Offline
It was just announced that the Giants have signed Matt Cain to a 5 year/$112.5M extension. That's $22.5M per season.
I don't mean to restart the great debate over the value of Wins as a statistic, but for his career, Cain is 69-73. That's a .486 winning percentage. Even in his last three seasons (by far his best), he's only 39-30, an average of 13-10.
Both Jake Westbrook (85-84, .503) and Kyle Lohse (102-106, .490) have a higher career winning percentage.
Yes, I realize Cain is durable and that is 3-year ERA is below 3, but at the end of the day, the bottom line is winning ballgames, and 13-10 isn't all that impressive. Certainly not $22.5M/year impressive.
If that's the right value, how much is Wainwright worth? For that matter, how much will the Giants have to pay if they want to keep Lincecum?
Offline
My reactions were roughly the same as yours:
First: "That's a lot of dough for a guy who's never won more than 14 games on some pretty good teams ..."
Second: "What the hell is Wainwright going to get?"
Third: "They'd better make a duplicate key to the vault for Lincecum ..."
Offline
I think the deal is out of whack because Matt Cain is just a pretty good pitcher with one terrific season and a bunch of other pretty good ones. He has a good strikeout rate, doesn't walk many batters and keeps the ball in the park, plus he has pitched 200+ innings (well, 190 in 2006 as a 21-year-old) for six straight seasons, but he's just not an ace. I guess if the Giants think he's going to keep being that durable and that reliable, he's worth it...but whatever.
Offline
I think this is the price tag that we will see applied to Wainwright. You cant pay a pitcher much more.