Welcome to Hogville!      Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Giants sign Lincecum to two year $35 mil deal

Started by clutch, October 22, 2013, 09:14:17 pm

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

clutch

What the H*** were they thinking? He threw the no hitter, but other than that hasn't done a thing the past two years. He's been pretty below average. Glad I'm not a Giants fan.

pigture perfect

He definitely needs a Dave Duncan type overhaul.
The 2 biggest fools in the world: He who has an answer for everything and he who argues with him.  - original.<br /> <br />The first thing I'm going to ask a lawyer (when I might need one) is, "You don't post on Hogville do you?"

 

Ray Piggers

Yeah, this one doesn't make much sense to me.
I'm basically Darkwing Duck

ucahogfan

This is one of those issues of a team rewarding a player for their past performance over their true value.  Lincecum probably wouldn't have gotten more than 10 mil per year on the FA market and the teams that spend money wisely like the Cards and Braves wouldn't have given him more than 5 mil per year.

Now the question is, since Lincecum got 17.5 mil a year for an ERA over 4, does that mean Kershaw will get 45 mil a year for an ERA under 2?

ChicoHog

http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/writer/jon-heyman/24122807/lincecums-35m-deal-isnt-a-record-but-it-is-for-a-476-era-over-2-years

I remember a couple months ago people in this board saying he would be lucky to get 10 a year and I said someone would probably pay 12-15m a year.  I never thought he would get 17.5m.  He still is a good pitcher but horribly inconsistent.  I'm kind of glad he stayed on the hated Midgets so i can keep on rooting against him. 

clutch

Quote from: ChicoHog on October 23, 2013, 09:34:29 am
http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/writer/jon-heyman/24122807/lincecums-35m-deal-isnt-a-record-but-it-is-for-a-476-era-over-2-years

I remember a couple months ago people in this board saying he would be lucky to get 10 a year and I said someone would probably pay 12-15m a year.  I never thought he would get 17.5m.  He still is a good pitcher but horribly inconsistent.  I'm kind of glad he stayed on the hated Midgets so i can keep on rooting against him. 

I was one of them saying he wouldn't get 10 a year. I still firmly believe that no other team would have given him 10 a year. Why they decided to give him 17.5 I will never understand. They have to be basing it off of what he did in the past and just hoping that he can do it again. Things aren't looking like he's getting any better though. He loses a little more of his control every year.

ChicoHog

The one good part for the Midgets is that it's only 2 years.  So if he doesn't come close to expectations they will cut him loose after two years, not a 7 year deal like they gave Zito.  I am strongly against long term deals, especially for pitchers, even though Kershaw will probably get one. 

clutch

Quote from: ChicoHog on October 23, 2013, 10:18:33 pm
The one good part for the Midgets is that it's only 2 years.  So if he doesn't come close to expectations they will cut him loose after two years, not a 7 year deal like they gave Zito.  I am strongly against long term deals, especially for pitchers, even though Kershaw will probably get one. 

They've never been willing to sign Lincecum to long term deals because of his throwing motion. He's always been a huge injury risk. The past 2 seasons I thought they were going to come out looking like the smartest people in baseball since they didn't sign him long term after his back to back Cy Youngs, then they turn around and give him $35 mil based off of a 96mph fastball that he can't get over the plate anymore.

Like I said, sure glad I'm not a Giants fan. I'd be PO'd haha.

Of course, if he ever figures out how to be the old Lincecum, then it's a heck of a deal. Anyone else notice that his demise started once he had to quit smoking weed? I'm convinced he can only throw stoned haha.

clutch

Quote from: ChicoHog on October 23, 2013, 10:18:33 pm
The one good part for the Midgets is that it's only 2 years.  So if he doesn't come close to expectations they will cut him loose after two years, not a 7 year deal like they gave Zito.  I am strongly against long term deals, especially for pitchers, even though Kershaw will probably get one. 

I'm strongly against them too. I don't like anything longer than 7 for position players and really don't like anything longer than 5 for pitchers. With the guaranteed contracts, it just seems reckless to sign those really long term deals. Some of those pitchers are like kickers. They can lose it in the blink of an eye and not find it again.