Daily Mets Poll: Ollie P vs. Bobby B
Ollie Perez started his rehab assignment last night, allowing four runs and five hits over six innings – in Class A-ball. To date, Perez is 0-3 with a 6.28 ERA at the major league level. You will remember that Perez was signed to a 3-year, $36 million contract in the off-season – who could forget that contract?
Here’s another contract you shouldn’t forget – beginning in July 2011, the Mets will have to make 25 yearly payments of $1.19 million dollars to Bobby Bonilla – the result of deferring money owed to him back in 2000. It sounds like a horrible contract – and it is – but there is a silver lining to this 25-year cloud:
By postponing their payments to Mr. Bonilla for 11 years, the Mets freed enough money to trade for starting pitcher Mike Hampton and outfielder Derek Bell and sign first baseman Todd Zeile. Those three players earned a combined $15.1 million in 2000, and the Mets reached the World Series that year for the first time since 1986. (Wall Street Journal)
Which brings us to today’s poll question – which contract is worse, going forward?
Loading ...About the Author
If you enjoyed this post, please consider leaving a comment or subscribing to the feed.
Here is a random awful question: if Bonilla dies before the 25 yrs are up does his estate still get paid? 25 years is a long time…
The Ollie contract was bad, but it is only 3 years long. 13 mil a year probably kept the Mets from making another couple of moves, but at least this is not a Zambrano deal or a Dontrelle Willis deal or Vernon Wells deal, etc.
Good points, all around. And that is a morbid question, but an interesting question, nonetheless.
I’m not sure you can credit the Ollie contract with preventing the Mets from making another bad move. Besides, Wells is doing well(s) this year. And the Bonilla move actually freed up cash so the Mets could get Hampton/Bell. The Ollie deal hasn’t helped the Mets do anything yet.
Can anyone help with the math here?
At the end of 2009, the Mets owed Bonilla 5.9 million, according to the WSJ article. Even with 12 years of interest at 8% a year I have no idea how you get to 29 million. Is it because interest continues to accrue on the balance over time?