Author Topic: 2012 free agency  (Read 44370 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online imref

  • Posts: 47398
  • NG Nattitude?
Re: 2012 free agency
« Reply #975 on: October 26, 2011, 11:47:57 am »
it looks like sabathia is coming off the market, the NY Post reports the Yankees are ready to offer him 5-6 years at more than $23 million a year.

Offline Slateman

  • Posts: 66731
  • THE SUMMONER OF THE REVERSE JINX
Re: 2012 free agency
« Reply #976 on: October 26, 2011, 11:57:46 am »
Of course they are. Only question for CC was how much does he want to stay in NY

Offline HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 21925
Re: 2012 free agency
« Reply #977 on: October 26, 2011, 12:37:56 pm »
Well they wouldn't give him up for Clippard, they were dead set on Storen/Lombo during the season. I mean looking at their starting pitching, Lannan would be really good for them but they think rather highly of Span. I'd be willing to give up Lannan and another prospect for him, but no way Clip or Storen.

a starter with a career of 4 (with more sub 4 than over) who is young and has years of team control left should yield you more than a reliever. I wouldn't trade lannan for span straight up- I would expect something else in return

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 35152
  • World Champions!!!
Re: 2012 free agency
« Reply #978 on: October 26, 2011, 12:52:21 pm »
a starter with a career of 4 (with more sub 4 than over) who is young and has years of team control left should yield you more than a reliever. I wouldn't trade lannan for span straight up- I would expect something else in return

And so should the Twins.

If this was say, the Padres and Tigers making a trade... and the Tigers were giving away the CF'er, they'd be asking for more in return than a Lannan type player.

I feel we severely overvalue our own players on WNFF and do not look at situations rationally from opposing teams viewpoints.

Offline Squab

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 4528
  • me lookin at the bullpen
Re: 2012 free agency
« Reply #979 on: October 26, 2011, 12:53:12 pm »
I would hope that's the case but I wouldn't count on Minnesota feeling that way. The fact that they didn't deal him at the deadline makes it seems to me like they value him higher than we do.

Offline HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 21925
Re: 2012 free agency
« Reply #980 on: October 26, 2011, 01:01:10 pm »
And so should the Twins.

If this was say, the Padres and Tigers making a trade... and the Tigers were giving away the CF'er, they'd be asking for more in return than a Lannan type player.

I feel we severely overvalue our own players on WNFF and do not look at situations rationally from opposing teams viewpoints.

Who knows when/if span will be right again, on the other hand look at the demand for starters with eras similar to lannan's.

Some of us may overvalue our own, but others seem to get it in their heads that certain players are garbage


Offline hammondsnats

  • Posts: 37394
Re: 2012 free agency
« Reply #981 on: October 26, 2011, 01:02:56 pm »
if we had a deal for a healthy span for lannan, we'd be coming out on top no question about it.  it's a moot point, not happening.

Offline Squab

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 4528
  • me lookin at the bullpen
Re: 2012 free agency
« Reply #982 on: October 26, 2011, 01:07:15 pm »
I guess if you look at it from The Twins point of view. They probably don't want to take less for him just because he's been injured, that's not really a good stance to take when you're trading away your talent. They can afford to hold onto him, and if becomes back healthy play solid LF for them.

Offline tomterp

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 33885
  • Hell yes!
Re: 2012 free agency
« Reply #983 on: October 26, 2011, 01:20:41 pm »
The typical Rizzo off-season results in a losing season a 10-game improvement over the prior season.

Fixed.

I know the losing gets old, but you seem to be setting an unrealistically high standard for Rizzo, or any GM for that matter, to attain.  He inherited a disaster, it doesn't get fixed overnight.  He's shown steady, if unspectacular progress.   If this isn't good enough for you, fine, but what would have been?   :shrug:

Offline Obed_Marsh

  • Posts: 7593
Re: 2012 free agency
« Reply #984 on: October 26, 2011, 02:04:17 pm »
The rate of jmprovement lags the Phillies and Braves which by competitiveness is no improvement at all. While we remain middle of the road in spending efficiency.

http://aol.sportingnews.com/mlb/story/2011-09-06/rating-the-nl-improvement-rate

It would be interesting to review marginal dollars per marginal win over the tenure in Washington after 2011 becomes available. 7 seasons of losing baseball. While Rizzo's tenure shows some incremental progess but is not the leaps and bounds improvement Rizzo toadies make it out to be.

http://mcubed.net/mlb/bwimp.shtml

I'll grant you the data could use more primary sources and be more current but the supporting information is there.

Offline DPMOmaha

  • Posts: 22885
Re: 2012 free agency
« Reply #985 on: October 26, 2011, 02:08:10 pm »
MLBTR Free Agent Tracker is up and running...

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2012-mlb-free-agents

Offline Vega

  • Posts: 5516
  • Party’s Over
Re: 2012 free agency
« Reply #986 on: October 26, 2011, 02:32:35 pm »
Something that must be considered with Minnesota is that they have Ben Revere as well. I suppose they could play both Span and Revere, but that would be a pretty weak offensive outfield, although the defense would be outstanding. Still, they can afford to deal Span.

Offline tomterp

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 33885
  • Hell yes!
Re: 2012 free agency
« Reply #987 on: October 26, 2011, 02:37:25 pm »
The rate of jmprovement lags the Phillies and Braves which by competitiveness is no improvement at all. While we remain middle of the road in spending efficiency.

http://aol.sportingnews.com/mlb/story/2011-09-06/rating-the-nl-improvement-rate


Here's the rate of improvement in terms of wins from 2010 to 2011:

Nats   +11
Phillies +5
Braves  -2.


From 2009 to 2011, which coincides with Rizzo's two full offseasons:

Nats +21
Phillies +9
Braves  +3

 :shrug:

Offline spidernat

  • Posts: 76956
  • The Lerners are Cheap AND Crooked
Re: 2012 free agency
« Reply #988 on: October 26, 2011, 02:50:58 pm »
That's what results from losing 100 games.

Offline spidernat

  • Posts: 76956
  • The Lerners are Cheap AND Crooked
Re: 2012 free agency
« Reply #989 on: October 26, 2011, 02:51:46 pm »
it looks like sabathia is coming off the market, the NY Post reports the Yankees are ready to offer him 5-6 years at more than $23 million a year.

Wait til he he's just about to re-sing, offer him a little less and then claim you tried.

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 35152
  • World Champions!!!
Re: 2012 free agency
« Reply #990 on: October 26, 2011, 02:52:46 pm »
Here's the rate of improvement in terms of wins from 2010 to 2011:

Nats   +11
Phillies +5
Braves  -2.


From 2009 to 2011, which coincides with Rizzo's two full offseasons:

Nats +21
Phillies +9
Braves  +3

 :shrug:


How exactly are the Phillies and the Braves supposed to compete in the "wins over previous season" category when they're winning teams.

A big loser like the Nats of course will see a higher jump in wins over prior season if they have a decent season compared to the Phillies going from a 95 to a 100 win team.

I know you know that... so I'm surprised you even pointed that out.

Offline spidernat

  • Posts: 76956
  • The Lerners are Cheap AND Crooked
Re: 2012 free agency
« Reply #991 on: October 26, 2011, 02:53:46 pm »
How exactly are the Phillies and the Braves supposed to compete in the "wins over previous season" category when they're winning teams.

A big loser like the Nats of course will see a higher jump in wins over prior season if they have a decent season compared to the Phillies going from a 95 to a 100 win team.

I know you know that... so I'm surprised you even pointed that out.

That's what results from losing 100 games.

Linty, your version was much more eloquent.

Offline The Chief

  • Posts: 31838
    • http://www.wnff.net
Re: 2012 free agency
« Reply #992 on: October 27, 2011, 05:55:25 pm »
More or less irrelevant discussion has been given its own thread and moved to Uncensored:

http://www.wnff.net/index.php?topic=25091.0