Shaun Marcum 2013 Outlook
#1
Posted 24 January 2013 - 09:07 AM
According to Jon Heyman of CBS Sports, the Mets have signed a one-year contract with Shaun Marcum.
Marcum will hope to revitalize his value in the pitcher-friendly confines of Citi Field before attempting to finally cash in big in the fall. The 31-year-old right-hander posted a decent 3.70 ERA, 1.27 WHIP and 7.9 K/9 in 124 innings last year for the Brewers while battling elbow issues. He'll carry a good amount of fantasy value in 2013 if he's healthy.
Anything to see here? End-game flier in drafts possibly.
#2
Posted 24 January 2013 - 09:15 AM
Also now in Citi Field, i'll be looking to add him later in drafts.
#3
Posted 24 January 2013 - 09:28 AM
#4
Posted 24 January 2013 - 09:34 AM
dzemens, on 24 January 2013 - 09:28 AM, said:
Haha i read 1 yr 8 million with an option for a 2nd year. Even if his elbow falls off in the 1st week of the season, thats still a no brainer signing. Marcum has #2 SP type upside.
#5
Posted 24 January 2013 - 09:43 AM
Whoopie!, on 24 January 2013 - 09:34 AM, said:
dzemens, on 24 January 2013 - 09:28 AM, said:
Haha i read 1 yr 8 million with an option for a 2nd year. Even if his elbow falls off in the 1st week of the season, thats still a no brainer signing. Marcum has #2 SP type upside.
Good signing, solid late round play but it seems like its a bad matchup.
#6
Posted 24 January 2013 - 09:45 AM
dzemens, on 24 January 2013 - 09:28 AM, said:
Whoopie!, on 24 January 2013 - 09:34 AM, said:
dzemens, on 24 January 2013 - 09:28 AM, said:
Haha i read 1 yr 8 million with an option for a 2nd year. Even if his elbow falls off in the 1st week of the season, thats still a no brainer signing. Marcum has #2 SP type upside.
The 2 points aren't mutually exclusive - a 1-year deal with team option has almost no risk for the Mets. But yeah, for Marcum's long-term prospects...I hope he has a good personal MD.
(On a more serious note - were there ANY changes in the medical staff of the Mets? Without all the details from the past 3-4 years, it's impossible to know for sure, but either the staff needs to change, or the FO needs to start listening to their concerns - because it's either the opinions weren't good, or the FO didn't listen).
AL-only 5x5, Roto - 2010 & 2011 league champion
RotoWood 2011 League Runner-Up - Mixed Roto regular season / H2H playoff 5x5 format - 3rd place reg. season, lost in finals
Been a blast everyone - take care, and remember to abide by the CoC, and to help your fellow community out - it's what's made the Forum community great!
P.S. My passion is primarily FBB - you'd LOL at my football track record!
#7
Posted 24 January 2013 - 10:34 AM
RotoRaysfan, on 24 January 2013 - 09:45 AM, said:
dzemens, on 24 January 2013 - 09:28 AM, said:
Whoopie!, on 24 January 2013 - 09:34 AM, said:
dzemens, on 24 January 2013 - 09:28 AM, said:
Haha i read 1 yr 8 million with an option for a 2nd year. Even if his elbow falls off in the 1st week of the season, thats still a no brainer signing. Marcum has #2 SP type upside.
The 2 points aren't mutually exclusive - a 1-year deal with team option has almost no risk for the Mets. But yeah, for Marcum's long-term prospects...I hope he has a good personal MD.
(On a more serious note - were there ANY changes in the medical staff of the Mets? Without all the details from the past 3-4 years, it's impossible to know for sure, but either the staff needs to change, or the FO needs to start listening to their concerns - because it's either the opinions weren't good, or the FO didn't listen).
I'll be eyeing him up as a late rd sleeper. should be cheap
#8
Posted 24 January 2013 - 10:36 AM
#9
Posted 24 January 2013 - 10:48 AM
*********
#10
Posted 24 January 2013 - 11:12 AM
Patrick Bateman, on 24 January 2013 - 10:48 AM, said:
Well hes got 4 pitches Marcum, mixes it up alot with a nasty curve. And has always had good control. He's a perfect fit for Citi Field assuming he is healthy
#11
Posted 24 January 2013 - 01:10 PM
Johan/Marcum/Harvey/Niese looks pretty respectable
2008 Extra Base Hit Dynasty League Champion - The Inaugural Season
Foots...
'06, '07, '08 & '09 Boozers & Losers League Champ
#12
Posted 24 January 2013 - 02:43 PM
malta69, on 24 January 2013 - 01:10 PM, said:
Johan/Marcum/Harvey/Niese looks pretty respectable
And Gee ...and Wheeler in due time.
Harvey/Wheeler/Niese going to be a solid foundation for yrs.
If this team can get some solid bats in here with Wright/Davis/Darnaud, future looks decent
#13
Posted 24 January 2013 - 04:41 PM
Whoopie!, on 24 January 2013 - 02:43 PM, said:
malta69, on 24 January 2013 - 01:10 PM, said:
Johan/Marcum/Harvey/Niese looks pretty respectable
And Gee ...and Wheeler in due time.
Harvey/Wheeler/Niese going to be a solid foundation for yrs.
If this team can get some solid bats in here with Wright/Davis/Darnaud, future looks decent
For the first time in a while the Mets actually have a decent outllook in the future... but they still need to add something to their OF (not sure if that something is Bourn). Back to Marcum, I think this is a great signing because if he starts out great then they could always trade him to a contender at the deadline for prospects, they also can might be able to get a good draft pick at the end of the year if they don't want to resign him.
#14
Posted 24 January 2013 - 05:29 PM
#15
Posted 24 January 2013 - 07:55 PM
#16
Posted 25 January 2013 - 08:47 AM

#17
Posted 25 January 2013 - 09:02 AM
Dissection, on 24 January 2013 - 05:29 PM, said:
Well they're apparently petitioning MLB to forfeit their 2nd rd pick if they signed Bourn. They have the #11 pick but they did finish with a bottom 10 losing record. Top 10 picks are protected, they may be able to keep that pick still. We'll see. Im not even sure how it all works, Pittsburgh wasnt able to sign that guy last year in the 1st, so they would get this Mets pick?
Anyone?
Edited by Whoopie!, 25 January 2013 - 09:03 AM.
#18
Posted 25 January 2013 - 09:08 AM
Whoopie!, on 25 January 2013 - 09:02 AM, said:
Dissection, on 24 January 2013 - 05:29 PM, said:
Well they're apparently petitioning MLB to forfeit their 2nd rd pick if they signed Bourn. They have the #11 pick but they did finish with a bottom 10 losing record. Top 10 picks are protected, they may be able to keep that pick still. We'll see. Im not even sure how it all works, Pittsburgh wasnt able to sign that guy last year in the 1st, so they would get this Mets pick?
Anyone?
From what I understand, the Mets pick would have been top-10 protected, but the Pirates got another high pick this year because they failed to sign their first rounder last year. The Mets are arguing that their pick would have been protected if not for the incompetence of the Pirates and/or said prospect.
This would also suggest to me that the Mets may already have the framework of a deal in place for Bourn and may move quickly if MLB rules in their favor.
Twitter: @MrJaredMoore
#19
Posted 25 January 2013 - 09:13 AM
TheJRod2006, on 25 January 2013 - 09:08 AM, said:
Whoopie!, on 25 January 2013 - 09:02 AM, said:
Dissection, on 24 January 2013 - 05:29 PM, said:
Well they're apparently petitioning MLB to forfeit their 2nd rd pick if they signed Bourn. They have the #11 pick but they did finish with a bottom 10 losing record. Top 10 picks are protected, they may be able to keep that pick still. We'll see. Im not even sure how it all works, Pittsburgh wasnt able to sign that guy last year in the 1st, so they would get this Mets pick?
Anyone?
From what I understand, the Mets pick would have been top-10 protected, but the Pirates got another high pick this year because they failed to sign their first rounder last year. The Mets are arguing that their pick would have been protected if not for the incompetence of the Pirates and/or said prospect.
This would also suggest to me that the Mets may already have the framework of a deal in place for Bourn and may move quickly if MLB rules in their favor.
Agreed. You dont go thru all that w/o the intent to sign. Now if they're denied, i cant touch Bourn as a Mets fan. Just makes no sense. Those 1st rd picks and #11 overall, just wayyyy to valuable.
2nd rd pick? Get Bourn here fast!
Oh and that rule is terrible, why should the Mets be penalized for the ineptitude of Pittsburgh??!
Edited by Whoopie!, 25 January 2013 - 09:14 AM.
#20
Posted 27 January 2013 - 02:02 PM
Quote
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users













