Jeff Passan @JeffPassan · 9m BREAKING: Right-hander Jacob deGrom has signed a five-year, $185 million contract with the Texas Rangers, sources tell ESPN. Physical is passed. Deal is done. Includes conditional sixth-year option that would take total deal to $222 million. Full no-trade clause. A massive haul.
A few years ago Mets fans were ready to hang the Wilpons if they didn’t resign deGrom and now we know he didn’t get us to the promised land despite his skill and now Cohen decides not to throw more $$$ at him.
Good luck Jacob, you gave us some great moments and always had that smile but it was time to say goodbye.
Btw, that great 2016 Mets staff that had Harvey/ deGrom/ Syndergaard/ Matz/ and Wheeler is now all gone. Remember when people fretted how could we afford them all?? Well it didn’t matter in the end.
_________________ "Every day a little sadder, A little madder, Someone get me a ladder."
ELP
“You can't have everything. Where would you put it?”—Steven Wright
That’s the thing, baseball isn’t a sport anymore but expensive entertainment. When I was a kid in the 60s you could compare stats and debate who was the best player or team and the sport was still pure. Now it’s beyond tainted and stats don’t mean a thing unless you like your stats padded. Adding the DH to the NL has put the final stake through its heart. It’s all just a big show now filled with expensive athletes, teams, stadiums and advertising (now on the uniform).
That’s why it funny they rail about steroids yet pollute the game every chance they get. I mean now they have legalized gambling in the sport! Yet Pete Rose is still on the outside.
I don’t take it seriously at all anymore. Still would like my Mets to win a World Series but it doesn’t have the meaning it once did.
_________________ "Every day a little sadder, A little madder, Someone get me a ladder."
ELP
“You can't have everything. Where would you put it?”—Steven Wright
That's what eventually happens when the players got their freedom to offer their services to the highest bidder. Instead of basically having no choice what team they go to unless they're traded. The owners can't collude to keep salaries down, so there will always be a desperate owner that will overpay.
That's what eventually happens when the players got their freedom to offer their services to the highest bidder. Instead of basically having no choice what team they go to unless they're traded. The owners can't collude to keep salaries down, so there will always be a desperate owner that will overpay.
But isn't the alternative to a system where the owners pay the players ridiculously high salaries, one where the owners keep that humongous pool of money for themselves? In my view, it's the players who deserve it, as they're the ones people are paying to see. Not a lot of income is generated by the public's interest in ownership. And when income is enhanced by the interesting or attractive ballpark that a team calls home, it's often funded by the city/state and not the owner.
How would a system that limited players' freedom - either the old reserve clause or some form of collusion - help anyone but the owners? It would not make the game better for fans, would it?
john is right, major league baseball is not the sport we grew up with, its all about the $$$ now.
in 1959 carl yaztremski got a $100,000 signing bonus with the red sox, which is only about 1.1 million today.....not even close to what guys are getting as signing bonuses today.
i remember when rocky colavito got a pay cut because he didn't hit enough home runs, try that today and you are in arbitration....and you lose.
it is woefully over the line, and not going to change until there are empty stadiums all over the country, not just in cleveland and detroit and kansas city.
_________________ Speak Out! You've got to speak out against he madness, that is if you still can, and you still dare"
That's what eventually happens when the players got their freedom to offer their services to the highest bidder. Instead of basically having no choice what team they go to unless they're traded. The owners can't collude to keep salaries down, so there will always be a desperate owner that will overpay.
But isn't the alternative to a system where the owners pay the players ridiculously high salaries, one where the owners keep that humongous pool of money for themselves? In my view, it's the players who deserve it, as they're the ones people are paying to see. Not a lot of income is generated by the public's interest in ownership. And when income is enhanced by the interesting or attractive ballpark that a team calls home, it's often funded by the city/state and not the owner.
How would a system that limited players' freedom - either the old reserve clause or some form of collusion - help anyone but the owners? It would not make the game better for fans, would it?
I agree. I wasn't arguing for owners just that's what happened and it really couldn't go any other way.
john is right, major league baseball is not the sport we grew up with, its all about the $$$ now.
in 1959 carl yaztremski got a $100,000 signing bonus with the red sox, which is only about 1.1 million today.....not even close to what guys are getting as signing bonuses today.
i remember when rocky colavito got a pay cut because he didn't hit enough home runs, try that today and you are in arbitration....and you lose.
it is woefully over the line, and not going to change until there are empty stadiums all over the country, not just in cleveland and detroit and kansas city.
But Renny, as I opined earlier, it has always been about the $$$, and the only thing that has changed is that more of the money is going to the players. And don't think that the owners are on the road to the poorhouse either. Teams are being bought and sold for records amounts, so even after paying players, the owners are left with considerable value.
It's okay to be envious of the players, who have a level of skill that translates into earning power that I can only dream of. But to imply that "the system" was better when only the owners benefitted from it strikes me a naive. Would ballparks be fuller if the players were paid less?
john is right, major league baseball is not the sport we grew up with, its all about the $$$ now.
in 1959 carl yaztremski got a $100,000 signing bonus with the red sox, which is only about 1.1 million today.....not even close to what guys are getting as signing bonuses today.
i remember when rocky colavito got a pay cut because he didn't hit enough home runs, try that today and you are in arbitration....and you lose.
it is woefully over the line, and not going to change until there are empty stadiums all over the country, not just in cleveland and detroit and kansas city.
But Renny, as I opined earlier, it has always been about the $$$, and the only thing that has changed is that more of the money is going to the players. And don't think that the owners are on the road to the poorhouse either. Teams are being bought and sold for records amounts, so even after paying players, the owners are left with considerable value.
It's okay to be envious of the players, who have a level of skill that translates into earning power that I can only dream of. But to imply that "the system" was better when only the owners benefitted from it strikes me a naive. Would ballparks be fuller if the players were paid less?
the ballparks would be fuller if the ticket prices weren't on par with concert tickets (for good seats in cleveland anyway, where any box seat even close to the filed is easily $100+) and if hot dogs were $2 instead of $8 and if a beer was $3 instead of $10 and if parking were $5 instead of $50. the closet parking deck to cleveland's stadium charges $60 for indians or cavalier games (the venue are right next to each other).
as for the owners, why do you think anyone with cash wants to own a professional sports franchise, dan gilbert bought half of detroit with the money he made on lebron james and the cavaliers. the question for them, is how much is enough?
_________________ Speak Out! You've got to speak out against he madness, that is if you still can, and you still dare"
One of the most genuine nice guys, and a bastion of consistency over his career, 7 home runs short (see 1994 strike), a World Series ring, and not a whiff of steroids. Oh, and 1/4 of the absolute largest trades in Toronto Blue Jays history.
Congratulations to one of my all time favourite players, Fred McGriff, on his election to the hall of fame.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
