...Just look at Hamels--he got $18 million from the Braves. Quintana is five years younger and has been at least as good as (and probably better than) Hamels over the last three years. It's going to cost a lot more than $9.5 million to replace Quintana.....
Q hasn't been nearly as good as Hamels for either of the last two years. Who cares about 3 years ago?
"He's not that old" and "over X years" is part of the Q fallacy, I think. We're not getting 2016 vintage Q; we're getting 2020 Q. With almost 2000 pro innings, I think his arm is effectively "older" and more worn than is typical for his age. Pitcher history is not the best predictor of future for a guy in physical decline; he's not the same guy anymore. He's trying to get by with below-average, liability stuff, needing to survive on guts and veteran savvy . He's been trending worse, and I'm hesitant to assume that's going to reverse.
Going with a guts-and-savvy overachiever as an anti-awful back-end guy makes more sense if your defense, offense, and pen rock. Settle for 4-5 anti-awful innings, and let the offense and pen win some of those mediocre starts for you. But I'm kinda worried that a hypothetical post-Bryant offense with Bote starting at 3rd, Hoerner at 2nd, and some jag in center isn't going to consistently score a lot and win a ton of Q/Lester starts.
O well, Theo is a big Q-fan, so I guess we'll just enjoy whatever he gives us, for better or for worse.