While nothing official from SNY or elsewhere, 22 minutes ago ESPNRadio’s Kevin Winter reported that the Mets and Max Scherzer have agreed to a 3/$130 deal. Let this be the official Scherzer does/doesn’t sign with the Mets thread.

25 comments on “Report has Mets signing Max Scherzer to a three-year deal

  • BrianJ

    And now SNY has the story, with a tease for an upcoming live video

  • JimO


  • BrianJ

    A Jeff Passan tweet confirms the 3/$130 deal and adds there’s an opt-out after the second season.

  • Name

    What’s crazy is that the last deal signed, although the dollar amount was nominally 7/210, it included so much defered money that the NPV of the deal was closer to 131 million.
    Assuming there’s no defered money this time around, the NPV is probably around 120m. And he’ll earn it over 3 years instead of 7. And at ages 37-39 instead of 30-36.

    It only takes 2 teams to create a bidding war. I wonder how much lower the 3rd highest offer was.

    • Brian Joura

      FWIW – Scherzer’s last deal had a bunch of deferred money. From Cot’s:

      2019-21 salaries ($105M) deferred without interest, to be paid in seven $15M installments each July 1 from 2022 to 2028
      deferrals reduce contract’s present-day value to $191,401,086 (by MLB calculation) or $191,409,858 (MLBPA calculation)

      Cot’s already has Scherzer on the Mets. However, they still have Rojas listed as manager…

      • Name

        MLB/MLBPA must have used a super low rate of return (1/2%?) in their present-value calculation.

        I got the 131m value from this article which used 7% return, https://blogs.fangraphs.com/max-scherzer-and-when-210-million-isnt-210-million/
        Which in hindsight so far is way too low as the average rate of return on the s&p for the last 7 years has been 15%.

        Who would have guessed he makes more in his late 30s than in his early 30s. He sure got lucky with his market timing too.

  • Wobbit

    Maybe the most exciting aspect to this trade, besides having the best 1-2 in the game, is the culture change that Scherzer will bring with him. He is a serious man, frighteningly intense, and not about to suffer fools or babies. He will make everyone else more serious just by his presence.

    A year ago the Mets had an intractable, deeply-troubling team chemistry… a bunch of looser, softer guys with no real leader and definitely no enforcer. Suddenly they have a heavy anchor rooted deeply into the ground, and the looser guys will have to be accountable… I did not think it was possible to solve the Mets’ problem so readily. I think Scherzer makes everybody better, including deGrom. The Braves and Phillies are squirting their pants…

    We all died and went to heaven…

    • Bob P


  • T.J.

    Mad Max is an animal for sure, and a certain HOF player. I’m not sure how many elite innings he’s got left in his arm, but it is hard to argue bringing in the best pitcher available, to pair with Mr. DeGrom and the gang.

    Uncle Stevie’s acquisitions need to be viewed in two contexts – the baseball value and the brand-building value. Paying a pitcher, even top caliber, $130 million for age 37-39 season is sick by any baseball metric. Ditto on the $341 million SS. But, a portion of those deals is not expense but equity, essentially purchasing an intangible asset. So, I’ll do my own math and assign $55 million of the Max deal and $100 million of the Lindor deal as intangible assets. So, $25 million a year for Mad Max is real nice. The other $155 million, stick that as additional goodwill value on top of the $2.5 billion or so paid for the team.

    • Name

      The excess value being considered goodwill is certainly an interesting way to look at these type of deals, although any amount for Lindor that was initially counted as goodwill has all but impaired to nothing and probably even negative at this point.
      Scherzer will definitely sell merch & tickets, and probably generate higher tv numbers too, even if he sucks next year.

  • Bob P

    There are some really good comments today by Wobbit and TJ about changing the culture with someone like Scherzer. As good as he’s been, I think that the Mets need that change more than anything and hopefully he brings that.

    Name also had a great comment (I think in the other thread) about how one team can spend $40+M on one player while others have $50-$60M payrolls. Even though I’m giddy to be on the good end of this, it’s not good for competitive balance in the game and I imagine there will be a discussion or two about that in the CBA talks.

    My last thought is that I like the direction the Mets are taking with relatively shorter contracts (outside of Lindor) with hopefully the plan being to continue developing the pipeline in the minors and going forward supplementing the team with free agent acquisitions rather than completely filling the team out with them. This spending spree is not a sustainable business model, even for someone with as deep pockets as Cohen, and who knows what the rules will be under the new CBA. Maybe that’s why they are trying to get in all this spending now.

  • Woodrow

    I’m thinking Stroman and Baez are no-go’s now. I’m a big Baez fan but Sherzer is great. How many more signings? I’m guessing another starter and a relief pitcher or two. Maybe trades?

  • TexasGusCC

    Enjoying reading all the comments and reveling in the atmosphere that surely has all of us euphoric. Once we digest that, it’s hard not to see the points Bob made here and Name made in the previous article.

    Kind of reminds me of the Greek Soccer League where two or three teams have the deep pockets, and the rest are scheduling filler making an appearance in the playoffs every once in a while. That’s not good. However, Cohen didn’t make the system and has nothing to apologize for. He wants to win, he deserves to spend his earnings any way he sees fit, and if our team benefits, yeah baby!!

    I think there needs to be a payroll cap, and obviously a floor. As a Mets fan, I love it and will love it more when they sign Suzuki and Kershaw. But as a pure baseball fan, it’s wrong. Now, having a big payroll and a bunch of superstars means nothing if your manager is an egomaniac with no clue – ahem, Dave Roberts. So, I hope they are smart.

    • ChrisF

      There have always been haves and have nots. The good news is there are now more haves with Texas getting real, and even the MAriners stepping up. I’m against a cap, but favor the luxury tax model. I’d prefer to see a raised base to 100M$ Coupled with luxury tax.

      • TexasGusCC

        Can’t have a floor to hurt the teams that don’t have the means if you can’t limit the teams that have the means and keep a level playing field.

        • ChrisF

          If an ownership group cannot make the grade, then they should be forced to sell. Team values have skyrocketed. A60M$ club is AAA. The lux tax distributes cash to lower level clubs, that works for me. No tears were falling for the Wilpons, nor should it fall for other scragglers.

  • Metsense

    Scherzer at 3/130m is unbelievable but expected. Cohen wants a championship and money is no object. The elite rich don’t say “how much”, instead they say “when will you get it done”. The Mets have the two of the best, dominant pitchers in the game which bodes well for them in the playoffs.

  • ChrisF

    To me right now what I see is a radical culture change from “cookie club” to “you earn every AB in this league”. I think championship teams need that sense of accountability. Lindor dressing down McNeil was the start of this. You can’t run around and just do whatever. Surely the absolute dedication of deGrom and Scherzer, Lindor etc will put that stupid everyone-gets-a-trophy attitude this team has has since Wright departed. I could not be more excited to see hard edged, all in, competent around the horn baseball coming from Queens. I want to see a substantial change to personal commitment, and accountability everywhere.

    That said, this is November. Jake still has not thrown a pitch in anger in half a season. He’s still a question mark until he isn’t. Right now he’s not the best pitcher ever, but a guy rehabbing. Let’s not forget Scherzer could not make his much needed start in the WS when he was needed most. Every day he gets older. Maybe he is Randy Johnson or Nolan Ryan, but that remains to be seen.it would be better if this was 4 years ago. Nonetheless the thought of a deGrom-Scherzer 1-2 is incredible and thinking the CY race could be between our pitchers makes me giddy. They will be mutual supporters but also internal competition that should be incredible must-see TV.

  • Footballhead

    So what other SP is still available? As I see it, we are as weak in our SP as we were at the end of the season. Oh sure deGrom is great; oh sure Scherzer is great…..so what! Will deGrom ever be able to get through a season again? Scherzer is 37, thirty seven! Even if I am wrong and these two studs are lights out next year, we still need three other SP.

    Carrasco? Forget him. Magill and Pederson? Unproven. Walker I like, but we need a couple more like him.

    As of now, Scherzer has replaced Stroman, nothing more, nothing less, at twice the price.
    And even if we had FIVE stud starters, we’ll need a bullpen to hold the line for the 2-3 innings that will be needed, day in and day out.
    At least get Hill back.

  • Mr_Math

    Still asking if anyone has an actual valid verifiable source concerning the extent/diagnosis and prognosis of JdG’s injury. All I’m reading here at 360 are opinions from Cassandra’s terminally pessimistic brothers who are certain that JdG has pancreatic cancer of his ulnar nerve because it is their fate to been forever suffering Mets fans.

    Thor was shut down for 2 entire seasons because of his injury/surgery/rehab. Ditto for Zach W’s nearly 2 year stint on the IL. Would Steve “Been fined $6B by the SEC” Cohen lie to us about JdG’s injury given he’s such an honest guy?

  • José

    This beast claims I “do not have permission to edit this comment” possibly because I waited too long to save after editing. Now it claims I have not the right to delete it and start over, further violating my human dignity

    Hope the above is not too retarded to be read successfully

    Also, why does this beast call me Mr_Math on previous post, and now calls me José which was my original Mets360 name?

  • Nym6986

    Seems Cohen can’t win with some of these comments. Used to greatly malign the Yankees who at one point made the playoffs 14 out of 15 straight years when only 4 teams made the playoffs. The evil empire bought their way in. We bought our way out because the ownership needed to make money from the team unlike Steinbrenner and now Cohen. The money for Max is obscene, no doubt about it, and at his age, almost absurd. But the game has changed and we are in the have and not the have not pile. Kind of feels good. To think at $43 million he is our #2 starter is sick. Then if healthy we need to resign Jake or he might switch uniforms. The key to keeping these players and others is to become competitive each year so that you win rings and keep having that goal realistically in sight. Love the smaller cheaper signings, if you consider $20 and $26 million dollar deals over two years to be cheap, but we got those players to boost our team and to serve as placeholders for the kids who are on the way. Bravo. Now sign Stro so we have a a solid 1-2-3 and one more top reliever and I dare someone not to pick us as the favorite in the NL. I feel we can now forego Bryant and Baez if that’s how it ends up. Only a week ago we desperately needed them to spark this team. Not anymore. Other people’s money – it was a fun movie (look it up) and it’s what we now finally have at Met fans. Let’s ride that #7 line to the top!!!

  • ChrisF

    I agree on the money. We need to worry less about how much they will spend versus the daily agony of how little the Wilpons would spend. They are different problems. Now that money is *not* a problem, we should not even talk about it. Cohen owns all the titles on the monopoly board except for Baltic Ave and Vermont Ave, and there is no apologizing for it. A little while back I wondered if Cohen would go to a 300M payroll, which now is assured. Why do we care what Cohen will invest? Why *should* we care what he will invest or what contract numbers he approves? The answer is whatever. We need to break the Stockholm Syndrome of identifying with poor teams and fussing about things. We wanted a bog market owner in a big market, and thats what we got. I couldnt care less about what other teams cannot keep up. I know what that feels like, and it sucked. Besides whatever he spends, that doesnt mean a perpetual winner is at hand. The Mets are what their record is, and frankly, it sucks – until that changes.

  • T.J.

    A belated follow up to the points about, especially Name and Bob P –
    I agree wholeheartedly that competitiveness is the league is a huge problem, and the spending gap between the rich and the poor has become extreme. This issue will hopefully get addressed to some degree as a result of the upcoming lockout. It’s not Cohen’s fault that he is rich, spent almost $3 billion for the team, wants to sign top name stars to win, and has yet to full established a model for sustained winning that includes an influx of less expensive talent to balance off the big contracts and prior loser deals (ahem, Brodie…). It is also not his fault that other franchises are completely tanking for years, spending extremely low, and likely profiting anyhow due to TV contracts and “revenue sharing”. MLB is different than the NFL and will never be completely equitable revenue wise, but it doesn’t need to be. High payrolls help but don’t guarantee winning. There are certainly changes that can be made that won’t function as a cap, but will raise the floor on spending, and will negate the draft spot advantages from having an awful record. Whether these two sides can agree on those, well, we shall see.

    For years I have felt the Mets should be able to spend like a big market team. Now they are, but my hope is that this is a “surge” in spending to fill the gap until player development improves. Having the Mets consistently in the top 25% of payrolls is good…having them or any other team (Dodgers) spending way more than others, or 6 times the lowest payrolls, that’s bad.

    • Bob P

      Love that last paragraph TJ. Sums up everything perfectly in my mind.

Leave a Reply to BrianJ Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

%d bloggers like this: