Worst Contracts Ever

[Dandy 0]

Inspired by a post in the MLB Offseason Thread.

[naiwf 0]

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2831135

 

The undisputed champ in my mind

 

From the above link: In the seventh year of a $121M, eight-year contract, Mike Hampton hasn't thrown a full season since 2004. He's not expected back for 2007, either. Assuming that, here's the breakdown of Hampton's worth.

Stat Total $ Per Stat

Starts 131 $791,044.78

Wins 53 $2M

K's 420 $252,380.95

 

(Dis)Honrable mentions in no specific order

 

Allan Houston's 2nd contract as a Knick (6 years, $100 million) when they knew his knees were shot. They didn't use the Allan Houston exemption on him either. Ugh.

 

Bryant 'Big Country' Reeves - (6 years, $65 million) BWAHAHAHAHA

 

Carl Pavano stealing money from the NYY

 

Chan Ho Park (5 years, $65 million)

 

Larry Brown (5 years, $50 million) which turned out to be almost $30 million for 1 year. . . where the Knicks won 23 games

 

Michael Vick (10 years, $130 million w/a $37 million signing bonus)

 

Roger Clemens '07 prorated monstrosity

[Cheech Tremendous 0]

Mike Hampton, Barry Zito, Albert Belle, Denny Neagle, Bobby Bonilla, Mo Vaughn, Darren Dreifort, Juwan Howard, Grant Hill, Allan Houston, Brian Grant and Stephon Marbury all immediately come to mind.

 

We could also have a Yankees category:

Pavano, Kevin Brown, Randy Jonhson, Roger Clemens, Jason Giambi, Jaret Wright

[Guest RyechnaiaSobaka]

Alexei Yashin.

 

10 years. $87.5 million.

[theintensifier 0]

Rashard Lewis and his $126,000,000 contract. Or C Web's last contract with the Kings. Ken Jr's contract is pretty stupid, he's obviously on the decline. Shaq's contract with the Heat is insane, as well.

[Brett Favre 0]

We could also have a Yankees category:

Pavano, Kevin Brown, Randy Jonhson, Roger Clemens, Jason Giambi, Jaret Wright

 

The only guy deserving to be on the worst contract ever list is Pavano. We didn't give Brown his contract (and he was at the end of his contract with us). Randy Johnson only had like 2 years and isn't even on the team. Wright only pitched two years for us. Giambi was good for 4 out of 6 years. Clemens was only a one year thing.

 

A bad contract would be like JD Drew stinking up the joint his first year then having him for like 4 more years.

[Guest RyechnaiaSobaka]

We could also have a Yankees category:

Pavano, Kevin Brown, Randy Jonhson, Roger Clemens, Jason Giambi, Jaret Wright

 

The only guy deserving to be on the worst contract ever list is Pavano. We didn't give Brown his contract (and he was at the end of his contract with us). Randy Johnson only had like 2 years and isn't even on the team. Wright only pitched two years for us. Giambi was good for 4 out of 6 years. Clemens was only a one year thing.

 

A bad contract would be like JD Drew stinking up the joint his first year then having him for like 4 more years.

 

Which year are you talking about? Drew had a couple bad years with the Cardinals (1999, 2002). Do you mean this past season with the Red Sox? It would qualify, depending on how you looked at it, as the 2nd or 3rd worst season of his career. Are you predicting he will have 4 more bad years with the Red Sox?

 

Also, just to pick one, Jaret Wright got $21 million over 3 years from the Yankees. They traded him in 2006, but they paid the Orioles $4 million to take him. So they paid a grand total of $18 million for two seasons of him pitching for their team plus another season of him pitching for a division rival. That doesn't qualify as a bad contract?

[Brett Favre 0]

This past year.

 

The Jaret Wright contract isn't even close to being the worst. He had an awful year and a mediocre year. It's not like we signed him for 6 years.

[Guest RyechnaiaSobaka]

This past year.

 

The Jaret Wright contract isn't even close to being the worst. He had an awful year and a mediocre year. It's not like we signed him for 6 years.

 

I agree. It's not even close to being the worst. I guess when people are throwing out five different players all signed by the same team in a thread called "Worst Contracts Ever," it starts to degrade into "Bad Contracts From Recent History" or "Worst Yankees Contracts," which I think is what Cheech was aiming for.

[Cheech Tremendous 0]

This past year.

 

The Jaret Wright contract isn't even close to being the worst. He had an awful year and a mediocre year. It's not like we signed him for 6 years.

 

 

JD Drew underperformed in 2007 but still had an okay year. He could easily bounce back to career form over the next four. It's really hard to call a contract bad after one year (unless we are talking about Barry Zito), especially when the contract given was essentially market value.

[Brett Favre 0]

We'll see.

 

The winner of this contest (well runner up to Mike Hampton) is Jerome James. He's not making the most money (like 5-6 million a year) but for literally absolutely nothing for like 5 years.

[Cheech Tremendous 0]

We'll see.

 

The winner of this contest (well runner up to Mike Hampton) is Jerome James. He's not making the most money (like 5-6 million a year) but for literally absolutely nothing for like 5 years.

 

 

They don't really qualify as the worst ever, but some of the worst contracts in the NBA have passed through the Knicks roster recently: Allan Houston, Jalen Rose, Stephon Marbury, Jerome James, Q Richardson, Zach Randolph, Steve Francis, Eddy Curry and Jamal Crawford.

[CanadianChris 0]

Alexei Yashin.

 

10 years. $87.5 million.

Second one I thought of, after Hampton.

 

Others: Chan Ho Park (5yrs/$65M), Larry Hughes (5yrs/$60M).

[Guest RyechnaiaSobaka]

This past year.

 

The Jaret Wright contract isn't even close to being the worst. He had an awful year and a mediocre year. It's not like we signed him for 6 years.

 

 

JD Drew underperformed in 2007 but still had an okay year. He could easily bounce back to career form over the next four. It's really hard to call a contract bad after one year (unless we are talking about Barry Zito), especially when the contract given was essentially market value.

 

I agree about Drew.

 

I don't understand the Zito thing though. He did get a massive contract, but that was the market. He gave the Giants fewer innings than he's turned in during any other full season he's pitched in the majors, which is a strike against him. He didn't strike out as many batters either, but on the plus side, he walked fewer batters than he has since 2004 and he let up the fewest hits of his career (tied with 2002 when he also gave up 182). It amounted to a 1.35 WHIP, which is not really what I'd like to be paying all that money for, but he had a 1.40 WHIP the year before. It's not like the Giants are getting something other than what they should have expected. They apparently valued this performance at that price. They couldn't have seriously expected him to be worth $18 million in his age 35 season, though, which would be his final one with the team.

 

(For what it's worth, if I use my favorite translated stats - which I didn't for the above information - Zito's 2007 actually looks a lot better. A 1.26 WHIP instead of 1.35, whereas his 2006 numbers would have been a 1.38 instead of 1.40. He let up fewer hits, home runs, and walks per nine innings, too. He struck out a hair fewer batters per 9 innings than in 2006. I still don't think it's necessarily worth $18 million, but again, that's what the market was at the time.)

[Cheech Tremendous 0]

I don't understand the Zito thing though. He did get a massive contract, but that was the market. He gave the Giants fewer innings than he's turned in during any other full season he's pitched in the majors, which is a strike against him. He didn't strike out as many batters either, but on the plus side, he walked fewer batters than he has since 2004 and he let up the fewest hits of his career (tied with 2002 when he also gave up 182). It amounted to a 1.35 WHIP, which is not really what I'd like to be paying all that money for, but he had a 1.40 WHIP the year before. It's not like the Giants are getting something other than what they should have expected. They apparently valued this performance at that price.

 

(For what it's worth, if I use my favorite translated stats - which I didn't for the above information - Zito's 2007 actually looks a lot better. A 1.26 WHIP instead of 1.35, whereas his 2006 numbers would have been a 1.38 instead of 1.40. He let up fewer hits, home runs, and walks per nine innings, too. He struck out a hair fewer batters per 9 innings than in 2006. I still don't think it's necessarily worth $18 million, but again, that's what the market was at the time.)

 

Barry Zito is a number 3 starter who got the richest pitcher contract in MLB history. His 98 ERA+ this year was atrocious and makes him decidedly below average. The Giants failed to recognize that he pitched in a pitching haven with one of the best defenses in baseball behind him. Zito turning into a pumpkin was predicted by every baseball fan with a brain (a group that does not include Brian Sabean).

 

I also disagree with the point about that being the market at the time. While contracts certainly got out of control last offseason, his was the farthest out of line and supposedly tens of millions more than any other team offered him. They went higher on AAV and years than any other pitcher has gotten (compare recent deals to Oswalt and Zambrano).

[Black Lushus 0]

the entire Knicks organization.

[Cheech Tremendous 0]

If we want to include coaches, how about Larry Brown (Knicks), Steve Spurrier (Reskins) and Rick Pitino (Celtics)?

[Guest RyechnaiaSobaka]

I don't understand the Zito thing though. He did get a massive contract, but that was the market. He gave the Giants fewer innings than he's turned in during any other full season he's pitched in the majors, which is a strike against him. He didn't strike out as many batters either, but on the plus side, he walked fewer batters than he has since 2004 and he let up the fewest hits of his career (tied with 2002 when he also gave up 182). It amounted to a 1.35 WHIP, which is not really what I'd like to be paying all that money for, but he had a 1.40 WHIP the year before. It's not like the Giants are getting something other than what they should have expected. They apparently valued this performance at that price.

 

(For what it's worth, if I use my favorite translated stats - which I didn't for the above information - Zito's 2007 actually looks a lot better. A 1.26 WHIP instead of 1.35, whereas his 2006 numbers would have been a 1.38 instead of 1.40. He let up fewer hits, home runs, and walks per nine innings, too. He struck out a hair fewer batters per 9 innings than in 2006. I still don't think it's necessarily worth $18 million, but again, that's what the market was at the time.)

 

Barry Zito is a number 3 starter who got the richest pitcher contract in MLB history. His 98 ERA+ this year was atrocious and makes him decidedly below average. The Giants failed to recognize that he pitched in a pitching haven with one of the best defenses in baseball behind him. Zito turning into a pumpkin was predicted by every baseball fan with a brain (a group that does not include Brian Sabean).

 

I also disagree with the point about that being the market at the time. While contracts certainly got out of control last offseason, his was the farthest out of line and supposedly tens of millions more than any other team offered him. They went higher on AAV and years than any other pitcher has gotten (compare recent deals to Oswalt and Zambrano).

 

That makes sense. If anything the argument about him performing better in 2007 than 2006 only makes the Giants bigger idiots, because it was the 2006 season they were coming off of when they gave him the big contract. Every baseball fan with a brain should have noted that his reputation was based totally off of his ridiculous 2002 season when he had a 101 pitching runs above replacement and 3.11 defense-adjusted ERA. He was never nearly that good again. It's more like Zito would have continued to be mediocre for the Giants. It's not like he imploded.

 

As far as the market stuff goes, yeah, Brian Sabean is an idiot. But people do crazy stuff for starting pitching. I'm not saying so much that Zito's deal is comparable or even proportional to anybody else, but just that the market itself is such that starting pitching is so overvalued that things like this will happen from time to time.

[Cheech Tremendous 0]

That makes sense. If anything the argument about him performing better in 2007 than 2006 only makes the Giants bigger idiots, because it was the 2006 season they were coming off of when they gave him the big contract. Every baseball fan with a brain should have noted that his reputation was based totally off of his ridiculous 2002 season when he had a 101 pitching runs above replacement and 3.11 defense-adjusted ERA. He was never nearly that good again. It's more like Zito would have continued to be mediocre for the Giants. It's not like he imploded.

 

He wasn't better in 2007 than 2006. He dove of a fucking cliff in 2007.

 

It was a failure on the Giants part to account for things like defense and park effects. Real baseball fans knew that he was a mid-rotation starter and not an ace. The Giants paid him like a multiple Cy winner.

[Guest Smues]

Bad contracts make me think instantly of Darren Dreifort. He signed a 5 year deal in 2001 and played in only 3 of those 5 seasons, winning 9 games. Baseball-reference shows him earning 57 million, but I thought the contract was 55 million so I used that number to computer his pay per stat.

 

Darren Dreifort

Starts 26 $2,115,384.61

Innings 205 2/3 $267,431.10

Wins 9 $6,111,111.11

K's 221 $248,868.77

Saves 1 $55,000,000

 

Not as long as the Hampton contract, and not as financially harmful, but in Hampton's defense he was at least productive for some small portion of his contract. Dreifort was useless.

 

Mo Vaugn also comes to mind. I don't know the exact dollar amount and length of his contract, but I do know he made a little over $17 million in both 2003 and 2004. He didn't play in 2004, and in 2003 he made $17 million for 79 at bats, 15 hits and 3 homeruns.

[AboveAverage484 0]

Not really one of the worst contracts in history, but didn't Larry Johnson sign some kind of mega bucks deal with the Hornets? IIRC, he was the highest paid athlete in pro sports at the time. When he was healthy, he was a baller, but that's the key, when he was healthy. He probably only had two really great, productive seasons where he stayed uninjured.

[snuffbox 0]

Whatever Tony Mandrich got.

[Brett Favre 0]

We'll see.

 

The winner of this contest (well runner up to Mike Hampton) is Jerome James. He's not making the most money (like 5-6 million a year) but for literally absolutely nothing for like 5 years.

 

 

They don't really qualify as the worst ever, but some of the worst contracts in the NBA have passed through the Knicks roster recently: Allan Houston, Jalen Rose, Stephon Marbury, Jerome James, Q Richardson, Zach Randolph, Steve Francis, Eddy Curry and Jamal Crawford.

 

It must be your I hate New York bias because Houston and James are the only ones there that are horrible. Marbury wasn't signed by the Knicks and was a big time PG when he signed with Phoenix. Same with Francis with Houston and he only spent like a year and a half with New York. Z-Bo averages 20 and 10 each year and deserves his contract. Centers get mad money nowadays so Curry getting 9 million a year ain't bad at all. Jamal Crawford makes like 7-8 million a year, same with Q, and honestly that's not bad either the way people are handing out contracts.

[Guest RyechnaiaSobaka]

That makes sense. If anything the argument about him performing better in 2007 than 2006 only makes the Giants bigger idiots, because it was the 2006 season they were coming off of when they gave him the big contract. Every baseball fan with a brain should have noted that his reputation was based totally off of his ridiculous 2002 season when he had a 101 pitching runs above replacement and 3.11 defense-adjusted ERA. He was never nearly that good again. It's more like Zito would have continued to be mediocre for the Giants. It's not like he imploded.

 

He wasn't better in 2007 than 2006. He dove of a fucking cliff in 2007.

 

It was a failure on the Giants part to account for things like defense and park effects. Real baseball fans knew that he was a mid-rotation starter and not an ace. The Giants paid him like a multiple Cy winner.

 

By what measurement? I used WHIP because it's simple. Even without factoring out the parks or anything else, he had a 1.40 WHIP in 2006. It went down to 1.35 in 2007. I don't see how that's falling off a cliff.

 

Even if you use more advanced stats, there's only a few things that were worse for him in 2007 than 2006. In many ways his 2007 season was quite comparable to his 2004 season.

 

I'm not saying he was very good last year, but I am not sure where he fell off a cliff.

 

[Ripper 0]

Most bad NBA contracts aren't really that bad. Most guys with huge contracts were actually worth it at some point. Its just because they were backloaded contracts and look bad later. Jalen Rose, Steve Francis, Stephon marbury, Penny Hardaway, all of these guys were allstar caliber players when they signed their big contracts.

 

I think you have to look at a guy like Jim Mcilvane. I know, 7 years, 33 million might not look like alot now, but at the time that was a pretty big contract for a guy that had done nothing. Ever. Then it pissed off half of the sonic players because he was getting paid more than most of them for no reason what so ever. It halfway broke the team up because it was part of the reason Kemp was so pisssed off with the Sonics refusing to give him a contract extension but signing Mister 3 points 3 rebounds a game to a 33 million dollar contract.

[Cheech Tremendous 0]

It must be your I hate New York bias because Houston and James are the only ones there that are horrible. Marbury wasn't signed by the Knicks and was a big time PG when he signed with Phoenix. Same with Francis with Houston and he only spent like a year and a half with New York. Z-Bo averages 20 and 10 each year and deserves his contract. Centers get mad money nowadays so Curry getting 9 million a year ain't bad at all. Jamal Crawford makes like 7-8 million a year, same with Q, and honestly that's not bad either the way people are handing out contracts.

 

I said passed through the roster because I didn't want to imply that all those deals were handed out by New York. Isiah just saw it fit to acquire all of those hefty contracts for his bloated, underachieving roster.

[Cheech Tremendous 0]

That makes sense. If anything the argument about him performing better in 2007 than 2006 only makes the Giants bigger idiots, because it was the 2006 season they were coming off of when they gave him the big contract. Every baseball fan with a brain should have noted that his reputation was based totally off of his ridiculous 2002 season when he had a 101 pitching runs above replacement and 3.11 defense-adjusted ERA. He was never nearly that good again. It's more like Zito would have continued to be mediocre for the Giants. It's not like he imploded.

 

He wasn't better in 2007 than 2006. He dove of a fucking cliff in 2007.

 

It was a failure on the Giants part to account for things like defense and park effects. Real baseball fans knew that he was a mid-rotation starter and not an ace. The Giants paid him like a multiple Cy winner.

 

By what measurement? I used WHIP because it's simple. Even without factoring out the parks or anything else, he had a 1.40 WHIP in 2006. It went down to 1.35 in 2007. I don't see how that's falling off a cliff.

 

Even if you use more advanced stats, there's only a few things that were worse for him in 2007 than 2006. In many ways his 2007 season was quite comparable to his 2004 season.

 

I'm not saying he was very good last year, but I am not sure where he fell off a cliff.

 

 

 

Using ERA+, which is park and league adjusted, saw Barry Zito slip from a 116 in 2006 to a 98 in 2007. He went from having a middle of the rotation pedigree to below average as a starting pitcher. Some of his underlying peripherals (K, BB) went in the wrong direction as well.

[Guest RyechnaiaSobaka]

His K/9 went down but his BB/9 got better. We're talking about shifts of 0.1 and 0.5, in any case. I don't have ERA+, but that is a pretty big drop-off. What was his ERA+ in 2004, if you have it handy?

[alfdogg 0]

The Golden State Warriors have over $29 million of Adonal Foyle's contract still on their cap.

[Cheech Tremendous 0]

His K/9 went down but his BB/9 got better. We're talking about shifts of 0.1 and 0.5, in any case. I don't have ERA+, but that is a pretty big drop-off. What was his ERA+ in 2004, if you have it handy?

 

baseball-reference.com is your friend.

 

In 2004, it was 101. That was the lowest of his career prior to this season.