0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
John Henry says the Red Sox have limits too. Is this a good sign, or should we not read into this? http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/baseball/mlb/12/17/redsox.teixeira.ap/index.html
He didn't say anything. He could have been this guy's role model.http://www.theonion.com/content/news/manager_achieves_full_mastery_of
Is there a point where even we don't want him? There has to be a price where his salary becomes a burden. At 20 million a year I think his is worth it, but much further north of that and you start to question whether or not he is worth it.
If you read between the lines, he is saying that there is a point he will not try to match anymore. Is this just hypothetical?
That's freaked up. I told a chick last night that come spring I am in the house every night from 6:30 until Nats Xtra is done. She asked me what happens if I miss a game and I told her I don't know because it's never happened and it's not going to start happenning. I went out to dinner with my mom and sister one night and wore earphones the entire time. She told me that it's sad that I let my mania for the Nationals take me away from "people".
Signing him would tell the world that we aren't the Expos anymore. We need to make a huge mark, in order to get players excited about playing here. Signing him, would also boost the team morale, and obviously open up the free agent market a great deal.
Agreed. Not only would it say we're no longer the Expos...but we're no longer the MLB-owned Nats either. One thing I don't think has been discussed a lot is that the contracts of Nick Johnson, Wily Mo and Dmitri come off the books soon. So that essentially will be "found" money that can go toward Teixeira. Not sure exactly what each of them is making annually, but added together, it's not a small amount of money.
Johnson, Belliard, Young, Pena, Kearns all are signed through '09. Young, Pena and Kearns all have options for '10. We'll have to figure out what to do with Milledge, Dukes, Lannan, Flores, Willingham and Olsen within the next couple of years too.
Don't forget Kearns. Betwenn those 4 that's over $20M. This season we don't have Cordero ($6M+), LoDuca ($5M),FLop ($4.9M),Vidro ($2.5M, paid to Seattle) Mackowiak & Estrada (Another $2.75M). In two years over $40M worth of salary shed. Sure Zimmerman's arbitration eligible and Milledge may be after this season. Guzman's salary is up $3m but there are no other significant increases to the payroll until after 2010.
Johnson, Belliard, Young, Pena, Kearns all are signed through '09. Young, Pena and Kearns all have options for '10.
Exactly. If that kind of money is going to be on the books, you may as well have it going to an elite player, rather than to players who either don't play at all, or players who stink when they do play.
Pena has a player option for '10 unfortunately, if I'm not mistaken. Do you know if Young and Kearns' options are team options or player options? Either way, my point was that most of the dead weight will be coming off the books within the first couple years of a Teixeira contract.
Both Pena and Johnson are free after this season. Kearn's contract has a $10M club option or a $1M buyout. Young has a $6M vesting option for 2010 (500 PA's in 2009 or 900 PA's for '08 & '09 combined).http://mlbcontracts.blogspot.com/2005/01/washington-nationals_01.html
Phil (NJ): Will, it seems that Teixeira will surely sign a long contract, maybe even 8 or 10 years. Does he seem like a good bet to provide solid value over the life of that contract, particularly the last couple seasons? Will Carroll: Ok, it's impossible to project 10 years out. Three is tough. Without the PECOTA comps, I go to BRef. There, you start seeing comp names like Willie McCovey, Jeff Bagwell, Fred McGriff and if you want a downside, Glenn Davis. All are pretty good physical comps, so that's a plus. McCovey was a HOFer and good until 37, with a nice peak through age-33, so getting those years of Teixeira cover most of an 8 year deal. Bagwell has a similar career path with a bit steeper of a drop due to the shoulder. Still, if you'd signed him to a big deal at age-28, you wouldn't have been unhappy. Davis had a HUGE dropoff and was out of the game at 32, so there's your worst-case. It's McGriff who I think is most comparable. Really good through 31, then good enough to be an All-Star for four more years. Worth $20 million a year? Not for the whole contract, but you don't kick yourself for doing it. For Teixeira, I wonder if the off-field value holds as much as we think for Baltimore (where he could be a huge difference maker in a lineup with Markakis and Wieters) or for Washington (where they're gonna stink no matter what and he could end up A-Rodding by the middle of the deal).
Bobby Lodson on the Colin Cowherd show thinks is 1) Sox, 2) Angels 3) O's and Nats - says the money is all the same, so it's winning prospects that make the difference.
see that's when the lerners need to up the offer.
Well, you have a point, but the clubs have their perspective too. To your point, however, anybody with the Nats who says the club has a 99% chance of signing Tex is smoking dope, or they have a severely flawed understanding of expected probabilities. They don't know what Boras is thinking, only what he's saying. They dont' know what the Red Sox or any other team are thinking OR doing. So there are a lot of gaps in the knowledge this insider might have, that could skew the opinion.Let's say for the minute that there is a very closely placed mole in the org who is talking to our Mainer. We can further assume he's giving the full truth as he believes it to be. That may reflect optimism on the club's part that they've put forth an offer that can't be refused, but we all know that s&^% happens. So I think it's fine for someone to bring forth what they hear, in fact I love the rumors, innuendo, gossip, whatever. I mean, aside from Xmas shopping and looking for a job, what the hell else do I have to do? But each reader can and should discount these reports as they deem appropriate.
