Originally Posted by Brutus the Pimp
Why? Like I said, isn't the goal to win? If this deal helps them do that, why is it a bad move? You need to clarify your rationale, because I don't see how not making this signing, no matter how ridiculous the length is, is better than making it. Not spending the money won't help them a bit. If there are specific things that were on the table they could have done with the money to better themselves, by all means, it's a bad deal. But everyone seems to be looking at the length of this deal in a vacuum and saying "it's a bad deal." But no one is explaining why that is. Why they are better off without Werth.
Why it's a bad deal:
Originally Posted by RedLegSuperStar
Jayson Stark -
The #Nationals offer on Werth was so far above everyone else that Boras didn't even ask other interested teams if they wanted to match it.
That wasn't so hard Brutus now was it?
Overpaying to get the guy you want is one thing. Overpaying to the point that Boras knows that there's no chance that any other team will come anywhere close? Well, that's something different altogether. Heck, he was probably afraid that other teams would find out about the deal and talk the Nats out of it. You can believe that they had to give him that many years if you want. I doubt that you'll find many people that will believe you.