Best and Worst Free Agent Signing of the offseason

[PuffyPig]

Why is it "weak" to look at the two richest contracts from last year, which went to two guys that play non-scarce positions (LF / RF), one of which (Crawford) was belowaverage offensively at his position over the course of his career, and the other of which had a short history of being above average and then comparing them to the guy who was the best offensive player in the major leagues at his position last year (6.2 oWAR) and was an all-star in 3 separate years prior to that?

Becuase both of those contracts are horrible contracts. They were when they were signed, and remain so today.

[TRF]

Darvish has a lot going for him that no other Japanese pitcher playing in the U.S. has. The foremost being height. He's 6'5". That's plenty tall. He's averaged 200+ IP since 2007. He'll have to adjust to a new schedule, but workload isn't an issue. He's a hard thrower, can dial it up to 97. Was he worth $100M? Well, he was to the Rangers, and since one of the guy evaluating him was Nolan Ryan, I'd say they are addressing a need.

And I sure wish the Reds would go after Ogando. But that's another thread.

I'd really like to know what Beane was thinking signing Crisp to that deal.

[RedlegJake]

I'd call Darvish neutral as a deal - that's a ton of cash and the track record of Japanese pitchers coming to America is not impressive. Darvish, however IS impressive and his record bests any pitcher who's crossed the ocean before him by a large margin so I'm not going to say the gamble is unwarranted. I actually wish the Reds had that kind of money - Darvish, Cespedes, I wish the Reds could fish in those waters. I was shocked when they went and landed Chapman and his was a much smaller deal. Still until Darvish actually performs in the big leagues I'm going to remain on the skeptical side with my expectation that he will pitching's equivalent of Ichiro. I personally think he'll take baseball by storm - but that is still all conjecture so calling it the best deal of the off season is hyperbole until he has a track record to look at - a track record here. I pretty much agree with the rest of your post and even Darvish is just a matter of degree.

[REDREAD]

I don't think Darvish will flop, but when his cost is compared to ML pitchers making a similiar amount, you get guys like Roy Holliday..

It's a risky proposition.. Darvish is going to have to be one of the top 10 pitchers in MLB to "earn" his money. Is that going to happen? Not likely.

Since Texas has a lot of money, it won't necessarily kill them if Darvish ends up being a solid #2 or even #3.

I think Darvish will start off well, as he has a quirky delivery. He may be able to ride that through the entire first year, much like Nomo did.
However, I think the league will adjust to him... He will still be good, but probably not a perennial Cy Young contender (which is what he's being paid as).

[TRF]

If Darvish is a #2, he'll more than earn that money the Rangers spen on him and on getting him. Because #2 starters have seasons where they are #1's generally. Because the Rangers look poised to be successful during at least the first 3 years of his contract. Because they will sell tons of Darvish merchandise. And finally, because he's an oddity that will bring in a new fanbase.

IMO this is not a bad signing for the Rangers.

[MikeThierry]

How do you determine what is a bad contract or good contract? Even though the Pujols contract looks bad on the surface, I think the Angels will make that money back two fold over the course of a contract. There is untapped marketing bringing the best player in the game to the biggest Latin American population in the country. Plus, with the Dodgers being in limbo right now, the Angels have an opportunity to make strides as the baseball team in LA. I think from a pure money grab for the Angels standpoint, the Pujols contract doesn't look as bad as one might think.