Quote:
Originally Posted by BigRedChief
We had no proven reliever. Most people in baseball thought it was a good deal at the time because it was a one year deal. Low risk. Who cares about losing $15 million total? How does that effect us long term? I'm also going off the articles and podcasts saying it was Matheny wanting Holland. Supposedly, Matheny went to Dewitt and asked for Holland.
|
"Most people in baseball" are the same idiots who mostly still refuse to acknowledge how god-awful Mike Matheny was.
And those are the same people who want to argue that a win share is worth $8 million.
We'll discuss it in terms that make the most sense in relation to Greg Holland - obesity. The national average for men is just a tick under 200 lbs and our national height is just a tick under 5'10''. So if a 5'10'' dude weighs 200 lbs he can say "hey, that's average".
Fantastic, it's average, but it ain't healthy because the average includes Omar the Tentmaker who needs a crane to get out of his bathtub and a whole slew of other exceptionally unhealthy people lugging around 100 lbs more than they need to be. 'Average' ain't the mark here, lads. Healthy is.
That's the context in which you need to consider the $8 million WAR. You pay $14 million for a 2 win reliever (which is about what even the optimistic idiot talking heads thought he'd be) and you can claim you beat the average by $2 million. But average sucks when it includes the Albert Pujols and Eric Hosmer's of the world.
'Healthy' is $4-5 million/win. There was no chance in the world that the Cardinals were getting 3 wins out of Greg Holland. I said at the time that I'd be shocked if they got 1. There was never any way to make that anything less than a LESS terrible deal. But it was a terrible deal in either event and the fact that Mike Matheny needed him as a wubby should have made it all the more apparent that he needed a new manager and not an out of shape, declining reliever.