Moyer signs a 2 year deal

by **Grotewold** » Tue Dec 16, 2008 10:54:06

Neyer can suck my slide rule.

by **TenuredVulture** » Tue Dec 16, 2008 10:54:23

The only explanation, and it doesn't reflect well on Rube, is the "player coach" idea that he'll help bring the young guys along. Moyer will make an outstanding pitching coach one day, possibly. But he won't make 8 million.

by **Grotewold** » Tue Dec 16, 2008 10:55:33

TenuredVulture wrote:The only explanation, and it doesn't reflect well on Rube, is the "player coach" idea that he'll help bring the young guys along. Moyer will make an outstanding pitching coach one day, possibly. But he won't make 8 million.

I also wouldn't rule out him reprising the Rick Dempsey role during rain delays.

by **JFLNYC** » Tue Dec 16, 2008 11:06:32

TenuredVulture wrote:The only explanation, and it doesn't reflect well on Rube, is the "player coach" idea that he'll help bring the young guys along. Moyer will make an outstanding pitching coach one day, possibly. But he won't make 8 million.

I think what it came down to is that Rube wanted Moyer so badly for 2009 that he was going to sign him, even if the price was committing to 2010, too.

by **FTN** » Tue Dec 16, 2008 11:07:02

JFLNYC wrote:
TenuredVulture wrote:The only explanation, and it doesn't reflect well on Rube, is the "player coach" idea that he'll help bring the young guys along. Moyer will make an outstanding pitching coach one day, possibly. But he won't make 8 million.

I think what it came down to is that Rube wanted Moyer so badly for 2009 that he was going to sign him, even if the price was committing to 2010, too.

If only there was a way we could have locked him into a 1 year deal....

by **JFLNYC** » Tue Dec 16, 2008 11:08:43

What concerns me is that Neyer, having a job, seem to have very little interest in improving. Granted, he's not likely to win a Pulitzer Prize no matter what he does. But don't you have to at least try?

by **FTN** » Tue Dec 16, 2008 11:18:54

bronxbombers111 (12/16/2008 at 10:02 AM)
Report Violation
whatever rob hates guys like ibanez who drive 100 men in and hit .290 and play 162 games. He loves guys who hit .250 and hit homers. Raul has a better chance in the hall of fame then Burrell. ROB YOU DO NOT KNOW BASEBALL AND IM ONLY 15 AND I KNOW MORE THAN YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!

by **Grotewold** » Tue Dec 16, 2008 11:19:59

I love the space between the exclamation points

by **Shore** » Tue Dec 16, 2008 11:30:09

FTN wrote:
JFLNYC wrote:
TenuredVulture wrote:The only explanation, and it doesn't reflect well on Rube, is the "player coach" idea that he'll help bring the young guys along. Moyer will make an outstanding pitching coach one day, possibly. But he won't make 8 million.

I think what it came down to is that Rube wanted Moyer so badly for 2009 that he was going to sign him, even if the price was committing to 2010, too.

If only there was a way we could have locked him into a 1 year deal....

He was reading market forces we could never understand.

by **Phight On!** » Tue Dec 16, 2008 13:50:44

Re: The list a little up-thread- The only guy we should compare him to is Phil Niekro. None of the other players on it pitched more than 114 innings. If Moyer pitches less than 150 IP in 2009 and 2010 it means it's a 2/13 deal. The most he can make in 2009 is a little less than 8 million. He made 7 million in 2008. If he went to arb this winter, based on the season he had he most likely would have received at least 3 but no more than 5 million more in 08.

How does arb even work? Is age factored into the equation? I think it would be illegal to use age, based on some discrimination laws but it could somehow be part of the collective bargaining agreement. I wonder if they use advanced metrics or just basic stuff like ERA, Wins, and IP. If it is the latter the Phils would have gotten screwed because Moyer had as many wins as Johan Santana and had a better ERA than a lot of guys making much more $. I'm not praising or bashing this decision- more than anything I'm legitimately interested to learn what criteria the arbitrator uses to make a decision.

by **philliesphhan** » Tue Dec 16, 2008 13:53:15

Drugs Delaney wrote:
philliesphhan wrote:They basically just put 6.5M (and possibly much, much more) on one number in roulette except the odds are hundreds of times worse.

Hundreds of times worse? Come on. It's not even remotely like that. Jamie Moyer has proven time and again that he's a unique pitcher. His career path is unlike anyone else's. Sure, it could all come to an end next year, but to suggest that it's a gamble worse than one number on a roulette wheel is a ridiculous overstatement.

I'll wager that the Phillies get 24-26 wins out of this contract. If I were Ruben, I probably wouldn't have offered him the second year, but I'm not upset about it. Getting upset about it is pointless. It's not your money and you're upset about something that may or may not happen in 2010. What's the point?

The Phillies are coming off a World Series championship. The level of anger some people have in the wake of that championship is astounding to me. Cut the team some slack. This isn't the 1997 Phillies spending millions of dollars on Mark Leiter and expecting us to think they're going to compete. Times have changed dramatically and so has the team. Let's be happy for a while.

You're right. One guy doing it out of thousands of pitchers in history is not worse odds than 1 in 35. Thanks for dropping by for your daily "this doesn't matter, guys, be happy like me" post

by **philliesphhan** » Tue Dec 16, 2008 14:02:55

Phight On! wrote:Re: The list a little up-thread- The only guy we should compare him to is Phil Niekro. None of the other players on it pitched more than 114 innings.

That's kind of my point. No one at 47 ever pitched successfully except for one guy in history. Seems silly to bank on it happening again.

by **Grotewold** » Tue Dec 16, 2008 14:04:16

philliesphhan wrote:
Phight On! wrote:Re: The list a little up-thread- The only guy we should compare him to is Phil Niekro. None of the other players on it pitched more than 114 innings.

That's kind of my point. No one at 47 ever pitched successfully except for one guy in history. Seems silly to bank on it happening again.

By that logic, we wouldn't have had him last year, and we would almost certainly have missed the playoffs.

by **jerseyhoya** » Tue Dec 16, 2008 14:05:00

philliesphhan wrote:
Phight On! wrote:Re: The list a little up-thread- The only guy we should compare him to is Phil Niekro. None of the other players on it pitched more than 114 innings.

That's kind of my point. No one at 47 ever pitched successfully except for one guy in history. Seems silly to bank on it happening again.

How many people in history pitched successfully at 45? I would imagine that would limit your sample size a fair bit.

by **philliesphhan** » Tue Dec 16, 2008 14:17:22

7 threw over 100 innings at 45, 8 threw at least 90
3 at 46

We'll be lucky to have him good at 46. If he is, awesome, resign him. It's just dumb to give him two years. No one else was even going to do that.

by **steven snell** » Tue Dec 16, 2008 16:21:15

I may have missed deep within the thread, but was the dollar amount of the deal?

by **philliesphhan** » Tue Dec 16, 2008 18:13:29

Here are some details on Moyer's contract: He's guaranteed no less than $13 million. He'll make a base salary of $6.5 million 2009 and 2010. His 2010 salary can escalate to as much as $11 million based on innings pitched in '09 ($250,000 for 150 innings, $500,000 each for 160, 170, 180 and 190 innings) and starts in '09 ($250,000 for 23 starts, $500,000 each for 25, 27, 29 and 31 starts). Also, he can earn $250,000 performance bonuses each year for 150, 160, 170, 180 and 190 innings pitched.

Lauber

by **Drugs Delaney** » Tue Dec 16, 2008 21:30:13

philliesphhan wrote:
Drugs Delaney wrote:
philliesphhan wrote:They basically just put 6.5M (and possibly much, much more) on one number in roulette except the odds are hundreds of times worse.

Hundreds of times worse? Come on. It's not even remotely like that. Jamie Moyer has proven time and again that he's a unique pitcher. His career path is unlike anyone else's. Sure, it could all come to an end next year, but to suggest that it's a gamble worse than one number on a roulette wheel is a ridiculous overstatement.

I'll wager that the Phillies get 24-26 wins out of this contract. If I were Ruben, I probably wouldn't have offered him the second year, but I'm not upset about it. Getting upset about it is pointless. It's not your money and you're upset about something that may or may not happen in 2010. What's the point?

The Phillies are coming off a World Series championship. The level of anger some people have in the wake of that championship is astounding to me. Cut the team some slack. This isn't the 1997 Phillies spending millions of dollars on Mark Leiter and expecting us to think they're going to compete. Times have changed dramatically and so has the team. Let's be happy for a while.

You're right. One guy doing it out of thousands of pitchers in history is not worse odds than 1 in 35. Thanks for dropping by for your daily "this doesn't matter, guys, be happy like me" post

You're missing the point. There haven't been "thousands of pitchers in history" that have even tried to pitch in the big leagues at the age of 46. The odds may not be great that Moyer pitches well for two seasons, or even next season, but I think the odds are certainly higher than one in 35.

by **Stay_Disappointed** » Tue Dec 16, 2008 21:34:14

FTN wrote:
But it's not the contract per se that concerns me. What concerns me is that the Phillies, having won a World Series, seem to have very little interest in improving. Granted, they're not likely to win another World Series no matter what they do. But don't you have to at least try?

- Neyer's blog

Yeah, the Phillies are probably one step up from the Nationals jerkoff. No chance at winning the World Series. WTF??? So Mr baseball genius, who do you think is so much better in the NL? Oh wait, THE METS?? I'm sure you'll pick them to win the division again.... but that is not likely either

by **FTN** » Tue Dec 16, 2008 21:37:50

Warszawa wrote:
FTN wrote:
But it's not the contract per se that concerns me. What concerns me is that the Phillies, having won a World Series, seem to have very little interest in improving. Granted, they're not likely to win another World Series no matter what they do. But don't you have to at least try?

- Neyer's blog

Yeah, the Phillies are probably one step up from the Nationals jerkoff. No chance at winning the World Series. WTF??? So Mr baseball genius, who do you think is so much better in the NL? Oh wait, THE METS?? I'm sure you'll pick them to win the division again.... but that is not likely either

Leave that as a comment for him on his blog

Archived

Moyer signs a 2 year deal