Mo Wants 'Mo After 2004

[Wolf Hopper]

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=1731102

Mariano Rivera will be 34 this season - and, as follows, 35 in 2005.

Ballpark, Mo's been good for 60 games a year with an RSAA around 18.

How many pitchers age 35 or older have had more than 3 seasons of 60/18? Zero. How many had 2 seasons? Just 4 - and one was a knuckler and the other was Doug Jones, the change-up master. How many pitchers have had one season? 18 have done it - - but, since 1994, only two RH pitchers have done it - - the aforementioned Jones and John Smoltz, who was last seen holding his right elbow in his left hand, in great pain, in Wrigley Field.

If the Yankees give Rivera more than a one year deal - for 2005 - someone in that front office will pay for it later, IMHO. Let him walk - come up with a new plan. It's time.

[TimmyB]

What are his numbers over the past couple years? Is he seriously declining or in a plateau?

In general, this sounds like a variation on the I-Rod arguement (which last year made us look, in general, like fools, but Detroit probably won't be so lucky... but that's another story).

So... Mo isn't quite the same guy he was in, say, 1999 or 2000, but, he still effective. Would you think a 2 year deal too long?

[SmedIndy]

A wise and prudent GM would let him walk after 2005 unless he does economical one-year deals. While you won't get a Rivera standing at the bus station, you can get a pitcher who can be fairly decent and reliable (the way Borowski or Tim Worrell was last year) cheaply.

[Crash Course]

I would give him a deal for 2005 - and a mutual option for 2006 with reasonable buyouts. No more than that.

[RedSeat]

If the Yankees give Rivera more than a one year deal - for 2005 - someone in that front office will pay for it later, IMHO. Let him walk - come up with a new plan. It's time.
When has someone in the front office paid for issuing or taking on a bad contract?

Why not pay him? If he falters, pay someone else. They can afford carrying dead payroll if it comes to that. Do they want to let another core member of the dynasty go? I think the negative feedback from the fans is worse than a few million more on the payroll.

[Crash Course]

It's time for the Yankees to start looking forward and realize that the "dynasty" is over. People forget that "the run" basically started in 1994-95. That was a decade ago. Time to start gearing up for a new "run" with a new cast of young players - - like Rivera, Williams, et al, were back in 1995. Hanging on to a bunch of players on the wrong side of 35, is a bad mistake. Back to the topic, what makes anyone think that Mariano Rivera will produce at his current level for more than another year or two?

[RichG]

A wise and prudent GM would let him walk after 2005 unless he does economical one-year deals. While you won't get a Rivera standing at the bus station, you can get a pitcher who can be fairly decent and reliable (the way Borowski or Tim Worrell was last year) cheaply.


I often see it written a GM can get a "fairly decent and reliable" pitcher cheaply but I think it's much easier said than done. It's easy after the season has played out to say someone is a bargain, it's much harder to identify those guys before their good season happens.

How many pitchers do you have to sign until you hit a Worrell or Borowski? How often will one of those guys also repeat their good performance and not revert to mediocrity? At least Worrell has a decent track record but it's because he's been halfway decent that SF chose not to try to resign him when he thought he'd be able to get more on the market.

If you had to name 10 relievers, who do you think will be a bargain and have good numbers next year? I don't have enough confidence to think I can do it with enough skill so I don't hurt my own team's chances by choosing a more expensive pitcher with a proven (good) track record.

[SmedIndy]

I disagree - if you know what you are looking for you can get a Chad Bradford here, a Steve Reed there, a Brendan Donnelley somewhere else.

Just going for proven veterans can be proven to kill you. I think the Cards went with Rickey Botallico once because he was "proven"...ugh.

[RichG]

I disagree - if you know what you are looking for you can get a Chad Bradford here, a Steve Reed there, a Brendan Donnelley somewhere else.

Just going for proven veterans can be proven to kill you. I think the Cards went with Rickey Botallico once because he was "proven"...ugh.


I agree with you about the results one can expect when going after a "proven" pitcher like Botallico, but I don't agree about Reed, Donnelley (sp?), or Bradford because they're not available now!

Which available relievers would you obtain/sign at a low cost that would give you more confidence than not signing anyone else at all?

I'm not trying to put you on a spot, I just don't think it's as easy as you're saying it is.

Bringing it back to Rivera, I'd rather tie up Rivera for 3 years and hope to get 2 good years from him before a drastic performance dropoff than start from scratch after his contract expires this year.

[satchel]

I can't be objective about this because he is my favorite player and my favorite Yankee. So take what I say with all that in mind.

The guy is one of the greatest closers of all time. With everything he's done for the Yankees, they should give him what he wants to finish his career with the Yankees, and find a new young closer to set up for him until he's gone (or done) the way he did for Wetteland. So, they may end up overpaying him for a couple of years at the end of his career. And? The Yankees can, and have, and will continue to, overpay players after they stop being great. Even if he's past his prime he should be kept on as an elder statesman of the bullpen. This Yankees fan doesn't ever want to see him in another uniform.

[hmrsf]

Offer him Arod $$ for 8 years. :D :cool:

Seriously. Incentive contract. Top load the 1st year and incentive laid the back end. Retire him a Yankee.

[gyb13]

there's also the question of whether he accepts a lesser role as his effectiveness decreases

[TimmyB]

King George is dedicated to winning it all. Period.

Not much room for sentimentality there.