Author Topic: Fielder  (Read 287464 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Vega

  • Posts: 5516
  • Party’s Over
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1725 on: January 09, 2012, 01:40:15 am »
I wish they'd hurry up and do something, one way or another. I'm sick of my Prince avatar.

Offline CALSGR8

  • Posts: 11627
  • BE LOUD. BE PROUD. BE POSITIVE!
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1726 on: January 09, 2012, 01:42:14 am »
I think we're being used.  Seattle has been now mentioned on ESPN.

Offline Vega

  • Posts: 5516
  • Party’s Over
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1727 on: January 09, 2012, 01:52:37 am »
At least in this case here, if we don't sign Prince, he won't end up on one of the big market teams like the Yanks or Sawks. If we weren't in on him, I'd be thrilled if he signed with Seattle.

Offline InsaneBoost

  • Posts: 1479
  • Censored
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1728 on: January 09, 2012, 02:34:14 am »
I really hope the Lerner's are not that stupid to let a player like Prince slide away if they indeed have him in talks. We need a player like him here, period. We need a pitcher and a big bat this offseason. We got Gio, now get Prince.

It's one thing to say, "Prince won't come here so were fine with LaRoche," but when you can land the guy, there's no excuse not too, especially when we have the money to do so.. Lerners have pissed me off a lot as a fan, but I've stuck around because I felt thing would get better.

We're now talking playoff contenders or not. They aren't getting any younger so you'd think they'd be more than happy to shed the money to not only increasue the fans in the stands, but also the W's and possible bring the chance of seeing the Nationals in the World Series closer.

Offline PowerBoater69

  • Posts: 14327
    • Twitter
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1729 on: January 09, 2012, 07:13:12 am »
The latest rumor, this one listing a person as the source:

Quote
According to a person who seems to always know stuff and is usually right about it -- Ted Lerner made an offer or two he was comfortable with, and went beyond that, and now the Nats are sitting at "take it or leave it".

 www.natsenquirer.com/2012/01/cecil-fielder-thinks-prince-fielder-going-to-washington-nationals-who-cares.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+typepad%2FTheNationalsEnquirer+%28Nats+Enquirer%29

Offline CALSGR8

  • Posts: 11627
  • BE LOUD. BE PROUD. BE POSITIVE!
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1730 on: January 09, 2012, 07:15:48 am »
Well the HOF announcement is today, isn't it?  So i doubt anything will be announced to upstage that!

Offline Mr Clean

  • Posts: 4109
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1731 on: January 09, 2012, 07:25:51 am »
Well the HOF announcement is today, isn't it?  So i doubt anything will be announced to upstage that!

As Roseanne R. says, 'It's always something.'

Offline MarquisDeSade

  • Posts: 15101
  • Captain Sadness
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1732 on: January 09, 2012, 07:31:13 am »


I dress to impress beeyotch.

With a Kenneth Cole bag?  Not really sure who's impressed by that.  Next you're going to start talking about the nice Cole Haans you bought at the outlet store. 

Offline PebbleBall

  • Posts: 3440
  • Now that right there is baseball.
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1733 on: January 09, 2012, 08:55:45 am »
The latest rumor, this one listing a person as the source:

This fits with my interpretation of what's been happening, which is that the Nats aren't as interested in signing Fielder as they are in signing Fielder at a bargain.  There's been a lot of "where else could he go," which is poisonous thinking because while DC might be the best choice for him at a premium price, we are far from the best choice at a bargain price.  If his price falls, it's Milwaukee or a contender miles before it's here.

Offline Tyler Durden

  • Posts: 7970
  • Leprechaun
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1734 on: January 09, 2012, 09:10:46 am »
This fits with my interpretation of what's been happening, which is that the Nats aren't as interested in signing Fielder as they are in signing Fielder at a bargain.  There's been a lot of "where else could he go," which is poisonous thinking because while DC might be the best choice for him at a premium price, we are far from the best choice at a bargain price.  If his price falls, it's Milwaukee or a contender miles before it's here.

I dont' think he's a 'must' for the Nats.  We'd probably be just as good with LaRoche at 1B and a true leadoff hitter as we would be with Desmond hitting leadoff and Fielder at 1B.  If his options are 8 or 9 years in DC versus 3 years with the Dodgers or Brewers, I hope he doesn't pick us.

Offline MarquisDeSade

  • Posts: 15101
  • Captain Sadness
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1735 on: January 09, 2012, 09:13:10 am »
Unfortunately the only true leadoff hitter that was a FA signed with a division rival and we traded all of our top prospects for a guy that walks a ton of guys.

Offline wj73

  • Posts: 851
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1736 on: January 09, 2012, 09:15:39 am »
They just need to sign him before I lose my job cuz I keep checking at work to see if there's any news!!!

Offline Ray D

  • Posts: 10073
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1737 on: January 09, 2012, 09:18:20 am »
We'd probably be just as good with LaRoche at 1B and a true leadoff hitter as we would be with Desmond hitting leadoff and Fielder at 1B.  I

I agree, in fact I'd say "better off' not "just as good".  But who is this mythical leadoff hitter?


Offline PowerBoater69

  • Posts: 14327
    • Twitter
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1738 on: January 09, 2012, 09:23:10 am »
This fits with my interpretation of what's been happening, which is that the Nats aren't as interested in signing Fielder as they are in signing Fielder at a bargain.  There's been a lot of "where else could he go," which is poisonous thinking because while DC might be the best choice for him at a premium price, we are far from the best choice at a bargain price.  If his price falls, it's Milwaukee or a contender miles before it's here.

I'm going to guess that the Nats have made a very significant offer for Fielder and Boras is trying to get us to bid against ourselves, at some point he will have to accept our offer before it's taken off the table.

Offline Minty Fresh

  • Posts: 20386
  • BOOM!
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1739 on: January 09, 2012, 09:25:52 am »
Unfortunately the only true leadoff hitter that was a FA signed with a division rival and we traded all of our top prospects for a guy that walks a ton of guys.

And I'll be you're sooooooooo disappointed . . .      :?

Offline MorseMythology

  • Posts: 828
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1740 on: January 09, 2012, 09:25:53 am »
This fits with my interpretation of what's been happening, which is that the Nats aren't as interested in signing Fielder as they are in signing Fielder at a bargain.  There's been a lot of "where else could he go," which is poisonous thinking because while DC might be the best choice for him at a premium price, we are far from the best choice at a bargain price.  If his price falls, it's Milwaukee or a contender miles before it's here.

Uhhh, the Nats are a contender with Prince in the lineup bro. He's not going to Milwaukee. Even at a bargain price, Milwaukee doesn't have the cash.

Offline MorseMythology

  • Posts: 828
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1741 on: January 09, 2012, 09:29:50 am »
Unfortunately the only true leadoff hitter that was a FA signed with a division rival and we traded all of our top prospects for a guy that walks a ton of guys.

A leadoff guy that averages 98 games played a season the last three years!

Offline Kevrock

  • Posts: 13814
  • That’s gonna be a no from me, dog
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1742 on: January 09, 2012, 09:43:36 am »
I dont' think he's a 'must' for the Nats.  We'd probably be just as good with LaRoche at 1B and a true leadoff hitter as we would be with Desmond hitting leadoff and Fielder at 1B.  If his options are 8 or 9 years in DC versus 3 years with the Dodgers or Brewers, I hope he doesn't pick us.

Name the magical leadoff hitter. Right. Sign Fielder.

It's not shopping for Fielder at a "bargain" just because we've reached our limit of what we would pay. I hope that we negotiated to 6 years and stopped. Who is going to outbid us?

Offline MorseMythology

  • Posts: 828
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1743 on: January 09, 2012, 09:48:34 am »
Seriously, people, a stork isn't going to drop a leadoff hitter in a parachute from the sky like Dumbo. There just isn't one out there.

Next year you can address that.

If you're making the argument that we're better off passing on Fielder this year and going all-out for Michael Bourn next year, that's a fun argument.

As for this year, Desmond is our leadoff guy. Not an ideal situation at all, but our only option right now.

Offline spidernat

  • Posts: 76956
  • The Lerners are Cheap AND Crooked
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1744 on: January 09, 2012, 09:52:06 am »
Unfortunately the only true leadoff hitter that was a FA signed with a division rival and we traded all of our top prospects for a guy that walks a ton of guys.

That's only true from our perspective.  :?

Offline PebbleBall

  • Posts: 3440
  • Now that right there is baseball.
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1745 on: January 09, 2012, 09:52:11 am »
Uhhh, the Nats are a contender with Prince in the lineup bro.

Agreed, but a current contender like the Rangers should be more appealing if the Nats aren't outbidding them.  Even though he transforms the Nats, it'll never be an easy road in this division.  It's just how I'm thinking about it, but I never said he wouldn't make the Nats a contender.  He would, that's why I want it to happen. 


Offline Minty Fresh

  • Posts: 20386
  • BOOM!
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1746 on: January 09, 2012, 09:58:40 am »
I think we can get around the leadoff situation by thinking outside the box and bag the idea of having to have a speedy guy at the top.

Sign Fielder.

Offline tomterp

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 33885
  • Hell yes!
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1747 on: January 09, 2012, 09:58:49 am »
I'm going to guess that the Nats have made a very significant offer for Fielder and Boras is trying to get us to bid against ourselves, at some point he will have to accept our offer before it's taken off the table.

Right.  Nats probably at this point have made the top offer, but one that falls far short of Boras' hope/expectation - hence the impass.  Beat the Nats' offer and Fielder is yours for the taking.  Unfortunately for Fielder, the market has nearly evaporated for him, making him victim of a random fluctuation in the supply / demand calculus.  That's why the mid-contract out clause might be so attractive and remains a key tool in the Nats' chances of attracting him to what would otherwise be a below expectations deal.




Offline Tyler Durden

  • Posts: 7970
  • Leprechaun
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1748 on: January 09, 2012, 10:13:15 am »
I don't know who the mythical leadoff hitter is.  I know it doesn't have to be a center fielder.  It can be an corner outfielder, maybe one that is overpaid right now.  Torii Hunter, maybe?  He's old and had a down year last year.  Maybe we can squeeze one more decent year out of him.  He's a free agent after the year.

Fukudome would be a good signing.

I'd like to sign Fielder but I'm not in the Fielder or bust camp.

Offline JMW IV

  • Posts: 11345
  • Name on the Front > Name on The Back
Re: Fielder.
« Reply #1749 on: January 09, 2012, 10:23:42 am »
I'm going to guess that the Nats have made a very significant offer for Fielder and Boras is trying to get us to bid against ourselves, at some point he will have to accept our offer before it's taken off the table.

this is what seems to be going on.