Mets break the Bank give $17M per year to Beltran, Is he worth the money?
- Thread starter Sean Mota
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 12
- Views 2K
While I agree that Beltran is no Lance Berkman, I'd probably take him over any of the other players mentioned. And I'd have been thrilled - THRILLED - if the team in this story had been the Tigers instead of the Mets.
- Nov 29, 2003
- 14,639
- 18,774
TheTimm said:
There was no way the Tigers were going to offer him that kinda of money, the big myth of the Tigers is they are going to spend more/big money to get Free Agents, but all they are doing is spending the money of the players that have left ( contracts expired ), next year when Higgy's contract is up, there will be a lot more cash available to go after more Free Agents.
Detroit Payroll
2004-58,812,762
2003-55,398,056
2002-56,574,721
2001-51,101,480
2000-54,806,803
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/wire?section=mlb&id=1954148
Been wondering what the Tiger payroll (not to mention team) would be looking like if Juan Gonzalez had taken that $148 million offered a few years ago! Just saw that he signed a minor league contract with Cleveland - better them than us. Sometimes the free agents you don't sign are more important than the ones you do.
We are talking about aplayer who, statistically speaking, is the greatest offensive threat in baseball. He is number 1 on every pre-draft day list I have seen so far.
Most rotisserie guys will tell you that most of these offensive players hit their peak when they are 28-32. This is when their experience starts to catch up to their ability, yet before their bodies start to wear down.
THIS is the kind of guy that can turn things around. I was ambivalent about the Pedro signing but I am excited about this one. Can't wait for opening day.
Most rotisserie guys will tell you that most of these offensive players hit their peak when they are 28-32. This is when their experience starts to catch up to their ability, yet before their bodies start to wear down.
THIS is the kind of guy that can turn things around. I was ambivalent about the Pedro signing but I am excited about this one. Can't wait for opening day.
Okay, you've aroused my curiosity : are you just hatin' on ballplayers' salaries in general (i.e., are you one of those guys that thinks they're all overrated and no one is "worth" 17 million dollars), or is it Beltran specifically whom you think is overrated/paid? If it's the latter, who are some of the guys who you think do deserve this kind of coin?vurbano said:
BobMurdoch said:
So how come they don't walk him all the time instead of Bonds?
Or are we just considering steroid-free offensive threats?
TheTimm said:So how come they don't walk him all the time instead of Bonds?
From a fantasy player standpoint, we appreciate players who are balanced and provide a high batting average, HRs, RBIs, Runs scored, and Steals.
Since most leagues ignore walks, Bonds is actually only ranked about 10-20 in most leagues.
Plus, Beltran almost single handedly carried the Astros offensively to the promised land last year. While everyone elses bats went to sleep he hit over .400 in the series, was belt(ran)ing HRs left and right and was stealing bases too.
The casual fans tend to only pay attention to home runs, but it is all of the other categories that put Ws up in the standings.
Now, we still need pitching (We basically traded Al Leiter for Pedro - That is going to be a wash statistically I think). Pedro has an obscene ERA in Shea (something like 1.60 over his career). So we'll see.
My bad -- I was stuck in reality, not fantasy. But seriously, any system that puts Bonds #10-20 is very flawed IMO. That being said, Beltran would certainly have been welcomed by me if he had signed with Detroit -- and unless it's actually coming out of my pocket, I don't really care how much someone's gettin' paid.
But seriously, any system that puts Bonds #10-20 is very flawed IMO. That being said, Beltran would certainly have been welcomed by me if he had signed with Detroit -- and unless it's actually coming out of my pocket, I don't really care how much someone's gettin' paid.
If you think THAT is bad, one of my leagues had the brainstorm to add a bunch of stats INCLUDING assists. Basically they turned shortstops from invisible to rotistuds (any idea how many balls a game get hit to the shortstop?) and diminished the value of outfielders who rarely get one. THAT little rule is going away from our league for 2005.....
Actually statistically speaking Beltran didn't do all that much until the postseason. He batted what, .258 during the regular season? The Mets overpay for a reason. They're the mets.
I consider Beltre the big steal of the offseason at 5 years 65 million.
Oh, and any fantasy league worth it's salt is using on base percentage rather than batting average. Making Bonds a pretty good player.
I consider Beltre the big steal of the offseason at 5 years 65 million.
Oh, and any fantasy league worth it's salt is using on base percentage rather than batting average. Making Bonds a pretty good player.
Beltran is still a 40-40 guy. Not too many of them around. He batted .268 combined for KC/Houston and might have done better if he had more protection around him. In the 2003 year where KC overperformed he batted .307.
Most lists I've seen list him right up there with Albert Pujols statistically. That works just fine with me (especially when we compare it to outfielders we have had over the years like Mike Cameron and Roger Cedeno).
I agree that Beltre gets the bang for the buck award. I'm surprised he keeps bubbling under the radar.
Most lists I've seen list him right up there with Albert Pujols statistically. That works just fine with me (especially when we compare it to outfielders we have had over the years like Mike Cameron and Roger Cedeno).
I agree that Beltre gets the bang for the buck award. I'm surprised he keeps bubbling under the radar.
