I would be all over a 4 year $25M contract for Fielder. Probably 5 years. But years 7 and 8 in the numbers being suggested begin to scare me. And it isn't that you could just say that his prodcutive years would indeed work out to $25M per, because of the damage done in the following years when a gimpy shell of his former self guy still consumes 20%+ of the teams salary.
I absolutely get that, but for me I'd rather spend 7 or 8 years on the best young FA hitter than 5 or 6 on the best pitcher. If you'd told me I could have Fielder for the next 7 years or Felix for the next 5, I would take Fielder. And that's with me believing that Felix is a Roger Clemens sort of horse.
Johan Santana came out of Minnesota at age 28, signed a 6 year, $137 million dollar contract ($23 million/year), pitched great for a year, well for a couple more years with nagging injuries, then missed this year completely and who knows how he'll be for the next two.
Santana was a MONSTER pitcher. He may never be again.
That sort of thing happens to a pitcher at the drop of a hat. It's rarer for hitters. But the idea that you CANNOT take that risk, that I don't understand.
Fielder is not likely to take 25 million a year and take entire years where he never contributes. It happens with pitchers where their contributions go from TOR to zero.
But you can still WIN with a guy like that on the shelf - the Giants did in 2010 with Zito. The Cardinals won in 2011 with a guy WORTH 20 million on the shelf (though he wasn't making it, so it didn't kill their payroll as much). The idea that having a $20 million guy on your payroll means that if it gets shelved you are worthless just isn't true.
Especially for the Mariners, who've stated that attendance = payroll. If we win with Fielder, then payroll goes up when attendance does and he doesn't hamper us much at all.
Man, I wish we'd get some movement in this offseason so we can see the plan. Can't they hurry up? Don't they know how impatient I am?
~G