Tigers, Scherzer Done Talking Extension For Season

3:00pm: Morosi tweets the Tigers' offer was for six years and $144MM, identical to Cole Hamels2012 extension.

1:07 pm: Jon Paul Morosi of FOX Sports also spoke with Boras and the agent indicated both sides were active in talks and there was a price point at which Scherzer would have said yes, but he declined to disclose the details of his proposal to the Tigers (Twitter links).

12:25 pm: Scott Boras tells ESPN.com it wasn't Scherzer who rejected the extension offer, but the Tigers. "Max Scherzer made a substantial long-term contract extension offer to the Detroit Tigers that would have placed him among the highest-paid pitchers in baseball, and the offer was rejected by Detroit,'' Boras said. "Max is very happy with the city of Detroit, the fans and his teammates, and we will continue negotiating with the Tigers at season's end."

10:58am: An industry source told ESPN.com's Jayson Stark that the Tigers' offer to Scherzer was for a slightly lower figure than the $25.7MM per year that Justin Verlander received in the extension he signed last spring.  However, the deal still would have placed Scherzer among the top six highest-paid pitchers in baseball in terms of average annual value.

That means that the offer would have averaged at least $24MM a year. The only pitchers currently earning that much or more are the Clayton Kershaw ($30.7MM per year), Verlander ($25.7MM), Felix Hernandez ($25MM), Zack Greinke ($24.5MM), C.C. Sabathia ($24.4MM), Cliff Lee ($24MM), and Cole Hamels ($24MM).

It's worth noting that there's no word yet on how many years the Tigers offered Scherzer or whether there was an opt-out clause in the final proposal.

8:11am: The Tigers announced that Max Scherzer has rejected the Tigers' latest extension offer, meaning that talks between the two sides are done for the season.  The pitcher has made it known that he would not negotiate a new contract during the 2014 season.

"This can be a major distraction," Scherzer said back in February. "I understand I have a chance to secure my future here with the team. I want that to happen. But at the same time, I’m not going to drag negotiations out into the season."

The Tigers' release indicates that the club made a "substantial, long-term contract extension offer…that would have placed him among the highest paid pitchers in baseball."  Moving forward, they say, there will be no further talks during the year.

Scherzer, a Scott Boras client, will play out his last arbitration-eligible season on a one-year, $15.525MM deal that broke the record for a raise by a five-year service time pitcher.  The 29-year-old was stellar last season, posting a 2.90 ERA with 10.1 K/9 and 2.4 BB/9 in 214 1/3 innings. With Clayton Kershaw locked up and taken out of the 2015 free agent market, Scherzer will now stand as the premier pitcher next winter.   

While no one can reasonably use Kershaw as a comparable, his new seven-year, $215MM deal with the Dodgers certainly raises the ceiling for top starters like Scherzer.  As our own Jeff Todd noted in January, Masahiro Tanaka's seven-year, $155MM deal ($175MM when including $20MM posting fee) could have been relevant to Boras' case.

Edward Creech contributed to this post.


101 Responses to Tigers, Scherzer Done Talking Extension For Season Leave a Reply

  1. Bill Couch 1 year ago

    Trade him then. whats he going to do when he goes 14-11 with a 3.45 era

    • Michael 1 year ago

      Boras will say that if he had a better infield, better run support and a more jovial locker room atmosphere, he would have been 21-4. That the 14 wins were accomplished on Scherzer’s grit and the 11 losses were not his fault. Then he’ll offer his thoughts on world affairs.

      • Mr Pike 1 year ago

        He can’t complain about the locker room or the run support. That is easily refuted. The infield was a huge problem. He has a good case there.

    • LordOfTheSwings 1 year ago

      Well he’s won 15+ in each of the last 3 years and has lost 9 or less in each of those years… so that doesn’t seem likely, not to mention W-L record is a terrible indicator of value and he is very hard to predict.

      Although that ERA would not be surprising.

      • Mr Pike 1 year ago

        W-L record will be relevant as long as they award championships based on it. In fantasy leagues it’s not that important.

        • LordOfTheSwings 1 year ago

          Well they don’t award championships based on individual pitchers regular season W-L records.
          I’m just saying, if Scherzer went 14-11 next year with a 3.35 ERA, as opposed to 16-8 with a 3.35 ERA (with the same innings, and ratios), that really doesn’t tell you anything about his future performance, nor do I think it would change the contract that he’d get in free agency either, as most GMs are smart enough to realize that.

    • publius varrus 1 year ago

      Mr. Boras will say Pedro Martinez went 16-9, 3.90 in ’04 and BOS won the WS, now give Max his millions.

  2. mmwatkin 1 year ago

    Apparently the offer “would have placed him among the highest paid pitchers in baseball” according to the Tigers.

    Maybe the Tigers offered just shy of Verlander’s current deal and Scherzer wanted to top it?

    • LordOfTheSwings 1 year ago

      I wonder if that means among the highest total contracts, or highest AAVs.
      I think all that really tells you that the offer was for 22m+/year for 6 or 7 years.
      He probably is looking for something in the neighborhood of Verlander’s deal, and like you said, maybe more than Verlander.

  3. Interesting and scary at the same time. I wonder what the offer was, someone will leak it eventually I suppose. Boras will probably use it later on as a leveraging device to say “you need to offer him more than what the Tigers did”. I’m scared because I DO NOT see it being a wise decision to offer Scherzer going into his age 30 season in 2015 a 7-year pact at top dollar (I’m looking at you Yankees).

  4. Green_Monster08 1 year ago

    At some point all the $ in the world is going to be paid to MLB players. Not every free agent gets to have $200 million. Not Yankee bashing but their constant overpay has forced other teams into same boat and the sport is being hurt.

    • JohnS 1 year ago

      I will never understand this. One little ball up the middle, one little tweak of your arm, and one little getting into your car to leave the ball field and you trip. Anything can happen at anytime. To me he must not want to be a Tiger. If it’s as much money as this says, there is still a week before the season starts. To much time. He don’t want to be here. Trade him NOW!

    • stl_cards16 1 year ago

      Where is proof the sport is being hurt? There is more money in baseball now than ever. The sport is thriving and that’s why you see these huge contracts.

      • Green_Monster08 1 year ago

        I was more referring to the long term ramifications. The new TV $ is here and teams are spending like sailors on shore leave which is fine but they’re talking 35 – 40 mil a year for some guys like Miggy – Trout and at some point the TV $ is spent and people going to games will be paying $8 a hotdog and $15 a beer.

        • erm016 1 year ago

          Not too far off from that already.

        • 0vercast 1 year ago

          Not to mention $55-70 per ticket to sit anywhere near the diamond in the lower deck. Also, the tickets prices rise about a 2% clip every year, and not long ago, it was a 1% per year.

          And they wonder why stadiums are half full on weeknights.

          • Green_Monster08 1 year ago

            yep, it’s the same cost for a family of 4 for 2 days at Disney as going to one Red Sox game in decent seats with everything all in.

          • 0vercast 1 year ago

            That’s why I haven’t been to Boston yet, even though Fenway is the ballpark I most want to see.

            Every summer I try to make a trip to follow the Twins, and most of the prices around the US are about the same. However, Fenway is just nuts. Prices appeared to be about 3-4x as much as I paid in MIN, KC, ChiW, ChiC, CLE, DET, COL, or SEA.

            Heck, I have two pairs at Coors Field this July, 4 rows above the Twins on-deck circle on a Fri and Sat for $75 a ticket, which is about face + $10. In Fenway, I’d get some pretty lousy tickets at that cost.

    • PaperLions 1 year ago

      The fact is that EVERY MLB owner makes more money off of his team than the highest paid player makes during his career. Even the worst owners (Loria, McCourt) makes 100s of millions of dollars every few years. When a larger percent of the revenue generated by baseball talent goes to the talent rather than the extorting, monopolizing, facilitators….how is that a bad thing?

      • Kslackey 1 year ago

        Because the owners aren’t going to see their personal profits drop, they will raise prices according to cost on the field. Ultimately, it hits the consumer. As long as we’re here to pay for the product.

        • PaperLions 1 year ago

          That is not how market places work nor is it consistent with the relationship between ticket/concession prices and player salaries. Owners charge as much as they can to maximize profits. The only time prices go down is if the models used to set prices demonstrate that greater profits would be realized if cheaper tickets would result in attendance increases great enough to offset the reduced prices.

          If players salaries were cut in 1/2 tomorrow, nothing would happen to ticket prices. Player salaries are what they are because fans are willing to spend so much money on baseball by buying tickets, merchandise, concessions, and cable/satellite TV. If fans spent less money, owners would make less and spend less on players….it doesn’t work the other way around, if you reverse the process, the result is called bankruptcy.

          • johnsilver 1 year ago

            How much do you think ticket prices were before FA in 1974 and many players didn’t make more than 35-50k, perennial AS, such as Yaz, Bench made 150-200k? You think inflated tickets were for the best seats 200 dollars? Not hardly.

            Not saying FA was bad, cause in many ways it was good, it forced Charlie O’Finley, Bill Veeck and Calvin Griffith out of the game, but it gave players the right to switch teams.

            What it also did, was allow lawyers in, many with -0- interest at anything but greed. The players are looking out for themselves, granted. If they are injured, their respective career could be over. If a team fails because of a bad contract (or 2) at massive levels? How many people could be out of a job? We have almost seen that situation already in Texas and a lesser degree in LA under different circumstances.

            Entirely 100% more risk being held with business owners everywhere and many just never will get that through their heads.

          • PaperLions 1 year ago

            Yeah, owning a MLB team is totally risky, look at all the guys that lost money doing it over the last few decades.

            Your general comparison is ignoring many factors (inflation, the growth of the middle class, changes in spending habitats and expendable income) but mostly how markets work. Tickets cost what they cost because millions of people buy that at that price and consider it a reasonable price to pay. If people didn’t buy tickets at those prices, they would cost less…just like everything else that has a price based 100% on maximizing profits.

            Teams with expensive tickets don’t have expensive tickets because they have expensive rosters….they have expensive rosters because they are in markets in which a lot of people will spend a lot of money following their baseball team, and the spending of the fans allows the teams to spend more on players. The cause of rising players salaries is the money fans spend on the sport…the cause of the money fans spend on the sport is not player salaries.

          • johnsilver 1 year ago

            “Yeah, owning a MLB team is totally risky, look at all the guys that lost money doing it over the last few decades.”

            The 1st rule of business is to try and set yourself up to NOT lose money. Many, many businesses have a 50% markup at the retail level, including one I was in (management) for nearly 30 years. Sound outlandish? Want to stay in business, afford salaries, insurance, taxes, pay for advertising and other things many that refuse to think about cost, they had better if want to keep America working.

          • John 1 year ago

            There is almost zero risk involved in owning a major sports franchise, outside of maybe the NHL (I don’t know much about hockey finances). Teams have guaranteed consumer bases and do not have to do anything to keep them. Take a team like the Pirates. 17 straight losing seasons. If they were any type of a real corporation and put out a cheap, inferior product that fans routinely protested against for that long, they would certainly be out of business. Do you think that the owners lost any money over that period, or did they likely earn well over $100 million dollars? Is that somehow because they are such brilliant businessmen? Or because they are in a business where, if you can afford a franchise, you win. No matter what. Same goes for the NFL and most NBA teams. Just look at the Knicks.

          • anon_coward 1 year ago

            in the 80s it was a little less than $10 for Mets tix in the cheapest seats. a little less than today. the lower level seats can run $300 per game along with all the crap they sell these days including the restaraunts at the ball parks

            except now you can watch most of the games on TV now instead of baking in the summer sun

      • Obama 1 year ago

        Those extorting monopolizing facilitators are the only reason why there is an organized game. Envious populists these days…

  5. Kirk Edward Gerwin 1 year ago

    He will get a QO so it’s not like he’s going to walk away with us getting nothing. Unless he wants to sit out next season until June. But with that being said I think he will still end up resigning.

  6. This is a good idea if Scherzer wanted a raise that passed Tanaka or approached Kershaw. Scherzer has been an ace for exactly one year. No team should feel comfortable paying him over 20 million a season until he has another elite year.

    Detroit is also probably better off not paying him a massive salary in the long run anyway if they want to keep Cabrera and still have wiggle room for Tori Hunter like players to supplement their elite core.

  7. ZackD 1 year ago

    “Among the highest paid players” is sort of vague, is that AAV, total compensation, etc.
    Highest SP salary in 2014 is 26m, #15 is 16m – that’s a large gap, especially when that’s per year over 5-8 years.

    • bobbleheadguru 1 year ago

      It was reported that he would be Top 6. That would be $24MM/year.

      • ZackD 1 year ago

        Well Tigers turned down his offer , not the other way around.

  8. bobbleheadguru 1 year ago

    This is good news for the Tigers.

    The Red Sox have proven that you can with the WS with ZERO $20MM/year players. There is no reason the Tigers need 3.

    “Right Fit” free agents at a mid-level salary makes much more sense from a risk/reward standpoint. Better to fill 2-3 positions for the cost of one Scherzer.

    I do hope they lock up Cabrera. Unlike Scherzer, he is a “once every 50 years player” for the Tigers.

    • MB923 1 year ago

      “The Red Sox proved you can with the WS with ZERO $20MM/year players”

      Pretty sure teams like the Cards and Giants have done that already (don’t forget Barry Zito was not even on the postseason team in 2010, he’s the only Giant who makes north of $20 million I believe)

      • MB923 1 year ago

        Actually I stand corrected. 2013 was the only year Zito made $20 million. His AAV was less than $20 million

        He’s still a free agent if I’m not mistaken as well

      • bobbleheadguru 1 year ago

        Your are completely right:

        Giants (twice), Cardinals (twice), now Red Sox (after they redid their team). Build the MIDDLE of your team and you have a better chance of winning WS. Top heavy teams are too risky.

    • bobbleheadguru 1 year ago

      … Also good PR move to let the Scherzer offered number leak. Slightly less than Verlander (which is good for Verlander’s ego) BUT much higher than most reasonable analysts would expect ($24MM+ AAV) and Top 6 EVER.

      There is no way anyone can say the Tigers were “cheap” or were intentionally trying to cut payroll.

    • Bob Bunker 1 year ago

      In reality, the Red Sox did not win a championship without a 20 plus million dollar player, they merely used the contact system in Mlb to under pay three guys (Ellsbury, Lester, and Pedroia) while getting amazing production. However, now they have lost Ellsbury because they wouldn’t pay him the 20 million and might (tho prob not) lose Lester for same reason.

      In reality the Sox championship merely proved a long known fact that the best way to win a ring is homegrown talent that is underpaid supplemented by smart signings. This is what every championship team has done since the nineties except for the 2008 Yankees.

      At the same time some players like Jeter, A Rod in his prime, Man Ram, Wainwright, and more are worth the 20 million price to keep around for more playoff drunks.

      • bobbleheadguru 1 year ago

        I agree with many of your points… but consider that Scherzer himself is NOT a homegrown talent and is underpaid at the moment.

        They traded extremely popular and productive player (Granderson) for Scherzer and Jackson, who were unproven, unknowns at the time.

        Not much unlike the Fister trade this offseason.

        • Overbrook 1 year ago

          Schezer and Jackson were much more highly regarded prospects at the time of that trade than were the prospects they got for Fister.

  9. LordOfTheSwings 1 year ago

    Bailey’s extension also sets an absolute floor (although Scherzer will obvious get a lot more)

  10. Jerry Mandering 1 year ago

    Going to blow up in his face. I see a return to his normal stats this season. Still really good, but not $200M good.

    • LordOfTheSwings 1 year ago

      Even if he puts up a 15-8 record, with a 3.50 ERA and 1.23 WHIP with 220 K’s, he’ll still probably get a $150m contract in free agency. I doubt the Tigers were offering that much more than that; It’s a relatively small risk.

      Just look at Bailey’s contract, and he didn’t even have to go to free agency (and I think almost every team would rather have Scherzer)

      Better yet, look at the huge contracts Zito and Greinke signed after less-than-stellar years.

  11. UltimateYankeeFan 1 year ago

    You have to think that Scherzer will be able to get a 6 year $120 to $130MM deal when he hits FA. That will make him 35 at the end of July 2020 the final year of that contract. If he can come close to his 2013 performance this year that kind of contract in the context of MLB salaries isn’t out of the question.

  12. Tigers72 1 year ago

    I am guessing that the Tigers announced that he was denying a huge offer so that the fan base would get a little angry at him. Now they will be able to trade him for a good young SP, a SP prospect, a left fielder and maybe a bullpen arm. They might include a couple guys like whoever loses the right handed platoon for SS. I don’t see a team that fits all of those needs so it will probably end up being a three team trade. I could see the Rangers being the one getting Scherzer and either the Blue jays or Pirates helping get the deal done. The dbacks are a possibility to.

    • erm016 1 year ago

      Step right up, ATL lol.

    • Mr Pike 1 year ago

      Nobody is going to give you enough for one year of Max to make it worth dashing your World Series hopes.
      They actually could still sign him after he becomes a free agent the way they did with Sanchez.

  13. 0vercast 1 year ago

    Who do you guys think will have the better season in 2014: Scherzer or Verlander?

    I’m going with Verlander.

    • Tigers72 1 year ago

      Yea me to they found out he was bending his leg to much at the end of the season and then he was lights out.

  14. Keith Richards 1 year ago

    It was a mistake if he declined an offer like that. There’s no way he repeats 2012. His stock can go nowhere but down from here. He should be paid as a top 5 pitcher in baseball, but I don’t think he’ll get it next off season.

  15. Mike1L 1 year ago

    You really wonder what the offer is. It’s going to be a test of a core Boras philosophy, which is (almost) never leave a stray nickel in the street, even when you bet big to do it. There’s no question Scherzer took a step forward last year. But unless the contract offer was at a significant discount, I’m not sure there’s that much incremental stretching this out. And there is serious risk of regression or injury. A lot went right last year for him.

  16. Rich 1 year ago

    He wants to become a St. Louis Cardinal as he was a huge fan as a kid. Now he has that chance to play for them. Face the facts Tiger fans Scherzer will be property of the Cardinals next year.

    • stl_cards16 1 year ago

      I really hope you don’t believe that.

      1. He will go to whoever offers the most money.

      2. That won’t be the Cardinals.

      3. The Cardinals drafted him in 2003. If he cared so much about playing for the Cardinals, he would have signed with them.

  17. dieharddodgerfan 1 year ago

    Not surprising that Scherzer would want a deal similar, or a little above, Verlander’s.

    He just won the Cy Young and he’s got Boras representing him.

    Considering Kershaw’s new contract, I would have offered Scherzer like 7 yrs with an AAV of $26 mill per.

    That would seem fair to me. That said, if the Tigers offer really was just under Verlander’s deal, then it seems like the divide shouldn’t be too wide.

    My guess is the offer is likely around $24 mill per year.

    • erm016 1 year ago

      Such an overpay.

    • Sam Froomkin 1 year ago

      How would 7 years at 26 per be fair? Max has been an ace for one season. One. And he’s about to be 30.

      • dieharddodgerfan 1 year ago

        I would figure that Scherzer would want a little more than Verlander.

        He’s also won a Cy Young and his extension would kick in same time as Verlander. It would basically be the same deal, adjusted for a little inflation.

        That’s a bit high, but not ludicrous, IMO.

        • Sam Froomkin 1 year ago

          Spend a few minutes and look at the seasons of Max and JV prior to their Cy Young breakout season. JV had established himself as an ace even before that. Max, not so much. He’s trying to cash in on a single season. I don’t blame him. But paying him like Felix, JV or Kershaw is a mistake.

  18. edwing 1 year ago

    Too bad they don’t have another arm to provide some quality depth behind verlander and sanchez in case they can’t get a deal done. Someone like fister maybe

    • Tigers72 1 year ago

      To bad he is probably not ready for the start of the season.

    • Mr Pike 1 year ago

      They have Porcello and Smyly who are at least 5 years younger with brighter futures at less cost. That’s enough since they also now have $175 million to spend.

  19. liberalconservative 1 year ago

    With all the TJS happening lately its not a smart move to turn down a offer over $150 million. One arm injury can cost you your career. Take the money and run.

  20. Mike1L 1 year ago

    If that report is correct, that’s a ton of money to leave on the table. He’s not better than Verlander or Kershaw. Boras is a busy man–he’s apparently floating a (rejected) new offer for Drew at 3/39.

  21. DerekJeterDan 1 year ago

    Come to the Dark Side Max.

    Scherzer, Tanaka, Sabathia.

    Do It.

    • bobbleheadguru 1 year ago

      … For Jeter and 2 prospects?

      • stl_cards16 1 year ago

        Why would the Tigers want to move Scherzer? Especially for a worse player that will also only play one year.

        That is a trade neither team would even consider, especially the Tigers.

        • GRN_ 1 year ago

          The Fister trade makes even the most crazy proposals somewhat possible.

  22. ZackD 1 year ago

    So wait, Tigers turned down Scherzer’s offer and not the other way around? The narratives are about to turn!

    • EightMileCats 1 year ago

      You really believe ANYTHING Scott Boras says publicly?

      • jb226 1 year ago

        So is it that you have trouble believing Boras proposed a contract that would make Scherzer higher paid than 144 out of the 150 starting pitchers in baseball? Or that the Tigers wouldn’t pay that? They both seem plausible to me.

      • ZackD 1 year ago

        I trust him just as much as I trust owners and GMs. My point wasn’t who to trust, it was first Max turned down a huge contract from Tigers and fans already started with the “trade him he’s greedy”, but then the roles were reversed and I was preparing to see if tone of comments changed.

        • EightMileCats 1 year ago

          Fair enough
          Not from me, but I also don’t hate Max for turning it down.
          He’ll get more in FA and he’s gotta take care of himself too

          • ZackD 1 year ago

            I think that’s a fair assessment

  23. TheBigNice 1 year ago

    Max, I know you frequent this website. You are going to be insanely rich wherever you play. Stay in Detroit. The fans love you.

    Respectfully,
    a Tigers fan

  24. Tigers72 1 year ago

    I do not believe Boras I bit. I think that Boras was mad at Detroit for not getting Drew. Now he is trying to get the fans mad at Detroit and try to make them want to sign him. He might be saying this because the Tigers got a very good offer to be traded to a contender with worse odds of making the playoffs and now Scherzer is mad.

  25. Mike1L 1 year ago

    So, the Tigers made a “substantial, long-term contract extension offer…that would have placed him among the highest paid pitchers in baseball.” and Boras said “Max Scherzer made a substantial long-term contract extension offer
    to the Detroit Tigers that would have placed him among the highest-paid
    pitchers in baseball, and the offer was rejected by Detroit.”

    Meaning, of course, that there were offers exchanged, and there’s no agreement. The rest is just spin.

  26. Hills of Glenallen 1 year ago

    So in other news, there was no news. Typical.

  27. Tigers72 1 year ago

    This is probably bad because I woke up early for baseball after watching College basketball all night and I thought of this real quickly this morning but hear it is
    Rangers get Scherzer, McCann and Collins
    Blue jays get Odor
    Tigers get L. Martin, L. Jackson and Stroman.

    • Tigers72 1 year ago

      So I didn’t type to much this is how I valued it all,
      Collins and McCann= L.Jackson
      Scherzer= Odor and Martin
      Odor= Stroman
      If this is bad please correct me.

      • Jared S 1 year ago

        BlueJays are playing for this year as many in the organization may not have until next year to win.

        If the BlueJays decide to take a few steps back, then I would agree with the Toronto portion of this. A 2nd baseman of the future would be nice,

  28. Jacob Viets 1 year ago

    I honestly wouldn’t go higher than 5/130

  29. tune-in for baseball 1 year ago

    My guess here is that 2 different “spins” are in play.The “Substantial,long-term contract extension offer…that would have placed him among the highest paid pitchers in baseball” quote by Detroit was probably around 23-25mill range for 4-6years. The “Max Scherzer made a substantial long-term contract extension offer to the Detroit Tigers that would have placed him among the highest-paid pitchers in baseball,and the offer was rejected by Detroit,” Boras statement bottomed out at 6-8 years at 25-28mill a year. The biggest roadblock in both proposals was probably in length. The numbers Max puts up in 2014 will dictate the difference between the length of the contract Detroit is willing to go vs. other teams bidding for Max’s services. I believe that Max will give Detroit an opportunity to match other bids. Depending upon how sincere Max is about playing in Detroit will decide his fate in Detroit.

  30. bobbybaseball 1 year ago

    He’s taking a huge risk. He’s one major arm injury away from going from $144M to a minor league invitation.

    • start_wearing_purple 1 year ago

      Any pitcher is one major injury away from a minor league invite.

  31. KJ4realz 1 year ago

    Damn if he really turned that down, that’s insane. 6 for 144 is a great deal for him

  32. cgriffith 1 year ago

    I would trade him immediately;

  33. UltimateYankeeFan 1 year ago

    If the reports are right 6 years $144MM I am a little surprised he turned that down. But as in so many of these types of negotiations “the devils in the details” and that we have no clue about.

    • cgriffith 1 year ago

      Mr. Ilitch has been nothing but fair with his players and teams (Red Wings & Tigers) and to offer as AAS of 24 million which only 5 others players currently recieve is more than fair; Max can take his agent (Boras also Drew’s) and leave Detroit maybe we should just trade him now.

      link to fangraphs.com

      Trends and projections over the next five years show a decline also.

      • UltimateYankeeFan 1 year ago

        My friend as they say you never want to “cut off your nose to spite your face”, Scherzer is a very valuable asset. That’s just my opinion.

        • cgriffith 1 year ago

          I understand fully; Boras and Sherzer are just greedy I understand. I would trade him though if we know he’s not going to sign. 24 million dollar offer and a refusal, he starting to sound like a spoiled brat. Verlander > Sherzer

          • UltimateYankeeFan 1 year ago

            Of course Verlander is better than Scherzer but Verlander was never in jeopardy of being a FA, Scherzer is.

    • psabella 1 year ago

      Not sure what kind of details would make 6/144 unacceptable unless 143 is deferred until 2035.

  34. Sufferfortribe 1 year ago

    Heck of a world we live in when someone can turn down earning $24MM a year to play baseball every 5 days.

  35. Jim Low 1 year ago

    This just cannot be true…it cant. If it is mlb needs to drug test him and Boras both

  36. psabella 1 year ago

    Scherzer had better have another Cy Young season to make this move pay off.

  37. Mike1L 1 year ago

    That is an enormous amount of money to risk on continued high performance and health. Enormous. Everything came together for him last year. Boras better be right. I’m hoping I’m wrong, but this could have the makings of the Ryan Madson situation. Push the envelope a little too far, and you have no deal.

  38. cgriffith 1 year ago

    Alright then if (24 milllion) isn’t enough how much is? Also us Tiger fans are saying trade him because it “appears” as if he and Boras are driven by the almighty dollar NOT the chance to win a WS. As a lifelong Tiger fan I want him out now; time to get something while is stock is “supposedly” high

    • stl_cards16 1 year ago

      So you want to trade him because his biggest priority isn’t the Tigers winning a World Series. Since the Tigers best chance to win a World Series is with Max Scherzer, I wonder what your #1 priority is.

  39. tune-in for baseball 1 year ago

    Tigers offer seems to have been 6/144. If that is true then Detroit’s offer was a “Substantial,long-term contract extension offer…that would have placed him among the highest paid pitchers in baseball”and a very good one.Detroit is on very firm ground in the PR department. Max’s position is probably: I am looking at my once in a lifetime chance at my final big opportunity for a career contract. I have confidence in myself and when I put up good numbers in 2014, I believe the open market will give me a shot at 7/168 or more. I should be able to get 6/144 even if I have an OK 2014. OK Max, go for your dream, I can’t fault you for that but I hope you understand the pitfalls that can happen in a long season. For us fans I guess we can only ask that you give Detroit the opportunity to keep you in the Tiger family. I am hoping for everyone to have a great season and a World Series victory for Deroit in 2014.

  40. Overbrook 1 year ago

    Look like the Central’s going to be wide open 2015 and beyond.

Leave a Reply