Dropped Third Strike

Lincecum Should Sign Long-Term

So according to this article, Tim Lincecum of the Giants prefers to take his contract status on a year to year basis rather than signing a deal to buy out his arbitration years. All signs point to him having 4 arbitration eligible years with the first one being the 2010 season. If he signed long term now, he could get definite money for five years with a team option or two probably attached.

Now let's assume that there was no chance of him being signed long-term for the '09 season as he isn't yet arbitration eligible. Lincecum is 24 this season which means that the first possible year of his free agency would happen when he turns 30. He's currently 12-3 with a 2.63 ERA in over 157 innings pitched. He's got 9.99 k's/9 and 3.31 walks/9 while only allowing 9 home runs. Yeah - this guy is good.

There is no doubt that he has the potential to make A LOT more money through arbitration and he will be 30 by the time he hits free agency (possibly 32 or so if he signs a contract with a couple of options.) My problem with this is that you never know how well a pitcher is going to hold up over the course of several years and it is foolish to not take the sure money now than risk not making any in the future (even it means making slightly less over the long haul.)

A couple of contract examples that worked out well for pitchers? Barry Zito, Dontrelle Willis, and dare I say Carl Pavano (man what a waste he was.) Guys like Matt Cain, James Shields, David Price, and even Scott Kazmir (yes, I mention 3 Rays because they were smart enough to get these guys for a good price) may seem like a good deal for the clubs now, but you never know when a player will lose the edge or go down with a major injury.

Long story short, my opinion is take the money while you can. That contract you sign for your arbitration years can set you up for life if you're smart - who knows how long you'll actually last in baseball.

DTS Top 5/Bottom 5 - 8.4.08

Each week here at DTS we will be picking the Top 5 and Bottom 5 teams in baseball. The writers here vote, and we will post our results here each Monday. First place (or last place for Bottom 5) are in parentheses.

Top 5
1. Angels (2) - What a great week it was for the Halos, going a combined 5-2 on the road in Boston and New York, and perhaps more importantly, picking up a much-needed power bat in Mark Teixiera. The Rally Monkey lives on!
2. Rays (1) - The Rays are ahead in the toughest division in the majors and nothing seems to be able to stop them.
3. Cubs - To go along with their impressive sweep of the Brew Crew this week, they also improved their already MLB-best run differential to +131. FYI - the second best in baseball belongs to Boston with +91.
4. Red Sox - Maybe trading Manny was a good thing - they haven't lost without him, and Jason Bay (I know he's not technically his replacement, but come on, you know that's how he's going to be looked at all year) is hitting .363 in those three games, and has even gone yard once.
5. Minnesota - He's baaack... Liriano looked good on Sunday.

Other teams getting votes: White Sox

Bottom 5
26. Braves - I pity the fools...
27. Giants - Put Tim Lincecum on a team that hits, at all, and he's a Cy Young candidate.
28. Padres - Which comes first - Hoffman retires, or they bring in the fences at PETCO? The are in last place in the weakest division in the majors.
29. Mariners - They gave up George Sherrill and "The Other" Adam Jones, among others, for Erik Bedard, who has made only 15 innocuous starts this year. It doesn't look like too many more are ahead for him in a Seattle uniform, either. Oops.
30. Nationals (3) - Does their broadcasting crew return from breaks with a hearty, "Welcome back to Major League Baseball...sort of" call, a la Harry Doyle in Major League 2? Is there anybody out there in the Beltway area who can confim this suspicion for me?

Other teams getting votes: Indians, Pirates