I wanted to share a few other takes from around the web. All discuss his age, fastballing tendencies, "risk," and the relatively small commitment in dollars and years the Mets made to Colon.
At Fangraphs, Eno Sarris takes an even-handed view of the contract, calling Bartolo Colon an "unreliable workhorse." He has some fun with words, "So the Mets got an older pitcher for fewer dollars or fewer years than comparable pitchers on the free agent market. And he’s a reliable risk. Or a firm flyer. Or a predictable plunge. Or a steadfast speculation. Or maybe a cheap, old pitcher."
Keith Law at ESPN liked it: "The New York Mets' deal with Bartolo Colon makes more sense for them now ... the two-year, $20 million commitment is so modest by today's standards that the Mets' risk is tolerable. ... The club could be surprisingly competitive in that case with an improved offense and a deep, mostly young (but 20 percent-old) rotation."
At Baseball Prospectus, R.J. Anderson also liked it well enough, "Colon joins Chris Young and Curtis Granderson as sensible winter additions... Risk is the one thing worth wondering about. The length and modest money keeps it to this side of a franchise-altering plunge... In the end, Colon is far from a sure thing to make 30 starts, but plopping him in Citi Field with a strong outfield defense and letting him do his thing seems like it should yield good results."
Jonah Keri at Grantland was a little more circumspect in his Winter Meetings Roundup: "Colon is a mystery. On numbers alone, this looks like a fine deal...The key to Colon’s success was his ability to pound the strike zone: Only three other starters flashed lower walk rates in 2013.... Of course, recent success does not guarantee future success. We’re talking about a 40-year-old pitcher who didn’t throw a single pitch in the big leagues in 2010....At any rate, it’s good to see the Mets and their bamboozled owners spend a little dough this winter, adding Curtis Granderson and now Colon to augment a very thin roster."