Figuring though that Werth got 7/126, I'm going to say that Fielder (being the better and younger player) will get more. Let's go ahead and assume that 8 years, 160 million gets it done. Now, based on those numbers, would I do it if I were the Nats? Let's argue it out with myself.
8 years, huh?
What about it?
I don't know, 20?
Six. Hell, through in age 34 and it's only eight. Go from 32 on and it's only 11.
Prince is a great hitter though - chances are better he'll be one of those 11 or 8 or 6 than just some random player.
Maybe you're right, but we haven't even factored in how bad his defense will be at that point. A third of those guys on the list are DHs for a reason. Or the fact that his body type tends to age worse than others. Or...
FINE! That back end will probably be bad. But you know what? That's the cost of signing guys like this. Every deal is not going to bring you good value right to the very end. He's 28 next year. Stop focusing on five or six years down the road. Think about what he could do for this team now.
He's gonna be 3-4 games better than LaRoche, and that's figuring in defense. Even in the absolute worst case scenario (barring injury of course) you aren't going to move backward at all. You take Prince's worst season of WAR in the past five years, you give it to Adam LaRoche and you're satisfied. You take his 2nd worst and LaRoche is having the season of his life!
But couldn't the Nats have LaRoche AND whatever else they can get for that 20 million? Wouldn't that also be 3-4 games better and not saddle the Nats with a terrible contract down the road? When they'll need money to sign Strasburg and Bryce etc etc?
Sure. But where do you see them spending that money this offseason? Who else is out there worth signing?
Do you see them signing Oswalt?
... no. But next year! Next year they could sign some one, like Michael Bourn or BJ Upton to finally solve their CF issues and a pitcher like Hamels or Cain or Grienke. And it gives them this year to see if Bryce or Werth can play center, if Desmond can hang in the majors, or Espinosa for that matter. If Rendon can make an immediate impact. If any of those young starters are ready to break through. If Morse was a fluke, if..
Hey now. Morse wasn't a fluke.
Maybe not being good, but being THAT good definitely. Basically no one has ever struck out that much and hit that well. Like NO ONE. In the history of the game. It's been around for a long time you know.
Maybe he's different? Damn it, stop depressing me. And back to your "next year" talk, I like your plan but that's a tall order. Are those guys even going to be available in the offseason? And are they going to want to come to Washington? It's not like other teams don't need these players. The Nats can get Prince now. He is available. The big boys don't need first baseman. He can help the Nats win now.
Sure win now, but if they don't make the playoffs what good is it?
Argh. I hate that argument. Wins are wins. I want more of them. But for your sake yes they will make the playoffs. The won 80 games last year, with Strasburg back, Zimmerman healthy, Werth bouncing back, a full season of ZNN, Gio here, they are bound to win a bunch more games, and that's without Fielder. Factor him in and you have a division challenger and a wild card lock.
Basically if everything goes right, huh? I'll give you they should be better, even with the inevitable bumps in the road. But for an 78 win team (by runs scored/allowed) I figure without Price they are around 85 wins maybe. The NL East is that tough. With him... 88? 89? That's fighting for a wild card, with a good shot at it, but not a lock.
You know what? That's good enough for me. Fans of this team sat through years of low payroll and crap teams. As far as I'm concerned those 60 million dollar payrolls meant 40 million went into a bank to spend later. Now IS later. Now they can be in the playoff hunt and I want them to be and not because of a lucky fluke like Lannan and LaRoche both having their best seasons ever, while the bullpen is the best in the NL, and the Nats go 15-5 in one run games. I want it to be because they are good enough to challenge for a spot regardless of luck.
I just can't go along. I want them to be good but I want them to be good for a long time.
They can spend money later you know.
Yes, but I have no faith in that. Hell, it's a lot of faith just to think they'll raise the payroll to 120 million or so when it's time. Forget about adding more to a 150+ payroll if the Nats are just missing where they need to be. I say wait it out, see what they need next year and make those big moves on pitching and defense. Let Bryce pick up the offense, maybe Rendon too.
I want to win now. You want to win...next year.
I think it's a smarter plan to spread out that monetary commitment to guys that won't have to be buried in a piano box someday.
Uncalled for! But the Nats are still going to have to pay.
Oh no doubt.
So even if we can't agree on signing Prince or not, we can agree that the Nats do need to up their payroll by 25 million (not including Zimmerman resigning) in the next two seasons.
Yes. It may even be that they have to spend more next year with my plan, just to outbid the big boys. The time might not be now, but it's soon.
At 8 years, 160 million, I think I fall in more with Mr. Red. I do. Sorry. I don't think signing Prince is a bad idea. I don't think the Nats should be allowed to pretend they're poor. It's just that I think they could go into next offseason with a ton of issues to deal with. A re-injury to Strsaburg or ZNN, and the failure of Desmond (both not crazy events) and the Nats could need a top flight SP AND a CF AND a MI. Or Desmond could stabilize, Rendon could be great enough that they try to move him to first, and Bryce could be great and capable in center and all of a sudden they don't need really Fielder and can spend in a bunch of ways to really finish out this team.
This isn't a veteran team that needs that one last piece. It's a team falling into place and I'd like to see where it falls for one more year before moving forward at full speed. Yes, it's worrying about the future rather than the present, but it's not spending in 2016 that I'm worried about, it's how to best form this team in 2013. If I had any faith the Lerners would spend with abandon then yes, sign Fielder. But I don't. I think Rizzo will have to fight to get that payroll up to a decent level and if that's the case it's gonna be better to spread out that Fielder money to a couple positions.
Do I feel the same way if I'm a die-hard Nats fan, instead of a souless automaton? Probably not. Do I feel the same way at a shorter or more reasonable deal? I'm not sure. That may be enough to tip me toward signing Fielder. I know basically anything 3-5 years, the Nats would be stupid not to jump at regardless of the annual cost.