, Martinez, Glavine and Sanchez, the Mets should be reluctant to shell out a ton of money on any pitcher who may or may not develop arm trouble somewhere along the way. $18 million a year for 7 years is a hefty chunk of change even if Zito is only 28 years of age.
Moreover Zito is not necessarily a number one starter and should not command such a high price, much less the largest contract ever for a pitcher -- $126 million.
The Giants on the other hand have a very bad team and they lost their “number one” starter (I use that loosely) in Jason Schmidt. They obviously used whatever cash they would have had to pay Schmidt and preferred to give it to Zito. Schmidt will be 34 in January and in 2008 will be the same age as Zito will be when his new contract expires.
Zito should be happy that he is becoming the richest pitcher in baseball. All he had to do was to cross town, go over one of the Bay bridges and work in a more chic neighborhood.
However, I believe all parties will rue the day this deal was made.
After Bonds completes his steroid tainted undeserved home run record this year, no one will bother to come to see the Giants play. Their income level will not meet their expenditures and they will eventually lose money every single year.
Zito will not be particularly happy pitching for a team which will find itself regularly floundering in the bottom of the division.
And if the statistic I heard today by John Hayman on ESPN radio is true Met fans will be sick to their stomach regarding the failed attempt to sign Zito.
When the A’s scored 4 or more runs for Zito, he was 85-4; when they scored only 3 runs for him, he was 93-11.
Zito’s ERA last year was 3.83. In the National League without the DH and the overall weak hitting it may go down to 2.83. His ERA has never been higher than 4.48.
Mind you those ERA numbers are for 9 innings. Since most pitchers work no more than 6 innings, his true ‘run average’ per start would be no more than 3 and could be as little as 2 and change.
He may not be a number one starter, but with the Mets lineup he could have easily been a 20 game winner.
If they could overpay Glavine and El Duque, they could overpay Zito as well.
Chalk up one more mistake for Minaya.
At first glance the signing of Barry Zito by the Giants seems to be for the best for the Mets, Giants and Zito.
After experiences with Zambrano, Martinez, Glavine and Sanchez, the Mets should be reluctant to shell out a ton of money on any pitcher who may or may not develop arm trouble somewhere along the way. $18 million a year for 7 years is a hefty chunk of change even if Zito is only 28 years of age.
Moreover Zito is not necessarily a number one starter and should not command such a high price, much less the largest contract ever for a pitcher -- $126 million.
The Giants on the other hand have a very bad team and they lost their “number one” starter (I use that loosely) in Jason Schmidt. They obviously used whatever cash they would have had to pay Schmidt and preferred to give it to Zito. Schmidt will be 34 in January and in 2008 will be the same age as Zito will be when his new contract expires.
Zito should be happy that he is becoming the richest pitcher in baseball. All he had to do was to cross town, go over one of the Bay bridges and work in a more chic neighborhood.
However, I believe all parties will rue the day this deal was made.
After Bonds completes his steroid tainted undeserved home run record this year, no one will bother to come to see the Giants play. Their income level will not meet their expenditures and they will eventually lose money every single year.
Zito will not be particularly happy pitching for a team which will find itself regularly floundering in the bottom of the division.
And if the statistic I heard today by John Hayman on ESPN radio is true Met fans will be sick to their stomach regarding the failed attempt to sign Zito.
When the A’s scored 4 or more runs for Zito, he was 85-4; when they scored only 3 runs for him, he was 93-11.
Zito’s ERA last year was 3.83. In the National League without the DH and the overall weak hitting it may go down to 2.83. His ERA has never been higher than 4.48.
Mind you those ERA numbers are for 9 innings. Since most pitchers work no more than 6 innings, his true ‘run average’ per start would be no more than 3 and could be as little as 2 and change.
He may not be a number one starter, but with the Mets lineup he could have easily been a 20 game winner.
If they could overpay Glavine and El Duque, they could overpay Zito as well.
Chalk up one more mistake for Minaya.
posted by judah h | 7:08 PM
5 Comments:
It never makes sense to waste all your money over one player. The most I would have given Zito is 5 years. He has pitched over 200 innings for the past six years. I can't see him being effective for a long period of time. Granted that he could have won 20 games with the Mets next year, but any decent pitcher from the American League could probably win atleast 12-15 games in the National League.
The contracts being signed this offseason have been insane. The owner will be he ones crying later on about the players making too much money.
The extra 2 years shouldn't make any difference.
If Pedro could be signed at age 33 for an extended contract, 2 extra years to Zito should not be an issue. Remember, Pedro's contract was over $50 million for 4 years and there's still 2 years to go.
Though other American League pitchers may win 12-15 games as you say, Zito would most likely have given the Mets more playoff wins against NL hitters.
As far as the World Series, I think Met fans would be happy to get there and take their chances.
I disagree. $126 million for a #2 starter is crazy and Omar was right for finally showing fiscal restraint.
I can't see how Zito will regret the day he took $126 million instead of $85 million.
Also, your analogy to Pedro's contract weakens your argument. Pedro obviously should not have received a 4 year contract, given that he broke down in year 2.
Pedro was much older and his arm was weak as compared to his early days in Boston and his time in Montreal.
The much younger Zito, however, has shown no arm problems. The fact that he isn't dominating as well as his early years is partly because the hitters know him and partly because the opposition that he faces has been stronger over the past 3 years.
That will not be the case in the NL.
Minaya certainly overpaid for Martinez but his theory was that he would be able to recoup those monies via the large crowds on the day Pedro pitches. The signing would have also given him the opprtunity to show other quality players like Beltran and Delgado that he was serious in making the team into a contender.
If he seriously wanted to get the team into the World Series, he should have 'overpaid' again.
$18 million in year 6 and 7 will look like an average pitchers' salary in 2013.
Post a Comment
<< Home