It's tough though, with such a competitive market, teams HAVE to go the extra distance to sign dominant starters. You really think a team wants to gamble on anybody beyond like 3 years? I can't imagine the Yankees and Mets feel tremendous about having Sabathia and Santana under contract for 7 years each, despite what they say. Waaaaay too much risk and money involved, even if the guys are in the elite tier of SP in the league.killeverything wrote:Long term contracts for pitchers is usually a bad idea. Schilling while he spoke highly of John Lackey, was really questioning giving him a five year deal. OTOH he's pretty vocal about why you re-sign Beckett now. So take that what it's worth......aside from the whole "he's a moron" thing.
Me personally I woulda signed Nathan over Hunter too. Finding a dominant closer is tougher than a dominant OF. I haven't even won a Fantasy league yet, so what the fuck do I know?
The Lackey and Burnett deals though, I had a problem with. These guys are just not #1 starters (in Lackey's case I think he was, but not anymore). Both guys have injury histories. I just think one or both deals is going to wind up ending badly. You can almost justify throwing $160M at CC or Johan because they win every game. But Burnett's an enigma and Lackey seems like he doesn't pitch til May each year with an elbow injury. Just a bad idea.