NYFS ny mets message boards

Mets to "explore" extension with DeGrom
Page 3 of 3

Author:  LTKfRGM [ Fri Sep 29, 2017 11:27 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Mets to "explore" extension with DeGrom

HeyNowHK wrote:
Keeping in mind that dG made $4M this season and has 3 arb yrs to go, what would an extension look like? 4/58M with a 5th yr option at $20M?

Going much beyond that is prob not worth doing if you're the Mets. He's prob looking at $45M in Arb for the next 3 yrs. Shave off a little to get the security if you're him, otherwise you're just gambling that your arm stays intact.

I think deGrom gets at least 9 this year. If he makes it through his arb years and he's lousy, bad players still get arb raises, so he's due at least, 9, 10, 11 assuming he gets offered arb. He's almost guaranteed 3 years 30 now. And if he stays in top form, he's looking at something like 9-16-24, or 3 years 49 then free agency. Ofcourse if his arm falls off, he won't get that.

Depends what the mets want to add and will those years be guaranteed or with buyouts.

I think 3-40/42 is a safe guarantee for the next 3 years, and for the additional year I think the mets might need to offer 20. 4 years 60 might get it done if I was to guess and give the mets a 5th year option. Our guesses are pretty close. Maybe if he wants guaranteed money and wants to stay a met, they talk it down to 4-55.

Author:  Nutsacjac [ Fri Sep 29, 2017 12:19 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Mets to "explore" extension with DeGrom

Typically against giving pitchers extensions but he's going to be 30 next year and is stuck in arb hell for a while; I'm sure he wants to secure a big payday for himself before he's too shopworn. I think a deal can be struck that both sides are happy with.

Author:  acerimusdux [ Fri Sep 29, 2017 12:24 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Mets to "explore" extension with DeGrom

Metro2007 wrote:
"To criticize the deal is to not understand that Bonilla gained nothing and the Mets actually came out ahead in the deal.

If Bonilla had accepted the $5.9 million in 2000 and invested the entire amount at 8% interest, the original investment would have grown to $104.1 million by 2035*......."

http://www.businessinsider.com/chart-co ... lla-2013-7

I think the 8% return they are assuming is too high, and using a lower rate, it comes out not really in favor of the Mets. I think inflation, and investment returns, have been lower than they anticipated at that time. But it's still not that big a deal, either way.

Page 3 of 3 All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group