2006-12-29 01:46:10 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Baseball
Suppan - a 7 year deal is such a burden for a team (see: Arod).
2006-12-29 03:05:43 · answer #1 · answered by iwasnotanazipolka 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Neither are good deals but if I had to choose between the two I would say Zito. Zito is going into the NL which means typically the #8 and 9 hitter are the weaker hitters on the team so he should do well there. Don't get me wrong Zito is a good pitcher but not worth that kind of money. I wonder if I could hire Boras to represent me at my job?
2006-12-29 13:25:53 · answer #2 · answered by Oz 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Both are bad deals. I like the Mets school of thought, only superstar pitchers get more than 3 years in a contract. Zito is good, beter than average, but no superstar.
The Suppan deal is a little better, but he is a lot older than Barry Zito.
2006-12-29 10:15:36 · answer #3 · answered by vertical732 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Both deals are equally ridiculous; Zito's is the worse of the two simply because of the length of the deal. $100 million for a player that plays every 5th day is just non-sensical to me. All baseball contracts these days are non-sensical to me.
2006-12-29 11:45:51 · answer #4 · answered by RichMac82 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
as from past experience Suppan will give the Brewers some good innings,but can the Brew Crew give him enough support (run wise),He'll Win 10-14 games.Not enough for a pennant chance
Zito now will give you a bonifide starter with a chance to Win every time he takes the hill
2006-12-29 11:56:22 · answer #5 · answered by Ricky Lee 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Neither. Both overpaid like crazy. But if I had to pick, Suppan really solidifies the Milwaukee rotation (Sheets, Capuano, Suppan...) and makes them a potentially good team for next year. So I'd say him versus the Giants one good pitcher.
2006-12-29 09:49:19 · answer #6 · answered by J 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the giants should have kept jason s.,,,the better of the 3,otherwise the brewers are gettin the deal w/ suppan
2006-12-29 11:52:38 · answer #7 · answered by deepbluerob2002 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Zito - better to pay big bucks for high quality than "almost big bucks" for lower quality.
Yankees did similar (paying "almost big bucks") for Pavano, Jaret Wright yielding little to no positive results.
2006-12-29 13:22:11 · answer #8 · answered by DF 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What these deals really mean is that neither player cares about winning but is only going for the cash.
2006-12-29 20:58:19 · answer #9 · answered by turkey 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Giants getting Zito!!!!!!!!!
2006-12-29 18:36:23 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋